Home Stadium Convo

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

Can you elaborate on that part? From what I have read, the city will cover the cost for infrastructure around the stadium while Harris and his team will cover the cost of the stadium.

I agree. No hand outs. What’s good for the goose…..
It’s a win for Harris, and the city. Jobs. People spending money. Etc etc etc.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

Can you elaborate on that part? From what I have read, the city will cover the cost for infrastructure around the stadium while Harris and his team will cover the cost of the stadium.

it's still nearly a billion dollars of tax payer money going to subsidize a billionaire's business interests.

if it works out, they'll get it back in taxes, but not nearly as fast as harris recoups his money from owning it (the stadium, the complex, is he the landlord on the retail and housing too?).

I'm not against it, but it's definitely a thing that's going to be brought up.

[GridIron26]

Originally Posted by That Guy

it's still nearly a billion dollars of tax payer money going to subsidize a billionaire's business interests.

if it works out, they'll get it back in taxes, but not nearly as fast as harris recoups his money from owning it (the stadium, the complex, is he the landlord on the retail and housing too?).

I'm not against it, but it's definitely a thing that's going to be brought up.

I see your point now, although I don't think it is that simple as you are making it to be. I personally hate the idea of NFL owners using tax funds to cover stadium costs, and I was surprised by this arrangement between Harris and DC as I see it differently. The infrastructure around the stadium would still happen if there is no stadium - of course, the designs would have been different if there is no stadium but infrastructure improvements still have to happen anyway. Not only the improvements are needed, it would create better traffic control and jobs for people near the stadium. Yes, Harris benefits this indirectly but taxpayers also benefit from Harris' investment into the stadium. So to me, it's win-win situation except for those taxpayers who don't like football.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

I see your point now, although I don't think it is that simple as you are making it to be. I personally hate the idea of NFL owners using tax funds to cover stadium costs, and I was surprised by this arrangement between Harris and DC as I see it differently. The infrastructure around the stadium would still happen if there is no stadium - of course, the designs would have been different if there is no stadium but infrastructure improvements still have to happen anyway. Not only the improvements are needed, it would create better traffic control and jobs for people near the stadium. Yes, Harris benefits this indirectly but taxpayers also benefit from Harris' investment into the stadium. So to me, it's win-win situation except for those taxpayers who don't like football.

I mean, sort of. The amount of infra needed BECAUSE of the massive stadium (water, streets, sewage, etc), the price is WAAAAY higher than if they left the area a bit dumpy. It is a win-win, because the taxes SHOULD pay it back with interest/cover the increased maintenance (depending on the details).

I can't see how having a new stadium + retail + housing (more people) is going to make DC traffic any better.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Can't wait to try to go to a game and find out tickets are approximately 1 million dollars....

[GridIron26]

It's official now

https://x.com/john_keim/status/1951366102250037757

[sdskinsfan2001]

LET'S FUCKING GO BABY!!

[Chico23231]

This is an amazing development. My god, who thought it was a good idea to leave the RFk site?

[WCommandersfan99]

Super pumped the deal got done. 9-3 count is great. Excited for the new stadium. If it looks close to the blueprint, it's going to be incredible.

[SkinsGuru]

whey do the same people vote again in September?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SkinsGuru

whey do the same people vote again in September?

The way I heard it explained is that because of the structure of the DC Council (one body instead of two like a house and senate), all bills are required to receive 2 approval votes with time in between for review. - mostly this time is allotted for minor editing and cleaning up of the bill's language not really for any new additions. So the first vote is on the substantial approval and the 2nd is for text approval.

But not only does the Council have to vote again, but then it goes to Congress. ugh

[punch it in]

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...urn-washington

[sdskinsfan2001]

[sdskinsfan2001]

[MTK]

We’re going home