Massachusetts Town Rejects Snyderization
On Tuesday night the city council of Agawam, Mass., home of Six Flags New England, voted unanimously to set aside the new law that was designed to prevent visitors to the park from parking anywhere but in the lots owned by the amusement giant.
For years, private landowners had offered parkgoers a cheaper alternative to the park-owned lots. The cost of parking at Six Flags New England, and all Six Flags outposts, has skyrocketed since the company was taken over by a group led by Redskins owner Dan Snyder, who now serves as chairman of the board. Six Flags New England now charges $15 to $30 for parking. The so-called pirate lots were charging $10 or less when the ban kicked in.
The vote means that the parking ban will be sent back to the Agawam planning board for rewrite.
The ban had been enacted by the council in June at the behest of Six Flags management and Agawam Mayor Richard Cohen (shown here on the left, dancing with Wiggles characters Captain Feathersword, Henry the Octopus, and Dorothy the Dinosaur. Park officials told local lawmakers and the town citizenry that for safety’s sake something had to be done. Cohen lobbied for the measure despite knowing that in the 20 years since the private lots had parked cars for Six Flags visitors, there were no reported accidents or safety issues. The ban’s language, however, created a situation where there was essentially no legal place to park in Agawam other than in Six Flags or government-owned lots.
Michael Palazzi, one of the private parking lot owners affected by the ban, says the townspeople and the council turned on Cohen when they learned that Snyder had used the same bogus safety argument back in 2000 to ban pedestrians from walking into FedExField for Redskins games, thereby forcing fans to park on lots that he owned. The pedestrian ban at the stadium was tossed out after a lawsuit on behalf of Skins ticketholders filed by D.C. lawyer JP Szymkowicz.
Agawamians came out in force to show their disgust with the Six Flags situation. According to a report of the council meeting in the Springfield Republican: “The Rev. Ronald Sadlowski, pastor of Sacred Heart Church, told the council the excuse of public safety was ‘a smoke screen for power.’”
Palazzi now says he couldn’t believe how contrite city officials, other than Cohen, have been since finding out about the Redskins owner’s past dealings. Council President Don Rheault told the meeting that he had been “duped” into believing safety was behind the ban.
“The members of the council apologized to me, personally, on television, for doing Six Flags’ bidding,” says Palazzi, who led the fight for the repeal. “They told me they know now this was never about safety—this was about money for Six Flags.”
3 Responses to “Massachusetts Town Rejects Snyderization”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- the $60,000 diet - does it work? (0
)
My friend Ray made a $60,000 bet with his friend Ted that he'd lose 60 pounds in nine months. Ted ma… - Extended Drinking Hours at Inauguration: It’s Official (2)
The vote is 9-4 in favor of extending hours of alcohol service at local taverns and nightclubs until… - Extended Inauguration Drinking Hours Not a Done Deal! (1)
DCist points to a load of confusion over the District's plans to extend drinking hours in the days l… - Sean Taylor’s Officially Fair Game (0)
On WTEM's "Monday Morning Quarterback" show yesterday, host Andy Pollin led a discussion of Sunday's… - AU Professor Proposes Using Complex Online Scheme to Make D.C. Simple to Understand (0)
Washington, D.C. is a complicated place. Journalists in D.C. bureaus are getting laid off in droves.…
- the $60,000 diet - does it work? (0
September 8th, 2007 at 10:23 am
Get real. The city council is a bunch of morons that didn’t think through the ramifications of the poorly written ordinance. Anyone who claims that they’ve been parking cars around the park for years is a liar. Not until Six Flags upped the price to $15 did anybody start parking cars their. Palazzi is a flat out liar. He may have parked a few cars back in the mid-90’s but from 2000-2005 he didn’t. I’d really like to see his income tax reports that show the revenue. Oh wait, he didn’t claim it, that’s why he hasn’t sued yet. Thanks Dave for writing such a one-sided and biased account of the goings on. You’ve done a real service to the readers of this rag of a newspaper by reporting both sides of the news.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
jeff:
your venom is fab, jeff! i particularly love: “Get real!” but I’d be, to use your parlance, a “flat-out liar” if I said you make any more sense than Miss Teen South Carolina. You write that no private lots parked cars til Six Flags upped the price (in 2006), and anybody who says they’ve parked cars “for years” is (here it comes again!) “a liar.” And then you concede Palazzi “may” have parked cars ‘back in the mid-90’s.”
Huh?
But, I concede that your unconventional definitions for “for years” and/or “liar” are irrelevant to the point I think you’re trying to make, Jeff. I think you’re saying the Agawam councilmembers didn’t err by trying to do Six Flags bidding, and that their only mistake was crafting a “poorly written” bill to benefit the amusement park.
If so: Get real, Jeff! (Thanks for bringing that back!)
Don’t believe me and my biased, one sided version. Let’s check out the Springfield Republican’s Sept. 6 story on the council’s unanimous vote to throw out the parking ordinance crafted for Six Flags.(http://www.masslive.com/metrowest/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1189066605208470.xml&coll=1)
Some snippets:
Councilor Ruth Carr Bitzas said the ordinance “is all about Six Flags and their ability to have all the parking privileges.”…
Councilor Robert E. Rossi said he was upset with himself because he allowed himself to be hoodwinked [by Six Flags]….
Some councilors criticized Mayor Richard A. Cohen for selling the ordinance on the pretense of public safety when, they said, it was really designed to protect the financial interests of Six Flags New England.
“Since we’ve implemented it and found out how it functions and operates, we find safety isn’t the real reason it’s transpired….,” Council President Donald M. Rheault said.
What part of “Officials Apologize for Parking Ordinance” (the headline in the Republican’s piece) don’t you understand, Jeff? And that’s just one piece. Go read the other accounts of the meeting from any news source near Agawam. They’re consistent, and entertaining.
Also, Jeff, if I still have your attention, I’d love to hear your rationale for the coincidences between the Agawam/Six Flags situation and the FedExField pedestrian ban from 2000. And, Jeff, I would be honored if you would use this space to present the side of the Agawam/Six Flags parking story that hasn’t yet been told.
Oh, one more thing, Jeff: Six Flags in Agawam has upped the top parking price to $30, not $15, the only figure in your rant. The big price is what created a windfall for Palazzi and the other businessmen near the amusement park. The way you tossed out “one-sided and biased,” it’s sorta strange you left the $30 tab out.
But, thanks for playing the Feud…
November 7th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
[...] council voted unanimously to toss out the parking ordinance, and several councilmembers publicly apologized to residents and the local business community for having fallen for the safety pitch. After [...]