Bills mount along with uncertainty over debate at UMass

By Adam Pertman, Globe Staff, 9/6/2000

he costs of preparing for a presidential debate in Boston are mounting for Massachusetts taxpayers, even though it is increasingly uncertain whether the event will take place.

University of Massachusetts officials said yesterday that they are about to sign a contract for electrical work that will cost $120,000 to $165,000, on the assumption that a debate will be held at the school's Dorchester campus.

And unless the Commission on Presidential Debates pulls the plug - which it said yesterday it does not want to do - the university will soon face an even costlier decision: In two weeks, it is scheduled to sign a contract to complete the production work needed to accommodate the news media for a nationally televised debate. The labor and materials for that final phase of construction would cost $250,000 to $400,000, according to school officials.

They expressed hope that Texas Governor George W. Bush, who has proposed a debate schedule that does not include Boston, will change his mind or that the commission sponsoring the event will scrap its plans before UMass enters into that last financial commitment.

The prospective spending would come on top of $250,000 the university already has laid out for infrastructure improvements and other preparations for a planned matchup between Bush and Vice President Al Gore on Oct. 3.

Most of the money is expected to come out of $900,000 that the state Legislature appropriated for this purpose after the bipartisan Commision on Presidential Debates chose UMass-Boston as one of three sites for presidential debates. Any additional funding presumably would have to be made up by the school itself, since it would be contractually obligated to return the $1.6 million it has raised from corporate sponsors if the debate does not take place.

Annemarie Lewis-Kerwin, the UMass spokeswoman, said yesterday that the university is contractually bound to continue preparations until the commission decides to call them off. ''We're going to keep going until someone tells us to stop,'' Lewis-Kerwin said.

Gore has accepted an invitation to participate in the Boston event, as well as the commission's proposals for debates in Winston-Salem, N.C., and St. Louis.

On Sunday, Bush announced he would attend only that last debate. In lieu of the others, he proposed that he and Gore appear next week on a prime-time edition of NBC's ''Meet the Press,'' and on CNN's ''Larry King Live'' Oct. 3.

All the major television networks have agreed to air the three events run by the commission, as well as one it proposed for the two vice presidential contenders. But CBS and ABC said yesterday they would not broadcast debates that would effectively shine a prime-time spotlight on their competitors.

Bush's offer not only raises questions about this year's presidential debates - and threatens to cost Massachusetts hundreds of thousands of dollars - but appears to undercut the commission's authority for the future. Most analysts believe the Democratic and Republican candidates will reach a compromise, but that might not include a stop at UMass-Boston.

At a news conference at UMass yesterday, the debate commission's executive director, Janet Brown, said Gore had accepted a commission invitation to discuss the debate schedule in Washington. She said Bush had not yet replied.

Brown stressed that the commission is amenable to suggestions about format to accommodate the candidates' concerns. She expressed optimism that, ultimately, Bush's concerns would be met and that the debate at UMass-Boston will take place. ''We wouldn't be here if we thought we were wasting people's time or resources,'' she said.

The commission's work has always been financed primarily by corporate contributions. Ralph Nader, the Green Party presidential candidate, contends that is illegal, but a federal judge in Boston last Friday refused a request by Nader and his supporters to prohibit such contributions.

US District Judge Patti B. Saris upheld the legality of regulations adopted by the Federal Election Commission that allow corporations and labor unions to make unlimited donations to the commission.

Shelley Murphy of the Globe Staff contributed to this report.