This Much Residents Agree On: Stadium Deal Should Be Better
November 27th, 2005 | by jg3 |This post is a response to this article in the Washington Post.
Yeah, the stadium deal should be better. But that should have been negotiated better when it originated. Whoever thought that the deal would happen quickly is naive. Even if it does happen quickly, the fact that costs fluxuate should have been worked into the deal. Price of materials or land goes down, the city gets to devote the leftover money to local, relevant projects. Price goes up, somebody (baseball, owner?) has to pay.
One person interviewed outside a Home Depot said that business should step in and cover the costs. I get that idea but why should local business be penalized for the city council being chest-puffing politicians and baseball being greedy. The foot-dragging hurts everyone and the penalty for it should be borne by the city council and MLB.
And about the schools … this is not a one-dimensional society, but this is a single topic of discussion. The schools issue is handled in the rest of the budget and newspaper. Besides, if I were in junior high school I would work my little butt of to get a chance to take an afternoon off and go see a Nats game. I would make a straight-B report card, if that is what it took.
Filed under: baseball
You must be logged in to post a comment.