| Councilmember Harold Brazil’s Proposed Issues to be Considered by the Blue Ribbon Panel on the DC Sports and Entertainment Commission
Topics for Discussion/Research
I. The two major functions of the Sports Commission are to: (1) Operate the Stadium-Armory Complex; and (2) Promote the District as a whole as a sports and entertainment location.
A. What types of entities handle these functions in other jurisdictions and how are they funded?
B. Does it make the most sense to have the same entity handle both functions? Should other functions also be handled by the same entity?
II. Facilities comparison
A. Do facilities similar to the Stadium and Armory (based on, e.g., age, condition, capacity, etc.) exist in the United States? What are their key characteristics?
B. What types of entities run these facilities, how are they funded, and are they profitable?
III. Is the operational function of the Commission self-supporting?
A. Can the Stadium be operated on a profitable, self-supporting basis?
B. Can the Armory be operated on a profitable, self-supporting basis?
[The two venues should be considered separately.]
C. If the operations are not self-supporting, what type of monetary support would be needed to make them break-even? Would there need to be an annual appropriation of operating/capital funds? Would there only need to be a one-time infusion of funds?
IV. Funding of promotional function.
A. Are there/will there be sufficient profit from the operations of the Commission’s facilities to fund the Commission’s function of promoting the District as a whole as a sports and entertainment location?
B. What other sources of funding would be available for the promotional function? (See also section VI below.)
V. Multi-year operating/budget plans.
A. The Panel should receive and review the following:
1. At least one five-year plan developed by the Commission showing break-even operations without any outside funding (if possible). [If there is more than one reasonable break-even scenario, the other scenario(s) should be outlined, including the pros and cons of each scenario.]
2. The Commission’s preferred course, regardless of its break–even status. For this course, the Commission should describe what actions would need to take place, what the costs would be, etc.
B. There are many variables that will affect the revenues and operations of the Commission. The Commission should develop, and the Panel should review, a flowchart showing how the Commission would handle different outcomes (e.g., baseball/no baseball; new soccer stadium/no new soccer stadium, grand prix/no grand prix), showing the Commission’s general financial situation under each scenario, and what actions the Commission would need to take in response to each.
VI. What are other sources of funding for the Commission?
A. Are there potential sources of funding from outside groups or the federal government?
B. What amount of funds could be obtained through a ticket surcharge or a surtax on concessions?
C. Can/should the Commission derive any income from promotional or organizational functions it may perform for events not held at the Stadium-Armory complex (e.g., DC Marathon, events it might help bring to convention center, etc.).
|
