Since when is PG County across the Potomac River? And when did the DC Council select the ownership for the Nationals?

I love the Washington Post.

The fact of the matter is that while I would assume that there will be plenty of hoopla around the new stadium, the Nationals will be attracting fans from throughout the region and country. No reason not to take up a FREE offer for the party, especially since it save $250,000, some of which presumably will go back into serving youth in the city.

You mean DC is shocked, SHOCKED, that its much ballyhooed baseball team would take something from PG County for free?!?

...and, just because the council bent the hotel and utility industry over and told the city to "take one for the team," we don't get the perpetual joy of hosting every Nationals-related party, activity, and fund-raiser?!?

...and, to keep the team coming back for more, we'll have to keep giving millionaires more free stuff, just so they'll like us?!?

Oh the humanity!

Wow. What pointless anger.

As apt as the "shocked, *shocked*" quote may be, I think a quote from a different Bogart movie puts it a little better: "When you're slapped, you'll take it and like it!"

It's not pointless anger, it's the frustration of giving away 600 million dollars, no strings attached, and hoping that in exchange, Lerner/The Nationals will show gratitude and, you know, kick in for parking garages, or drop some cash for better stadium building materials, or host events in the same city that gave them their stadium. Thanks again Tony Williams.

It seems pretty clear that Lerner and his organization just don't really care about DC at all, which is their prerogative after all.

NOW they're questionning the stadium deal?

You mean, all of the other things that ointed to it being a poor use of tax dollars were ignored, but THIS is what sets them off?

Have mercy.

Reid:

You are correct. National Harbor or whatever they end up calling it is going to eat the DC Convention alive.

Why? Because DC official won't get their heads out of their asses. They built this 3/4 billion facility, but then have done nothing to combat crime in the area. You step outside the Convention Center and all you see are boarded up buildings, bums demanding your money, a few leftover hookers, and, especially at night, people waiting to jack you up.

The only one of those things that conventioneers actually want are the hookers. But these ain't even pretty hookers.

And of course they've dicked around and not built a hotel for conventioneers.

Yet you mention this to anyone associated with the DC government or the Convention Center and they immediately go into denial.

Whereas National Harbor will be splendid. Hotel rooms onsite, tons of restaurants onsite, a waterfront location, and presumeably very little crime.

Talk about a massive waste of DC taxpayer funds. We've built this huge thing, and now we're going to sit back and watch National Harbor take all the business.

It all stems to DC's odd refusal to see that customers have choices. And given the choice, customers (conventioneers in this case) will take the swank waterfront location with no crime over the downtown location with crime, boarded-up stores, and panhandlers.

Hillman:
how many of the boarded up buildings are the result of DC government policies, and how many are the result of owners holding out for unreasonable rents or sales prices? As far as crime is concerned, vacant buildings tend to be a magnet for things like prostitution...I wouldn't be surprised if crime rates dropped if/when the vacant properties are replaced by businesses.

Serious question, btw, not rhetorical at all. If there is anything the DC gov't can do about the high vacancy rate around the convention center (beyond actually getting an anchor hotel deal done), I'd love to know about it so I can call up Jack Evans' office and give him a piece of my mind...'cuz right now, it's about this far away from being a complete embarrassment.

I don't know any hard stats, but would guess one thing the city could do, but isn't, is to tax the vacant properties at the higher abandoned rate.

Although the real property office has long had the authority to use this stick to force absentee/negligent owners to sell or rent their boarded up places, they have a miserable track record of actually doing so.

Very well said by Hillman. Unless Chimay is a millionaire partner at a law firm, he's not paying a dime for the stadium, and if he is a millionaire partner, I certainly don't feel sorry for him.

Hillman is also correct about the National Harbor taking away DC Convention Center business because of the crime and boarded up buildings. There's nothing to do around the Convention Center, except maybe get mugged, because the city did nothing to improve the area. As 14thandYou says, it's a joke there.

EdTheRed: There are things the city could have done, but didn't do, to improve the Convention Center neighborhood. As DudeLooksLikeALady said, they could tax the vacant properties at a higher rate. They could also eminent domain all of those properties without any difficulty per Supreme Court precedent in Kelo. DC blew it by not taking care of the neighborhood, and they'll lose out to National Harbor as a result.

I honestly don't know what the city )(and by 'city' I mean both regular DC govt and the Convention Center Authority or whatever it is they call themselves) could do about the boarded up buildings, or how to apportion blame. I've heard so many different stories about why development has not happened that I've lost count.

But I have a few ideas, from an outsider's point of view. Since it is my damn tax dollars being pissed away here....

IF one major developer has most of the property, as I've heard repeatedly, then DC has a ton of leverage to force him to go ahead and develop. They could do things like expedite the process - clearing the various DC government hurdles that slow the process enormously.

If it's a hodge-podge of owners, it's harder to do, but DC could still meet with each owner and strongly suggest they develop.

Either way, they could offer incentives, like allowing additional building height or other concessions. And they could threaten - like the higher tax rate others suggested.

I haven't checked lately, but are all of the retail spaces in the convention center itself even occupied? I know for the longest time even those were vacant. There is no one to blame for that but the city and the convention center folks.

Of course, there are creative things that could be done too. Has the city ever considered chartering the 'party buses' for conventioneers, to be ferried to a part of town where you can actually have a little fun? Or are we still fighting the operating licenses of the 'party bus' guys?

I'm loathe to use imminent domain on private property, but in this instance I'd almost say it's justified. There's a 3/4 billion dollar city property that is languishing because the surrounding businesses are not just not nice - they are actually boarded up.

But the biggest thing the city could do is go ahead and admit that there is serious crime (and, just as importantly, the perception of crime) in the neighborhood. We stand to lose tens of millions in revenue per year. This I would think would justify us literally stationing a DC cop on every corner in the entire area. Make visitors feel safe.

As it is, you can walk up 9th Street for blocks and never see a cop.

This don't make for happy conventioneers. And unhappy conventioneers tell their convention planners that DC sucks.

So we lose the convention business, and yet another generation of people get a terrible impression of DC.

It's a shame, because the building itself is pretty nice, and it certainly wasn't cheap.

Again, this goes back to the DC way of thinking - that people will use a crappy product because they have to, that you only have to put forth the minimum effort and people will flock to your product. Turns out that's not true once there is competition that doesn't suck.

Sorry. I think it's 'eminent domain', not 'imminent domain'.

Turns out mid-week is not a good time to give up the crack pipe...

i think with the convention center it's a matter of 'you reap what you sow'.

restaurants closed when the convention center was being built because who wants to dine next to the noise of construction?

we saw this happen a decade ago as the MCI center was being built in china town and all the restaurants on 7th st. closed (and bank. and jewler. and optitician)

Hillman hit the nail on the head with the national harbor. it's pulling culture. the awakening statue moved there. the children's museum moved there, looking at their website
http://www.nationalharbor.com/ it's like 'all of the convienience of DC, none of the hassle'.

because let's face it, DC works really hard to give those of us who live and work in the district a hard time.

I have a job where i work for the government actually improving their workspaces and you would not *believe* the blocks i have to knock down to fulfill their requests. it's ridiculous.

Barry is just pissed because he can't dip his fingers into MD buisness deals ... as goes for the rest of the DC city council. The stadium was a great idea, it has already done wonders for SE ... just sit back and relax folks, DC will figure out someway to get its money out of this!!