I don't want to get anybody's hopes up...

[eddiejc1]

...but it is possible this could bring us the swing votes we need to get the lease passed. If seven members feel the way as D.C.'s next mayor, Adrian Fenty, there will never be a stadium built, even if the only thing D.C. had to pay for was infrastructure. Fenty has gone on record saying that he does not believe any of the development near Verizon Center has brought in $100 million to D.C.'s coffers and he still thinks that was a bad idea...

Anyway, I'm getting off track here.

Developers Offer $70 Million for SE Land Rights

Eddie Cunningham

[wilkerson_rulz-06]

...but it is possible this could bring us the swing votes we need to get the lease passed. If seven members feel the way as D.C.'s next mayor, Adrian Fenty, there will never be a stadium built, even if the only thing D.C. had to pay for was infrastructure. Fenty has gone on record saying that he does not believe any of the development near Verizon Center has brought in $100 million to D.C.'s coffers and he still thinks that was a bad idea...

Anyway, I'm getting off track here.

Developers Offer $70 Million for SE Land Rights

Eddie Cunningham

Eddie, nothing against you, but personally I'm tired of all this saga!
All I hear is stadium this, lease that!

Enough already, can't the mayor sign a stupid paper and get this over with!

(not yelling at you eddie! )

[Bob Hannah]

Reading Tea Leaves: Stadium Almost In the Bag

The District city council has scheduled on its agenda for Tuesday, February 7, a vote on the baseball stadium lease agreement. This is significant because it was strongly felt council chair Linda Cropp would not place the vote on the agenda if she did not feel the vote would win a majority of seven in order to pass. Of the thirteen council members, proponents of the stadium could count on six votes. One former opponent, Kathie Patterson, who had only recently been opposed, is now counted as a vote in the yea column, leaving the bill one vote shy of passing. If the bill doesn't pass, say bye-bye to the new stadium and possibly baseball, as MLB still controls the team. With Cropp scheduling the vote, she feels the pendulum has swung the other way.

Just this afternoon, the Washington Post carried this story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...020302034.html

Developers Offer $70 Million for SE Land Rights
By David Nakamura
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 3, 2006; 4:18 PM

Developers have offered to pay the District $70 million for the rights to build on land adjacent to a new baseball stadium, money that city leaders said would help cover potential cost overruns on the project.

The pledge was made in a letter this afternoon from Stephen Goldsmith, chairman of the Anacostia Waterfront Corporation, to Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) and D.C. Council Chairman Linda W. Cropp (D). The letter was included in a larger package of documents submitted to the council that is intended to convince members that the city will be able to cover cost overruns without dipping into the city's general fund.

The council is sharply divided over a stadium lease deal with Major League Baseball that is critical for the project to move forward. Many members have expressed serious concerns over the rising cost of the project, whose price has risen from $535 million to $667 million.

Goldsmith and Williams went into a closed-door meeting with the council shortly after 1 p.m.

The Anacostia Waterfront Corporation was established by Williams to oversee development of the waterfront near the ballpark, near South Capitol Street and the Navy Yard in Southeast Washington.

Also included in the package to the council was a cap on stadium construction costs of $320 million. The cap was contained in a "guaranteed maximum price" contract between the city and the three construction companies that will build the ballpark -- Clark Construction Group, Hunt Construction Group and Smoot Construction.

The contract transfers the control of the project from the city to the construction companies, but also transfers the risk. The companies agreed to a guaranteed price of $320 million for the materials and labor. The price includes a $20 million payment from Major League Baseball, which the league promised in December.

If the companies fail to complete the stadium by March 1, 2008, their fees will be reduced by $100,000 per day, up to a maximum penalty of $5 million, according to the documents submitted to the council.

The documents also include a cap of $68 million for so-call "soft construction costs," including fees to architects and consultants.

In his letter, Goldsmith said developers have pledged to pay for the rights to develop on land within the 20 acres needed for the stadium project that is not taken up by the ballpark structure. Of the $70 million, $55 million will go to the waterfront corporation and $15 million will go to MLB.

The waterfront corporation has chosen four developers to oversee construction of a ballpark entertainment district just beyond the stadium site. Two of those companies, Forest City and Western Development, signed a letter stating they will pay $70 million for the three open parcels on the ballpark site. Two parcels are just north of the stadium abutting N Street SE and one is on the south side, between South Capitol Street and Potomac Avenue SE.

With the money, the corporation will pay for upgrades to nearby roads and an underground parking garage. The corporation also pledged to pay for cost overruns related to the city's acquisition of 14 acres for the ballpark and potential environmental remediation, as well as to help with other potential overruns related to construction.

Goldsmith's package stated that the corporation expected to take in millions more dollars from a special taxing district on new businesses to the area. Another special tax district farther from the stadium will raise money for a community benefits fund promised by Williams.

The council had also expected to receive a construction contract today. The contract, between the D.C. Sports and Entertainment Commission and the three construction companies set to build the stadium, was to include a special "guaranteed maximum price" contract that would cap ballpark construction costs at $320 million -- including a $20 million payment from MLB.

Very good news overall, Natsfans. As the areas bolded in the story show, the Waterfront corporation's $70 mil pledge, the cap on constuction costs for the stadium itself, risk transfer to the construction companies with penalties for late delivery, added to concessions made by MLB in December, will more than likely be quite enough to sway the seventh and deciding yea vote. Once that occurs, it is believed the eighth and ninth (?) (more than is needed) will come along. There will those on the council that will still flat out refuse to vote yes-probably Catania, Fenty, Barry and Schwarz, maybe Graham.

Very good news indeed. Everyone wins.

[Bob Hannah]

OOOPPPPPPPs!!!!!

Sorry, eddie, I was so excited at seeing the story on the Post site tonight I didn't check the forum and started a thread myself! I'll merge them and add mine here. There will be some redundancy, but what the heck- things lookin' good!!!!!

[Bob Hannah]

Eddie, nothing against you, but personally I'm tired of all this saga!
All I hear is stadium this, lease that!

Enough already, can't the mayor sign a stupid paper and get this over with!

(not yelling at you eddie! )

We are sick of, too, wliky. Too bad its not as easy as signing a piece of paper. Believe me, if Mayor Williams could do such, the stadium would be half way to completion.

[eddiejc1]

Sorry, eddie, I was so excited at seeing the story on the Post site tonight I didn't check the forum and started a thread myself! I'll merge them and add mine here. There will be some redundancy, but what the heck- things lookin' good!!!!!

Who is the sixth vote we can now count on? Schwartz or Mendelsonn?

Eddie Cunningham

[Bob Hannah]

Patterson. I understand up 'til a week or so ago she was considered a no, but was really a fence sitter.

On the yes side, along with her, there are Cropp, Evans, Orange, Ambrose, Gray.

No's -Catania, Fenty, Schwartz, Graham, Mendelson, Brown, Barry. From what I understand, Brown and Mendelson would be the ones to pull from this side.

[eddiejc1]

To be honest, Patterson was listed as one of the supporters a couple of weeks ago. Gray hasn't, so I assume he is the one who switched. We had better hope Schwartz and Mendelsson switch, because I don't think there is any chance of getting the others. They WANT the stadium to fail, even if it means killing baseball in Washington and paying millions in arbitrator damages. I do not have the same faith as others do that arbitration would force the Council to build the stadium, nor am I sure there is a "plan B" to build a baseball stadium off the Dulles corridor. Even if there was, why would baseball wait? Let's keep our fingers crossed...

Eddie Cunningham

[KingJ]

Remember: If the Nationals don't get a decent stadium, the terrorists win.

[eddiejc1]

Remember: If the Nationals don't get a decent stadium, the terrorists win.

Thanks---I needed that!

Eddie Cunningham

[eddiejc1]

Patterson. I understand up 'til a week or so ago she was considered a no, but was really a fence sitter.

On the yes side, along with her, there are Cropp, Evans, Orange, Ambrose, Gray.

No's -Catania, Fenty, Schwartz, Graham, Mendelson, Brown, Barry. From what I understand, Brown and Mendelson would be the ones to pull from this side.

Kwame Brown has supposedly asked Linda Cropp to delay the vote, which worries me since he is supposed to be a swing vote. What worries me is that Brown might not be checking over the facts to make sure this saves money, but to find some reason to vote against this. Fenty and company will not listen to arguments that baseball, basketball, and hockey will help the city economically---as far as they are concerned, it is unconscionable for the District to spend ANY money on a sports facility. All the development around MCI/Verizon Center has not changed Fenty's mind about it. He would STILL vote against the center today, and he says that the development which took place around it did not bring much money into the city.

Why am I babbling? Because I am worried that at least seven Council members agree with Fenty, and if that is the case, no concessions in the world will get them to build the stadium. They want to kill the baseball stadium because they see it as a symbol of wasted priorities and a big extended middle finger to the suburbanites they view as the District's enemies. I don't think even arbitration penalties will change their minds, and if there is no workable plan to build a baseball stadium in the suburbs, the Nats will be history.

Eddie Cunningham

[Bob Hannah]

Maybe Brown wants the vote delayed because he thinks it will pass!?!

What boggles my mind is Fenty and Co. can be so blind. But for them to say devlopement downtown around MCI is ludicrous. Just look at the Penn Quarter area. I don't believe a major sports facility in and of itself is the answer to a city's economic woes, but it is just plain foolish to say there are no benefits reaped.

Fenty is foolish to want to stick it to the suburbanites-along with tourism thats what brings money into the D.C. coffers. D.C. has made noise for years in regard to a commuter tax, but they can't legally pass one. What with special tax districts that go along with the lease agreement, and the fact that 80% of Nationals seats are sold to those outside the district, these guys are plain nuts not to see the long range benefits. They are effectively getting non-resident dollars placed into the treasury.

I'll ammend my earlier post. I believe it is Schwartz, not Mendelson, who is a swing vote. And I believe you are correct, eddie, citing Patterson as having jumped into the yea fold, with Gray leaning that way.

The one who kills me is Graham. He seems more clueless each time he opens his mouth. He speaks of what should be done with money generated from the project, yet is a nay vote. Doesn't he realize there will be no money if the nays have it?

On Monday the federal government decides how much they will spend on Metro. Watch this vote. If it covers enough to renovate the Navy Yard to accomodate baseball that will be a telling sign. There are politicians wanting baseball in the city. This goes deeper than the city council.

[Uncle Dak]

Who is the sixth vote we can now count on? Schwartz or Mendelsonn?

Eddie Cunningham

If you live in the area, send an e-mail to the DC City Council and let them know you support the new stadium. Even if you live in MD or No VA, you are bringing cash to the district on account of the new team and ballpark. The project will be a showcase architectural project and WILL spur development in SE.

[email protected]

[eddiejc1]

This does not look good:

http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=25&sid=691403

It tells me right off the bat that all the HUGE concessions made have not brought over the seven votes needed, and I have a sickening feeling that even if this emergency legislation were to pass, the other side would make more demands because deep down, they DON'T want a compromise and they DON'T want a stadium. Let's hope there is a "Plan B" in Virginia...

Eddie Cunningham

[eddiejc1]

If you live in the area, send an e-mail to the DC City Council and let them know you support the new stadium. Even if you live in MD or No VA, you are bringing cash to the district on account of the new team and ballpark. The project will be a showcase architectural project and WILL spur development in SE.

[email protected]

They won't listen to me, but here's the e-mail I sent them. The only thing I am not posting here that was in my e-mail was my mailing address and phone numbers:

Dear Madam Chairman and fellow Council Members:

I will be brief. I am not a resident of the District of Columbia,
but I am a lifelong resident of Silver Spring, MD and a longtime
baseball fan. 20 years ago, I was writing letters to Peter Ueberroth
begging MLB to put a major league team in Washington, D.C. Now
it seems that out of spite, a majority of you want to throw this away,
despite the enormous concessions made this past weekend.

I believe that if you wish, an adequate compromise can be reached
to build the park AND meet the other budget requirements of D.C.
citizens, including the new school construction budget. But if you
decide that you would rather not have my money spent at or near
a new baseball park, then you won't have it spent elsewhere in D.C---
ever. Rest assured I will not forget who was responsible for killing
D.C.'s chances of keeping its first major league baseball team in
a third of a century. Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Edward J. Cunningham