Josh Harris makes case for D.C. stadium deal

Yahoo

5 days ago

The Commanders and D.C. mayor Muriel Bowser have a stadium deal. That's not the end of the matter but the beginning.
Next, D.C. Council must approach the arrangement and the significant public expenditure that comes with it.
That makes it a distinctly political issue. Winning at the ballot box is one thing (such votes routinely fail). Here, the Commanders, the NFL, and Bowser still need to get enough members of the D.C. Council behind the project.
Appearing recently on The Deal with Alex Rodriguez and Jason Kelly, owner Josh Harris rattled off some of the pro-stadium talking points.
Harris said, via Sports Business Journal, that the stadium deal will "be highly beneficial" for the District, citing the $2.7 billion payment the team will be making as the biggest private investment in D.C. history.
'The project has incredible [return on investment] for D.C., literally billions of tax revenues, thousands of homes and thousands of jobs," Harris said. "And of that, 30 percent are, by agreement, going to be affordable homes. And so it's going to raise the standard. And then you get an amazing entertainment district.'
Harris added that the redevelopment is "going to change D.C.," while acknowledging the basic reality that it all comes down to whether they can persuade the politicians to support the project.
'The next step for us is to obviously get the council's vote," Harris said. "You've got to tell the citizens and the politicians . . . why this is good for the city, why they should invest their money in this.'
The basic argument is that D.C. will make back its $500 million and then some in tax revenue. Council's response easily could go like this: "The District will make that money anyway, even without kicking in a half billion dollars."
It's a common argument for companies seeking some sort of public subsidy. You'll get more back than you put in. But if the stadium is going to be built in D.C. even without kicking in $500 million, they'll get it all.
The Commanders, the league, and Bowser have touted the stadium deal as basically a done deal. If D.C. Council declines to pay for any of the venue, will the Commanders proceed with a privately-financed project? Will they pick a site in Maryland or Virginia?
That's the fundamental question for the D.C. Council. Are we willing to risk not having the stadium at all, if we refuse to pay for it? And are the Commanders willing to build a new stadium not in D.C. if the final verdict is, "Pay for it yourself."