Imagine that, a politician making The New Yankee Stadium an issue as the Yanks prepare to close the old ballpark. Shocking, I know.
Notice, I didn't say that the politician is necessarily wrong, but I just can't stand politicians. All of them.
Assemblyman Richard Brodsky said the commitment of $550 million to $850 million in taxpayer money was based on an unsubstantiated threat that the Yankees would leave New York. He said in a new report that the team predicted the public investment would generate 1,000 new permanent jobs, but the actual total would be 15.Now, Brodsky might be right. Of course, the Yanks mouthpiece refuted those claims:
Brodsky also criticized the deal for not making affordable tickets available to lower income New Yorkers.
[Yankees spokeswoman Alice McGillion] said Brodsky’s statements were inaccurate, noting that 1,000 permanent jobs will be created — not 15 as Brodsky claimed, citing public statements by the city and Yankees.I can tell you this much: those tickets will be tough to get as the escalating cost for season tickets will push the "regular folks" who had season tickets higher up the bowl to just keep their costs close to constant.
She also said ticket prices are very affordable, with about 35 percent of tickets priced at $25 or less and half the tickets priced at $45 or less.
“It is disappointing that Assemblyman Brodsky, for personal aggrandizement, is attempting to insert himself into the final week at the current Yankee Stadium,” she said.
The Yankees noted, as did [Mayor Mike] Bloomberg, that Brodsky had twice voted in favor of the Yankee Stadium deal in the Legislature.
My question is: Are those 1,000 permanent jobs INCREMENTAL to what were already permanent jobs in and around the Stadium? Was Brodsky's count of 15 the incremental amount? Or are those 1,000 merely a recounting of those existing jobs and counted as if the Yanks were considering leaving the area?