RFK Stadium home of the Commanders?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of you have a short memory, but opposition to the Nats Stadium giveaway is the issue that propelled Fenty to the Mayor's office.

Someone will step up to make hay of this and perhaps rid us of Bowser once and for all.

And then Fenty, who also opposed the school takeover before becoming mayor, also embraced the stadium.

The fact is, the stadium as been a huge financial success and the bonds will be paid off years in advance.

Properly accounted for, stadiums are a huge waste of public resources. This has been demonstrated time and time again. Stop shilling for billionaires.

Only the lowest of low information voters aren’t aware of the facts on this by now, but there are so many of them.

It’s even worse here when the teams can play three jurisdictions off one another. I’ve reached the point where im almost excited to see how badly DC gets swindled.

Everyone absolutely knows that stadiums are a rip off. I don't think DC will give away the store for this. We don't need it.

DC financed Nats Park, but it's been so successful that it will be paid off 11 years early. DC paid for a part of Audi Field, but not most of it. Abe Pollen paid 100% of Capital One arena.

DC has not been fleeced on stadiums. They've made pretty good deals.

There literally is no economic argument for public funding of a football stadium. It simply does not draw enough people to the area over 12 months. The other stadiums draw more fans over 12 months than a football stadium ever will. And football stadiums are considerably more expensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of you have a short memory, but opposition to the Nats Stadium giveaway is the issue that propelled Fenty to the Mayor's office.

Someone will step up to make hay of this and perhaps rid us of Bowser once and for all.

And then Fenty, who also opposed the school takeover before becoming mayor, also embraced the stadium.

The fact is, the stadium as been a huge financial success and the bonds will be paid off years in advance.

Properly accounted for, stadiums are a huge waste of public resources. This has been demonstrated time and time again. Stop shilling for billionaires.

Only the lowest of low information voters aren’t aware of the facts on this by now, but there are so many of them.

It’s even worse here when the teams can play three jurisdictions off one another. I’ve reached the point where im almost excited to see how badly DC gets swindled.

Everyone absolutely knows that stadiums are a rip off. I don't think DC will give away the store for this. We don't need it.

DC financed Nats Park, but it's been so successful that it will be paid off 11 years early. DC paid for a part of Audi Field, but not most of it. Abe Pollen paid 100% of Capital One arena.

DC has not been fleeced on stadiums. They've made pretty good deals.

There literally is no economic argument for public funding of a football stadium. It simply does not draw enough people to the area over 12 months. The other stadiums draw more fans over 12 months than a football stadium ever will. And football stadiums are considerably more expensive.

Especially for a football stadium at the RFK site.

Nats Park was a unicorn - in an underutilized part of town with tons of available space for growth of the surrounding area, served by multiple Metro lines, walkable from downtown and Capitol Hill.

RFK has nowhere but the campus itself for growth - it's hemmed in by the river to the east and south, Langston golf course on the north, and residential homes on the west. It would forever be a pustule on the ass of Hill East - empty for 90% of the year, prohibiting useful development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of you have a short memory, but opposition to the Nats Stadium giveaway is the issue that propelled Fenty to the Mayor's office.

Someone will step up to make hay of this and perhaps rid us of Bowser once and for all.

And then Fenty, who also opposed the school takeover before becoming mayor, also embraced the stadium.

The fact is, the stadium as been a huge financial success and the bonds will be paid off years in advance.

Properly accounted for, stadiums are a huge waste of public resources. This has been demonstrated time and time again. Stop shilling for billionaires.

Only the lowest of low information voters aren’t aware of the facts on this by now, but there are so many of them.

It’s even worse here when the teams can play three jurisdictions off one another. I’ve reached the point where im almost excited to see how badly DC gets swindled.

Everyone absolutely knows that stadiums are a rip off. I don't think DC will give away the store for this. We don't need it.

DC financed Nats Park, but it's been so successful that it will be paid off 11 years early. DC paid for a part of Audi Field, but not most of it. Abe Pollen paid 100% of Capital One arena.

DC has not been fleeced on stadiums. They've made pretty good deals.

There literally is no economic argument for public funding of a football stadium. It simply does not draw enough people to the area over 12 months. The other stadiums draw more fans over 12 months than a football stadium ever will. And football stadiums are considerably more expensive.

Especially for a football stadium at the RFK site.

Nats Park was a unicorn - in an underutilized part of town with tons of available space for growth of the surrounding area, served by multiple Metro lines, walkable from downtown and Capitol Hill.

RFK has nowhere but the campus itself for growth - it's hemmed in by the river to the east and south, Langston golf course on the north, and residential homes on the west. It would forever be a pustule on the ass of Hill East - empty for 90% of the year, prohibiting useful development.

Spot on, and the bolded is precisely why DC should be agitating to be permitted to develop that land into housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of you have a short memory, but opposition to the Nats Stadium giveaway is the issue that propelled Fenty to the Mayor's office.

Someone will step up to make hay of this and perhaps rid us of Bowser once and for all.

And then Fenty, who also opposed the school takeover before becoming mayor, also embraced the stadium.

The fact is, the stadium as been a huge financial success and the bonds will be paid off years in advance.

Properly accounted for, stadiums are a huge waste of public resources. This has been demonstrated time and time again. Stop shilling for billionaires.

Only the lowest of low information voters aren’t aware of the facts on this by now, but there are so many of them.

It’s even worse here when the teams can play three jurisdictions off one another. I’ve reached the point where im almost excited to see how badly DC gets swindled.

Everyone absolutely knows that stadiums are a rip off. I don't think DC will give away the store for this. We don't need it.

DC financed Nats Park, but it's been so successful that it will be paid off 11 years early. DC paid for a part of Audi Field, but not most of it. Abe Pollen paid 100% of Capital One arena.

DC has not been fleeced on stadiums. They've made pretty good deals.

There literally is no economic argument for public funding of a football stadium. It simply does not draw enough people to the area over 12 months. The other stadiums draw more fans over 12 months than a football stadium ever will. And football stadiums are considerably more expensive.

Especially for a football stadium at the RFK site.

Nats Park was a unicorn - in an underutilized part of town with tons of available space for growth of the surrounding area, served by multiple Metro lines, walkable from downtown and Capitol Hill.

RFK has nowhere but the campus itself for growth - it's hemmed in by the river to the east and south, Langston golf course on the north, and residential homes on the west. It would forever be a pustule on the ass of Hill East - empty for 90% of the year, prohibiting useful development.

Even more than 90 percent of the year. 10-12 home games with preseason and possibly playoffs. Maybe 10 other big concerts or other events. I will concede that DC would get one Super Bowl out of a new stadium as part of the deal, but that’s it.

In the long run, it will be a terrible deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of you have a short memory, but opposition to the Nats Stadium giveaway is the issue that propelled Fenty to the Mayor's office.

Someone will step up to make hay of this and perhaps rid us of Bowser once and for all.

And then Fenty, who also opposed the school takeover before becoming mayor, also embraced the stadium.

The fact is, the stadium as been a huge financial success and the bonds will be paid off years in advance.

Properly accounted for, stadiums are a huge waste of public resources. This has been demonstrated time and time again. Stop shilling for billionaires.

Only the lowest of low information voters aren’t aware of the facts on this by now, but there are so many of them.

It’s even worse here when the teams can play three jurisdictions off one another. I’ve reached the point where im almost excited to see how badly DC gets swindled.

Everyone absolutely knows that stadiums are a rip off. I don't think DC will give away the store for this. We don't need it.

DC financed Nats Park, but it's been so successful that it will be paid off 11 years early. DC paid for a part of Audi Field, but not most of it. Abe Pollen paid 100% of Capital One arena.

DC has not been fleeced on stadiums. They've made pretty good deals.

The difference in popularity between the teams the city didn't pay for all of the stadiums for (D.C. United, Caps, Wizards) and the team that's about to come demanding a stadium is big enough to be a little worrisome, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of you have a short memory, but opposition to the Nats Stadium giveaway is the issue that propelled Fenty to the Mayor's office.

Someone will step up to make hay of this and perhaps rid us of Bowser once and for all.

And then Fenty, who also opposed the school takeover before becoming mayor, also embraced the stadium.

The fact is, the stadium as been a huge financial success and the bonds will be paid off years in advance.

Properly accounted for, stadiums are a huge waste of public resources. This has been demonstrated time and time again. Stop shilling for billionaires.

Only the lowest of low information voters aren’t aware of the facts on this by now, but there are so many of them.

It’s even worse here when the teams can play three jurisdictions off one another. I’ve reached the point where im almost excited to see how badly DC gets swindled.

Everyone absolutely knows that stadiums are a rip off. I don't think DC will give away the store for this. We don't need it.

DC financed Nats Park, but it's been so successful that it will be paid off 11 years early. DC paid for a part of Audi Field, but not most of it. Abe Pollen paid 100% of Capital One arena.

DC has not been fleeced on stadiums. They've made pretty good deals.

There literally is no economic argument for public funding of a football stadium. It simply does not draw enough people to the area over 12 months. The other stadiums draw more fans over 12 months than a football stadium ever will. And football stadiums are considerably more expensive.

Especially for a football stadium at the RFK site.

Nats Park was a unicorn - in an underutilized part of town with tons of available space for growth of the surrounding area, served by multiple Metro lines, walkable from downtown and Capitol Hill.

RFK has nowhere but the campus itself for growth - it's hemmed in by the river to the east and south, Langston golf course on the north, and residential homes on the west. It would forever be a pustule on the ass of Hill East - empty for 90% of the year, prohibiting useful development.

To be fair, there is room for growth south of the stadium on the parking lots, the former site of the DC General Hospital, and the industrial areas between there and the Anacostia. But generally I agree with you. I think the space could be used for much better purposes and will have next to no positive economic impacts on Hill East.

If the stadium were to be built at Poplar Point - a former toxic waste dump across the Anacostia from Nats Park - and coupled with a project to bury the Anacostia Highway and develop the Anacostia riverfront, I could hold my nose at get behind it. But situating the stadium at RFK is a net loss for the city regardless of who pays for it.