Brodsky, Yanks square off over Stadium financing, again

Former Yanks highlight Mexican League rosters
Game 52: Small Sample Size Alert

Richard Brodsky and Randy Levine, those two titans of New York and its stadium politics, are at it again. While the two have clashed over public financing for new Yankee Stadium in the arena of the New York State Assembly, yesterday, they squared off in court over a subpoena Brodsky has issued calling for internal Yankee documents about stadium financing. The Yankees, rightly so, claim that Brodsky is singling them out unfairly when other New York entities have enjoyed sweetheart tax breaks as well. For what it’s worth, the Mets have complied with Brodsky’s document request, took over a parking lot and not a park for their new stadium and required less in public financing to build Citi Field.

Meanwhile, the Yankees allege that Brodsky’s request for document production could cost taxpayers around $5 million. At this point, I have to wonder if it’s worth it. As Neil deMause wrote in September, Brodsky is garnering headlines and not much else. It’s doubtful that the IRS will revoke the tax-exempt status of the bonds, and Brodsky is continuing to burn through public money and good will. The Yankees, a very rich entity, relied on more public money than they should have to build the stadium, and we can debate the true economic impact of the new park until the cows come home..

For more on the issue, check out this post at Fack Youk. Their resident law student feels that the team should comply for the sake of transparency. In principle, I agree, but it’s getting to the point, though, at which Brodsky should consider just dropping it.

Former Yanks highlight Mexican League rosters
Game 52: Small Sample Size Alert
  • Tony

    It does seem that the Yankees have a point with Brodsky. According to the NY Times – a hotel in upstate NY received similiar financing – but Brodsky has not gone after it with the same zeal. It leads me to believe that Brodsky’s motives go beyond the issue at hand and more to do with making a name for himself.

  • Whizzo The Wize

    Whizzo knows for a fact that a 1.4 million document production costs nowhere near $5 million. It’s half that, at most. And given that the market rate for attorneys who do document review has been decimated over the last 6 months, it’s probably even less costly than that.

    Also, the opposing party DOES NOT PAY for document production UNLESS it loses the case. Until a final judgment is entered, each party pays for all of their own attorney fees and costs. Then the salaries paid to the reviewers (assuming they are attorneys) can become the responsibility of the losing party as normal fee shifting statutes allow. It’s why law firms hire attorneys to review documents and not 8th graders (who in many cases could do the work just fine).

    Whizzo thinks it’s still a waste of time even at “only” $1-2 million, but the Yankees are blowing smoke on this one.

    • http://www.riveraveblues.com Benjamin Kabak

      So shockingly, both the Yankees and the Brodsky are blowing smoke — also known as a “Monday” in New York state politics.

      • Whizzo The Wize

        Indeed.

        Whizzo will be a lot happier when the only heated debates regarding the Stadium involve how many home-runs are flying out of it.

        • Mike HC

          I will be a lot happier when the only heated debates regarding the Stadium involve how many MORE World Championships the Yanks can win in the new building.

          Analyzing fee shifting statutes, declining rates of the billable hour and trying to sift through typical political/lawyer posturing, is not my idea of a BASEBALL conversation. But I guess that is just the way of the world in this day and age.

        • Tony

          do you always talk in the 3rd person? Tony would like to know

          • Whizzo the Wize

            Almost always.

            On the few occasions Whizzo has lapsed, Whizzo has been swiftly rebuked for the transgression.