Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Gandhi Nods

I forgot to link this earlier, but DC CFO Natwar Gandhi recertified his earlier numbers of $161 MM for land acquisition costs related to the ballpakr. This is just under the $165 MM cap that would've triggered ballpark armageddon.

David Catania and some local business interests have teamed up trying to derail the stadium -- at least frome being built in that location.
"Once again, the chief fictional officer is perpetrating a fraud on District taxpayers," said D.C. Council member David A. Catania, at-large independent and firm opponent of the ballpark project. He said he thinks the $77.1 million pegged for land acquisition is off by as much as $100 million. "He has become more absurd by the day. I really don't think he's capable of conducting a study on this in a truthful and honest fashion."


  • can i be contrawershul here?
    who thinks the nats should benefit from corporate welfare?
    is rfk ok for baseball?
    is it quirky enough to be a long term home?
    am i just an annoying brit who's pissed that he left dc before the nats arrived?

    By Blogger pete, at 4/28/2005 6:30 AM  

  • Pete - there is are a few issues with RFK. First and foremost, its location is as Stephen A Smith would say is "terrible" There is nothing food/bar/shopping wise anywhere near RFK and odds are no one is going to want to (or be able to) build there. Second, RFK has no real luxury boxes. It was built long before luxury suites became common. Whereas newer parks have dozens of these suites to sell to moneyed fans and corporate sponsors, RFK Stadium has just 11. That means most of Washington's high-powered crowd will be in the stands -- from opening night until at least 2008, when a new ballpark is scheduled to open in the District. Third, RFK is just too big. Too many seats (approx 45,000) mean too many empty seats for a team that wants to draw for 81 games. A team that draws 37,000 fans a game will bring in about 3,000,000 fans for the season. But that leaves 8,000 empty seats on average. That gives an appearance of not drawing enough fans.

    By Blogger Brian, at 4/28/2005 9:36 AM  

  • I'm not a fan of subsidies to the owners either... but, I think that this one might be a little different.

    You have three different jurisdictions here: DC, VA and MD.

    I'm in VA and never spend any money in DC. And, based on the crowded Metro back towards VA after the games, I know I'm not the only one.

    I'm at least willing to entertain the idea that the de facto commuter tax could make up for the subsidy.

    By Blogger Chris Needham, at 4/28/2005 9:41 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home