Monday, December 12, 2005

Fouled-Off-Bunts: What's A Couple Hundred Million Between Friends Edition

The DC CFO released his long-awaited report on the cost updates of the new stadium. It's not the overly dramatic $714 million figure that was thrown about last week, but a much more palatable (in a Fear Factor sense) $667 million figure. Phew! Is that all. The Post notes that it's $67 million above the $589 million budget which is really a $535 million budget that's artificially loaded with gimmicks.

Of note, he projects that building at RFK would cost $606 million, a savings of just $61 million. It's kind of fun when you can say 'just' when talking about millions of dollars, huh? Talk to a budget analyst for DoD then. That's a rounding error!

The Mayor issued a press release clinging to the hope of the $535 million figure, noting that only $535 million in bonds will be issued. Perhaps the rest will be delivered by the Underpants Gnomes? Ladies of DC, hold on to your underpants!

The CFO's letter to Herr Cropp is available on his website, and might be worth a quick skim if you're really bored, or in need of a sleep-inducer.

With amazingly convenient timing, the Mayor trotted out a few development groups who are more than willing to get their greedy paws civic-minded brains into the process of developing the area around the stadium. They went with several groups in the hope to more rapidly expand the revitalization in the area. The Post helpfully reuses their wonderful graphic showing the ballpark area and the current businesses there. If you're not familiar with the area, not that there's anything wrong with that, it's a good first look. Isn't it amazing, though, that of all the days to discuss development in the SE, that it happens on a day that increased stadium costs are released? The Mayor just keeps stumbling into these fortuitous circumstances!

  • Dave Sheinin writes about the two-headed GM in Boston. The two-headed GM, you recall, was instrumental in the Baltimore Orioles successful 2005 campaign. The Nats implications are that Bowden stays for a few more weeks, obviously, and that Theo Epstein, despite rumors that he'd be brought back, isn't there yet. I'm agnostic on Theo, but I'd be open to giving the guy a shot.

  • I'm sure his best blogging friend will get to this, but Dayn Perry is giving out his off-season grades. Yeah, excited now, aren't you? C-, Mr. Bowden. Be sure to have your mom sign it, and have it back to Dayn by Thursday. (Doesn't that picture of Dayn look like something from a minor league hockey team in New Jersey?)

  • Friend of Capitol Punishment, Bill Ladson is back with another mailbag full of inspid questions from men who sit when they pee. I'd rip the hell out of it, as per my usual, but I'm lazy. What does that man have against strikeouts and Brad Wilkerson? Whatever he does have, he doesn't hold it for Terrmel Sledge: [O]f the three the Nationals traded, I hated to see Terrmel Sledge go, because I believe he is going to be a star in the Major Leagues. He can hit all types of pitching and doesn't strike out much.

    Come to the light, Bill!

  • With the Nationals left to pick at the sun-bleached bones of the pitching free-agent market, there's still one name floating out there that could probably be had for cheaply. Hint: He's an Aruban Knight. Nope. Eugene Kingsale's an outfielder, silly! What's Sidney Ponson up to these days? (I can hear you thinking "about 285 pounds!") OOPS! Nevermind.

  • Finally... Banks of the Anacostia notes an article in the Chicago Daily Herald advocating a Cubs trade for Jose Vidro. He floats the idea of Corey Patterson and Jerry Hairston (because he knows we'd need another second baseman to compensate for the devastating loss of another second baseman). Banks doesn't like the idea, but, as I note in his comments, I'd take the money and run, no matter what we'd get. Especially when that money entails $23 million over the next three seasons.

  • 2 Comments:

    • You are so right the $61M does amount to a rounding error. How come Tony is not talking about the eco benefits of the SE site.

      By Blogger dcbubble, at 12/13/2005 11:05 AM  

    • I would imagine that that will be brought up as one of the first bullett points by the pro-stadium council members.

      Remember that the council is essentially deadlocked 5-5. Ther are three undecideds. They're the ones that need to be convinced.

      By Blogger Chris Needham, at 12/13/2005 11:09 AM  

    Post a Comment

    << Home