I knew there had to be some caveats. Seemed to good to be true when I first saw the news yesterday. The devil is indeed always in the details.

Looks like they agree to the cap, as long as there is no cap.

Wonder who will be going to the big stadium five years from now when the Nationals continue to lose? Who owns the Nationals anyway? There's no Dan Snyder, or Steinbrenner here, so who'll hire the talent? Nobody's rep is on the line. This all looks like the Senators redux. What a waste of time and money.

Hey, my annual property asessment went up another 20-sum percent this year while other District residents face 40, even 60 percent increases. I don't hear Linda Cropp complaining about how the District is continuing their record intake of taxpayer revenue. If this egregious act of taxation is okay by the D.C. Council, then why should an additional $20 million earmarked for cost overruns be an issue? Heck, my tax dollars aren't even being used to fund the stadium.

Hypocrites. Pure and simple.

General taxation has no business being used to fund your trivial entertainment choice.

It's about time that 'git r done' turned into 'got it done'. Let us hope this soap opera has reached its conclusion. The way politicians waste our money, what indeed is another 20 mil., just a drop in the bucket. Now let us get on with it and PLAY BALL DC.

I think you miss my point.

The D.C. Council has no problem jacking our property taxes to record numbers -- not to mention other forms of taxation -- and then hypocritically argues how using "taxpayer dollars" to pay for a stadium is unthinkable.

The argument I am trying to make is that those in opposition of the stadium funding on the Council are trying to appear above the fray, as if they care about D.C. residents, and general taxation.

But if the Council really thought D.C. residents are overburdened by taxation, then they would do something about it. But they don't. The money keeps pouring in ...and in record numbers.

And so here we are ...at the umpteenth hour ...and the Council is bickering and squabbling over a paltry $20 million gained from of all things ...taxes.

The real issue here is why the prospective owners can't pick up the tab for cost overruns on the stadium. MLB needs to get a grip and lighten up. The greedy SOBs are already getting $611 Million paid for them (ridiculous); there's absolutely nothing wrong with the prospective owners paying for all cost overruns, especially when all groups in consideration ARE WILLING to do so! But hey, why have an easy answer to an easy problem. Don't make a way, make an excuse!

I could be wrong, but is this the exact same deal wrapped in a different package or what???? MLB's not responsible for cost overuns, and the 20 million is to be paid by the DC taxpayers (two weeks later, but worded backwards)!!

Heres and idea that's not so far fetched: Why doesn't DC just buy the team, buy the best franchise coaches and players, and invest in the future on a much grander scale, that way,win or lose the nats will stay in DC, and the cost overuns would be justified.....because it's really our team and our stadium!!!!

Communist!

Don't you understand that only pure, massively subsidized by tax money Capitalism works?! Real capitalism privitizes profits and communalizes expenses!

Get with the program!

DC property taxes?

Check out DC Council At-Large candidate A. Scott Bolden's blog:

Why Is "Tax Relief" Costing Us More?

http://blog.bolden2006.com/

These idiots have taken all the joy out of what has been a 30 year wait so they can gain political capital. Every chance I get, I will vote against a seated Council person.

Every chance I get, I will vote against Stadium giveaway supporter.

The 5% cap was regressive and you and Scott know it. That's why you just assert that it wasn't, without linking to or providing any information to bak up the claim.

Demogogery doesn't impress people.

It doesn't impress people. Also, regardless of what some think (or hope) - the DC voter is not fooled by pie-in-the-sky claims and impotent blog entries...

A tax can be progressive or regressive, but not a tax cap.

Want more? Here's an easy to follow summary:

http://www.kaloramacitizens.org/news/files/%5CDocuments%20and%20Settings%5CMatt%5CMy%20Documents%5Ccapisnotregressive.pdf

This won't be the Senators again. Both the original and expansion teams were underfunded even for the time, playing in what was then a comparatively small market. Today's Washington is a far bigger and wealthier metro area, and whomever owns the team (hope it's the Lerners) will have the resources to play with the big boys -- and, let us hope, do it in a way that is fan-friendly, unlike the money-grabbing Mr. Snyder.

As a D.C.-area sports fan, it is going to be fun over the next few years to see the Capitals and Nationals build teams around Alexander Ovechkin and Ryan Zimmerman, respectively.

One more thing about the tax issue - let's not muddy the waters here, ladies and gentlemen (sadly, it seems as though certain folks thrive on this behavior). Take a look: A little light reading for those who like to hide behind unsubstantiated generalizations... http://www.dcfpi.org/2-28-06tax.htm

It's clear that MLB thinks, or thinks that others think, there will be cost overruns, otherwise they would not worry about selling a team encumbered by the possibility.

Since Linda is running on an "I'm savvy and experienced" platform, she'll need to defend that fig-leaf of a spending cap with DC voters. How much room does the Mayor have to help her?

It appears Mr. Bolden's flunkies can't even do the math. CT, that bit was hilarious...the writer claims you can "plug in any numbers" and his math holds. Hardly...anyone with 5th grade math skills can figure out his numbers only hold with very carefully selected break points.

But as has been said, it appears certain folks thrive on this behavior.

Debate math, policy and wonkish calculations all you want.

DC property owners are feeling the pinch. That's the bottom line.

http://www.thecommondenominator.com/030606_edit.html

As noted, certain people thrive on demagoguery. Doesn't say much for you or Bolden.

I am a DC resident, home owner, parent of a child in a public school and stadium supporter (there must be at leadt 5 of us who meet this description) with no illusions about the monstrous greed of the Major League Baseball establishment. If MLB had awarded the franchise to an owner first and then that individual or syndicate could have negotiated with DC, I think this all would have gone much better.

As flawed as Anthony Williams may be in some areas, I shudder to think about city politics without him. We have an old-school type in Cropp and a demagogue in training in Fenty. Anybody have any idea is Marie Johns is the real deal or the second coming of Sharon Pratt Dixon/Kelly?

As fr the person who about 20 messages ago talked about taxpayer dollars for our "trivial" entertainment, get off your high horse. I suppose you have no problem with tax dollars going to support the arts, which has no chance of paying their own way. For the record, I like the symphony and theater too. Some people consider that an unjust subsidy to elitist entertainment. I see more working people at RFK than I do at the Kennedy Center.