[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 105 (Thursday, July 30, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H6826-H6827]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CONVENTION CENTER AND SPORTS ARENA AUTHORIZATION
ACT AMENDMENTS
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight be discharged from further
consideration of the bill (H.R. 4237) to amend the District of Columbia
Convention Center and Sports Arena Authorization Act of 1995 to revise
the revenues and activities covered under such Act, and for other
purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the bill, as follows:
H.R. 4237
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REVENUES AND ACTIVITIES COVERED UNDER WASHINGTON
CONVENTION CENTER AND SPORTS ARENA
AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1995.
(a) In General.--Section 101 of the District of Columbia
Convention Center and Sports Arena Authorization Act of 1995
(DC Code, sec. 47-396.1) is amended by striking subsections
(a) and (b) and inserting the following:
``The fourth sentence of section 446 of the District of
Columbia Home Rule Act (DC Code, sec. 47-304) shall not apply
with respect to the expenditure or obligation of any revenues
of the Washington Convention Center Authority for any purpose
authorized under the Washington Convention Center Authority
Act of 1994 (D.C. Law 10-188).''.
(b) Rule of Construction Regarding Revenue Bond
Requirements Under Home Rule Act.--Nothing in the District of
Columbia Convention Center and Sports Arena Authorization Act
of 1995 may be construed to affect the application of section
490 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to any revenue
bonds, notes, or other obligations issued by the Council of
the District of Columbia or by any District instrumentality
to which the Council delegates its authority to issue revenue
bonds, notes or other obligations under such section.
SEC. 2. WAIVER OF CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW OF WASHINGTON
CONVENTION CENTER AUTHORITY FINANCING AMENDMENT
ACT OF 1998.
Notwithstanding section 602(c)(1) of the District of
Columbia Home Rule Act, the Washington Convention Center
Authority Financing Amendment Act of 1998 (D.C. Act 12-402)
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) is
recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. DAVIS of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4237, which we have just
passed, is a bill that permits the District of Columbia to move forward
with a financing plan for the purpose of building a new state-of-the-
art convention center in downtown Washington.
This bill authorizes the Washington Convention Center Authority, an
independent agency, to issue bonds and waive the 30-day waiting period
for the D.C. City Council enactment to go into effect. Its passage this
evening is important so they can get immediate Senate consideration and
be signed by the President, and we can be in the ground and starting
construction the 1st of September.
Our subcommittee has followed the effort to build a new convention
center in downtown Washington with great interest. We think this is
critical for the city to reestablish a tax base in downtown Washington,
and working with the MCI Center, we will build, we think, a
revitalization of the downtown area.
Over time it is estimated that the situation only gets worse in terms
of attracting tourism if we were to go with the existing center. The
District of Columbia's existing Convention Center is now only the 30th
largest in the country, and it can accommodate only approximately 55
percent of national conventions and exhibition shows. That is a serious
blow to the District's economy. A new convention center will provide
much needed jobs for the city, and an increase in locally-generated
local tax base revenue. It will boost morale for the entire region.
I want to thank the General Accounting Office and the General
Services Administration for their respective roles in analyzing the
development of the financing plan for the new Washington Convention
Center. Their thorough analysis has reinforced our confidence in
permitting the District to move forward with this project.
I also want to thank the District's Financial Control Board for their
hard work and oversight on the development of this project. The Control
Board is empowered to approve or disapprove all city borrowing, and
this sign-off of the financial package I think gives everyone more
confidence in its viability.
After reviewing information from both the proponents and opponents of
the project, our committee has unanimously approved the project, and
the Control Board has, in effect, reported to Congress that all aspects
of the project, including borrowing and costs, are compatible with the
interests of the District of Columbia. The next step is for Congress to
go ahead and pass this bill. Our action this evening is a giant step
forward for the District.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
(Mr. MORAN of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this
legislation that moves the convention center forward for the District
of Columbia. Frankly, having a world class convention center in the
Washington metropolitan area is something that the entire region needs,
and there are suburban jurisdictions that would have loved to have had
this center within their jurisdiction. I can say, quite frankly, we had
some great sites for it.
But the fact is, it belongs in the center city. Had the business
community, the residential community, the political community not
gotten their act together they might have lost this, but this is a
credit to the fact that there is that kind of symbiotic relationship
that is acting in a constructive manner today, particularly the hotel,
the restaurant, and the tourism industry.
They deserve this convention center. Most importantly, the people of
the District of Columbia deserve this convention center and all the
economic benefits it will provide.
I thank the gentleman who chairs the District of Columbia authorizing
committee for moving this legislation forward at a rapid pace, and I
look forward to the day that we can all go to this convention center
and enjoy not only the center itself, but all the economic and social
benefits it will bring to this great capital city.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank Tracy Cox
and Peter Sirh of my staff for the staff work they have done on this.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to amend the D.C.
Convention Center and Sports Arena Authorization Act of 1995 in order
to enable the Washington Convention Center Authority (Authority) to
finance revenue bonds for the cost of constructing a new convention
center in downtown D.C. This legislation moves forward the hope and
promise of the 1995 legislation for a sports arena and a convention
center, twin centerpieces of economic development and jobs in the city
and revitalization of downtown in the District. The quick and efficient
construction of the MCI Center and the new jobs and revenue the arena
has brought to D.C. residents have encouraged the city to complete its
work on a convention center, where the need has long been conceded.
In every other city in the United States, this matter would not come
before any but the local city council. Unfortunately, unlike every
other city, the District does not have legislative
[[Page H6827]]
and budget autonomy and therefore cannot spend its own funds unless
authorized by Congress.
Extensive hearings in the D.C. City Council have been held on the
underlying issues, with an informed and vigorous debate by members of
the City Council. On June 16, the City Council approved legislation to
finance the new convention center, and on July 7, the City Council
passed a bond inducement resolution to approve the Authority's proposal
for the issuance of dedicated tax revenue bonds to finance construction
of the convention center. On July 13, the D.C. Financial Responsibility
and Management Assistance Authority (Control Board) gave its final
approval to the financing plan for the project, leaving only
congressional authorization, which is necessary for the District to
proceed to the bond market.
On July 15, the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia heard
testimony from Mayor Marion Barry, City Council Chair Linda Cropp, City
Council Member Charlene Drew Jarvis, Control Board Chair Andrew
Brimmer, Authority President Terry Golden, and representatives of the
General Accounting Office (GAO) and the General Services Administration
(GSA) on the financial aspects of the project. After hearing this
testimony, I am satisfied that the Authority is ready to proceed with
the issuance of bonds to secure financing, allowing the Authority to
begin to break ground possibly as early as September. Considering the
many years' delay and the millions in lost revenue to the District,
ground breaking cannot come too soon.
Although the GAO testified that the cost of constructing the new
convention center would be $708 million, $58 million more than the $650
million estimate, this $58 million is not attributable to the cost of
the center but to certain costs that should be borne by entities other
than the Authority. For example, vendors who will operate in the
facility are anticipated to contribute $17.7 million in equipment
costs; the District government will provide $10 million for utility
relocation from expected Department of Housing and Urban Development
grants; and the President has requested $25 million in his budget to
expand the Mount Vernon Square Metro station.
The GSA testified that the agency had worked closely with the
Authority to keep the costs of the project down. With the GSA's
assistance, the Authority secured a contract with a construction
manager for a ``Guaranteed Maximum Price,'' whereby the private
contractor is given incentives to keep costs down and assumes the risk
for any cost overruns.
Mayor Marion Barry testified, among other things, regarding the
promise of additional jobs for District residents. He said that the new
convention center would create nearly 1,000 new construction jobs, and
that once the facility is completed, it would generate nearly 10,000
jobs in the hospitality and tourism industries. He testified that,
using some of the approaches that were successful with the MCI Center,
special training and goals for jobs for D.C. residents would be met.
The District of Columbia Subcommittee hearing was not a reprise of
the lengthy D.C. City Council hearings, and, on home rule grounds, did
not attempt to repeat issues of local concern. However, since the
issues of financing and bonding before the Congress implicate other
areas, the Subcommittee asked extensive questions and received
testimony concerning many issues, including location, size, and job
creation, in addition to the strictly financial issues.
This convention center has an unusual financial base, which I believe
other cities might do well to emulate. The financing arises from a
proposal by the hotel and restaurant industry for taxes on their own
industry that would not have been available to the city for any other
purpose. The proposal was made at a time when the city's need for
revenue and jobs has been especially pressing. For many years, the
District had been unable to attract large conventions. Not only has the
District lost billions as a result; the local hotel and restaurant
industry has suffered from the absence of a large convention center. It
is estimated that the inadequacy of the current facility led to the
loss of $300 million in revenue from lost conventions in 1997 alone. My
legislation will enable the District to compete for its market share in
the convention industry for the first time in many years.
The delay in building an adequate convention center has been very
costly to the District. In a town dominated by tax exempt property,
especially government buildings, a convention center is one of the few
projects that can bring significant revenues. To that end, the District
intends to break ground this September. I ask for expeditious passage
on this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read
the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
____________________