New from the Post: "Developers have offered to pay the District $70 million for the rights to build on land adjacent to a new baseball stadium, money that city leaders said will help cover potential cost overruns on the project. ... [D]evelopers have pledged to pay for the rights to develop on land within the 20 acres needed for the stadium project that is not taken up by the ballpark structure. Of the $70 million, $55 million will go to the waterfront corporation and $15 million will go to MLB. [...] With the money, the corporation will pay for upgrades to nearby roads and an underground parking garage. The corporation also pledged to pay for cost overruns related to the city's acquisition of 14 acres for the ballpark and potential environmental remediation, as well as to help with other potential overruns related to construction." Also, the council is supposed to get today a construction contract "between the D.C. Sports and Entertainment Commission and the three construction companies set to build the stadium, was to include a special "guaranteed maximum price" contract that would cap ballpark construction costs at $320 million -- including a $20 million payment from MLB." This would appear to be a big step toward alleviating some of the council's disagreements with the lease, but we will see how it shakes out. UPDATE, 4:22 pm: The Post has updated its story to say that the construction contract has been sent to the council as well: "The contract transfers the control of the project from the city to the construction companies, but also transfers the risk. The companies agreed to a guaranteed price of $320 million for the materials and labor. The price includes a $20 million payment from Major League Baseball, which the league promised in December. If the companies fail to complete the stadium by March 1, 2008, their fees will be reduced by $100,000 per day, up to a maximum penalty of $5 million, according to the documents submitted to the council. The documents also include a cap of $68 million for so-call "soft construction costs," including fees to architects and consultants."

The Post's District Extra's cover story today is "Landowners in Stadium's Path Fight to Stay Put", the stories of three of the people who are being forced off their properties as the stadium moves forward (or does it?). Accompanying the story is a timeline of the eminent domain seizures.

Let's move to the Thursday stories on the stadium battle. In the Post, we have "Private Stadium Funding Canceled, Deutsche Bank Deal Collapses": "A District government plan to use $246 million in private financing from Deutsche Bank to help build a new baseball stadium has collapsed, a political blow to the D.C. Council, which spent months pushing to reduce public investment in the project. D.C. Chief Financial Officer Natwar M. Gandhi said the deal has been called off in part because the bank was seeking a $5 million fee to structure the financing arrangement. But another complication emerged yesterday when bank spokesman Ted Meyer said the bank had a signed contract with the District and remains entitled to the payment if the city uses the bank's strategy." (What? A snafu surrounding the stadium? How un-US-u-al!) The article is chock full of council members backpedaling like mad from the Deutsche Bank private financing plan, which of course was not part of Mayor Williams's original financing plan, it was added after the council insisted on private financing options being investigated. UPDATE: The WashTimes's story is "Mayor: Lease vote will go off Tuesday", saying that the council should have by Friday the information they need on the plans to have the construction companies and the AWC be responsible for construction/land acquisition cost overruns (although the contracts themselves may not be done by then). Some council members are expressing skepticism. If the council vote fails, the city will have to go to arbitration with Major League Baseball. Fasten your seat belts. it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Today's lease stories: from The Post, "Stadium Pact To Be Revised For Financing," and from the WashTimes, "Council fails to reach deal on stadium lease." No one is leaping up and down with joy about the new agreement, and while Mayor Bow Tie says he'll get the documentation about the construction agreement to the council by Friday, council members appear to be suspicious of any promises that aren't backed up with legally binding documents, so a Feb. 7 vote is looking kind of iffy. UPDATE: And here is the AP story on the mayor's comments during his weekly briefing today. Guess what? He's optimistic! UPDATE, 9:50 pm: NBC 4 says that Mayor Tony is getting tired of it all, and saying that it's time to put up or shut up, and vote on the agreeement: "I think it's now time to have a vote. I do not have any intention whatsoever this time of withdrawing the legislation. I think we just need to have a vote. And if you want baseball, this is what we have."

The February issue of the Hill Rag has a large feature story ("Trading a Queer Home for Home Plate") about the gay-oriented clubs and businesses along O Street in the footprint of the new baseball stadium. It traces the history of the neighborhood, the people who have congregated there, and what the future may be for the clubs as they try to find new homes.

If you just can't get enough of the wrangling over the stadium lease and construction agreements, David Catania has posted the proposed lease agreement, summaries of the agreement itself as well as of recent amendments, the proposed construction administration agreement, the non-relocation agreement, and the mediation team's letter to Linda Cropp. (Hat tip to Capitol Punishment.)

From the AP: "Members of the D-C Council will learn more about the latest proposed lease agreement with Major League Baseball this afternoon. The 13 council members have been invited to a closed door briefing where those who helped negotiate the deal will answer questions. [...] Chief Financial Officer Natwar Gandhi is also expected to attend. He has questions about changes that could affect the sale of bonds needed to finance the new stadium." The session is scheduled for 1:00-4:00 pm. Speaking of Mr. Gandhi, this morning's WashTimes has a piece on Gandhi's reservations on the proposed financing, and the WashPost editorial board tells the mayor and council to listen to what the CFO says.

One thing that can be seen between the lines in the stories about the lease agreement is the apparent recognition by all sides that the new baseball stadium can't be ready by the 2008 season. At least the new lease agreement seems to do away with penalties on the city for not delivering the stadium by the original agreement date, and sets up a payment requirement for leasing RFK in 2008. (Hat tip for this tea-leaf reading to the Nats fans at BallparkGuys.com and also the District of Baseball blog.) And has enough groundwork been laid for MLB to go ahead and name a new owner? Lots to watch over the next few weeks, if we can stand it.

Starting a new clean entry... The Post's print version of the lease agreement story is now available, "Baseball Consents To Revised Lease Deal", which gives both the good news and the bad news in the lede: "District leaders reached an agreement on a revised stadium lease with Major League Baseball yesterday that includes a commitment from baseball for a $3.5 million youth academy but fell short of fully answering the concerns of some key D.C. Council members." And, just to add to the peppyness: "Meanwhile, some changes to the lease drew strong objections from Natwar M. Gandhi, the city's chief financial officer. [...] Gandhi noted that the new document deleted a monetary reserve account that Wall Street bond raters had requested. Gandhi is seeking investment-grade bonds for the stadium project to get a lower interest rate for the city." And, while quoted as carping earlier in the story, two council members seem to grudgingly admit that there's been progress: "Brown and Gray acknowledged that the city has won some significant concessions. In addition to the academy, which would teach children about baseball and provide academic tutoring, the city would get 2,000 additional free tickets for disadvantaged youth." And finally, because nothing can ever be easy: "Williams promised to send more documentation about capping stadium costs in a separate document called the Construction Administration Agreement, Brown and Gray said. That agreement, which is expected to specify how the construction companies contracted by the city would build the stadium, will be voted on separately by the council, setting up the possibility of another tough political fight for the mayor." UPDATE: The WashTimes story is similar, with explanations of the agreements between the city and MLB.

WTOP is reporting that the city and Major League Baseball have reached agreement on negotiations over the stadium lease agreement. It has been decided to not use the Deutsche Bank private financing agreement, and to instead go with traditional financing. MLB has also agreed to develop a youth baseball facility, to increase the number of free tickets given to disadvantaged children, and to lease RFK in 2008 if the stadium is not completed in time. There's also a comment about the city and the team splitting profits on land sold for development, which sounds kind of odd, will wait to hear an explanation of that.

More posts: Nationals Park