y Stefan Mychajliw
The United States Supreme Court will soon make a decision on whether or not it will hear what could be a landmark lawsuit to stop taxpayer dollars from being used to build a new stadium for the Buffalo Bills.
While it could be considered a legal “Hail Mary,” this case could put the brakes on using $600 million in state funds to construct a new stadium for the only NFL team that currently plays within New York State.
If successful, taxpayers from Coram to the Catskills, from Brookhaven to Buffalo, and from Mastic Beach to Machias, would not have to fork over $600 million in state funds for an NFL stadium that is already under construction.
“I’m hopeful. There's a lot more money to be spent on the facility. It could even be decided whether the money already spent would have to go back to the State of New York. For sure, public funds would cease, it would stop,” said lead plaintiff Bob Schulz, who spoke to the South Shore Press from his home in the Lake George Region of New York State.
According to search results on the Supreme Court website, Mr. Shulz’s lawsuit to block taxpayer dollars from being used to build a new Buffalo Bills stadium is on the docket for the high court to be “Distributed for Conference'' on Friday, April 26th, 2024.
What this means is that the Supreme Court will review a large number of cases, this one included, on whether or not they will even consider taking it up and hearing it.
Friday is the day of the week when these conferences take place. 75% of cases are rejected outright, with zero debate, and not even considered to be heard. A very small percentage of the remaining 25% are then debated amongst Justices and Clerks on whether or not they will be reviewed by the Supreme Court.
The backbone of Mr. Schulz’s lawsuit, which was rejected previously by lower courts: the New York State Constitution prohibits using public dollars for a private business.
Schulz points to Article Seven, Section Eight of the NYS Constitution that states: “The money of the state shall not be given or loaned to or in aid of any private corporation or association, or private undertaking.”
“This is a stadium to be used exclusively for the Buffalo Bills. They were on notice from day one that this case was filed and might go against them,” added Shulz, who spent a lifetime as a “good government” advocate who holds politicians and municipalities accountable. By the 84-year-old’s own estimate he’s filed over 100 lawsuits in his lifetime.
His passion fighting back against big government overreach began in 1979. At that time his local government told Shulz and his neighbors there was an environmental disaster brewing, Lake George was turning “pea soup green,” and a desperate need existed to build a sewage treatment plant, one that would carry waste 12 miles and eventually into the Hudson River. He had a sneaking suspicion the real motivation was to be able to handle an influx of tourists into his quaint community for those who wanted to build a casino.
Schulz hired a lawyer from outside that region. He did not want a massive development where he and his wife Judy raised four children, horses, chickens, and sheep. A lawsuit was filed to force the government to engage in an environmental study, as required by law.
Lo and behold, Shulz won. A review was completed, one showing a negative impact on the environment. The sewage treatment plant was not built.
“That changed my life. We are still a family oriented, seasonal destination,” said Shulz.
He went on to take numerous levels and branches of government to court, even successfully suing former Governor Mario Cuomo for using public tax dollars to promote a “yes” vote for a public referendum back in 1990.
As for his current lawsuit against New York State to stop the use of $600 million in state funds for a new Buffalo Bills stadium, Schulz feels he has a strong shot at the Supreme Court hearing his case.
“I’m confident because the federal question involves the Guarantee Clause of the Constitution. Article four, section four. It guarantees people a ‘republican form of government.’ That means ultimate power rests with the people. Government is based on the consent of the people,” added Shulz, who has no “best guess” on when he will know whether or not the Supreme Court will hear his case.
“My hopes are up. It would be a great way to end a 45 year career to argue before them,” concluded Shulz.