Baseball Battle

Here's the latest from city hall. The council will vote on baseball after completing its regular legislative meeting today. The meeting is in progress.

Chairman Linda W. Cropp has drafted her own stadium spending cap after the council heard Monday from consultants that the mayor's spending cap was not sufficient. But Cropp's plan is not acceptable to Mayor Williams or Major League Baseball because it restricts city spending, and it is not clear who would be on the hook for overruns. It appears that MLB might be on the hook. Mayoral aides are scrambling to get Cropp to agree to changes before the council votes.

Cropp would need 9 votes to win approval for her cap because it is emergency legislation. The stadium lease with MLB would then be approved on the contingency that MLB and the mayor accept the spending cap.

If Cropp's spending cap is not acceptable to the mayor and MLB by the time the council votes on it later today, the mayor may have to take action, according to his aides.

If the mayor decides that letting the council approve Cropp's cap could cause even more problems with MLB, the mayor may try to block Cropp by asking the pro-baseball supporters on the council to join anti-stadium members and vote the cap down. Then Cropp might have to allow the council to vote on the mayor's plan, for which the mayor would hope to get 7 votes. He would need only a simple majority of the 13-member council because his plan is not being offered as an emergency bill.

But there are several hours left to go before the council reaches a baseball vote and lots of negotiating still to go on.

By David Nakamura |  February 7, 2006; 2:49 PM ET
Previous: Ouch! | Next: It's Alive!

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Hey Dave, If (or should I say When) the DC Council defeats the baseball lease agreement, will the Post do an indepth questioning of what exactly does Fenty, Catania, Graham et al, want?

Posted by: MW, Alex., VA | February 7, 2006 04:08 PM

When will these idiots on the Council realize that you have to spend money to make money. They are posturing because there is a mayoral election later this year. If DC loses baseball, believe me, it will come back to bite those who voted against it in the butt!!

Posted by: Todd - DC | February 7, 2006 04:19 PM

Holy crap!! This surely makes for good news, but man, I have never seen such ineptitude in my life!

Posted by: Doug | February 7, 2006 04:43 PM

Of course the ineptitude comment was directed at Cropp and the Council...not you, Dave! Your coverage of this ridiculous saga has been top notch.

Posted by: Doug | February 7, 2006 04:48 PM

I love it Count Crackula is wearing a Nats Cap, I wonder if he bought it with left over money he had when he didn't pay his taxes...

Posted by: The Anti-Barry | February 7, 2006 04:53 PM

man, that was a Phenomenal Speech by Councilman Orange.

even if you are against the stadium, you gotta appreciate that. :)

Posted by: John IV | February 7, 2006 05:00 PM

http://www.dcbar.org/bprReports/informal_ads/Fenty_A.pdf

Posted by: Cipher | February 7, 2006 05:05 PM

Great speech by Vincent Orange.... maybe he should be the next Mayor of DC. Oh yeah.. why is Marion Barry wearing a Nats hat??

Posted by: Bowie, MD | February 7, 2006 05:09 PM

Regardless of the outcome of the votes today, the Post needs to track what's been happening here over time. I for one am confused. Here are some questions the Post should answer:

* Track the statements of each council member and the mayor on this issue. Have they changed over time? If so, how?

* Did the letter from Cropp to MLB accurately state the sense of the council? If so, did the mayor and MLB meet the demands in the letter? Did the council change its demands after the new agreement was reached?

In short, somebody down at the Wilson Building is lying through his/her teeth. I want to know who. The post should get to the bottom of all this nonsense rather than just tracking the ongoing fiasco of ever changing demands and petty egos.

Posted by: DC | February 7, 2006 05:14 PM

This being the same Bill Orange who tried every cheap trick in the book to kill the Living Wage?

Man, millions (or likely a billion when all is said and done) for an adult male hitting a ball with a stick and then running in a circle, but nothing for honest working people. What screwed up priorities.

Posted by: DC | February 7, 2006 05:18 PM

Vincent Orange's middle name is Bill?

Posted by: John IV | February 7, 2006 05:48 PM

Someone needs to step in an shut down the DC Government. I mean, I use to be all for statehood -- but considering the morons in charge of the District, it could never survive as it's own state. It's time for DC to lose all city government and be run by a Congressional Committee.

Posted by: Bill | February 7, 2006 06:35 PM

Bring on the Baseball...End the grandstanding!!!! enough bickering!!

Baseball is GOOD for DC bottomline

Posted by: Pissed Off | February 7, 2006 06:38 PM

Bring on the Baseball...End the grandstanding!!!! enough bickering!!

Baseball is GOOD for DC bottomline

Posted by: Tax Payer | February 7, 2006 06:39 PM

wassup with bill oranges emotional outburst directed at adrian fenty? what did he mean by being fined by the dc bar and unable to manage 20,000 dollars?

Posted by: ricardito | February 7, 2006 07:46 PM

"Bill" as in sticking us with the stadium bill.

Exactly how is baseball "GOOD" for DC? Every study not funded by MLB demonstrates that stadiums are at best revenue neutral, and usually a net negative. I see nothing good in losing money so some people can watch a grown man hit a ball with a stick and then run in a circle.

Posted by: DC | February 7, 2006 07:54 PM

Yes!! The lease as written is toast!

Posted by: DC | February 7, 2006 08:41 PM

Congratulations Meridian Hill and others ... the Distric just lost a revenue source of more than $100 million per year over the next 30 years.

Posted by: Arlington | February 7, 2006 08:50 PM

Uh...again. No non-Pro-sports funded study supports your assertion.

Posted by: DC | February 7, 2006 08:54 PM

Absolutely disappointing. This council continues to display its short-sightedness.

Robbie
http://beyondthemall.wordpress.com/

Posted by: Robbie | February 7, 2006 09:05 PM

The DC council again shows its utter ineptitude to squander every opportunity presented to it, no matter how many chances it's given.

Posted by: asmith | February 7, 2006 09:06 PM

Thanks DC Council!!!!!!!!
you are the best at........waisting time and money for self interest

Posted by: Tax Payer | February 7, 2006 09:37 PM

Well Done DC Council. Your vote today was inline with the wishes of the majority of the dc residents. We do not need baseball on these terms.

Posted by: dc voter | February 7, 2006 09:55 PM

Wow, the DC Council screwed DC Metro residents. Not only will the Nats move after RFK deal is done, but DC will then have to wait another 33 years for a baseball team. Its obvious they can not see the long-term benefit the stadium and furthermore the team will have to DC's finance and social welfare.

Posted by: Potomac, MD | February 7, 2006 09:59 PM

Oh man, I guess I saw this coming. I mean, how can we expect the council, in its current makeup, to move the city forward? At least my ward's councilmember (Ms. Ambrose) had the good sense to see the benefits that a revitalized Near SE neighborhood would have bestowed upon the city. But alas, she was one of only five.

Now we can all look forward to putting all of the tax revenue from the Metro bus repair depot, the seven residences, and the five gay nightclubs, etc. that sit in what would have been the stadium and stadium district to better our schools and improve our infrastructure. And surely Florida Rock will put its site to good use...

By the way, the "DC" poster misconstrues the facts by stating that "stadiums are at best revenue neutral, and usually a net negative" - we're not talking just the stadium...but the development (and its associated tax revenue) that will be spurred by the stadium. And don't forget that all of the tax revenue that does come in from the use of the stadium (including the tickets) is coming from all of those VA and MD suburbanites for whom you hold such disdain...yes, it's a de facto commuter tax.

Posted by: Doug | February 7, 2006 10:42 PM

Let's remember Chinatown and surrounding areas before the Convention Center and MCI center. Then lets go up to Baltimore and ask them if building Camden and their Convention Center was worth it, cause about 20 years ago that area was very similar to SE is now. You know what screw it I am following the Nats to No VA at least there I wont pay sky high taxes and have public officials that think being robbed at gun point is no big deal. I hope they don't lock up Barry, it’s not worth the tax dollars. If Ward 8 residents can't learn after all those years that a crack addict can't do anything for you after four terms in office they will never learn, Ward 8 was the poorest, had the highest crime, and the worst education record in DC when Barry was first elected and it still does! My only conclusion can be that the people of Ward 8 like it that way, why would they continue to elect him! And if Fenty becomes Mayor of this town well then this just proves it even more, he sure loves Barry and maybe he is getting ready to follow in his footsteps (http://www.dcbar.org/bprReports/informal_ads/Fenty_A.pdf)?

Posted by: Remember | February 7, 2006 10:47 PM

Unbelievable. The actions of the council are beyond belief. Why does every major city in American want a team and are willing to pay the price for the teaam? Because it is good for civic pride, it is good for generating wealth and any new stadium built anywhere in the world brings development, jobs, fans with money and raises the whole city up in almost every imaginable way. It's like arguring that we should build no more hospitals because they cost a lot of money and only the doctors get rich. A service is provided that citizens (over 2M last year) are willing to pay to particiapte. I will simply go back to Camden Yards and spend my money there and let Baltimore and Maryland get rich while we can sit in our slums wondering why nothing gets better. The biggest slam on politicians is that they "do nothing" and everything crumbles. Here is the first real effort to do something good for the community and the economy handed to them on a plate and they turn away. For the life of me I do not know why ML Baseball has waited this long to have their gift thrown back in their face. I trust MLB will not let the D.C. councel do that again and in 5 years when my son asks why we cannot watch baseball in D.C., be sure it will be around election time and I and all my friends and fans will remember the criminals on the council board who performed a bad rendition of a feather dance will be the last person baseball fans, my friends and myself will ever vote for. SHAME ON YOU FOR LETTING PETTY POLITICS DESTROY THE IMAGE OF OUR TOWN. Some of us care, 8 of you do not. You represent nothing but yourself, now go away!

Posted by: Chris | February 7, 2006 11:38 PM

Chris, do you really believe MLB is in the business of giving "gifts" to cities? You can be sure that any deal MLB agreed to would be at least as good for MLB as it would be for DC. That's not a bad thing, as long as DC actually benefits, but let's not pretend that MLB is Santa Claus or some sort of charity.

Posted by: KCinDC | February 8, 2006 01:28 AM

I suppose I sent this a wee bit prematurely to our dissenting At-Large members:

When I lived in Denver from 1997-2000, residents voted in favor of a referendum that created a stadium district tax. Taxpayer money was used to pay for the Denver Broncos' new Mile High stadium. At that time, I VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED any and all public financing for the Broncos stadium. Why?

1. Because the NFL franchise already had an existing venue.
2. There was NO tangible benefit for Denver taxpayers.


And so you probably think that I support your vote against funding a baseball stadium in the District? QUITE THE CONTRARY.


As a Southwest D.C. resident, I WANT the baseball stadium. And I want the redevelopment that would quickly follow the stadium's arrival. Heck, I would vote yes if District officials wanted to impose a stadium district tax. I already fall within the (ridiculous) 9 percent personal income tax bracket - so I would be hardly dismayed if an additional .01 percent was stripped from my pay check to fund a stadium.


Contrary to the situation in Denver and other cities with existing sports franchises, The District did not have a baseball team (and may no longer have one). Major League Baseball obviously recognizes D.C. as a deeply lucrative market. However, I do not look upon baseball's millionaires with envious eyes, nor do I let their blatant greed upset me. Instead, I view this 'deal' as the District's opportunity to capitalize on its marketability. An opportunity for vibrant growth. An opportunity to spur immediate, needed change. Look no further than the MCI Center and the Convention Center.


Neighboring areas of SW and SE along the dilapidated South Capitol corridor are crying for something better. And with a neighboring stadium, the dominoes will fall in place quicker than any plans that are presently slumbering along through bureaucratic red tape. Revitalization and redevelopment will lead to a sweeping rebirth for an area of D.C. that sorely needs one.


But I suppose I am missing the big picture? Taxation? Cost?


What angers me is the rhetoric and spin spewed by those of you on the D.C. Council who oppose the stadium.


If you really cared about D.C. taxpayers wallets, you would act to lower exorbitant taxes we residents already pay - such as taxes on phone, cable/satellite television or satellite radio subscriptions which are in excess of nearly 11 percent per billing cycle. Instead, you sit idle, and allow communications companies to double-tax us residents. Additionally, while DC's excise tax on gasoline is on par with the national average, we pay 10 to 30+ cents more per gallon at a DC station than we would across the rivers in Maryland or Virginia. Furthermore, the 9 percent income tax that I pay is the third largest percentage in the United States.


When you leaders cry 'Taxation Without Representation', you are not kidding. For my families' single-household income is severely diminished by the mounting taxes our representatives turn their backs on and pass on to its residents.


And what do I get for having the third worst tax burden (taxes as a percentage of income) in the United States - behind New York and Connecticut? A city with an unusable, untouchable $1 billion surplus. An education system that is the laughing stock of the nation? Crumbling roads? Decaying neighborhoods? An industrial wasteland such as the Anacostia site for the proposed stadium?


At least with a business tax to fund the stadium, I know that this money is being put to use. And if I am marginally affected by a business tax, so be it. I get what I am paying for.


Your vote against funding baseball in the District will not be forgotten. For you have lost two votes tonight - mine, and my wife's.

Posted by: TLinDC | February 8, 2006 01:58 AM

Todd's message about the stadium deal "it will come back to bite those who voted against it in the butt!!" will find that it works both ways. There are many outraged voters and when they start seeing their monthly utililty bills with the tax pass through for the next 30 years, they will realize that indeed tax payers are paying for this stadium. Ah, but it is time to move on to the next big DC boondoggle, another half billion for a new hospital.
Greg

Posted by: Biting Butt | February 9, 2006 09:05 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company