Members of the city of Glens Falls' Common Council are a vilified bunch lately.
Listen to some of the descriptions of them expressed in letters to the editor to The Post-Star newspaper.
-A "group of greedy cowards"
-"Does this Common Council want to promote gangbanging, narcotics, underage drinking, urinating in a public place or kids smoking pot..."
-The Council wants to "promote poison to our kids and to our future generations to cover up the truth about this pack of lies on the Common Council."
-"The Common Council made it their effort to run a negative campaign and make it so the person didn't want to come and save the hockey team."
-The Council wants to promote "underage drinking, open container violations and urinating in public."
What crime have Council members and business owners committed? Do they give beer to three year olds? Do they peddle kiddie porn? Do they pass out joints to kids hanging out in the park? Are they in league with terrorists?
No. Their crime is that they conducted negotiations with the owners of the local pro hockey in the summer of 2006 over a lease for the team to use the Civic Center arena. The hockey owners understandably wanted a lease favorable to them. The Council understandably wanted to make sure that the arena made enough revenue to lessen the building's operating deficit thus less the impact on the city's taxpayers. The two parties unfortunately could not come to an agreement and the franchise effectively folded.
Business owners Rick Davidson and Art Guillory have also taken sharp hits for dissenting from the orthodoxy that the city needs professional hockey no matter what the cost.
Fans lashed out angrily against the Council, against the business community and against the team's owners. Against everyone except the real culprits: the fans themselves. Or more specifically against the fans who stopped going to games.
The reality is that in their last year, the United Hockey League team averaged fewer than 2000 fans per game. Owners said they needed at least 3000 to break even. During the glory years of the 1980s, Glens Falls' American Hockey League team averaged between 4500-5000 fans a game most years.
The UHL is about two levels lower than the AHL, so it's not surprising that attendance dropped. But 3000 a game was a realistic number for the owners to expect. In 2005-06, the UHL team had an excellent season and played an exciting brand of hockey. Yet the team didn't even average 2000 fans a game.
Some complain about ticket prices. When the AHL team left and the UHL team replaced it, the new team's owners kept the ticket prices the same. This was a huge mistake. Fans were offered lower quality hockey at the same price. It's no surprise that attendance tanked. But the city government does not set the ticket prices.
Some point to the city's per ticket surcharge tax on tickets. But attendance was in steady decline long before this surcharge (to offset the burden to the city's taxpayers) was put into place. The policy of charging the same ticket prices for lower quality hockey was made long before this surcharge came into effect.
The reality is that fans stop chosing to spend their money to watch hockey games. That's not the fault of the Common Council or Rick Davidson or Art Guillory, no matter how much it angers the hockey fundamentalists. It's an unpleasant reality, but it's reality nonetheless.
I say this as a hockey fundamentalist myself. If the team returns at some point, I will be one of the first people in line to get season tickets. I'll put my money where my mouth is. But I don't want property taxes (and thus my rent) to go up dramatically just so I can have another entertainment choice.
The hockey team was a business. The Common Council runs a venue where that business was located. They couldn't come to an agreement that satisfied both parties. It's unfortunate. I'd been going to hockey games at the Civic Center for 20 years. But these things happen. I'm a hockey fan but the sport has run its natural life cycle in this small market. Nothing would please me more than to be wrong about this, but all the evidence points in the wrong direction.
The arena has run several big rock concerts since October (which would have been the beginning of hockey season). This brought in revenue that might not have been available had the building been filled by hockey. Of course, the city decided to forego revenue that they would've gotten from a lease with the hockey team. They lost one kind of revenue but are gaining another. It's a gamble, sure. But the building has operated a significant deficit for years. I give kudos to the Council for trying something new and for not chopping off the city taxpayers' left arm to appease the freeloading outsiders.
Davidson said that despite the lack of pro hockey, his business has been UP this winter as compared to last. Despite or because? The hockey fundamentalists may not like this but their overwrought melodrama can not counter cold, hard facts.
The reason the hockey fundamentalists are so upset is because they have a hard time accepting a reality. The simple fact is that interest in pro hockey in this area has significantly declined. The numbers demonstrate this. As a huge hockey fan myself, it saddens me. But I saw the writing on the wall several years ago.
They point to sellouts of a couple of games, each a special case scenario. One was the 2006 UHL all-star game and Adirondack Red Wings alumni game. It was a one-time special event. No regular Adirondack UHL game sold out that year. Another was an AHL Albany River Rats game last October that drew over 5000 fans. But that was a pre-season game and tickets were sold at $5 as a fundraiser for the local youth hockey program.
If Adirondack's UHL or AHL teams drew 5000 fans a game at REGULAR prices (not 2/3 off), then they'd still be here. What is a potential owner going to give more weight: one-time only special situations or the evidence of a decade of declining attendance? Is an owner going to believe promises and pleas or the facts of numbers?
The simple fact is that interest in pro hockey has declined in this area. I'm a huge hockey fan. I don't like this reality, but we fans need to recognize it if we're going to have any hope of changing it.
The answer is not to berate the Common Council or the business community. It's not to treat them with a venom usually reserved for child molesters. The answer is to be positive and encourage fans to go to hockey games whenever possible. The River Rats will hold four AHL regular season games at our Civic Center next year.
The infantile attacks against city leaders need to stop. I do not hold them above criticism, but only if the criticism is reasonable and coherent. If hockey fundamentalists see this as a serious problem, then let's hear some serious solutions.
I've been to several Glens Falls Common Council meetings and I've never heard anyone in the public comments period take nasty cheap shots at the Council for the hockey question. This tells me one of two things.
Either a) it's a lot easier to slam the Council members via letters to the editor or anonymous comments on their website than to have the guts to look them in the eye and slam them face-to-face or
b) actual residents of Glens Falls generally feel that their elected representatives are representing their interests (rather than the interests of people in other towns) in the way they use their tax dollars. Just because the Council is representing the interests of the people of Glens Falls, rather than the people of Olmstedville or Queensbury, doesn't make them idiots. It means they're doing their job!
It's telling that, as far as I can recall, of the many letters attacking the Council on the hockey question, NOT ONE was actually written by a resident of the city of Glens Falls.
Glens Falls residents and Glens Falls residents alone are the ones paying for the Civic Center, both the bonds and the operating expenses. Despite the fact that any economic benefit from big events at the building also typically spills over into South Glens Falls and Queensbury. Non-Glens Falls residents are the ones whining about the decisions our elected officials make, while not offering to contribute a dime.
Non-Glens Falls residents who want hockey to return to the Civic Center need to put up or shut up. Instead of demanding someone else's tax dollars foot the bill, let them share the burden. They ought to be demanding the their own town government or their county board of supervisors contribute money to offset the Civic Center's operating deficits.
As far as I'm concerned, if these people are not interested in having their own tax dollars help out, then no one in Glens Falls should listen to their opinions on how to run the building. No money = no input.
It's all too easy to 'volunteer' someone else's tax dollars. The job of the Glens Falls Common Council is to represent the interests of the residents of Glens Falls. Their job is not to have the residents of Glens Falls subsidize the entertainment choices of people in other municipalities.
20 comments:
I think one thing we saw with the Red Wings was community involvement. The players went to the mall and signed autographs, they went to schools, and one time I remember them going to Whitehall one day during a canal fest, I believe, to sign autographs. They would skate for charity and their promotions drew fans. Also one year after their debut we had the Olympics in Lake Placid and the Americans won and that pumped hockey fans.
Brian,
You still miss the most basic point.
If the city of Glens Falls operated the GFCC properly it wouldn't have a deficeit at all.
Please explain why you continue to expect the hockey team, which plays 40 games/season to pay the entire cost of operating the GFCC for 365 days?
You have a Director at the GFCC. She is paid to book as many events as possible there. This is how you cover the overhead costs associated with operating the building.
You can't just say "we have a hockey team" and sit down and do nothing and expect them to pay your bills.
You aren't supporting hockey, you are operating the GFCC. There's a very basic difference there and you don't seem to grasp it at all.
Don,
I grasp it well, thank you. It has nothing to do with the hockey team covering the operating expenses of the Civic Center for the entire year. Everyone involved wants to maximize the Civic Center's revenues so as to diminish the taxpayer subsidy. The Glens Falls taxpayer subsidy.
Bear in mind it was the publicly elected members of the Common Council, not Civic Center Director Bernd, who declined to sign a lease with Melrose and Levy. I believe one of the points argued was that it was difficult to book other events such as concerts because prime weekend dates were almost always unavailable because of hockey and basketball. Except in the summer when no one around here wants to be inside, as evidenced by the short-lived pro basketball and indoor soccer teams.
The Council decided that the lease money the City would have been paid by the team was less than they could've gotten by keeping those dates open so they could book other events. It was a judgement call of guaranteed vs potential revenues. But it was the Council members' job to make this decision with the best information they were provided, not based on sentimentality or the wishes of out of city residents.
It's not a question of hockey paying all the bills for the arena, as you mischaracterize my comments. It's a question of maximizing the arena's revenues so as to diminish the tax burden to GF residents, who foot the Center's bills by ourselves. Whether this is done by primarily hockey or concerts or political conventions or a combination of events should not be the Council's concern. I was happy for them to give hockey some leeway because of the sport's history and tradition here, but there's a limit.
The only way we'll be able to tell is to look at what the Center's financials look like come May.
As both a music and hockey fan, I'd love to have both. But the Council felt that they'd be foregoing far more potential revenue than the proposed Frostbite lease would've provided. It's a judgement call that they were paid to make and there hasn't been a huge outcry from their constituents here in GF. Most of the outcry is coming from neighboring towns. Why do you think that is?
I sincerely hope another hockey owner will be able to offer different parameters.
[quote]I believe one of the points argued was that it was difficult to book other events such as concerts because prime weekend dates were almost always unavailable because of hockey and basketball.[/quote]
You are just believing everything that Suzanna says as the truth. People complain about not having concerts due to hockey but it seems like most of the concerts that are being booked are on Thursday nights! There were probably 2 Thursday night hockey games in 7 years of UHL hockey in Glens Falls.
So that argument just doesn't work.
Frostbite,
The first two big concerts of what would been the hockey season were on a Friday (Godsmack) and a Wednesday (Disturbed). Both traditional hockey nights.
I also notice that Don and Frostbiterule ignore my main query. Specifically if the Civic Center is a regional asset, why shouldn't the burden of funding it be shared with the other entities that share in the economic spinoff benefits? Specifically, the municipalities of Queensbury and SGF/Moreau and/or the counties of Warren and Saratoga. That is my most basic point. If non-GF residents want to offer input, they're more than welcome to pony up.
So two concerts occurred this year instead of 40 hockey games. I don't have the numbers, but I wouldn't think that the city would make more from 2 nights than 40. Fact is, every successful arena in the country has a major tenant (a sports team of some kind) and other events such as concerts. Only in Glens Falls do people lack the knowledge to comprehend this fact.
As far as other neighboring towns helping out, I actually agree with you on that (I know its a surprise). Good luck convincing the local government of these towns to buy into that though as why would they spend money on something when they don't have to and the economic impact will be the same.
The best thing would be if the Civic Center was privately run. Then Glens Falls would instantly turn a large deficit (due to inept management) into an instant profit. Again, the chances of that actually happening though are probably slim to none.
Actually FBR, there've been several. Those are just the ones whose day of the week I can remember. I was at the Godsmack concert and there were about 6000 people there; would've taken 3 Frostbite games to get that many people.
Hockey's glory days in GF were during my childhood. I spent many an evening watching (or listening to on the radio) the Red Wings. There's no warmer sentimentality than good childhood memories.
BUT those days are gone and most hockey around fans here are loathe to face reality.
The fact of the matter is that hockey's popularity has waned in this area. If they were getting crowds of 4,000 or 5,000, then the lease wouldn't be an issue. That's not the fault of the Common Council or Suzanna Bernd, as easy it would to have them as a scapegoat.
Sorry, but even a favorable lease wouldn't have made hockey sustainable with crowds of 1,900 a game.
I have a couple points for you Brian...
First, if the GFCC wanted to be a regional asset then it needed to be sold that way in the first place. All the surrounding towns should've been brought in before it was built and had a say in not only running it but where it was located. Obviously if Queensbury, South Glens Falls, etc. were part of the regional group that owned the GFCC then it might not have been located where it is now as each town would've fought to get it built in their town.
Glens Falls saw itself as the regional "city" and wanted the benefits of having a building that draws people downtown so they went ahead and built it themselves, where they wanted it, and ran it as they saw fit. Deciding not to share control of the GFCC with other towns was their decision, not mine.
You can't take on that responsibility and build something your way, run it your way, and then 30 years later come back and expect people who have no say in the GFCC's operation to give you money for something that they already get for free. Things don't work that way. I'm sorry if you don't like it but that's the way it is.
If Queensbury had built it and now wanted money from Glens Falls residents you would be complaining about that too. The only difference is that you would then have the exact opposite opinion. Wouldn't you?
Let's not talk about hockey preventing concerts because that is just a bullshit excuse and you know it. That might have happened once and then Suzanna decided to just sit on her ass and stop trying. She gets paid $65,000 of your tax dollars to essentially do a part-time job now.
Fire Suzanna, bring the Wolfpack to Glens Falls and bring MSG in to manage the GFCC and I guarantee you things will be different. You'll see hockey crowds grow again, you'll see NHL exhibition games, and you'll see many many more events.
Why? Because we just got lucky? Of course not! It'll be because you actually have someone doing the job of managing the building properly for the first time ever.
Want a perfect example? Glens Falls gets $150,000/year from the county for East Field. They just gave back $20,000 from last year because your great manager, Suzanna, didn't spend it! I ask you, is that not proof of her incompetence?
How can Glens Falls residents ask for more money when they got $150,000 last year and didn't even use it? As a taxpayer, doesn't that piss you off?
Doesn't it embarrass you? It should! You folks can't manage $150,000 and you want more?
There's an old saying about getting your own house in order before you try to tell others what they should do. Glens Falls has their own messes to clean up. Don't come around preaching to the surrounding towns until you get capable people in your own city jobs. Maybe residents of surrounding towns are tired of being expected to pay for your uncorrected mistakes.
Let's say you had a grain silo and it had hole in it and kept leaking grain. A normal person would want money to fix the hole. Glens Falls residents don't want money to fix the hole, they want money to buy more grain so they can keep re-filling the silo. That's how dumb Glens Falls is run. You can direct your anger at everyone other then yourselves all you want but the problem is yours' and ultimately it's up to you to fix it.
Other city's spend a fortune trying to get people downtown. Glens Falls spends money trying to repel them because when the people do come downtown you folks can't figure out how to get them to spend money there.
That's just sad...
"Glens Falls gets $150,000/year from the county for East Field. They just gave back $20,000 from last year because your great manager, Suzanna, didn't spend it! I ask you, is that not proof of her incompetence?
Are you kidding me? This facility was run so efficiently that it didn't need the entire subsidy it was given and this is a cause for outrage?
I guarantee you, Don, that if the CC were given a county subsidy and WASN'T LOSING ENOUGH MONEY TO NEED IT, no I wouldn't be embarrassed in the least!
(I don't know what your point is since money given for East Field can only be spent on East Field. It's not like they could've taken that $20k and used it for the CC).
"There's an old saying about getting your own house in order before you try to tell others what they should do."
This is great advice, Don. You should follow it!
Don't you think it's interesting that the people who've spouted off to the paper ripping GF officials (and anyone else the path of their rage) about this are people from Queensbury, Olmstedville and other surrounding towns? I think they should follow your good advice too.
Don, you're absolutely right that GF wanted the benefits of the Civic Center so it took on the liabilities. No argument there.
If I weren't 3 years old when the public debate over building the arena were held, I might have objected. Though from what I've read, I'm not sure it would've mattered. GF leaders have always been looking for magic bullets.
However, the fact of the matter is since we residents of GF are the only ones paying for it, ours is the only input that should matter. The Common Council should NOT bow to the people who aren't footing the bill. They are responsible to the people of their wards, not to people in Olmstedville or Queensbury.
That's always been the most basic point my comments from the beginning. I resent people telling us how to spend our money. Ok if they were just offering suggestions, I might stomach it. But most of the letters have pompously ordered us how to spend our money and denounced our politicians, businessmen and Bernd with a vitriol (The Bennetts being the worst offenders) sometimes bordering on libel for not spending our money the way outsiders would like.
I detest what Queensbury has become and I'd never choose to live there (I use sidewalks and they don't have any) but I would never be pompous enough to tell them what to do and berate Dan Stec and co. if they refused. I haven't taken sides in their debates like over the community center. I've been frustrated at how long its taken them to redevelop Jenkinsville since I use it a lot but I haven't said anything because it would make me come across as a whiny freeloader to tell them what to do with their money so I can have more rec/entertainment opportunities.
"the problem is yours' and ultimately it's up to you to fix it."
As you yourself so correctly said, it's not costing you a dime. So mind your own business. Worry about your own municipality's board, not someone else's.
"Are you kidding me? This facility was run so efficiently that it didn't need the entire subsidy it was given and this is a cause for outrage?"--Brian
You are kidding, right? Have you been to East field lately? I have. There are any number of projects that $20,000 could've been used for and it wasn't. At the same time they were giving back $20,000 that went unused they are asking for more this year? That's total nonsense.
You really don't see that?
By the way, hockey fans were paying an extra $2/ticket. That was a city surcharge. Non-residents didn't get a refund on those surcharges.
That's what allows non-residents to comment about waste at the GFCC.
The main thing that needs to happen at East Field is a new clubhouse and $20k isn't going to be anywhere near enough to do that.
I assume there was a requirement in the agreement between the county and the city requiring the city to give back any money they didn't use.
So you're complaining about the city giving back $20k and for not reneging on their agreement. Can't win with some people, I suppose.
And if you seriously believe that CHOOSING TO pay $2 a ticket for a hockey game for one or two years gives you an equal voice with city residents who've been forced to pour millions of dollars into the building, then you're seriously mistaken.
If you went to every single home game last season, then the surcharge cost you around $80. Your choice to pay.
The city subsidy to the arena worked out to about around $50 last year for every GF resident. Not their choice to pay.
Sorry to make customers chip in a nominal amount for one or two years for building maintenance that GF residents (customers or not) took care alone of for over 20 years. The surcharge, much like the bed tax, was long overdue.
The difference is that you were a customer, while GF residents are basically investors. We've paid that for two and a half decades, you paid that for a year or two.
You could choose not to pay if you didn't like it. As long as we're living in GF, we're forced to pay whether we like hockey or not. And that $50 per capita certainly didn't exempt me or anyone else from the surcharge if we went to games.
So stop comparing apples to oranges.
Wednesday, 04 April, 2007
Brian,
Only hockey fans paid the $2/ticket surcharge. How do you justify concertgoers not being charged that same fee? Are they not using the same facilities that hockey fans used?
It's not comparing apples and oranges if you want to complain about inequities at the same time you are creating new ones. You complain that non-residents don't pay and that bugs you. At the same time it's okay with you if hockey fans pay extra but people going to other events don't?
I have no say in how Glens Falls wastes it's money. You are right about that. However, I certainly have a right to point out that had you managed the GFCC properly you wouldn't lose money on it every year and your taxes would go down.
That building is 30 years old and from what I understand the city hasn't even paid off the original cost of it yet. You are paying a bunch of interest on the original cost however. Had the city managed their finances better you wouldn't still be paying interest on it either. As a non-resident, is that my fault as well?
"Only hockey fans paid the $2/ticket surcharge. How do you justify concertgoers not being charged that same fee? Are they not using the same facilities that hockey fans used?"
I was not aware of that. I assumed this was paid for on all tickets. If I am wrong, I am wrong. Perhaps this is because of the costs associated with maintaining the ice. I don't know. You are correct that this should apply to all events (though I'd make an exception for high school and other amateur sporting events).
"You complain that non-residents don't pay and that bugs you."
"As a non-resident, is that my fault as well?"
Ok, this is the 132nd and last time I am going to say this.
I have NEVER complained that non-residents don't pay.
I have NEVER complained that everything (or anything) about the Civic Center's financial problems is the fault of non-residents.
All I have complained about the non-residents who don't pay yet think they should have a say in how the venue is run.
If that's not clear enough for you, let me know and I try to explain it in languages other than English.
I was perfectly content with GF trying solve this problem on its own. It's ONLY when people from other communities who don't contribute a dime went out of their way to berate officials whose job it is to represent me not them, that's when I decided to speak up.
You have the right to point things out. But you've more than sufficiently done that.
Warren County allocates $150,000.00 a year. This money is to be used for East Field, Fire Road Rec, and the Civic Center. The City submits Purchase Orders to the County who in turn reimburses the City. The Total spent last year was a shade less than $130,000.00. The City didn't "realize" they didn't spend it all and are going to the County to see if they can get it added in this years amount. Amazing. I am a City resident, a Hockey fan and do attend most all of the Common Council Meetings. I have FOILED numerous documents, and if you would like to sit down and take a look at them you would see why other municipalities dodn't want to get involved in our mess.
Chris,
My gut impression is that you are probably correct.
Bear in mind that the whole point of this was not to beg for county or Qby money for the Civic Center.
It was to tell those Qby and Pottersville residents offering their unsollicited attacks to mind their own business. It's a debate the building's investors (GF taxpayers) alone should be having.
As such, I welcome your further elaboration.
Americans have a long, proud history of complaining... yet a shorter history of offering solutions. You're right- they shouldn't have to subsidize a facility on taxpayer money if it isn't working out. They should work to get a biger variety of acts in GF to save the arena.
Post a Comment