Skip to main content

In radio interview, Paterson hedges on AY, whiffs on naming rights

Governor David Paterson answered questions on WCBS radio during an interview yesterday afternoon, and Atlantic Yards was one of the relatively few topics that came up. His answer was an unsurprising hedge, but his comment about naming rights elsewhere during the interview was a dismaying whiff.

AY was a legitimate topic; four critical questions on AY were among the 31 posted on the WCBS web site before the 4 pm interview.

One question posed online was:
With the state in dire fiscal straits, why are you supporting the costly Atlantic Yards project, which may end up costing the state and New York City as much as $2 billion dollars in subsidies and tax breaks? Since many fiscal experts believe that sports facilities return little in economic benefit to the taxpayers, why not scrap the arena in favor of more needed projects?
(That $2 billion figure is highly debatable.)

On the air

A variant of the question was asked (about 11:15 into the program): "With the state in such dire fiscal straits why are you supporting this costly project, which according to this writer may end up costing the state and New York City about 2 billion in subsidies and tax breaks?"

Paterson's response: "There is a point that the listener correctly has addressed, that if it starts to become too costly, a lot of these projects that we were for, we might have to change our mind. To this point we don't think that we are there with the Atlantic Yards and continue to try to help them."

Does continuing to try to help mean simply moving ahead or does it mean additional subsidies, which Forest City Ratner seeks?

Whiffing on naming rights

During the interview, Paterson said he was opposed to selling state assets but not averse to leasing them. Asked about naming rights, as in “the Company Y state office building," Paterson responded, "Well, we’ve got [the new Mets stadium] CitiField"--he chuckled—“and that might be a way to do it, but I wouldn’t want to change the names of any of the facilities that we have honored great New Yorkers in the past…”

Still, the governor said, he was open to more options than previously.

The fact is, “we” don’t have CitiField, nor the Barclays Center, the corporate name of the planned Atlantic Yards arena. The naming rights go to the team owners.

But why? In an interview published last month, author Neil deMause observed, "There’s no reason for this to be private money. If the public is building the stadium, if the public is owning the stadium, why should the team get to slap a name and get the money from it, or consider the money from it that pays off the stadium as paying off their share?"

Maybe it's time to reconsider.

[Update: A reader suggests that Paterson's "we" was merely a reference to the concept of naming rights, not a claim that the state was benefiting from CitiField. Well, the governor probably does know better. However, I'd still contend that his formulation--without the acknowledgment that the public doesn't benefit--was misleading to listeners.]

Other AY questions

Among the questions posted online, five were about Atlantic Yards:

1) What about Atlantic Yards?
With the severe fiscal problems facing the city and state; with the developer unable to put together financing and scrapping all the public benefits; and all the serious unanswered questions about the approval process for Atlantic Yards, will you have the PACB review this project's approval?

3) More Money for the MTA
The MTA has an agreement to sell their 8-acre rail yard in Brooklyn to developer Bruce Ratner for 100 million, even though the MTA appraised the land at $214.5 million. that deal has not actually closed. Wouldn't it make sense for the Governor to have the MTA void that deal and put the rail yard out for bid to multiple developers and get at least $100 million more for the supposedly cash strapped MTA?

6) Atlantic Yards
With the state in dire fiscal straits, why are you supporting the costly Atlantic Yards project, which may end up costing the state and New York City as much as $2 billion dollars in subsidies and tax breaks? Since many fiscal experts believe that sportsfacilities return little in economic benefit to the taxpayers, why not scrap the arena in favor of more needed projects?
29) Do you like the UNITY plan for Brooklyn?
An alternative to the stalled Atlantic Yards boondoggle has been endorsed by many of the area's city and state representatives for many reasons, including that because many developer would be involved it's actually more likely to get built. Your officehas been studying the plan; what do you think of it and the recommendations of the city and state legislators?

35) Vanderbilt Yards
FCR's Atlantic Yards project will forever be known as a project that came out of three men in a room. You are now one of those men. How can you support the poster child for cronyism and corruption?


I'll point out that final question was posted long after Paterson had left the air.

Is Atlantic Yards the most important issue facing Paterson? No, and there were even more questions about the fate of the MTA.

There was only one question about Moynihan Station, which, though less controversial--though hardly less complicated--than Atlantic Yards, is probably more important. Then again, it's AY that may be the Penn Station of our generation.

Comments

  1. I beg to differ on the analysis that there was only one question about Moynihan Station or that Moynihan Station could possibly be more important than Atlantic Yards, because Moynihan Station and Atlantic Yards are inevitably linked- A question about Atlantic Yards is, per se, a question about Moynihan Station.

    What is needed for a proper outcome with respect to Moynihan Station is simply a proper amount of public investment. What is sopping up the money that we should be investing in Moynihan Station is Atlantic Yards. There is no project that represents a greater misinvestment of New York’s public resources than Atlantic Yards and there is no project currently more ripe for a pruning with a quick triage than Atlantic Yards. The money it would free up would be everything needed for Moynihan Station and then some. That “then some” could fund a slew other favorite and worthy projects.

    Moynihan Station and Atlantic Yards also represent the two sides of the mirror Alex Garvin referred to the other day when he made the distinction between public investment in `transit-oriented development’ vs. `development-oriented transit.’" He said that we should be doing a lot more of the latter (Moynihan Stations) and not putting resources into the former, and specifically as an example, Atlantic Yards. (See: the comment at:
    http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2008/07/at-mcny-panel-defending-dissent-and.html)

    To quote part of what Mr. Garvin said, “. . . stop having this ridiculous argument that we constantly have about the government going to get involved in developing property on its own. I think the government should be not developing real estate. The government should be doing its investing in its infrastructure and its own property.” “"If we stopped talking about developing Atlantic Yards or developing these things and left private property to the private owners to develop and instead spent our money on the public realm, I think we’d get a lot of work [done].” (AYR notes that this “drew significant applause”).

    Lastly, Moynihan Station and Atlantic Yards are linked because it was Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan our senator who, in 1986, sponsored the insightful law that bans the use of tax-exempt bonds to finance sports stadiums and arenas. It is this legislation that the Michael Bloomberg administration and the State ESDC want to circumvent to finance the proposed Nets arena as a hook for Atlantic Yards together with the $2-3 billion in subsidies the megadevelopment is proposed to receive overall. It would be an irony if Moynihan Station is not built or if it otherwise suffers because of Atlantic Yards and this kind of circumvention.

    Moynihan Station is to be named in honor of Senator Moynihan because of his honest, insightful and excellent governance. At the moment, given their conduct on Atlantic Yards, I can think of a lot of politicians like Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver whom I would not nominate for such an honor.

    I draw and reinforce the links between Moynihan Station and Atlantic Yards because those who do not think of these things as closely interrelated are doomed to getting their priorities wrong.


    Michael D. D. White
    Noticing New York
    http://noticingnewyork.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Revising official figures, new report reveals Nets averaged just 11,622 home fans last season, Islanders drew 11,200 (and have option to leave in 2018)

The Brooklyn Nets drew an average of only 11,622 fans per home game in their most recent (and lousy) season, more than 23% below the announced official attendance figure, and little more than 65% of the Barclays Center's capacity.

The New York Islanders also drew some 19.4% below announced attendance, or 11,200 fans per home game.

The surprising numbers were disclosed in a consultant's report attached to the Preliminary Official Statement for the refinancing of some $462 million in tax-exempt bonds for the Barclays Center (plus another $20 million in taxable bonds). The refinancing should lower costs to Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the arena operating company, by and average of $3.4 million a year through 2044 in paying off arena construction.

According to official figures, the Brooklyn Nets attendance averaged 17,187 in the debut season, 2012-13, 17,251 in 2013-14, 17,037 in 2014-15, and 15,125 in the most recent season, 2015-16. For hoops, the arena holds 17,732.

But official…

Is Barclays Center dumping the Islanders, or are they renegotiating? Evidence varies (bond doc, cash receipts); NHL attendance biggest variable

The Internet has been abuzz since Bloomberg's Scott Soshnick reported 1/30/17, using an overly conclusory headline, that Brooklyn’s Barclays Center Is Dumping the Islanders.

That would end an unusual arrangement in which the arena agrees to pay the team a fixed sum (minus certain expenses), in exchange for keeping tickets, suite, and sponsorship revenue.

The arena would earn more without the hockey team, according to Bloomberg, which cited “a financial projection shared with potential investors showed the Islanders won’t contribute any revenue after the 2018-19 season--a clear signal that the team won’t play there, the people said."

That "signal," however, is hardly definitive, as are the media leaks about a prospective new arena in Queens, as shown in the screenshot below from Newsday. Both sides are surely pushing for advantage, if not bluffing.

Consider: the arena and the Islanders can't even formally begin their opt-out talks until after this season. The disc…

Skanska says it "expected to assemble a properly designed modular building, not engage in an iterative R&D experiment"

On 12/10/16, I noted that FastCo.Design's Prefab's Moment of Reckoning article dialed back the gush on the 461 Dean modular tower compared to the publication's previous coverage.

Still, I noted that the article relied on developer Forest City Ratner and architect SHoP to put the best possible spin on what was clearly a failure. From the article: At the project's outset, it took the factory (managed by Skanska at the time) two to three weeks to build a module. By the end, under FCRC's management, the builders cut that down to six days. "The project took a little longer than expected and cost a little bit more than expected because we started the project with the wrong contractor," [Forest City's Adam] Greene says.Skanska jabs back
Well, Forest City's estranged partner Skanska later weighed in--not sure whether they weren't asked or just missed a deadline--and their article was updated 12/13/16. Here's Skanska's statement, which shows th…

Not just logistics: bypassing Brooklyn for DNC 2016 also saved on optics (role of Russian oligarch, Shanghai government)

Surely the logistical challenges of holding a national presidential nominating convention in Brooklyn were the main (and stated) reasons for the Democratic National Committee's choice of Philadelphia.

And, as I wrote in NY Slant, the huge security cordon in Philadelphia would have been impossible in Brooklyn.

But consider also the optics. As I wrote in my 1/21/15 op-ed in the Times arguing that the choice of Brooklyn was a bad idea:
The arena also raises ethically sticky questions for the Democrats. While the Barclays Center is owned primarily by Forest City Ratner, 45 percent of it is owned by the Russian billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov (who also owns 80 percent of the Brooklyn Nets). Mr. Prokhorov has a necessarily cordial relationship with Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — though he has been critical of Mr. Putin in the past, last year, at the Russian president’s request, he tried to transfer ownership of the Nets to one of his Moscow-based companies. An oligarch-owned a…

Former ESDC CEO Lago returns to NYC to head City Planning Commission

Carl Weisbrod, Mayor Bill de Blasio's City Planning Commission Chairman and Director of the Department of City Planning, is resigning,

And he's being replaced by Marisa Lago, currently a federal official, but who Atlantic Yards-ologists remember as the short-term Empire State Development Corporation CEO who, in an impolitic but candid 2009 statement, acknowledged that the project would take "decades."

Still, Lago not long after that played the good soldier at a May 2009 Senate oversight hearing, justifying changes in the project but claiming the public benefits remained the same.

By returning to City Planning, Lago will join former ESDC General Counsel Anita Laremont, who after retiring from the state (and taking a pension) got the job with the city.

Back at planning

Lago, a lawyer, in 1983 began work as an aide to City Planning Chairman Herb Sturz, and later served as the General Counsel to the president of the NYC Economic Development Corporation, Weisbrod himself.