[quote]
SOME STADIUM SENSE: LET NEW YORK THINK BIG
THE ISSUE: The debate over building a stadium on Manhattan's West Side.
When will New York become the Big Apple again ("Sharks Lurk for Jets," Editorial, April 1)?
I'm a registered Democrat, but these wannabe mayoral candidates — who are trying to stop the West Side stadium — are killing me.
No one — and I mean no one — was even thinking about building on the rail yards until the Jets started lobbying for the land.
Cablevision, which owns Madison Square Garden, is just scared that New York will now be like other major cities and have more than one indoor arena.
Then the Dolans won't be able to fleece any event that wants to come to town.
The stadium will benefit hotels, construction, restaurants and Broadway with an influx of events and conventions.
That helps all of New York.
We do not need another luxury apartment complex that most of us will not be able to live in.
So, I say to all New Yorkers: Let's be the Big Apple and dare to have the best of everything.
Patrick Coleman
The Bronx
I am continually shocked by the reaction of "progressive" New Yorkers to the West Side stadium.
As always, the shortsighted opponents care more about saving the city's money than building something that would actually create jobs and revenue.
That doesn't sound very progressive to me.
I start to wonder if these people even know what they're protesting anymore.
Maybe they just like how the "No West Side Stadium" buttons look.
Steve Lavner
Manhattan
John Podhoretz rightly notes that Manhattanites are often self-righteous reactionaries when confronted with proposed changes to their urban landscape ("West Side Wars," Opinion, April 1).
But his desire for comeuppance on these stubborn opponents of progress misleads him into supporting the proposed West Side stadium.
No one would have a legitimate gripe if Jets owner Woody Johnson offered to foot the entire bill for the stadium.
But, in fact, taxpayers will be drained of more than $1 billion for the project.
Research shows that most of the economic benefits of taxpayer-financed sports stadiums are pocketed by team owners.
This new stadium is welfare for the super-wealthy.
It's detestable.
Donald Boudreaux
Chairman
Economics Department
George Mason University
Fairfax, Va.
I'm glad Cablevision didn't win the bid for the West Side railyards.
The Dolans are trying to monopolize the indoor venue business in Manhattan.
Corey Citrin
Glen Oaks
As a resident of Chelsea, not far from where the proposed West Side stadium project is to be located, I have some strong feelings about it.
On first glance, it seems that the Jets have finally wised up and realized that they can't get away with paying only $100 million for the West Side rail yard, worth — as we all know — about nine times as much.
But what the Jets just don't seem to get is that relying on more than a $1 billion in taxpayer funding for a stadium no one wants is undesirable no matter how hard they try to convince us.
At the end of the day, the Jets' offer will still cost taxpayers a lot — and not only in dollars.
It will also cost us a community-focused plan, like the one submitted by Madison Square Garden, that includes schools, affordable housing and office space.
That sort of plan would actually enhance the quality of life for all New Yorkers. And it wouldn't cost them a thing.
Amy Harlib
Manhattan
[/quote] http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/letters/41992.htm
jake · 2005-04-03
[quote] SOME STADIUM SENSE: LET NEW YORK THINK BIG THE ISSUE: The debate over building a stadium on Manhattan's West Side. When will New York become the Big Apple again ("Sharks Lurk for Jets," Editorial, April 1)? I'm a registered Democrat, but these wannabe mayoral candidates — who are trying to stop the West Side stadium — are killing me. No one — and I mean no one — was even thinking about building on the rail yards until the Jets started lobbying for the land. Cablevision, which owns Madison Square Garden, is just scared that New York will now be like other major cities and have more than one indoor arena. Then the Dolans won't be able to fleece any event that wants to come to town. The stadium will benefit hotels, construction, restaurants and Broadway with an influx of events and conventions. That helps all of New York. We do not need another luxury apartment complex that most of us will not be able to live in. So, I say to all New Yorkers: Let's be the Big Apple and dare to have the best of everything. Patrick Coleman The Bronx I am continually shocked by the reaction of "progressive" New Yorkers to the West Side stadium. As always, the shortsighted opponents care more about saving the city's money than building something that would actually create jobs and revenue. That doesn't sound very progressive to me. I start to wonder if these people even know what they're protesting anymore. Maybe they just like how the "No West Side Stadium" buttons look. Steve Lavner Manhattan John Podhoretz rightly notes that Manhattanites are often self-righteous reactionaries when confronted with proposed changes to their urban landscape ("West Side Wars," Opinion, April 1). But his desire for comeuppance on these stubborn opponents of progress misleads him into supporting the proposed West Side stadium. No one would have a legitimate gripe if Jets owner Woody Johnson offered to foot the entire bill for the stadium. But, in fact, taxpayers will be drained of more than $1 billion for the project. Research shows that most of the economic benefits of taxpayer-financed sports stadiums are pocketed by team owners. This new stadium is welfare for the super-wealthy. It's detestable. Donald Boudreaux Chairman Economics Department George Mason University Fairfax, Va. I'm glad Cablevision didn't win the bid for the West Side railyards. The Dolans are trying to monopolize the indoor venue business in Manhattan. Corey Citrin Glen Oaks As a resident of Chelsea, not far from where the proposed West Side stadium project is to be located, I have some strong feelings about it. On first glance, it seems that the Jets have finally wised up and realized that they can't get away with paying only $100 million for the West Side rail yard, worth — as we all know — about nine times as much. But what the Jets just don't seem to get is that relying on more than a $1 billion in taxpayer funding for a stadium no one wants is undesirable no matter how hard they try to convince us. At the end of the day, the Jets' offer will still cost taxpayers a lot — and not only in dollars. It will also cost us a community-focused plan, like the one submitted by Madison Square Garden, that includes schools, affordable housing and office space. That sort of plan would actually enhance the quality of life for all New Yorkers. And it wouldn't cost them a thing. Amy Harlib Manhattan [/quote]Post: Support Letters
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/letters/41992.htm