Playland Amusement Park has been an institution in Westchester County for more than 80 years. Today governments at all levels are facing budget shortfalls are confronted with tough spending decisions. Apparently the fate of Playland is one of those decisions. For years the park has been operating at a deficit, and the new County Executive Rob Astorino is taking a hard look at the scope and organization of County Government. Recently he was claiming that Westchester was operating at a deficit of $166 million dollars, (not sure how you can come up with such a precise number, worst case scenario, possibly?). So what is the solution to these budgetary woes?
When Astorino was running for election last year, he was running on a campaign to reduce the size of government and lower taxes. Government had overstretched its reach and was involving itself in things that was beyond its role. Critics of the Spano Administration pointed out that property taxes were the highest in America. This was very effective politically, as we see in this upcoming election year, when politicians in an astonishing exercise in amnesia or subterfuge are trying to blame government spending for the recession and massive unemployment. After the failure of the market system, the same old saws are coming out of the woodshed again. Another issue that helped Astorino get elected was the affordable housing settlement that the county made, where certain affluent towns would have to build affordable housing for minorities, i.e. never in my back yard. A lot of people seemed to think that County government was unnecessary and that it could be just completely eliminated, without any of the services that County Government does being transferred to another tier of government. In any event Astorino wound up winning in a landslide, so his message had a lot of resonance with the populace.
And because of campaign promises, one of the solutions off the table is tax increases, even a very moderate one. No one likes taxes obviously, but things like balanced budget amendments and laws restricting deficit spending make things difficult for government to operate by restricting options. In a crisis, government needs to spend sometimes, as it has over the last 2 years. It seems that deficit spending is was alright prior to President Obama--I wonder where all these penny pinching mavens of fiscal responsibility in the Republican party were during the deficit spending in the Bush years and tax cuts while we were fighting two wars! And unfortunately, like any candidate running against an incumbent for this job, one of things that he also chose to ignore was that 75% to 80% of the County budget is mandated by the state, so there is not that much proportionally to cut. And suddenly cuts were characterized as being "symbolic", because government does not have the authority to not fund mandates and results are suddenly not as important. Another part of the tax problem is that the majority of the taxes that the old administration was criticized for were taxes calculated and levied by local governments, not the County. I guess hard and fast campaign promises can get you elected, but in the final analysis, maybe in the long run painting yourself into an ideological corner is not prudent or practical. The flip side of the argument is that tax cuts can't be made at the expense of having bad government, where nothing can get done, and residents are harmed in the process.
After all, while he may want to do things to prune down government, his job is in fact to run government and provide services, not just to cut expenditures. If cutting and burning means inadequate and ineffective government he is not doing his job. If something is not working right, fix it. In most cases, there are reasons why programs exist. These days we constantly hear opinions on what government should not do--I am not too certain about what Astorino feels the job of government actually is. All of this can wind up being a very divisive thing, because budget cuts can force sacrifices from people who can least afford it. Some people don't have a problem with sacrifice, as long as it does not directly affect their interests. But cutbacks can often have unintended consequences that do wind up affecting the whole community.
One of opinions we hear about Playland is that we are the only government that runs an amusement park. I say so what? I'm proud of the fact that Westchester is unique. And I firmly believe that there are ways to make the park more profitable. While I agree that huge deficits are a problem, I don't know whether the goal of the park is necessarily profitability, but rather to provide a recreational service. Are the other County Parks running in the black? Another thing that I've been hearing is that the people who are patronizing the park are "not residents". So exception is taken to County funds subsidizing other communities. But if Playland was made $5 million would anyone be making such an argument? Then NYC could argue that they were subsidizing us!! Maybe its a testament to the attractiveness of the venue that people would travel from other places to go there. And the close proximity to so many people should be considered a major contributory asset to the long term success of the park. I would hope that the argument is not a sort of coded message, that the park is attracting "undesirables". But judging the overreaction of people to affordable housing in some areas in Westchester, you have to wonder whether it is playing to an ugly political base.
I would not argue that some modernization is necessary for the park, and that perhaps government may not have the sort of funds to enable such improvements. Perhaps better marketing is in order, or maybe more special events with a residual effect of attracting bigger crowds and ultimately attracting first time visitors who become regular customers. One of the assets of the park but also to an extent a developmental drawback is that there is a certain traditional character to the park that should be respected and maintained. It would be a disaster to have a private company come in and tear the whole place down and make it into a Six Flags. Another idea would be to create or lease activities and destinations that could be utilized year round, such as restaurants or indoor recreation, in addition to the Ice Rink.
When I think of possible solutions, I find that Rye Playland reminds me of Tivoli Gardens in Copenhagen. It has that same old time charm, and a family atmosphere and would seem to me, at least on a very basic level a good template for what Playland can be. People young and old go there, if only wander around, grab a bight to eat, or sit on a bench and relax. Tivoli, like Playland has been around a long time and is a part of the history of the area. I can't imagine that there are many people there who are interested in shutting the place down. I understand that it is not a government enterprise, that it was created by beer barons in the mid 19th century. But if what they have is successful, I think that an analysis of what they are doing over there would be a boon. I know that something as great as what we have in Westchester can work, and that losing Playland would be an irreplaceable loss for Westchester. And I think that we all know from experience that once you tear something down, its difficult perhaps economically impossible to bring it back. And sometimes, the question is not what is necessary, but what sort of society and life do we want to have, a fundamental role of government.
A lot of conservatives think that government always is bad, that private enterprise is the answer to everything (funny how that mantra is still being chanted after the events of the last two years?) It used to be that if something didn't work, you would try to fix it. And these same people keep running for office, so if they fail I guess it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. How completely cynical of them. I guess they run for office because of the gratitude that awaits them after they retire from politics. And after all the nightmares that came from deregulation and defunding of government agencies, to keep maintaining that big government has created the mess we are in is actually duplicitous. There are no ideas except cut taxes from this crowd, and ten years of tax cuts have done what?? Well, true, we have an even greater chasm between the wealthy and the vast majority of us. It seems unbelievable to me that so many relevant and crucial issues are being addressed since Obama has come to office and people don't remember nearly a decade of government inaction. Is that what everyone wants? Government has a big role to play for us--the job of business has nothing to do with the public weal, only making profits. Government is the agency that can help our country to be the place we want it to be, to live up to its great ideals, to be a real egalitarian democracy. So let's keep our public places, maintain our heritage, and support places like Playland continuing. Without them we would not be Westchester.
No comments:
Post a Comment