Stadium Discussion

[ZYanksRule]

I'm not so sure about that. We'll still be in YS. FO will still be the FO. STHs will continue to be unhappy for the same reasons and may downgrade or cancel, until seats for the new stadium are available for purchase. I think it will help get some more excitement for sure, but not sure it'll be enough to stop the bleeding.

Everyone's been waiting for them to announce the stadium. There will be a surge in excitement when they announce it for sure. That might peter out at some point, but the year we move into the new stadium will be the biggest season in team history in terms of fan excitement.

 

[moogoo]

Everyone's been waiting for them to announce the stadium. There will be a surge in excitement when they announce it for sure. That might peter out at some point, but the year we move into the new stadium will be the biggest season in team history in terms of fan excitement.

no doubt. but that doesn't mean season tickets and/or actual tickets are going to suddenly surge because a stadium is being built. especially if season ticket prices continue to go up. people will just jump on board once the new stadium is ready to open. there will be buzz and excitement, sure. but it'll die down once people let it sink in that it's gonna be 4 years before it opens.

 

[Kjbert]

Not sure why anyone cares about De Blasio right now. He could give two shits about being Mayor and the city hates him.

Any strength he has back in 2014 to halt a deal has evaporated Ruben Diaz very well may be the next mayor

 

[sundance]

Not sure why anyone cares about De Blasio right now. He could give two shits about being Mayor and the city hates him.

Any strength he has back in 2014 to halt a deal has evaporated Ruben Diaz very well may be the next mayor

I’d bet on Corey Johnson

 

[sundance]

Speaking of city elections—I highly, highly encourage all y’all in NYC to vote YES on Question 1 next week:

PROPOSAL 1: RANKED-CHOICE VOTING

If New Yorkers vote yes to the first ballot measure, they will be able to rank candidates running for city office in order of preference.

The changes would affect only city primaries and special elections, and would go into effect starting in 2021 — right in time for the next mayoral election.

How would a winner be determined? If no candidate gets over 50 percent, the last-place finisher is eliminated and their votes transferred to the second-choice candidate on each ballot. The process repeats until there's a majority winner. The current system requires costly runoff elections when no candidate reaches 40 percent.

The proposal has support from good-government groups, the city's business sector and some lawmakers who believe the changes will give way to cleaner — and even nicer — political campaigns and save money by eliminating run-off primaries.

If approved, the first ballot proposal on elections would also:

• Require special elections be held 80 days after an elected office is vacated, a change necessary to conform to military voting and early voting laws.

• Speed up the timeline for redrawing City Council district boundaries so it is done before Council candidates run for election. This is in order to accommodate a new primary calendar.

What's on the Back of Your Election Day Ballot in NYC

You will see five proposals to amend the city's constitution

www.ny1.com

 

[mgarbowski]

Speaking of city elections—I highly, highly encourage all y’all in NYC to vote YES on Question 1 next week:

What's on the Back of Your Election Day Ballot in NYC

You will see five proposals to amend the city's constitution

www.ny1.com

And I encourage you to vote no unless you want to encourage extremist candidates.

And why the fuck is this even a subject here?

 

[sundance]

And I encourage you to vote no unless you want to encourage extremist candidates.

And why the fuck is this even a subject here?

Aw, man, you’re going to get me all excited talking about electoral systems. But seriously, like a third of this thread is kibitzing about local politics. A potential new mechanism in the city charter that would change the structure of how we run our primaries seems like fair game.

I’ll dig a little today and come back to you on the idea that ranked-choice voting would produce more extremist outcomes. I don’t know that anyone has proved the system’s effects on ideological representation in that way, but happy to take a look.

As a basic matter, however, RCV has been shown to produce more civility in campaigning and, as a whole, to leave people more satisfied with the final result. This would seem to make sense—whereas in first-past-the-post systems a candidate may be incentivized to invest in drumming up enthusiasm in a narrow base, in RCV the game is to win both the first- and second-choice line, so that a candidate’s incentive is to play for more broad-based support.

Links:

Research and data on RCV in practice - FairVote

www.fairvote.org

(also check the other sub-pages—e.g., Voter Support, Representation, RCV versus Two-Round Runoff, etc.)

Why RCV Works - Rank The Vote

Why ranked choice voting works On Tuesday November 5th, New Yorkers will decide whether or not to adopt a top five candidate Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) system for Mayor, Comptroller, Public Advocate, Borough Presidents and City Council in primary and special elections to be implemented by 2021...

rankthevotenyc.org

If we’re abolishing the Electoral College, let’s also have ranked-choice voting for president

It would maximize participation and broad-based appeal, and improve our democracy.

www.vox.com

Instant-runoff voting - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Keith Putnam]

I've said this before, but absolutely zero public money should be used to build and run our stadium, bar basic city services that every property uses.

Our club exists as part of a sportswashing initiative funded by the sovereign wealth fund of a petrostate and as an egoic plaything of an absolute monarch. There is no justification for one single tax dollar (or subsidy) to be allocated for this project.

Given the above, I would think it would grease the wheels for CFG to publicly say "we're paying for absolutely everything, and here's a little more on top".

 

[Ulrich]

I've said this before, but absolutely zero public money should be used to build and run our stadium, bar basic city services that every property uses.

Our club exists as part of a sportswashing initiative funded by the sovereign wealth fund of a petrostate and as an egoic plaything of an absolute monarch. There is no justification for one single tax dollar (or subsidy) to be allocated for this project.

Given the above, I would think it would grease the wheels for CFG to publicly say "we're paying for absolutely everything, and here's a little more on top".

That little extra on top should, at a minimum, be paying for the infrastructure upgrades. Show the city that it’s not costing them a dime, for any part of it. Not the water main nor the sewer nor the high voltage electrical feeds.

 

[Kjbert]

That little extra on top should, at a minimum, be paying for the infrastructure upgrades. Show the city that it’s not costing them a dime, for any part of it. Not the water main nor the sewer nor the high voltage electrical feeds.

People will still lie and complain that a public space will be used for private good. You’re not dealing with good faith actors here

 

[Ulrich]

People will still lie and complain that a public space will be used for private good. You’re not dealing with good faith actors here

Toss in a perpetual Trust for the Parks Dept as a thank you for allowing failing garages to be replaced. That Trust can be dog-eared for outer borough parks that don’t have conservancies or endowments (like the CEntral Park Conservancy or Prospect Park or Hudson River or Bkln Bridge, etc) to keep them maintained. That’s the sort of commitment that would help the city’s residents long term; building new urban concrete soccer surfaces is nice but maintaining dilapidated Parks is better, so why not both?

 

[moogoo]

Toss in a perpetual Trust for the Parks Dept as a thank you for allowing failing garages to be replaced. That Trust can be dog-eared for outer borough parks that don’t have conservancies or endowments (like the CEntral Park Conservancy or Prospect Park or Hudson River or Bkln Bridge, etc) to keep them maintained. That’s the sort of commitment that would help the city’s residents long term; building new urban concrete soccer surfaces is nice but maintaining dilapidated Parks is better, so why not both?

exactly. CFG has the money to spare. At this point, making the city and its residents an offer they can't refuse is the best way to get this thing moving quickly. CFG can pay for everything to develop the stadium, including whatever the city would normally take care of. On top of it, offer to pay for other stuff too, like you said. Win win win for everyone. There really shouldn't be any reason why residents or politicians would want to deny the deal then.

 

[sbrylski]

And I encourage you to vote no unless you want to encourage extremist candidates.

And why the fuck is this even a subject here?

Yes, because first-past-the-post has elected us a ton of moderates operating on good faith and in a cooperative and bipartisanship manner.

Ranked-choice voting is literally designed to incentivize solutions with broad-based appeal. You can't win unless you appeal to most people. So get out of here with that scare tactic misinformation.

 

[Kjbert]

Ulrich i don’t think these are rational people. They’ll find any excuse to bash us. We could fund NYC public schools in perpetuity and they would still complain.

 

[Ulrich]

Ulrich i don’t think these are rational people. They’ll find any excuse to bash us. We could fund NYC public schools in perpetuity and they would still complain.

Then why bother doing anything if you already have painted the situation in to the corner as a lost cause?

If this team does not get a stadium, it will wither and die. Co-sharing with baseball is a morphine drip that keeps the patient alive while slowly killing them over an extended & indefinite time.

 

[Shwafta]

Yes, because first-past-the-post has elected us a ton of moderates operating on good faith and in a cooperative and bipartisanship manner.

Ranked-choice voting is literally designed to incentivize solutions with broad-based appeal. You can't win unless you appeal to most people. So get out of here with that scare tactic misinformation.

Now now, mods, could we maybe keep this into a politics thread instead? Some of us don't exactly care to see political arguments here. c:

 

[FredMertz]

exactly. CFG has the money to spare. At this point, making the city and its residents an offer they can't refuse is the best way to get this thing moving quickly. CFG can pay for everything to develop the stadium, including whatever the city would normally take care of. On top of it, offer to pay for other stuff too, like you said. Win win win for everyone. There really shouldn't be any reason why residents or politicians would want to deny the deal then.

How is paying for everything and a bunch of extra stuff a win for CFG? I’m not accepting “they have so much money” as an explanation.
If that was a useful point, the stadium would be built already.

They should expect to receive exactly as much municipal help as any other enterprise creating any comparable development would. And that’s a number higher than zero.

Rich people don’t get (or stay) rich because they enter into unfavorable financial transactions.

 

[moogoo]

How is paying for everything and a bunch of extra stuff a win for CFG? I’m not accepting “they have so much money” as an explanation.
If that was a useful point, the stadium would be built already.

They should expect to receive exactly as much municipal help as any other enterprise creating any comparable development would. And that’s a number higher than zero.

Rich people don’t get (or stay) rich because they enter into unfavorable financial transactions.

It's a WIN because it gets the job done and a stadium built. and one could argue they are in an unfavorable financial transaction in the situation they're in right now. losing STHs, renting a stadium, having to deal with the cost of moving a game if necessary, etc etc.

The longer there isn't a stadium, the more money they lose, or at the very least, the less money they can make off the club. So it's simply a situation of spending money to make money.

 

[COLINMOUTH]

It's a WIN because it gets the job done and a stadium built. and one could argue they are in an unfavorable financial transaction in the situation they're in right now. losing STHs, renting a stadium, having to deal with the cost of moving a game if necessary, etc etc.

The longer there isn't a stadium, the more money they lose, or at the very least, the less money they can make off the club. So it's simply a situation of spending money to make money.

BOOM

 

[Gotham Gator]

CFG is trying to get a stadium done at probably the hardest time in memory to get the government on board with a stadium and in the city where there is the least possible space available to build one. And this is also for a sport that doesn't have broad public support. It's been really hard and is getting worse. This isn't 10 years ago when Bloomberg was happy giving away subsidies for big projects. CFG are going to have to bite down and do this without subsidies - and probably with a sweetener.