Metro: D.C. Stadium

Comments on District's Proposal to Build New Ballpark

Washington Post staff writer David Nakamura was online Monday, Feb. 6, at noon ET to field your questions and comments about the District's proposal to build the Washington Nationals a new ballpark on the Anacostia River ahead of the D.C. Council's vote on Tuesday, Feb. 7.

New Blog: D.C. Wire

Recent Post Coverage:

Williams Revises Stadium Cost Plan (Post, Feb. 4)

Developers Offer $70 Million for SE Land Rights (Post, Feb. 3)

Private Stadium Funding Canceled (Post, Feb. 2)

Interactive Graphic:

Block by Block, the Changing Face of Southeast

The transcript follows.

____________________

David Nakamura: Hi everyone.

Thanks for joining us today. We're less than 24 hours from the possible day D.C. baseball fans have been waiting for for a while: a D.C. Council vote on the baseball stadium. My council sources tell me, as of moments ago, that the vote is still on the council's schedule. Chairman Linda Cropp is out of the office for the moment, but due back later today. She is the one who will decide whether the vote goes forward. I'll be heading over to city hall after the chat to report for tomorrow's paper.

Also, I'd like to call your attention to a new feature we have today at washingtonpost.com and will have for the rest of the year at least: a political blog dealing with the coming race for mayor and city council. You can access it here:  D.C. Wire

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: I thought the whole stadium issue was supposed to be resolved last year. What is the hold up?

David Nakamura: This is a good question because lots of people wonder exactly this. The Council voted on the $535 million stadium FINANCING deal in December 2004, approving it 7-6. That gave the go-ahead for the city to enact a new business tax to help pay for the stadium. But then the city and Major League Baseball had to agree to a lease that will lay out terms by which the Nationals rent the new stadium. That lease agreement is now before the council and the council has not been supportive of it so far because many members believe the stadium is now too costly. In the year since the council approved the financing package at $535 million, new stadium cost estimates by the city are now at $667 million. Remember, that includes buying land, building infrastructure, architect fees, in addition to the ballpark cost.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Did the Mayor make a political blunder with regard to the stadium when announcing he was not going to run for Mayor again? It seems like this whole mess has been created by political wannabes.

David Nakamura: The race for mayor and D.C. Council in the fall is definitely playing a role in the stadium debate, along with many other city issues. Linda Cropp, Adrian Fenty and Vincent Orange are running for mayor, while Kathy Patterson is running to replace Cropp as council chairman. Vincent Gray and Jim Graham are rumored to by eyeing the chairman's seat as well. So they are all weighing how their votes on stadium will play in their election chances.

_______________________

Columbia Heights, Washington, D.C.: SO, IS THIS GOING TO PASS TOMORROW? AND IF SO, BY HOW MANY VOTES?

David Nakamura: Ha. The question of the day. Jack Evans is predicting, loosely, a 7-6 vote to approve the deal. He notes that the MCI Center and Convention Center both narrowly squeaked by the council after much debate. There are five solid yes votes -- Cropp, Evans, Sharon Ambrose, Vincent Orange and Kathy Patterson. David Catania, Adrian Fenty, Marion Barry, Phil Mendelson and Jim Graham are fairly solid in the no camp. That leaves Vincent Gray, Kwame Brown and Carol Schwatz. The mayor needs at least two of them to support the deal. No one wants to be the seventh vote against baseball and no one may want to be the seventh for it. So the mayor has been trying to get at least eight votes. I hesitate to make a prediction at this point.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: What is so drastically different in the paper work that the Mayor sent to the city council that makes the stadium leas deal likely to pass on Tuesday?

David Nakamura: The mayor gave the council three pledges Friday to help assure them the costs of the stadium will be capped. One was a "guaranteed maximum price" contract between the city and the construction companies that will build the stadium. That promises that the construction costs -- labor and materials -- will not be more than $320 million.

The second piece the mayor gave was a promise from developers to pay the city $70 million for development rights on the stadium site. Developers want to build mixed-use development right next to the stadium ,as part of a ballpark district. That money, the mayor said, can be used to help pay for infrastructure (underground parking, street repair) and additional cost of buying land for the stadium.

The final promise the mayor gave Friday was that $20 million for upgrade to Navy Yard Metro will be in today's federal budget from the White House. My sources said today that, indeed, the $20 million is there.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: What is the stadium going to look like?

David Nakamura: Now, here's a question that has not gotten much attention thanks to all the lease deal politics. I have seen the designs that the city got from architects last fall. They feature a modern looking stadium with glass, limestone and steel as the major exterior features. There will be a lot of luxury boxes (around 70) on two stacked rows between 1st base and third base. There will be an asymetrical outfield fence, cantilevered bleachers, large/wide corridors, a restaurant beyond centerfield possibly open all week and "viewing platforms" as people walk up to upper decks giving a view of the Anacostia River and of the downtown monuments. The stadium will have 41,000 seats. But because of the cost concerns there are behind-the-scenes talks about scaling back on some design elements, though most are not visible to the general fan. None of these documents have been made public.

_______________________

Washington D.C.: Assume that the lease fails tomorrow (sad outcome in my view), then the this all goes to arbitration. When do potential monetary penalties kick-in for the failure of the city to abide by the Dec 2004 financing agreement? Afterall we still do have a binding deal with MLB don't we?

David Nakamura: If the council were to vote against the lease, the whole thing would go to arbitration. A mediator has already worked with the two parties, so the next step is a three-person panel selected by the American Arbitration Association. The question would be: What monetary damages would MLB ask of the city. Most believe the panel could not force the city into a lease, but could rule that the city missed the Dec. 31, 2005 deadline to finish the lease and therefore owes MLB damages -- especially if the team chose to leave or if the stadium did not open by March 2008.

_______________________

Northeast, Washington, D.C.: So if (hoping) the council approves the lease, is there any indication how long it might be before the team is sold by MLB?

Maybe I shouldn't be jumping ahead, but MLB is doing very little to promote this team and make it competitive.

David Nakamura: Great points. We keep being told the team, which is owned by MLB's 29 other team owners, would be sold to an ownership group shortly after the lease is signed. Keep in mind, that even if the council approves the lease, it still must vote in the near future on a Construction Administration Agreement, which contains the stadium cost cap documents I mentioned previously. SO that could delay things too. The team has not had a lot of marketing, to the chagrin of the Nationals' executives and there is a question how competitive the team has been in the free-agent market. And spring training begins in a couple weeks. The city is pushing MLB to name an owners ASAP, so it could be within a few weeks of the vote. But you never know.

_______________________

Takoma Park, Md.: Hi David,

I've read a lot lately of people who are none too sad that the Deutsche Bank private financing deal fell through. I confess I have a hard time sorting out the details. Can you give a thumbnail for those of us who don't get all the technicalities? Is it really going to be cheaper for DC to build the stadium without the private financing? If so what was the rationale for pursuing it in the first place. Was it purely for politics and perception, or did Linda Cropp have some genuine policy rationale for it? Thanks!

David Nakamura: Okay, this can be kind of technical, but for those interested in the whole 'private financing' issue, here goes. The Council approved the stadium financing in Dec. 2004 with the caveat that the mayor seek private financing. The mayor's public financing plan was to use four revenue streams: 1. a gross receipts tax on city businesses; 2. a utilities tax on businesses and federal buildings; 3. concessions tax at the stadium; and 4. the Nationals annual rent payment.

The only "private" plan that was looked upon favorably by the CFO Natwar Gandhi was one from Deutsche Bank. Basically, the bank offered the city $246 million for control of the concessions tax and rent payment. Gandhi liked it because the deal offered two things: 1. the city could borrow less money in general obligation bonds, therefore keeping its credit rating higher; 2. the city would be able to take in less business taxes.

But Wall Street said, no, the city would still have to take in all $14 million in business taxes. Plus, the bank wanted a $5 million payment. So the city has killed the Deutsche Deal. Lots of people think that Cropp had a lot to gain by supporting a private deal as she runs for mayor but that the bank's deal was never better than the mayor's public financing in the first place.

_______________________

Petworth, Washington, D.C.: Your answer to the question about what the stadium will look like is not quite accurate. Since the construction companies will have almost total control over cost savings, and since it's almost certain that corners will have to be cut becuase the stadium will cost even more than the highest estimate to date (about $675 million), I would think the stadium will be very sparse on decor. It may not be as ugly as RFK, but I'm guessing it won't win any accolades for interesting architecture. It sounds like the mayor wants stadium built, even if it is an eyesore. Your thoughts?

David Nakamura: Well, I wrote the story a couple weeks ago saying that because of the "guaranteed maximum price" contract the construction companies would have more control of the project. IN that story, I wrote that there were discussions that the companies would use less glass on the exterior, for example, to save money. The city and the companies have stressed to me there will still be a major "wow" factor. The thing to watch is whether the cost concerns continue over time and cut into the design elements or make the construction companies skimp on materials. Rest assured, we will cover that.

_______________________

Salem, Ore.: I lived in D.C. for 25 years. Why is this decision so difficult? D.C. has not have a team since 1970! I traveled to Baltimore dozens of times over the years just to watch baseball. I would rather have had my money spent on a D.C. team. I would love to watch Frank Robinson as the manager of a D.C. team. I watched him as a player! Good heavens! Where is the D.C. Council on this one! Get it done! This is a great opportunity for the District and the City Council still doesn't get it. I am very grateful that Marion Barry is no longer the Mayor. We would never get an agreement with MLB with him as the Mayor.

David Nakamura: Main issue is that a lot of the city loves baseball, but a lot of residents also believe the city has a lot of other problems that the council and mayor should address first. They are unhappy that the city will spend so much "public" money on the stadium. However the mayor says: This is not taxpayers' money. It's a special tax on large businesses, so it's not fair to say the money could go to schools, etc.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Hey David, thanks for your continued reporting on this matter. Is there any indication what, if any, political capital Linda Cropp may lose because of her grandstanding on the stadium issue? I understand she is running for Mayor and would like to both be a proponent and opponent of the stadium - will this affect her run? Too bad I don't live in the city, because I sure wouldn't vote for her.

David Nakamura: Let me ask you chatters to help answer this: How does Cropp look in all this to you? Has she helped make the deal better for D.C. or is she standing in the way of the deal and "grandstanding" as the chatter writes?

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Will building the stadium along the Anacostia make the neighborhood safer than it is right now?

David Nakamura: One of Mayor Williams's primary rationales for building the stadium is to help spark major redevelopment along the Anacostia Waterfront. The area where the ballpark will be build -- near South Capitol Street SE and the Navy Yard -- is a mostly industrial area that has been neglected by the city for ages. But redevelopment is already coming thanks to federal projects and other business offices being built. the Mayor said the stadium will bring about the revitalization faster and indeed, developers have snatched up land near the stadium ever since the mayor's announcement in 2004 that the stadium would be built.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: "Some people" say development in Near Southeast won't proceed as rambunctiously without the new stadium. I disagree and anticipate that the area will be the next Gallery Place (only with a waterfront!). What do you think?

David Nakamura: This is up for debate. Again, all signs pointed to some development in that area no matter what. The city was planning to overhaul that area even before baseball arrived. The mayor just thinks the stadium will bring a critical mass of people to the area 81 times a year, sparking the building of restaurants and other things. Four developers have been named by the city to do a "ballpark entertainment district" as have been tried in other cities (san fran. san diego. denver)

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: If we're talking about the Nationals front office... they should be embarrassed by how poorly they have performed their jobs.

This team drew 2.7 million faithful fans last season. Our reward? Nothing. No marketing, no promotion. No fanfest. A 3 day Winter "Caravan". New season ticket sales? Not yet? Single game sales? Sometime in March. I understand the player personnel budget being restricted. But they need to hire several dozen folks to work tickets and promotions and get this organization rolling. I hope the first act of the new owner is to kick Tony Tavares to the curb. Maybe he could announce it during the first press conference. Abyssmal!

David Nakamura: Tavares, the Nats' president, would say he's doing the best he can while a bit hamstrung b/c of the limbo his franchise is in with no owner. I think a lot will change once an owner is picked. Do people have opinions about which owner should be selected? Remember the three finalists are probably:

1. The Fred Malek-Jeff Zients "washington baseball club" featuring Colin Powell -- the mayor's choice.

2. the Ted and Mark Lerner group -- major Bethesda developers

3. Jeff Smulyan, the Indianapolis media mogul who signed up a bunch of DC business leaders and sports stars like Charles Mann and Eric Holder

_______________________

20003: Very much appreciate your fine reporting on the stadium melodrama.

How substantial is the proposed upgrade of the Navy Yard metro station? I use that station and it is way -- way -- too small and awkward to serve stadium crowds right now. Is this work likely to happen within the two year window before the 2008 baseball season. Are you lauging that I am suggesting the stadium will open in 2008?

David Nakamura: The Navy Yard Station, under the $20 million renovation plan, would add more escalaters, elevators and turnstiles. It also would expand the platform. The net result would be an increase of capacity from 5,000 riders per hour to 15,000.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: What are the chances the Council will become fed up with MLB's arrogance and decide to pay a penalty rather than build a stadium? How much would such a penalty be?

David Nakamura: It's possible the council could reject the deal, it could go to arbitration and the city could be stuck with penalties -- which presumably would be paid by the general fund. It is not clear how much the city might have to pay b/c there are so many factors - how much revenue the team might have lost, whether the team stays in D.C.

_______________________

The other stadium project: Hi,

Is there any news on the other sports facility project in SE -- the DC United stadium at Poplar Point. While I've heard that Barry and others community leaders from Ward 8 have been consulted, has the City Council reviewed any part of that (by comparison very uncontroversial) plan ? If not, how long can the uncertainty about the Nats stadium deal can hold up the development of that privately-funded project?

Thanks.

David Nakamura: I don't follow the soccer stadium as closely, but you'll recall that an ownership group trying to buy the United backed out recently. That group was supposed to be a key in building the stadium, so I suspect that will be a setback.

_______________________

Anonymous: I think many people are under the assumption that the stadium will will be built right on the banks of the Anacostia and that you will be able to see DC "skyline" from the seats. Am I correct in thinking that neither of these assumptions are true? And if so, what makes this site so great?

David Nakamura: The stadium will not abut the river. There will be no San Fran-like homeruns into the water. It's a block or so away from the water. As for the monuments, architects say there will be a view of the Capitol Dome from the uppermost seats and possibly the press box, as well as from "viewing platforms" on the ramps leading up to the upper deck. Again, the main reason for the stadium location is that the mayor wants economic redevelopment along the Anacostia River.

_______________________

Fanboys: Apparently it also helps when the reporters aren't fanboys as well. Care to take a critical question, rather than rah-rah laments about how tragic it would be to "lose baseball"?

BTW fanboys, why should we non-fans pay for your trivial entertainment choice? Can I get the city to remodel the 9:30 Club on your dime?

If this disaster passes without limits to the original $535M, I'm looking forward to petitioning to get this on the ballot as a referendum. You'll lose.

David Nakamura: Lots of strong opinions coming...

_______________________

FAIRFAX, Va.: I would prefer local ownership, but it certainly hasn't worked well in Baltimore.

I think Jeff Smulyan has been the "insider" favorite all along and will be shocked if he is not named owner.

I also think an owner, especially with local ties, could have cut thru alot of the difficulties in getting the lease deal done, possibly be guaranteeing some of the cost overruns!

David Nakamura: Smulyan is said to have some support among top baseball brass, particularly with Jerry Reinsdorf, Chicago White Sox owner. ... But Bud Selig will make the final call.

_______________________

SW Washington, D.C.: Regarding the stadium design: Was any thought put into designing it with a more classical look, such as to match the monument architecture (columns, etc)? It seems an uber-modern structure may have a "wow" factor now, but will be hideous and out of style in 20 years or so.

David Nakamura: Yes, the architects were told to tie into the monuments, but not copy them. The western wall of the stadium, along south capitol street, is set to have a more "monumental" feel with limestone columns.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: While you're in the mode of correcting mistaken assumptions, can you remind people that the stadium is slated to be built on the -west- side of the Anacostia River? So, while it's -along- the Anacostia, it won't be -in- Anacostia. It amazes me how many people don't realize that there are parts of SE that aren't across the river....

David Nakamura: yes good point .this is often called "near southeast" or the Navy Yard neighborhood. The stadium's western border is South Capitol STreet, which, on the other side, is SW D.C. Across the Anacostia River to the south and east is the area people call Anacostia.

_______________________

Cropp and Political Capital: Granted, I'm just one of the many Virginians who work in DC and the political situations in VA leave just as much to be desired, but in my opinion, Cropp's blantant dealings to look good just makes her look even worse. Stalled votes, thwarted plans (only to have nearly identical plans supposedly originate from her office) and and number of other items just look comical. If I were a DC voter and staring at the MeMeMe attitude across the board from everyone running, Cropp would seem the worst of the evils and not have my vote. At least hide the ambitions a teeny bit....

David Nakamura: As people in D.C. know better than anyone, politics and political ambition can drive pretty much anything. That said, Cropp will tell you she's trying to get the best deal possible for the city.

_______________________

Northeast Washington, D.C.: On the Linda Cropp question, she has unquestionably made a name for herself with her involvement in the stadium issue; no one will remember (or vote one way or the other) that she was on the original negotiating team and then turned around and withdrew her support without telling the mayor. If the deal the city agrees to is better than the original, she wins votes. If not, maybe she loses, maybe not. She won't get my vote because I can't trust her.

David Nakamura: more opinions... What do you all think of Fenty's position. He's her top competition in the mayoral race. He's been against public funding for the stadium from the start.

_______________________

FAIRFAX, Va.: I think Cropp used the Stadium issue to advance her run for mayor, but I do believe she has the best interest of the city at heart. For those who say schools and programs should get the money earmarked for the stadium, I would ask why this is an issue now? we haven't had baseball for a generation and a half. why should the condition of the dc city schools be linked to a baseball stadium?

David Nakamura: another fair point...

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: If baseball had an ounce of common sense, they'd have awarded the team to Northern Virginia instead. But noooo, award the team to the same city wherein live the same morons who re-elected Marion Barry to Mayor AFTER he got out of jail!

David Nakamura: If you'll recall, Va. did not offer to put as much public money into the project, so baseball liked D.C.'s offer a lot better. Wonder if they knew it would come with this much trouble?

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: To the poster who asked "Can I get the city to remodel the 9:30 Club on your dime?"

Sure if you can get 2.7 million people to attend annually, and generate 20 million in NEW general fund revenue each year, then I'd say yea lets do it.

David Nakamura: here's an answer to previous poster...

_______________________

Foggy Bottom, Washington, D.C.: For decades the city has wanted a commuter tax -- and suddenly it would seem that baseball has given them one for eighty one days out of the year. All these suburbanites come into the city to SPEND MONEY, the majority by Metro and the rest by car -- and they pay to park at the Stadium.

With a decent venue, they'd stay in the city or get here early to spend MORE MONEY. Look what's happened around the MCI Center or in any other city where a new stadium has been built! Doesn't the City Council realize that they have to "spend money to make money?"

It just seems so short-sighted and parochial.

David Nakamura: You essentially make the argument Mayor Williams has made. He said 70 to 80 percent of fans are coming from suburbs. They pay the concessions tax at the stadium, which is a large part of the money that will pay off the bonds. Not to mention, they might spend their money on dinner in the city. But others say most fans just go to game and won't stick around afterward or come to stadium district on off-days to shop.

_______________________

NW, Washington, D.C.: Sure, remodel the 930 Club on my dime. And we can start the moment that the 930 Club brings millions of people into its area of the city and revitalizes a neighborhood. Apples and oranges otherwise.....

David Nakamura: wouldn't the 9:30 club lose some "charm" it if were remodeled?

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Am I correct that as the documents now stand, the maximum penalty to the contractor of missing the 2008 season is $5 million. That's not pocket change, but it doesn't seem like enough to compel timely completion. Do you know how much overall the contractor (or whatever party is the one on the hook for the late fee) is expected to earn on the stadium project?

David Nakamura: Yes, if the construction companies do not finish stadium by march 1, 2008, they will be fined $100,000 per day up to $5 million. This doesn't sound like much compared to the price of the stadium project, but would come directly from the companies' profits,so then it could be a lot.

_______________________

SW Washington, D.C.: While I completely appreciate the efforts of the Washington Baseball Club to bring baseball back to DC, my guess/preference for ownership would be the Lerner family merged with Stan Kasten. That provides local ownership, a wealthy and apparently blemish/closeted skeleton-free family with future generations to pass the team onto as well as the sports management experience. They've also been pleasantly quiet and not pushing their faces out there, which Selig seems to appreciate.

David Nakamura: interesting point. Yes, Lerner-Kasten merger could be possible. we've reported it has been discussed. Kasten is former Atlanta Braves exec who is like in MLB circles.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: Re: Fanboys...

1st off, Nice Job, Dave. Good reporting. You wouldn't want to add any facts to the argument. For example, that the stadium will be a positive revenue stream. That the stadium will be mainly funded by taxes collected AT the stadium. I could go on. But Fanboys isn't interested in facts either.

David Nakamura: a response...

_______________________

David Nakamura: Okay, I have so many comments I could not get to, but I have to run to city hall now to get the latest for tomorrow's story. Remember, you can watch the council live on DC Cable Ch. 13 or at the DC Council Web site.

Stay tuned. Lots more coverage to come over the next few days, weeks and months.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.