WASHINGTON - August 24 -
George M. Steinbrenner III
Owner, New York Yankees
Dear Mr. Steinbrenner:
So you want to be the man who tears down "the House That Ruth Built."
And for what? More profit.
Neither you, nor the city government you pressured, nor anyone else
should ever do this to a place so rich in history and tradition as
Yankee Stadium. Would the city ever tear down Carnegie Hall? Adding
wasteful insult to senseless injury, you command hundreds of millions of
dollars in public subsidies and primary neighborhood parkland to support
a new impostor stadium.
At your invitation-only "groundbreaking" on August 16, you professed
that "It's a pleasure to give this to you people," as if you were giving
to south Bronx residents, the taxpayers and the fans, rather than taking
from them.
Perhaps "you people" were the many compliant politicians who fell all
over themselves to approve your plans, virtually skipping thorough
public debate and process altogether. Or maybe "you people" were the
well-connected developers eager to get their hands on another
neighborhood. Either way, I'm sure they are all dreaming of securing
further deals behind the closed doors of their luxury suites at a new
stadium.
But what you are "giving" to south Bronx families and residents is less
opportunity for their recreation, more pollution, and unease over
developers' unknown intentions for their neighborhood. You have seized
their centrally-located parkland and are reportedly in the process of
cutting down nearly 400 mature trees to make way for a new stadium. In a
dubious proposal to offset this loss of parkland, other park spaces are
to be created in three years. But these are scattered farther away --
much of it across a highway -- with little value and utility to the same
residents.
In addition, the plans call for parking garages and 4,000 more parking
spaces that will result in further contamination of the already heavily
polluted neighborhood while discouraging transit ridership.
What you are "giving" the taxpayers is a bill for $422 million or so in
land giveaways, tax breaks, and supporting infrastructure and transit
costs. In a new stadium -- owned by a development company, which is
owned by the city -- your "rent" payments would no longer go to the city
treasury, but instead toward paying off the taxable share of the
construction bonds. Plus, you would no longer pay property taxes at a
new stadium.
But the gravy train doesn't stop there. In a recent piece for the
Village Voice, Neil deMause reported on a taxpayer-soaking lease clause
cooked-up by former Mayor Rudy Giuliani during his final week in office
in 2001. Your big-money lobbyists who pressured city and state officials
to approve the stadium plan were actually paid for by city taxpayers.
That lease clause allowed you to deduct up to $5 million a year in
"stadium planning" costs from your current Yankee Stadium rent payments
to the city. Apparently, lobbying elected officials for public money and
approval of the stadium deal counts as "stadium planning."
And while you claim to be paying for the vast majority of the $1.3
billion stadium project, it turns out your share really comes to about
$492 million according to deMause. In addition to the $422 million
public cost, about $136 million would come from subtracting stadium
construction debt from your gross revenues -- money that you are allowed
to withhold from your revenue-sharing responsibility to Major League
Baseball. And private developers are paying $250 million toward parking
garages.
And finally, what you are "giving" the fans of the Yankees is 4,000
fewer seats per game, higher ticket prices and a wrecking ball to
history. What's left of affordable seats would be placed much farther
away from the field, above and behind the luxury suites and club seats
that would become the priority. Average fans would long for the days of
the wonderfully intimate upper deck at Yankee Stadium.
From the days of Ruppert and Huston to present, fans have watched
historic games at Yankee Stadium, and collected memories that will stay
with them forever. They watched the likes of my own childhood hero, Lou
Gehrig, along with Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle, Roger Maris,
Reggie Jackson and Don Mattingly. They witnessed the month of October
like no other fans have.
Instead of destroying a national treasure like Yankee Stadium to build
yet another replica of everyone else's new stadium/"mallpark", you
should use those private funds that you've been publicizing and make the
needed updates and improvements on Yankee Stadium to fulfill
contemporary requirements and deepen historic roots. Nothing can compare
to the real thing, and there is nothing that a new stadium can provide
that Yankee Stadium cannot. You have the opportunity to make a great
shrine of the national pastime even better, as was done for Fenway Park
in Boston.
If you truly believe in the extraordinary relationship between the
Yankees and the community that has made the franchise so special, then
you can surely respect the virtues of historic preservation and its
benefits to society. Preservation is good business and contributes much
to the quality of peoples' lives. Yankee Stadium is a perfect example,
as it maintains a link with New York's past and connects the citizens
with the experiences of the people who came before them, in turn giving
us a better understanding of our connectedness. When such an amazing
part of Americana as Yankee Stadium is destroyed, all the lessons that
it has offered are mostly forgotten and lost over time.
Would your conscience be clear as you repay this peerless ballpark by
leveling it? It's not too late. You still have the chance to do the
right thing.
Sincerely,
Ralph Nader
Washington, DC
###