David Rubin critical of stadium building as a form economic development

[Millhouse]

Yeah the fact that it worked and the 'bailed-out' companies, that w ere bailed out because we legislated our financial system into a prvetnable crisis, paid back the money shouldn't get in the way of a good narrative on waste.

If the money is already spent, may as well get what you can...to do anything else is irrational. I'd rather see stadium funding in Syracuse than in Buffalo, wouldn't you?

you're confusing tarp and the stimulus. duh

the money is not already spent. that's why they're talking about whether to spend it on a dome. duh.

i root for both teams and i think that theft is wrong either way

the fact that they're still figuring out how to spend stimulus money should cast some doubt on the governments ability to stimulate through stadium spending.

 

[OttoMets]

...

He's attacking her as an opinion columnist, and quite frankly, Syracuse needs more people voicing opinions in matters like this. No matter what side you fall on, I think we can all agree that this area dropped the ball in terms of landing an enormous gift from Cuomo. Hopefully the new Chancellor continues to do what I hear has been a great job of working with the SU campus and the community.

This is a real problem.

Failure of the Fourth Estate, if you ask me. And it hurts us on matters big and small, from economic development projects like this and Pyramid to mundane matters like this week's Council failure to create a statutory penalty for code-violators who don't clear snow from their sidewalks.

We need more reasonable people to take a vocal stand. Too few matters of importance get debated on their merits. It's all straw men and hollow cliches.

 

[cuseinchina]

you're confusing tarp and the stimulus. duh

the money is not already spent. that's why they're talking about whether to spend it on a dome. duh.

i root for both teams and i think that theft is wrong either way

the fact that they're still figuring out how to spend stimulus money should cast some doubt on the governments ability to stimulate through stadium spending.

When money has been allocated and is going to be spent, your obligation as a politician of any party affiliation is to get as much of it as possible for your constituents. If you don't you shouldn't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

[xc84]

Buffalo is also getting $680 million that isn't related to stadiums for either the Bills, Sabres or UB.

Yup...exactly...so using them as a model then Syracuse should get a lot more money including the stadium money.

 

[Millhouse]

When money has been allocated and is going to be spent, your obligation as a politician of any party affiliation is to get as much of it as possible for your constituents. If you don't you shouldn't let the door hit you on the way out.

allocation and spending aren't the same thing.

allocation for a big stupid building is different than building the big stupid building.

 

[Full_Rebar]

Yup...exactly...so using them as a model then Syracuse should get a lot more money including the stadium money.

I don't disagree with that, and that's what Rubin's saying. When you compare Buffalo, Syracuse and Albany, which city was getting the least amount of aid for direct economic development projects?

 

[xc84]

this is also an insane waste of money

one difference is that the bills are less tethered to Buffalo than SU is to Syracuse. the blackmail threat is stronger there. but i hate this too. nfl owners can afford their own own buildings

You are confusing reality with your utopia. The reality is that this is the way funds are handed out. In the reality space, we can't just sit back and say "Well, Buffalo should not get it either for such projects so we won't accept it in principle". If Syracuse refuses its fair share (based on what other cities get), it would be plain dumb. And it was.

 

[xc84]

I don't disagree with that, and that's what Rubin's saying. When you compare Buffalo, Syracuse and Albany, which city was getting the least amount of aid for direct economic development projects?

And no one disagreed with that except Miner who nixed one deal.

However, that was not his main point. His main point was an attempt to make the county exec. and the governor look bad by backing a stadium. The fact is, Buffalo will get more in stadium funds and he used Buffalo as an example of good policy.

 

[oldpinepoint]

You are confusing reality with your utopia. The reality is that this is the way funds are handed out. In the reality space, we can't just sit back and say "Well, Buffalo should not get it either for such projects so we won't accept it in principle". If Syracuse refuses its fair share (based on what other cities get), it would be plain dumb. And it was.

This is my point exactly. It's not like we are being handed $200mm to spend on whatever we want. I hate government waste as much as anyone however I'm also a believer in getting our fair share of the government waste. This money will be spent here, Buffalo or Albany. I just assume it be here.

 

[Millhouse]

You are confusing reality with your utopia. The reality is that this is the way funds are handed out. In the reality space, we can't just sit back and say "Well, Buffalo should not get it either for such projects so we won't accept it in principle". If Syracuse refuses its fair share (based on what other cities get), it would be plain dumb. And it was.

fight it in buffalo too. they're still having games at the ralph.

 

[Millhouse]

This is my point exactly. It's not like we are being handed $200mm to spend on whatever we want. I hate government waste as much as anyone however I'm also a believer in getting our fair share of the government waste. This money will be spent here, Buffalo or Albany. I just assume it be here.

even if you take it as a given that the money has to be spent so we might as well grab it, a stadium is a terrible way to do it

 

[cuseinchina]

allocation and spending aren't the same thing.

allocation for a big stupid building is different than building the big stupid building.

But when the 'big stupid building' is going someplace else instead of to your constituents...that's a problem.

 

[cuseinchina]

even if you take it as a given that the money has to be spent so we might as well grab it, a stadium is a terrible way to do it

That's not the decision being made here - you aren't getting it.

 

[xc84]

even if you take it as a given that the money has to be spent so we might as well grab it, a stadium is a terrible way to do it

Yeah... we disagree. e.g. See Carrier Dome

 

[Millhouse]

But when the 'big stupid building' is going someplace else instead of to your constituents...that's a problem.

you guys don't realize you're contradicting yourselves.

You: If we don't build the stadium they'll spend the money on something else.

Me: OK if they have to spend the money, they can spend it on something else better than a stadium

You: No, no, no you aren't getting it, it has to be spent on the stadium

Me: You just said it would get spent on something else.

You: Derpy derp derp

 

[Millhouse]

Yeah... we disagree. e.g. See Carrier Dome

one of us likes the dome enough to keep using it.

 

[xc84]

one of us likes the dome enough to keep using it.

So you clearly think that stadium project was a good one.

 

[xc84]

you guys don't realize you're contradicting yourselves.

You: If we don't build the stadium they'll spend the money on something else.

Me: OK if they have to spend the money, they can spend it on something else better than a stadium

You: No, no, no you aren't getting it, it has to be spent on the stadium

Me: You just said it would get spent on something else.

You: Derpy derp derp

Nope. The money proposed was for a stadium which many of us want. We like that idea. We don't just like the idea because it was the only idea. Sure, continue to fight for more funds for other projects but don't turn down the stadium funds simply because that is not priority 1 for some. As in Buffalo and may cities around the country, you can have both.

 

[Millhouse]

So you clearly think that stadium project was a good one.

I'm not sure if that project was smart.

but those costs are actually sunk (unlike these costs)

I think it's much more likely that a 40M investment in the dome is more beneficial than a 400M investment in a dome replacement.

We shouldn't treat both projects like they're the same.

 

[Millhouse]

Nope. The money proposed was for a stadium which many of us want. We like that idea. We don't just like the idea because it was the only idea. Sure, continue to fight for more funds for other projects but don't turn down the stadium funds simply because that is not priority 1 for some. As in Buffalo and may cities around the country, you can have both.

that wasn't china's argument. i respect your argument more - you think this is the best way to spend it. that wasn't china's argument. it was stadium or nothing in his view.

 

[cuseinchina]

you guys don't realize you're contradicting yourselves.

You: If we don't build the stadium they'll spend the money on something else.

Me: OK if they have to spend the money, they can spend it on something else better than a stadium

You: No, no, no you aren't getting it, it has to be spent on the stadium

Me: You just said it would get spent on something else.

You: Derpy derp derp

someplace else not something else. see the new stadium coming to buffalo for reference.

that wasn't china's argument. i respect your argument more - you think this is the best way to spend it. that wasn't china's argument. it was stadium or nothing in his view.

Again I'm not sure that you actually read what I write before responding. I made very clear in my initial critique of Rubin's rant that he has a valid point in questioning the amount and type of investment coming to Syracuse versus what is coming to Buffalo. I think that there are plenty of better ways to spur economic growth, some of which cost money some of which don't.

But that is not the scenario we have here. those other projects in buffalo and Albany were already allocated funds. Our funds were going to be for a stadium - now we get nothing. seems like we lose out in the deal. better a stadium then nothing.

And in terms of keeping the dome...the university wants access to that valuable land, it makes campus way more disjointed than it should be and they can only expand so far. Better to do it now - strike while the iron is hot because you never know who will be in office the next time this comes up. And your argument that Buffalo bills have more leverage because they can leave...while true on the surface is also missing the point. SU is the biggest employer in the area and one of the only things Syracuse has going for it...you give them what they want and support their development plans just as they have (rightly or wrongly) been supporting development of the community over the past few years.

 

[xc84]

that wasn't china's argument. i respect your argument more - you think this is the best way to spend it. that wasn't china's argument. it was stadium or nothing in his view.

Not exactly. I am saying if I had a list, this would be on the list. I like it. For argument's sake, let's say it is #2 on my list. If someone comes and says, I'll support your item #2 this year but not#1 this year then I will take it and work on the #1 next year.

 

[Millhouse]

someplace else not something else. see the new stadium coming to buffalo for reference.


Again I'm not sure that you actually read what I write before responding. I made very clear in my initial critique of Rubin's rant that he has a valid point in questioning the amount and type of investment coming to Syracuse versus what is coming to Buffalo. I think that there are plenty of better ways to spur economic growth, some of which cost money some of which don't.

But that is not the scenario we have here. those other projects in buffalo and Albany were already allocated funds. Our funds were going to be for a stadium - now we get nothing. seems like we lose out in the deal. better a stadium then nothing.

And in terms of keeping the dome...the university wants access to that valuable land, it makes campus way more disjointed than it should be and they can only expand so far. Better to do it now - strike while the iron is hot because you never know who will be in office the next time this comes up. And your argument that Buffalo bills have more leverage because they can leave...while true on the surface is also missing the point. SU is the biggest employer in the area and one of the only things Syracuse has going for it...you give them what they want and support their development plans just as they have (rightly or wrongly) been supporting development of the community over the past few years.

i think you might be a crazy person

i said "that wasn't china's argument. it was stadium or nothing in his view."

you say "Again I'm not sure that you actually read what I write before responding" and "Our funds were going to be for a stadium - now we get nothing. seems like we lose out in the deal. better a stadium then nothing."

how am i distorting your argument?

 

[cuseinchina]

i think you might be a crazy person

i said "that wasn't china's argument. it was stadium or nothing in his view."

you say "Again I'm not sure that you actually read what I write before responding" and "Our funds were going to be for a stadium - now we get nothing. seems like we lose out in the deal. better a stadium then nothing."

how am i distorting your argument?

I think we operate on different planes of existence --- some people you just can't connect with for whatever reason - clearly that is the case in spades here.

Again I have made clear that I think there are probably other better uses of development funds, like we saw in Albany or Buffalo. Rubin was right to point that out.

However a deal was in place to get a stadium built here with real money, private market support etc...they weren't debating investment priorities and decided upon a stadium. SU wanted money, the county went after it, the gov wants something to hang his hat on when he campaigns for higher office so he's on board - and now its going nowhere. there is not some magical pool of private/public combo money waiting around for any project you might dream up. It as ready for a stadium and it's not waiting for people to get their act together. What's difficult to understand about that?

 

[KellySyracuse]

This is a real problem.

Failure of the Fourth Estate, if you ask me. And it hurts us on matters big and small, from economic development projects like this and Pyramid to mundane matters like this week's Council failure to create a statutory penalty for code-violators who don't clear snow from their sidewalks.

We need more reasonable people to take a vocal stand. Too few matters of importance get debated on their merits. It's all straw men and hollow cliches.

The sidewalk issue really fries me to no end. You own the property you're responsible for maintaining the walk. Since when do people with disabilities trump the good of the rest of the city? And how about the people with disabilities without viable transportation that need to navigate around town? And how about your civic duty of maintaining your property? I agree that the city sucks on this point because they neither maintain the sidewalks they're responsible for or enforce the current codes on the books. But that shouldn't mean that the rest of us should just sit back and point the finger. UGH

The common council is all about inaction. I've got to give Dougherty a hand for at least trying