D.C. Council member Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) said it took about eight years for now-bustling Gallery Place to become built up. “You’re looking at a decade before you really see the effects of the baseball stadium. But it will happen.”

Something tells me slogans like "you gotta wait 10 years for this to work out" weren't part of Evans' pitch back when he and his colleagues were voting to transfer hundreds of millions of dollars from impoverished D.C. residents to wealthy baseball owners.

Eh. If you've walked through the neighborhood, you see the construction has already started and has finished in some places. You're not going to have to wait 10 years to feel the effect. You might have to wait 10 years for it to be complete, which is reasonable.

I still want to see an honest look at the stadium by an economist that captures how much $ is flowing in from MD and VA that otherwise wouldn't go to DC. I'm sure it's not $600 million worth, but I bet the true number would surprise a lot of us.

Motorists must navigate streets bounded by Jersey barriers
Couldn't the cars drive right through the jerseys?

Seriously, I am unfamiliar with the term "Jersey barrier" and I've lived in the Philly area for over 40 years.

Here's everything you ever wanted to know about Jersey Barriers*

*but were afraid to ask.

I still want to see an honest look at the stadium by an economist that captures how much $ is flowing in from MD and VA that otherwise wouldn't go to DC. I'm sure it's not $600 million worth, but I bet the true number would surprise a lot of us.

The issue is that whatever side you support, you could spin the numbers that way. I'd imagine the difference between what the new Stadium (and all its neighhborhood accessories) pulls in and what was being pulled in at RFK is not anywhere near big enough to justify the cost.

On the other hand, one could argue--maybe fairly, maybe not--that the team doesn't arrive in DC at all without the promise of a new stadium, so counting the different from RFK is silly. Like I said, it's a complicated issue and I'm not sure there is one clear "answer."

Thanks, Chris. We have always called them concrete barriers without noting the particulars of design.

On the other hand, one could argue--maybe fairly, maybe not--that the team doesn't arrive in DC at all without the promise of a new stadium

It's fair, and completely accurate. The team would still be playing in Montreal today, had the city built Labatt Park the way they originally said they were going to. And Oakland is going to relocate to Cisco Field in Fremont for much the same reason.

The team would still be playing in Montreal today, had the city built Labatt Park the way they originally said they were going to

Well, that's true but by the end there (once the team started playing some games in PR, basically) it was clear the Expos were heading out of Montreal come hell or high water. How long Bud would've been willing to put up with having them there if DC wouldn't go for the stadium plan is a matter of debate, as I said.

Seriously, I am unfamiliar with the term "Jersey barrier" and I've lived in the Philly area for over 40 years.

Hmmm...we always called 'em Jersey Barriers or Jersey Walls.

I'm sure the neighborhood will pick up before long. Surrounding blocks already look very different from how they used to.

I'd talk more about what used to go on down there, but I'm not into grossing people out too much outside the Lounge.

I was just down there recently. It's not that bad.

Listen, Rome wasn't built in a day. It'll work itself out.

Fans arriving by Metro will emerge from a station housed in a building that is a still a maze of concrete and steel girders. From there, they will walk an unsightly path along a chain-link fence—protecting a four-story-deep hole, soon to be a hotel basement—en route to the glitz and game.

By car, it won’t look any better. Motorists must navigate streets bounded by Jersey barriers, then find parking lots set among towering cranes and shells of office buildings and condominium high-rises

Sounds infinitely better than Willets Point at the moment.

Was just down there last night driving the folks around the new ballpark. It looks great, there are some construction zones, but it was much worse a few months ago.

Also just got my parking passes - just a shade farther than the Metro, but a little farther than the parking at RFK.

Shouldn't be too bad getting in and out - for me that is.

Fans might grumble that there are plenty of cement mixers but virtually no restaurants or bars -- and only one Starbucks -- in the blocks immediately surrounding the ballpark.

Are the Nationals going to put that many fans to sleep that they actually NEED another Starbucks there?

And they're concrete trucks, not cement mixers (as my Dad would remind me when I was working construction with him).

-- MWE

Are the Nationals going to put that many fans to sleep that they actually NEED another Starbucks there?

No sleeping, but a good Maalox Bar would be useful.

The issue is that whatever side you support, you could spin the numbers that way

It's true that you're never going to get a 100% accurate answer, but that's probably true of every other "Stadiums suck!" econ study that's been done. This one has a chance to be in the middle somewhere, and I just wonder what the middle ground is.

$600 million (or more) is a scary number. How much of that is going to be recaptured by new revenue that wouldn't be if the stadium were located in a difference city where it couldn't leach off the surrounding states?

Are the Nationals going to put that many fans to sleep that they actually NEED another Starbucks there?

Like all fast food emporiums, Starbucks' existence is easily justified by their public bathrooms, in this case apparently the only one within miles. We are grateful for small favors.

$600 million (or more) is a scary number. How much of that is going to be recaptured by new revenue that wouldn't be if the stadium were located in a difference city where it couldn't leach off the surrounding states?

Not just a different city, but what's also important here is the part of the city that DC placed the stadium. While it's probably almost always bad, in practice, to spend $600 million in public funding on a single private entity, it might be more worth it (or at least less not worth it) to use the money to build the flagship in the redevelopment of an area of the city with huge economic potential.

Are the Nationals going to put that many fans to sleep that they actually NEED another Starbucks there?

Don't talk crazy, Mike. One can never have enough Starbucks.

Back to the topic at hand... There seems little doubt that the construction will not be done in a day, month, year, or years. But, then, what did you expect? Redevelopment -- stadium or not -- would see this.

As to the economics of the deal... One of the big reasons the DC Council approved the funding was to build up the "ballpark district." I found this to be politics, and not much more. As I understand it, development was started in the area, and given a few years, you would see development that is transpiring now, albeit at a slower pace.

For those interested in the funding, well, here's the nuts and bolts. By the way... I think the businesses that are being taxed are getting shafted. The idea that they will see revenues offset by those traveling in from out of the District seems a bit of a leap:

Cost: $610.8 million

Public financing: The city may sell up to $610.8 million in bonds to finance the stadium. Revenue to pay the debt on those bonds would come from these sources:

* $11 million to $14 million per year from in-stadium taxes on tickets, concessions and merchandise.
* $21 million to $24 million per year from a new tax on businesses with gross receipts of $3 million or more.
* $5.5 million per year in rent payments from the baseball team's owner.

Private financing: The team will be responsible for any cost overruns. Naming rights would belong to the team and are not earmarked for stadium construction costs.

Lease: Team would lease stadium for 30 years from the DC Sports Commission. The value is estimated at $5.5 million per year.

Not just a different city, but what's also important here is the part of the city that DC placed the stadium. While it's probably almost always bad, in practice, to spend $600 million in public funding on a single private entity, it might be more worth it (or at least less not worth it) to use the money to build the flagship in the redevelopment of an area of the city with huge economic potential.

That's certainly valuable, but any econ prof is going to get a haughty look and scoff at you. That part of town might bloom, but that just means that Shaw isn't getting gentrified faster.

Now if they can show that the developers are spending their dough in DC instead of in Fairfax or PG County, we've got something.

Maury -- Is the utility tax (the bulk of which is paid by the feds) included in that? My memory is that that accounted for something like ~$7 million a year in proceeds to DC.

And let's not forget that if -- call me crazy -- the park were being built with mostly private dollars, SF-style, all of that development would still be happening, and all of those VA and MD folks would still be coming into the District for ball games.

Yes, I realize that ship sailed a long time ago, but it's a pretty nice ship.

And let's not forget that if -- call me crazy -- the park were being built with mostly private dollars, SF-style, all of that development would still be happening, and all of those VA and MD folks would still be coming into the District for ball games.

Sure. And if I were elected President tomorrow, my first act would be to declare world peace. And we would have world peace, dammit!

DC got a bad deal. If there were more competent people in the city's government, they probably could've strongarmed MLB a bit and had to pay less of the freight.

But MLB owned the team and ultimately decided the cost. They were NOT going to get a SF-type deal, so there's not much point into holding it up to that standard.

(here's where Maury comes in and points out the millions SF's gov't ended up spending anyway...)

Here's everything you ever wanted to know about Jersey Barriers*

. . . and a possible name for a future Garden State franchise - "The Jersey Barriers".