By Ben Nicholson
October 10 – The New York Red Bulls have been granted a hearing with the Supreme Court of New Jersey to settle its tax dispute with the Town of Harrison. The club is seeking reimbursement for tax paid on its Red Bull Arena, claiming exemption is statutorily permitted.
The club paid $1.5 million for the 2010 tax year and $1.3 million for 2011 for the stadium, which is owned by the Harrison Redevelopment Agency and is leased to the Hudson County Redevelopment Authority.
The trial and appellate courts ruled in favor of Harrison. The exemption the Red Bulls are seeking is from the language of the statute providing, “All properties and public facilities of a county improvement authority are exempt” and that “All projects and other properties of a redevelopment agency are exempt.”
The issue is whether the Red Bulls can squeeze themselves into these categories.
The appellate court held that Red Bull “is a non-government entity privately operating on the property”. They reasoned that the club is the chief user of the stadium. Other uses of the arena, albeit beneficial to the public, is subordinate to this primary purpose.
The Red Bulls appealed, claiming that they were “undoubtedly the victim of a ‘bait and switch'” and that the court ignored the “plain language” of the text. The club points to its inception, which was during a time when the town was “dying”, arguing that to allow the ruling to stand would entail a crippling effect on any such similar project in the area. They draw upon the heartstrings of policy so as to create an encouraging and welcoming precedent for future investments.
But if that argument fails, they also have the alternative argument that since the property and stadium are devoted to an “essential public purpose”, their exemption should be allowed and their monies returned. The Harrison Redevelopment Agency has access to the stadium for high school, college sports championships and public ceremonies. Whether this will amount to “essential public purpose” will be a matter for the courts to decide.
In response to the Red Bulls’ motion, Harrison drew attention to the club’s usage of the stadium “for its own economic benefit”, stating that the law does not allow for an exemption on this foundation. Harrison alleges that the “Red Bulls’ attempt to manipulate the exemption provisions of these laws for its individual financial gain, to the detriment of the public, is not only improper, it is baseless.”
Contact the writer of this story at moc.l1742890022labto1742890022ofdlr1742890022owedi1742890022sni@n1742890022osloh1742890022cin.n1742890022eb1742890022