Look, I get it. It’s tough enough to report on often-convoluted stadium deal finances when the details are known; when it’s a proposal still in the works, like Washington, D.C.’s long-discussed plan to build a new Commanders stadium on the former RFK Stadium site, it’s like trying to nail mud to the wall. Any news coverage is going to require a lot of digging into what internal conversations local elected officials are having and what other cities are doing, plus a healthy dollop of speculation. It takes time and effort and is likely to obsolete as soon as more specifics are released.
Or, you can just do like WUSA did, and just go with one number that is irrefutable, whether or not it’s relevant:
According to data obtained from DC’s chief financial officer, by 2030 the District is predicted to be more than $1.7 billion in debt, including the $520 million the city just shelled out for renovations at Capitol One, as part of a deal to keep the Wizards and Capitals from leaving D.C. That puts the District smack up against the city’s limit on debt based on D.C. law. Essentially, the D.C. government is out of borrowing power.
“Out of borrowing power” sounds pretty definitive, but the WUSA segment then undercuts its own conclusion by noting that some types of bonds — including those based on tax increment financing, where future property tax payments are kicked back to pay for stadium construction — are exempt from the bond cap. And the guy who they choose to explain this, remarkably, is former district councilmember Jack Evans, who spearheaded almost every D.C. stadium subsidy plan until being forced to resign after taking money from companies who would benefit from legislation he was pushing.
What makes WTOP consider Evans an expert in this case rather than an unindicted co-conspirator is presumably that he, equally remarkably, was hired by the district to conduct a study of how to fund an NFL stadium. And Evans has much to say about that, it turns out:
Evans said the study, which focused on successful stadium funding models locally and nationally, was completed in mid March. But months later, the DC government still hasn’t released the results.
“I would say the overall conclusion is that sports stadiums actually produce enormous revenue for the cities,” Evans said. “You’ll have economists say it never does anything, and in some cities it doesn’t.”
But Evans says D.C. is different. Nationals Park, which revitalized Navy Yard, is paying off its debt far faster than planned.
Okay, so: The results of Evans’ study aren’t available, and Evans isn’t going to make them available. But WUSA is going to let Evans characterize the conclusion as that “sports stadiums actually produce enormous revenue for the cities,” without either asking Evans to show his work or checking in with actual economists to see if D.C. really can be different. Or even whether the Nationals stadium paying off its debt faster than planned is really a good thing. (Spoiler: It’s not really, since it just means that the various tax revenues that are funding it are coming in faster than expected — and being kicked back to the team owners faster, but it’s still the same total outlay by taxpayers.)
Evans specifically recommends a TIF to raise money for a Commanders stadium, which is kind of hilarious if you remember that Evans was last seen writing an op-ed about how a Virginia arena for the Capitals and Wizards was a terrible idea because it relied on TIFs. Though not nearly as hilarious as where WUSA chose to stage its interview with Evans, which was apparently in the room where he keeps his personal vibrating football stadium:
Truly, how could anyone who has one of these be anything but unbiased about NFL stadium funding? Cut, no need for more interviews, everybody knock off for the day.
Vibrating football stadium?
Is that like the electric football game I had as a child, except with fans, it looks like?
Yes. Click through and watch the video, there’s a closeup of the players, it’s truly something.
Thanks Neil!
Most of them had cardboard fan zones that clipped onto the edge of the (metal and plastic) ‘field’. If you are like me, you lost those cardboard fans very early on. Hey, there’s a John Fisher joke in there somewhere I just know it…
Thanks John! I don’t remember any fans coming with mine but that was over 40 years ago. A much better game was Talking
Football…..
On the plus side, he can draw an epic play like Homer Simpson did and insist three players fall down while Nelson Muntz spins around in circles.
There is a subculture of people who have actually figured out how to play that game effectively. There are probably youtubes about it.
Not completely relevant to the conversation, but vibrating football was the most disappointing Christmas gift I received in my entire life. The commercials made it look like so much fun. It was just a bunch of plastic pieces moving slowly in random directions (not unlike the current Bears). Do not trust anyone who would build a shrine to Tudor vibration football.
Turns out TV people are like that, too.
There are people who have figured out how to make the game work. It’s complicated, but I guess it is fun for those who have patience.
How would a TIF even work at RFK? There is like two convenience stores and 4 restaurants with 1.5km of the site. The rest is all either residential, park, and/or the middle of the river. I’m not sure there is remotely enough of a tax base there to fund a stadium.
If they were willing to sacrifice parking, there’s a lot of land there to redevelop. They should do thst anyway. It’s dumb to have that much land devoted to parking lots that are only used a handful of days a year.
They could also replace the armory with something more useful.
There isn’t a lot of land there to develop. Most of the land around that could be developed is in the process of being developed already and the rest is hemmed in by the Anacostia pretty well. RFK is the only part of that site that sits behind the levee, everything is in the 10-year flood zone.