[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 135 (Friday, August 11, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12513-S12514]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CONVENTION CENTER AND SPORTS ARENA AUTHORIZATION

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar 180, H.R. 2108.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 2108) to permit the Washington Convention 
     Center Authority to expend revenues for the operation and 
     maintenance of the existing Washington Convention Center and 
     for preconstruction activities relating to a new convention 
     center in the District of Columbia, to permit a designated 
     authority of the District of Columbia to borrow funds for the 
     preconstruction activities relating to a sports arena in the 
     District of Columbia and to permit certain revenues to be 
     pledged as security for the borrowing of such funds, and for 
     other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the immediate 
consideration of the bill?
  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. COHEN. Mr. President, the Senate will move shortly to take up 
H.R. 2108, the District of Columbia Convention Center and Sports Arena 
Authorization Act of 1995. This legislation, which passed the House of 
Representatives last Friday, has two purposes.

[[Page S 12514]]

  The first is to authorize the District of Columbia to pledge revenues 
generated by the sports arena tax as security to borrow funds. These 
funds are to be used to pay for preconstruction activities, mostly site 
acquisition and preparation, for the new arena to be built in the 
Gallery Place area. Over the next several years, revenue from the new 
arena tax, which has been imposed on the District's business community, 
will be used to repay the debt.
  The second purpose is to authorize the Washington Convention Center 
Authority to spend certain revenues for operating the current 
convention center and for costs associated with developing plans for a 
new convention center. These revenues are also generated by a special 
tax, in this instance an additional tax imposed on the District's 
hotels and restaurants.
  Both of these projects are considered critically important to the 
future economic stability and growth of the District. The financial 
recovery of the Nation's Capital is important not only to those who 
live in the District but to all Americans. A new convention center and 
sports arena will help to revitalize areas of the city, generate badly 
needed revenue for the District, and create new businesses and jobs for 
the residents of the District and the surrounding communities. Both 
will also enhance civic pride and promote tourism. As a result, both 
projects have broad based support among local citizens and businesses.
  As chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management 
and the District of Columbia, I conducted a hearing earlier this week 
on this legislation. The responsibility of the subcommittee and, 
ultimately, the Congress is to examine the financial soundness of the 
District's plans for spending these special tax revenues. In light of 
the District's current financial crisis, there is an even greater 
obligation to ensure the District is proceeding in a fiscally 
responsible manner before the Congress approves the pending 
legislation.
  One aspect of the proposal that I have been concerned about over the 
past few days is the leasing arrangement being considered by the 
District to house some 720 employees that must be relocated from the 
buildings which are to be demolished on the proposed site. According to 
press reports, the council was expected to vote on a proposal from the 
Mayor to lease space for employees in two buildings owned by a local 
developer. The council, however, learned that the District had never
 independently confirmed whether the vacant buildings could be 
renovated by the October construction deadline and consequently the 
council did not vote on the $48 million lease. The Mayor subsequently 
negotiated a modified lease which was not submitted to the council 
before it adjourned its special session on August 10.

  Concerns have been raised about the wisdom of the District entering 
into a long term lease at a time when the District and the D.C. 
Financial Control Board are looking at making significant cuts in 
personnel. In addition, some have suggested that the District may have 
space to relocate the affected employees to existing D.C. owned or 
leased buildings.
  The first year lease costs for one of the buildings are included in 
the District's preconstruction costs and will be paid for by the arena 
tax. The remaining costs will be paid from the District's general fund 
and, therefore, any lease agreement will affect the District's 1996 
budget and beyond. Consequently, Senator Levin, who is the ranking 
minority member of the subcommittee, and I believe it would be prudent 
for the Financial Control Board to review any leasing agreement given 
that the Board is currently reviewing the District fiscal year 1996 
budget.
  As a result of discussions with the Mayor and the Control Board, the 
Mayor has agreed by letter that he will furnish a copy of the lease to, 
and cooperate with, the Board to enable it to provide a written 
analysis of the lease.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter to me from Mayor 
Barry be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                     The District of Columbia,

                                 Washington, DC., August 10, 1995.
     Hon. William Cohen,
     Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management 
         and the District of Columbia, Hart Senate Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for the opportunity to meet 
     with you and Senator Carl Levin this afternoon to discuss 
     your interest in the D.C. Sports Arena and H.R. 2108. As I 
     indicated in our meeting, we have been successful in 
     negotiating a lease for relocating our employees at 605 and 
     613 G Street, that is economically and programmatically 
     advantageous to the District in that it saves the District 
     $25 million in potential rent payments.
       As the basis for using your best efforts to obtain Senate 
     approval of H.R. 2108, I agree to the following:
       First, to provide by no later than 12:00 p.m. on August 11, 
     1995, to the U.S. Senate Oversight Subcommittee and the 
     Financial Authority copies of the original and modified 
     leases previously submitted to the D.C. City Council;
       Second, to cooperate with the Financial Authority to enable 
     it to provide by August 18, 1995, a written analysis of the 
     lease terms;
       Third, to use my best efforts, working with the Chairman of 
     City Council, to obtain from the D.C. Council, its approval 
     or disapproval of the original or modified lease by September 
     13, but not before the Council receives the written analysis 
     from the Financial Authority; and
       Fourth, to obtain a letter of commitment, which is legally 
     binding, from the developer, R. Donahue Peebles, that commits 
     him and the District to the terms of the modified lease, 
     notwithstanding the fact that the original lease will be 
     deemed approved on September 14, absent disapproval by D.C. 
     City Council.
           Sincrely,
                                                Marion Barry, Jr.,
                                                            Mayor.
       I have been duly informed and agree with the terms of this 
     letter.
                                               R. Donahue Peebles.

  Mr. COHEN. In addition, he will also make every effort to have the 
D.C. Council consider the lease by September 13.
  Finally, I want to note that passing this legislation does not 
resolve any controversies surrounding the process by which the 
agreement for the new arena has been reached. These are matters for the 
citizens of the District and their elected representatives to decide 
and for the appropriate regulatory and judicial forums to resolve. 
Final action by Congress on this bill should not be construed as 
interfering with or affecting the administrative or legal rights of any 
individual or organization pertaining to the District's decisions on 
the arena or convention center.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be 
deemed read the third time and passed; that the motion to reconsider be 
laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the bill be 
placed at the appropriate place in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  So the bill (H.R. 2108) was deemed read the third time and passed.

                          ____________________