The Carrier Dome Controversy: Rewriting the Town-Gown Relationship Author(S): Donald J
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The Carrier Dome Controversy: Rewriting the Town-Gown Relationship Author(s): Donald J. Kirby Source: Change , Mar. - Apr., 1988, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Mar. - Apr., 1988), pp. 42-49 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40164593 JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Change This content downloaded from 130.127.238.233 on Mon, 23 Nov 2020 22:05:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms /';-=09 )(8* =-0/'] This content downloaded from 130.127.238.233 on Mon, 23 Nov 2020 22:05:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms THE CARRIER DOME CONTROVERSY "rewriting the town-gown relationship 1984, when Syracuse University activities," and that the Dome was in- paid the city of Syracuse $1.25 mil- deed taxable. Murphy delayed entering lion in contested taxes and interest an order, and for the next eighteen charges- its 1982 property tax bill months the city and university strug- on the 5O,OOO-seat stadium known gled to resolve the problem locally. Fi- as the "Carrier Dome" - colleges nally, on December 16, 1986, a new city and municipalities looked on with administration and the university an- anxious interest. Although the nounced an agreement exempting the payment was made "under protest," Carrier Dome from real estate taxes; in had the university failed to pay that bill return, the city would receive a share of the city had the authority to sell the ticket proceeds from nonacademic Dome for back taxes. Even as it made Dome events. The city retained the the payment, the university was hold- $1.25 million in taxes paid earlier by ing city tax bills for the Dome of overthe university. $1 million per year for 1983 and 1984. I have changed my mind about this The university's fears were con- case three times. The first was when firmed on June 7, 1985, when New students researched the matter during York State Supreme Court Justice its early stages and presented their Thomas J. Murphy ruled that the pri- findings in a senior seminar on "Cor- vate university had used the facility for porate Responsibility." Their presen- "deliberate, willful revenue-producing tation and class discussion persuaded me that the university was right to fight 3 taxation. I switched to the city's side a DONALD J. KIRBY, S.J. is associate pro- >■ few months later when at Vassar Col- fessor of Religious Studies at Le Moyne c/5 College, Syracuse, and project director lege of I /presented a reworked analysis of ^. Le Moyne 's Working Group on Values the in case to a work group studying "val- Higher Education. His areas of interest ues are conflict in institutional decision u Christian social ethics and the theological I making." This meeting of the Society foundations of ethics, especially in business CD for Values in Higher Education had as- areas. He has published in the Journal of Business Ethics, Liberal Education, and sembled college presidents, deans, fac- other journals. ulty, lawyers, and legislators; their in- © 43 Change March/April 1988 by Donald J. Kirby. S. J. This content downloaded from 130.127.238.233 on Mon, 23 Nov 2020 22:05:37 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms sights convinced me that the City's po- tionally ranked basketball program, facility's financial and political impli- sition had more merit. But the final which was already playing before cations; ca- no one party felt strong out-of-court settlement caused me to pacity crowds in the 9,000-seat Manley enough to pressure another. The uni- reconsider; both sides have persuasive Field House. An enhanced sports pro-versity needed public services and good arguments about this complex issue. gram and the resulting publicity would will; surrounding communities needed Now that a settlement has been help recruit high-quality athletes theand spin-off revenue from Dome events. reached, the full story of the facilitateCarrier general student recruitment Thus all parties proceeded cautiously. Dome controversy can be told. onIts a nationalout- basis. The increase in stu- The money needed for operating costs come can help educators and citydent numbersad- and spin-off income and related services clearly would be ministrators understand critical issues from the Dome would allow the uni- great, and it was by no means clear of taxation and town-gown relations. versity to improve its educational pro- how much revenue the facility would grams. The Dome, then, was seen as an The Carrier Dome Story generate. Given the financial uncer- answer to problems the university tainties, the city adopted a more giving The Carrier Dome is massive. Sub- would face over the next twenty years. attitude in early discussions. stantially completed on September 19, But where should the Dome be built? 1980 at a cost of $27.5 million, the Funding the Dome: A breakdown of At least three sites received considera- white shining roof of the 50,000-seat how the Dome was paid for sheds light tion. One was Skytop, a large parcel of Dome dominates the physical and psy- on the financial controversy. Of the land contiguous with and owned by the chic geography of central New York Dome's total cost of $27.5 million, $15 university. Construction was to be a million came from the State of New State. It symbolizes both Syracuse Uni- joint city and county effort, with the uni- versity's hope for big-time athletics York, $2.75 million from the Syracuse- versity contributing the land. Another and a controversy that lingers across based Carrier Corporation, and $9.75 proposed site was the New York State million from other sources. More than campus, city, and state. The history of fairgrounds on the outskirts of Syra- half the cost, then, came from New that controversy is illuminating. cuse. Like Skytop, this site had ample Why It Was Built: Except for the im- York State taxpayers. The next largest parking and access by interstate high- portance of football to Syracuse there amount came as a gift from a large cor- ways and public transportation. (The would be no story to tell. Since 1889 poration (note that, for $2.75 million, site eventually chosen had little or no football has been a major part of the Carrier gets continual advertisement parking.) fall for both the university and central on national television). So from the be- New York State. Football legends such The Skytop location was dropped ginning, the Dome reflected a marriage as Jim Brown, Ernie Davis, and Larry when it became clear that prolonged between government, business, and ed- Csonka played for Syracuse in the '50s opposition from citizens groups made ucation, an attempt to make a univer- and '60s. The Orangemen won the na- the cooperation of local communities sity and community more viable. tional title in 1960. Throughout the and municipalities unlikely. As various Why Syracuse University received '70s, the team struggled to regain na- parties wrangled, the university opted such a large sum of money from the tional repute. That struggle reached a for a pre-emptive strike: It would build state treasury for this facility was a milestone this past January when Syra- a huge, multipurpose facility itself, mystery and a source of contention cuse, after an undefeated 1987 season, right in the middle of its own crowded within the state. Governor Hugh Carey played Auburn to a tie in the Sugar campus on the site of the old, 22,000- and key local legislators were up for Bowl. seat Archibold Stadium. The univer- election at the time, and the governor For a number of years the city and sity's plan called for playing fields and was in trouble in Onondaga County. surrounding municipalities in Onon- basketball courts, of meeting areas, That circumstance, and heavy, effec- daga County had hoped cooperatively and health facilities- a major attrac- tive lobbying by influential alumni in to construct a major sports facility. tion for alumni, students, and the Albany and support from small busi- But who would build such an arena, larger Syracuse community. ness across the state, convinced state and where to locate it, was always the The site's main advantage was that it officials in late September 1978 to problem. For its part, the university was already appropriately zoned, so the award $15 million to the university. was feeling pressure to build a new sta- structure could be built promptly. The Provided as a grant from the Urban dium to meet ncaa stadium require- disadvantage of the decision to proceed Development Corporation, the money ments for division-I football. alone was that sufficient time wasn't would go for construction costs (the In the early '70s the university had left to negotiate with neighborhoods, state would not agree to fund operating hired a consultant to evaluate its finan- the city, or the county. The fact that costs). Back in 1978, this allocation cial future in light of expected drops in neighborhoods and hospitals around meant that what remained of the student enrollments. The consultant the Dome would be greatly impacted state's financial pie for other private suggested that an alternative would was be not carefully considered, which incolleges and universities was very small to build a large, attractive, domed, ex-retrospect was a mistake.