$20,000 added to boathouse lobbying bill, bringing it to $1.2 million

A computer-generated image of what the boathouse would look like

Georgetown is definitely putting its money where its mouth is on the proposed boathouse on the Potomac. A lobbying report [PDF] filed last week shows that between April and June Georgetown paid $20,000 to the Carmen Group, a lobbying firm that has been doing work on the project since 2005. This brings the all-time boathouse lobbying bill to more than $1.2 million.

According to the report, during this period the Carmen Group had no direct contact with the National Park Service, but engaged in “ongoing consultation” with the University about environmental documentation.

The total lobbying bill for the boathouse is definitely higher than $1.2 million. Another lobbying report (PDF) issued earlier in the month disclosing $30,000 worth of spending combines other costs of boathouse lobbying with lobbying for other issues, such as student loan bills, making it impossible to figure out how much of that 30 grand went towards fighting for the boathouse.

What’s all this money getting Georgetown? Scott Fleming, Georgetown’s Assistant Vice President for Federal Relations, and the University’s point man on lobbying issues, wrote in an email that the National Park Service is currently working on a Draft Environmental Impact Statement about the boathouse, but it’s unclear when the Draft EIS will be released.

19 Comments on “$20,000 added to boathouse lobbying bill, bringing it to $1.2 million

  1. For a university constantly plagued with a poor endowment, this is a sad waste of money.

  2. For a university that has an ugly-ass campus, it’s sad to spend this much on an off-campus space.

  3. All of that money is explicitly solicited and donated solely for this purpose. It’s not like they are taking money out of the endowment.

  4. I’d say our campus isn’t that ugly. Lauinger, yes. But seriously?

  5. That 1.2 million that could have funded a whole lot of scholarships…

  6. New south harbin and darnall are ugly as sin. the b school is still up for debate.

  7. really bad investment. especially when our endowment’s floundering. oh and our campus is freaking sweet by the way.

  8. Pingback: The Morning Metropolitan «

  9. If only the university had spent that kind of money to hire some decent rowing coaches to replace the “has-been”.

  10. he’s paid $200k a year, second only to JTIII. However, he’s the one that keeps the donations coming in from alums…

    Vox should look into how much the university sank into trying to get the back entrance to campus built…apparently also a major lobbying effort…the school brings a lot of money to the area, it’s a shame they have to fight for this stuff

  11. This is positively infuriating!!! As I’ve said many times before, the one thing that is keeping from G’town becoming a great school are its science depts. Leave it to G’town to neglect the sciences and put money into something this useless!!!

  12. And I’ll bet my life on the fact that the new science building won’t happen for another 10 years!

  13. It’s a great investment! Georgetown has a great campus and great academics. Rowers want to row there…. they just want a nice boathouse to row out of. Aside from the basketball team no other sport gets the giving and results as rowing. Oh and BTW 1.2 million isn’t going to do a whole lot for an endowment. Get the rich rowing families to give.

  14. I was speaking to another Georgetown student on the phone and she thought that we had spent $1.2 million lobbying for a bath house. I’m not sure which is worse; I neither take baths nor use boats.

  15. It is incredible to see how much little pride my fellow Georgetown students have for their university. Georgetown is first and foremost an academic institution. President DeGioia certainly understands this, and he will see that the Science Building starts construction and finishes in a timely manner. However, many of you are being quite sophomoric in thinking that the university tackles issues in a linear manner (i.e. X must be done before Y begins); when in fact, Georgetown handles financial issues in a much more sophisticated matter. The Boathouse and the Science Building are just two major capital investments the university has planned for (they were not the first, and they will not be the last). Importantly, one is not getting priority over the other. In fact, contrary to what Vox Populi would like its readers to believe, once the boathouse starts construction it will be completely donor-funded, whereas the University will (rightfully so) invest millions from its capital-investemnt fund into the Science Center.

    The Boathouse should be a source of pride for the University, not a source of internal conflict. The Vox Populi should seek to bolster the University, not bolster those who would rather see Healy towers turned into more townhouses. The University always runs into problems with any new building project because of its historical and affluent location. We, as Hoyas and as Georgetown University community members, should support efforts to improve the prominence and prestige of the University; and sorry but that means spending money, whether its on a new Science Building, a Boathouse, or John Thompson II “consulting contract.” http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/03/sports/ncaabasketball/03hoyas.html

  16. Pingback: Vox Populi » Lobbying bill for Georgetown boathouse inches higher

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>