Article is in the District Extra section and deals with the revitalization of the Anacostia river. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63603-2003Mar31.html "They (city planners) also envision about 20 acres of festival grounds, including a "sports campus" -- combining several sports fields with the riverfront park system -- in the area of RFK Stadium that would be home to the D.C. United soccer team, along with new gathering spaces and plazas at the Southwest Waterfront." The concept of a "sports campus" dovetails nicely with what was said the other day about the DCSEC visit to Home Depot Center in LA. The comprehensive plan is going to be released this summer for comment - though they say many of the features are already underway.
sounds great but 2025 for a final completion date is quite a ways out. I wonder if they expect to have the stadium or "sports campus" up before anything else?
Where is Kenilworth Park? Is it near RFK? I wonder if the discussions between AEG and DCSEC have been around how this facility would tie into the master plan for the area. It could take a quarter-century for everything to happen, but the stadium project could be one of the first things...
I'll believe this when I see it. Many of these plans were discussed in conjunction with the Olympic bid, but without an impetus like that, I find it real hard to believe the city is going to get huge federal $$ to pull this off.
It would be nice to have a Home Depot Center East here. But I would rather have it around 2008, not 17 years later.
The way funding works, as you can see in this write-up, projects are funded and the planners try to get what they can when the can from local/state/fed money. In other words, if AEG jumps in with a Hunt-like deal on the table, that might accelerate the aspect of this overall 25 year plan that we care about -- a sports campus. Just to reiterate, don't worry about 25 years and $2 billion. That's the whole schmear and we're only interested in a more focused piece. I find this encouraging.
I don't believe that federal government funds would be related to the sports aspect of this development. It seems more likely that the federal funds are related to cleaning up the river and revitalizing the community.
The plan AS A WHOLE is scheduled for completion in 2025. Individual elements will be completed in the interim according to the master plan, as funding and other factors make them possible. The DC United stadium would be on the grounds of RFK and as such is included as part of the master plan, but if the baseball situation is resolved and Uncle Phil drops a bag of cash on Anthony Williams' desk, you'll see the stadium long, long before 2010, let alone 2025.
Unfortunately, all DC has is federal dollars. The so-called local dollars are mostly made up of the "federal payment" to the city, since DC can't tax governments, non-profits, diplomats, etc. I sound like I'm whining, but that is the truth. So the bulk of the budget is allocated directly from the federal government. No matter how you slice it, the money for the project will be federal dollars, which is why I don't believe it. Another poster mentioned Uncle Phil jumping in to kickstart the stadium. That would be a whole different scenario. But relying on the city to get it done is very iffy, IMHO.
One thing that they are talking about, though, in relation to the proposed baseball stadia, is a special tax that would be levied on visiting players. This would be in addition to, I believe, increased hotel taxes (maybe). These taxes exist in some, but not all, of the states. However, there is little chance of this passing through the congressional committees that oversee our finances since they don't want to open that can of worms. What the hell - it's a moot point, anyway. How much money could we get by taxing soccer players? A buck? Buck and a quarter?
I think it is extremely wise to tax visiting MetroStar players. Since they are so far over the cap there is plenty to go around. Tim
kenilworth park is east of rfk, it is right off the 295, near eastern avenue. it is a very large park and i am unsure how far to the north and west it extends. i think gets close to across the anacostia from rfk.
I'd like to see Alex Rodriguez get up in front of a Congressional Committee and complain about having to pay a $2,000 tax to the District - not the most sympathetic of witnesses. Passing the law is not the probelm, the fact that it would be borderline unconstitutional would be the big hurdle. There are two taxes being considered for the baseball stadium. The first was used with the MCI center - it basically taxed all business revenue in DC over a certain amount (say $2 million). The second would establish a development zone around the stadium and would garnish the sales taxes in that area to pay for the bonds issued for construction. I believe that the big building being built next to the MCI center was financed through a variant of this tax. Putting the stadium in the comprehensive plan gives me some hope there will be some sort of annuncement before the paln is released this summer. Also, the fact that there will be other facilities on the "sports campus" means that there will be a big investment in infrastructure. I am assuming the District wouldn't pony up much more than the land and the underlying infrastructure - parking lots, sewer service, utlities to the site. Possibly some money through bonds. But, the more the city is involved over and above infrastructure, the less revenue AEG gets. B
Unconstitutional? Surely you jest. 16th Amendment gives Congress the right to levy income taxes. But this isn't a federal tax, its a state tax. Most states already have an law like that taxing atheletes (or anyone else) for income earned in that state.
Nope, no jest. From the Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49231-2003Mar18.html "The city's plan to raise $275 million, for example, includes a tax on ballplayer salaries that some experts believe may be unconstitutional. The so-called "jock tax" already exists in 20 states, but the D.C. home rule charter prohibits the city from taxing non-resident income. Congress would have to amend the charter to permit the tax, but even then it could face a legal challenge on grounds it was created to tax a specific group. "If we think a jurisdiction is singling out players and treating them differently from all other taxpayers, then that's a situation we would certainly look to challenge," said Stephen W. Kidder, the former Massachusetts commissioner of revenue, who represents the Major League Baseball Players Association on tax issues." In most other jusrisdictions I believe they have broader taxes on income earned by non-residents. To get the bill through Congress, DC would have to create a specific tax only on baseball players (otherwise all the MD and VA commuters could be taxed - which isn't a bad idea, but DOA on the Hill). The catch is that if DC creates such a specialized income tax it could be challenged as unconstitutional. Maybe we should call it a "user fee" or require a license to play professional baseball in the District (and charge $2K for each one). That might pass muster. A little off topic, but interesting (if tax law is ever interesting). B
OFF TOPIC RANT ALERT Isn't it wonderful to live in a Federal Territory without any of the taxation benefits? I love the fact that 532 (IIRC) congress people who don't live here have the ability to dictate what the District can and cannot do!
Ahh... interesting indeed. DC wants to implement a commuter tax, but the chances of all us Hill staff who live in NoVa or Maryland allowing that into a bill (since we write them) are zilch. MORE OFF TOPIC RANT The DC tax situation is completely f'ed up, but its never going to get any better because there is NO chance of DC ever becoming a state. Its become way too much of a political issue. Republicans will never let through a petiton for statehood because it would add 2 Dem Senators and 1 Dem Rep. Sorry DC, enjoy your 10% sales tax.
Way off topic - I know, this is a soccer board, right? Using your position to legislate to your own benefit is a conflict of interest. And anyway, as a former staffer, I seem to remember I had the option of paying taxes to my home state anyway (until I worked for a committee). That's why you see so many cars in the district with way-out-of-state tags. Besides, if anyone actually read the proposal for the "commuter tax" they would understand that no commuter would actually see a difference in their taxes. They would get a credit on their federal taxes to offset the commuter tax. And it is actually a good idea to try and wean the District off of the arbitrary federal payment each year and give it a stable tax base. Help, I need a life. b
Kenilworth Park is on the other side of the Anacostia. Apparently, there's a complex of soccer fields nearby. You can access it from the SE freeway. They have an aquatic garden there which is really quite nice. If you've got an afternoon to kill when the weather's nice, make a double outing of Kenilworth Gardens and the Arboretum.
Re: Way off topic - I know, this is a soccer board, right? As one of those supposedly unreasonable sorts who disagrees with the notion of paying a tax based on where I work, how is the situation above really any different than getting a federal payment, which is quite stable, other than it creates a great deal more paper work?