Live-blogging THE VOTE (cont)

February 7, 2006

Whew, that last post was getting long!
Ambrose: We are building a neighborhood to help revitalize the city. But for the thing we’ve done around the MCI center, we would not have the property tax increases, etc. for more revenue. But for baseball, it would take a whole lot longer to get the mixed-use development down along the Anacostia River that some of us have dreamed about. I believe that we can bring a baseball stadium in on time and within budget. When we start talking about caps, I think that gets a little iffy. We can’t control the international steel market, the volatility, even of the unemployment figures. Do I have confidence? Yes. Could we have a better deal? I’m not a deal maker – I don’t know. I know when you play games, whoever has the ball and bat is in control of how the game goes and we have never had the ball and bat. We have had to do the best we can with what we have, and I think we have a whole lot in being the nation’s capital. We will have done it and I will be proud to be part of the vote that accomplishes that.

Graham: I voted no in 12/04 because I believed it was too expensive then. Why would I change my mind today? What has happened that would tell me I should vote yes instead of no. Everything has reinforced my point of view that this is a bad deal. Let me cite this morning’s WaPo – they have these helpful little boxes so you don’t have to read the whole article. I’m told that today MLB will give 3.5 million dollars for a DC youth academy. Now that’s not a lot of money, but it’s something and an academy would be very good. If you go to page 37 in the lease, it says “The team will also work with the sports commission and other charitable organizations to dedicate a…” It is not as the WaPo has reported. I go to a letter from our distinguished Chair that she submitted to the mayor asking for a cap in plain English – 2. No more money shall be allocated for baseball other than the 535 million already authorized. So how did they answer that cap question? Single word no – but it’s captured in hundreds of pages of documents, meant to mislead and obfuscate. We have other needs to attend to, even though I realize that some money would only exist because of baseball. We do not know how much this is going to cost the people of the District of Columbia. Two years from now when the chickens come home to roost, I want to say not because of my vote.

Barry: I was very intimately involved in MCI center. ACK!! Work interrupted me and I missed the best part.

TABLE VOTE (I think?): yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, Patterson -no Schwartz – no Someone changed to no. 10 yes, 3 no.

Cropp: Everyone can speak one more round. Two minutes.

Patterson: Concur it’s time to make a decision – make or break time for baseball. The info is known by all of us. We’re pretty far down the road. I was on this council in 95/96 when we tried to claw our way out of bankruptcy and we were the butt of jokes on late night television. We’ll put ourselves right back on the Jay Leno show. I think it’s time to move forward, I hope we can move forward, I hope the folks looking for a better deal realize it’s fish or cut bait time and vote in favor of baseball as an engine for people having idle conversations on the subway about our team. I think it’s time to move forward – good things for a city, gov’t, neighborhoods, fathers and son, and moms and sons as well (YEAH!). We need to move.

Mendelson: We should limit the public cost. Prospective owners can pay overruns. That’s an option that has not been explored. We could say instead MLB – you build the stadium under the same terms we give the contractors. I think they’re close to that. Let them build the stadium under the max price terms and conditions negotiated with the contractors. There are options here to get us a price cap on the public financing. That’s where I am.

Schwartz: I was sincerely trying to come to a real cap. I want something more hard, more solid, more firm and fast [no jokes, please!!]. I wasn’t looking for delay at this point. I love baseball. I used to write Bud Selig and ask him to look DC over for baseball. I don’t want to say bye to baseball, I want to say welcome, I’m glad you’re here and we got a decent lease. I’m going to be here and I want to make the best deal so I’m not left here holding a shaky bag. I want additional time.

Evans: Mr Barry, I disagree with you – the MCI Center was a very complicated deal. That was as complicated and convoluted as any we’ve seen – much more than this one. We are financing with money we wouldn’t have otherwise. If there’s no baseball, there’s no money. Gone gone gone. Costs are not unlimited – capped within all reasonable methods. This is just as good a deal as any building being built downtown. Frankly, if they lost money then we wouln’t be building them. Finally, this reminds me of the Jack Cook discussion – let’s tell him he can take his team and shove it unless they agree to our terms. Well he took it – we really taught him a lesson. When the gov of VA announces a new stadium will be built at Dulles International – won’t we be proud we really taught them a lesson?!

Gray: Loves baseball, played it, yadda yadda. Feasibility is issue he’s coming to grips with. I’ve tried to figure out a way to make baseball work feasibly and financially. I understand the rent, baseball fee, taxes – I understand revenue streams. One of the questions we sent forward to the mayor was in part construction costs of the stadium will be guaranteed so the taxpayers won’t face an open checkbook – we guarantee the checkbook will be closed. We got a document back titled to sound like cap. We got a consultant. In a word, they came back and said in answer no, it does not provide a max cost. I would love not to vote no today to this lease, however we’re being forced into a situation where we’re being told to ‘fish or cut bait‘ (hee! I love that phrase and the imagery it conjures up).

Orange: Let me apologize to the council – I got a little emotional and the statements at the end were uncalled for. Our consultants stated the guaranteed max price contract is well-stated. They also said it’s the best we can get.

Catania: No one has mentioned what it will cost us to maintain the stadium – operating capital cost. Fixing up, replacements, etc. The lease has a provision that says the public has to pay for those modifications. What does this mean in terms of possible cost? Uses Three Rivers Stadium as an example of Keeping Up With The Joneses. This GMP is just a folly. A GMP would be helpful if the design work of this stadium were completed. We have not done the design work. There is no way for anyone to tell us how much it will cost. We underbudgeted allocations of cost – such as the scoreboard. Will ours be inferior to NC state’s $25 million one?
Barry: (I’m not missing it this time!) Madame Chair, if this council votes this present lease down, could the mayor submit a different lease? I think that’s another option we have there. Vote this down and have the mayor submit another one.

Brown: I came in today expecting that we will have some positive news about baseball. Reconsider the motion to table. I would urge our colleagues to take another look at this for those who seriously want to keep baseball here in DC.

Cropp: I’m going to support the motion to reconsider. Let me tell you why. (everything just paused.. hmm…. )

Brown moves to reconsider previous question. Cropp explains what’s going on.

Cropp: I’m the one who wants to vote on baseball today. No matter what, before we leave, there WILL BE a vote on baseball today. I’m prepared to vote in favor of baseball. There is concern however. Quite frankly, I don’t think there are seven votes right now to vote on the lease as is. What I have done is put together legislation that will put a cap on it. In doing that, we then have an opportunity to vote on that legislation and pass the lease. What happened with an earlier motion made by the ward 8 rep if continued will force the council to vote on the issue before us either up or down on the existing lease. Voting up or down on the existing lease will mean in my opinion failure. We do have opportunity to get 9 votes for the emergency, but in order to do that, this vote must be tabled. What the expectation is, this will get tabled, we will recess, and I will schedule an emergency meeting. There are members not prepared to vote on the lease as it is, but are prepared to vote on the emergency piece. Then there would be the votes in place to pass the lease and to have a cap on it. A vote to reconsider – I would encourage a vote to reconsider. Then we can move to table this.

Mendelson (or Graham? they’re all a blur now) – asks questions. Cropp: Reconvene after finishing the existing agenda. Graham: Is this motion to reconsider debatable? Cropp: Yes. Barry: Are you suggesting we vote to reconsider the previous question, will you then recess this meeting? Cropp: Not until we go through the rest of the agenda. Barry: And we’ll have an opportunity to discuss before we come back out here so we don’t spend a lot of time debating the question. Cropp: What I may do is after we vote on this, I would like a motion to recess for a short period and I would like to have an administrative meeting with members of the council to talk about our process. Orange: You indicated you want to recess – shouldn’t we finish? Cropp: No, we need to do it now (Ok, now I’m confused – I thought she was saying after finishing other stuff. Cool, I can finish work and hopefully get home before they reconvene). Graham argues and wants to vote down the lease.

Motion to reconsider withdrawn. Motion to recess: (is it debatable? some smartalek asks) They’re just giving up for now. Whew, I have to go potty and get home!
Evans y
FEnty n
graham n
Gray y
Mendelson y
Orange y
Patterson n
Schwartz y
Ambrose n
Barry
Brown y
Catania n
Cropp y
Barry? Barry? y

Cropp: Going to recess. I will try to bring us back no later than 6:30. See ya later!!

Continued…¬¨‚Ć

Posted in Stadium, Washington Nationals