If we had a "we're gonna work on that" drinking game we'd be shit-faced right now. There are a whole lot of details left to be addressed.
Stumbling in here. Have they established any sort of time line on this stadium? (Get obligatory 60-90 days joke out of your system) Mixed emotions as so excited, but do not want to get burned a third time.
Should be complete by the start of the 2016 season. 20,000-25,000 seater. I am cautiously optimistic.
I am actually kind of optimistic at this point. That press conference started with a statement from the Mayor about the team staying in the District, about how hard everyone worked, about how this was good for the city. Gray emphasized no taxes, that was a land swap that would result in jobs and tax revenue for the city. So the question is - within the City Council - where and why would the objections come from? Did the Verizon Center model cost the city money when it was all over with? Seems that the hard point in the deal was not from Levien's end but from the city end.
no problem .. just get the new Reeves center shovel in the ground and this is a done deal. they can name it whatever suits them.
Very very doubtful that would happen. But my understanding of all the moving parts is that the sop to Barry is that the agencies currently in the Reeves Center would move to a facility in his ward.
more information and comments from Goff and Olson. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/soccer-insider/wp/2013/07/25/d-c-united-stadium-plan-day-1/
The key is that DC United and the city have agreed on their cost sharing which was always going to be the biggest stumbling block. Now that Gray has pretty much put his entire weight behind the project I just don't think that some minor equity disagreements with Ein and Akridge are going to destroy the whole plan. In fact Ein's presence on stage seems to suggest that his weight is fully behind this too. Anyways these are politicians. For all we know the details have already been mostly hammered out behind closed doors. In situations like these there's no benefit to the politicians giving too many details. Details just open the door to more scrutiny from media and opponents. Gotta placate the masses to move something like this through. BTW if anyone was keeping count there were 5 council members present. I don't follow DC politics but that would imply 5 guaranteed yes votes, no?
Was the one person asking about $150 million needed for schools & etc, a member of the press or a council person? If she was a council person, there may not be 5 guaranteed votes.
While it was known that Wells and Evans are pro-stadium, I was wondering about the rest of the Council. Considering there was five Councilmembers present there, I think that was a very good sign. Especially, since two of them were at-large (Grosso and Bonds). You know that Mendelson will always stall because "something is not completely clear", but I was pleasantly surprised seeing Grosso, Bonds, and Barry there in addition to Wells and Evans. I also like that they focused on the economic side of the deal and not just "we're getting a new stadium" slogans, because making it clear that city is not sinking its dollars to build someone's stadium will probably be crucial in getting it approved by the Council.
The was a press person. I had trouble hearing her but I think she was asking about the sound judgment of diverting funds to this stadium. I say this because Mayor Gray's response was the cost of the Stadium was on DC United's dime.
Just out of curiosity, did anyone from the team or the District mention the leg-work Kevin Payne did on the stadium hunt?
I think she was asking about cost over-runs on school construction, and he responded that since The United is paying for the construction, it would be their problem.
Yeah, I thought his answer to her was good, but I didn't understand who the questioner was. Hopefully, we have 5 of the 7 votes needed on the council, with at least two more coming soon.
no and in fact Lew referred to the game changing approach that happened with Thohir and Levien joined Chang and took it over. Not a single reference to Payne.
If 5 are present then presumably they will vote for it .... all you need are 2 of the remaining 8 to vote for it. I have to assume the other 8 are assessing all data and options and political positions before they give any indication. But having 5 in the tent there certainly is a positive sign.
I agree, been there, and to see the tube gates opening to the human wall coming out of trains was giving me sheevers...
Especially given the fact that most people don't read or pay attention to the story beyond the headlines, and thus will be loudly asking "why are we building them a stadium?!" Hell, that's already happening on the WaPo site. And even if their Ward residents don't know the actual terms of the deal, council members have to listen to them, because that's how you stay in office.
LOL obviously that answer is political double talk. Notice he didn't answer an emphatic "the city's liability will not exceed 1 penny over $150,000,000" because there's no way to know that. Are you going to nix an entire project you put so much time and effort over a 1% or even 5-10% cost overrun?