There's hope in Beach budget, but let's not celebrate yet

Well, thanks for at least considering the points that I have made. In truth, I would think we would share some objectives. That is, I support new initiatives that add value to the commercial tax base because in the long run, I believe that the residential taxpayers need to have support from other sources of revenue, and the commercial tax base is one of those sources. The question then is how best to achieve that objective. Frankly, most private development follows exactly the model you have outlined, as do the projects of the company for which I work. But in certain circumstances, I support PPEA's which stimulate the investment of private capital to create a project that has much greater impact than would have been the case with just private capital. Why? Because when this happens, the city, on behalf of taxpayers, is first in line to collect extra tax revenue. In fact, the lien of the city comes first before the mortgage. Sales taxes, meals taxes, admission taxes, room taxes, all keep our residential real estate taxes as low as possible. To me, that is an outstanding strategy.

Well Mr. Barrett, as usual we will have to agree to disagree. I don't believe it is the function of government to finance private ventures with public money. The function of government in this case is to give the entrepreneur the opportunity to develop land, acquire wealth for himself/herself and for their investors. The city can't lose as it will collect taxes on sales and real estate and yes it will provide some jobs. How long, if ever will Virginia Beach see a return on it's investment at town center? Has it seen it's return on investment for The SportsPlex? I don't think so. If you want to develop land for commercial business, use YOUR money, not mine.

You can't effectively do urban redevelopment around Sportsplex in that there's no real transit in the area. Town Center is along the Norfolk Southern ROW, the convention center HQ hotel at the line's eastern terminus, etc.

The closest transit is HRT Route 33, an hourly bus route which goes from TCC to the Municipal Center via PA Road. (It then shoots up General Booth to your neighborhood.) To get LRT to that area you'd either have to go down PA Road from Newtown Road or down the General Booth Corridor from the convention center. Either would require a myriad of condemnations.

While I'm 110% in favor of a MLS franchise, we need a realistic plan for doing it.

Yes, I am basically describing the same thing as occured at Town Center, and may be the basis for development of the dome site and the new hotel at the convention center. Frankly, these techniques are used throughout the nation, and have formed the basis for public private ventures that have stimulated growth and development both within the tax district and around it. Sure there is some risk, but let us also assess the risk of doing nothing. Perhaps you are aware that the land on which town center is now developed had been recommended for central business type development for years as one developer after another came forward but could not make it work. It has worked now. But what I hear you saying is that despite the evidence in our own city that a PPV, properly conceived and constucted, using the financial techniques described herein, is too risky and should not be pursued. I think your views are firmly entrenched in the last century and do not serve us well today.

You are assuming the city government would issue bonds or go into debt for the venture and establish a taxing district that would charge the owners of the business a higher tax rate than normal. Assuming the businesses are successful in order to pay the taxes, then the bonds would be paid back with some sort of interest. The only thing the city should issue bonds are for projects such as local road construction, city sewage replacement/repair and things of that sort. The functions of local government. I don't see shopping malls and MLS stadiums and parks for rich ball clubs fit that criteria. As for your statement that it relieves the pressure on the real estate tax rate, I don't believe that is true. The citizens have to rise up and cause a stir before they see any relief. If that were true, the taxes wouldn't go up at all. At least a year or two. Whatever increase in profits the cities accrue, they end up creating ways to spend it, or go into debt for something else. Like adding 1/2" to a swimming pool. Cities have come to respect spending taxpayer money like chickenfeed.

Yes, it would be best if we were all omniscient and therefor only invested in projects that fulfilled their pro forma. In the case of the Sportsplex, if Council established a TIF (tax increment finance)district, sold the stadium and surrounding property to a developer that had obtained an MLS franchise and prequalified for an initial investment, issued bonds to be paid back by the increased real estate tax, expanded the Sportsplex to 24,000 seats and made improvements to the public infrastructure, would that qualify as priming the pump? Now let me acknowledge that I have the same objective that I think you have; that is, create new economic development, an increase in the size of the commercial tax base, new commercial ventures that provide jobs and opportunity and pay for employees, so these projects can relieve the pressure on the residential real estate tax rate. Frankly, that is what cities around the nation have done, not just with MLS stadiums, but with other amenities that attract young, creative, entrepreneurs.

Daniel, you are free to chime in or contribute anytime. The rules of this forum is governed by The Virginian Pilot. The Pilot controls censorship on these blogs. Not government. A republic or democracy has nothing to do with it.
To answer your question Mr. Barrett about "priming the pump", it depends on what that pump is being primed. If it is priming it with opportunity, then yes. With taxpayer subsidizes then absolutely not. Local government can evaluate plans the developer has, sell them the public lands and let them have at it. I just object to taxpayers having to bail out failures of local ventures such as Waterside. It's like me buying 1000 shares of stock in a company for $100. The market takes a nose dive and the shares are now worth $1.00. Is it right that I get the city to reimburse me the $99,000 I lost?
I remember I used to go to downtown Norfolk in 1974. You could barely walk on Granby street due to the high volume of people and businesses down there. They should have left well enough alone.

Well Daniel, you are not required to keep reading. In regard to Granby Mall, Norfolk joined with thousands of small cities throughout the nation which tried to come to grips with the trend toward suburbanization and the crowning of the automobile as king. But to the point, is it the responsibility of local government officials to "prime the pump" to create the opportunity for local growth and development? I of course would say yes; I think you would say no. I point to Waterside as an example, so do you. So is there anything to be learned from this particular event? Frankly, I opposed it at the time, thinking that it was up to the private sector to develop shopping centers. However, I have come to appreciate that cities with citizens who really care about their environment will develop consensus about what has to be done to restore public credibility in their city. In this case, I think Norfolk exhibited vision and leadership for which the subsequent development of downtown is the proof and the payback. Thanks you Dr. Andrews; may you rest in peace.

The comments here are perfect evidence for the notion that the public should be allowed to comment once per article. If Mike and Keith are so smart, why aren't they...? Oh, well, this is perhaps what our founding fathers had in mind when they created a republic instead of a democracy.

Parish the thought sir. No offense taken by me. I am humbled that you have taken great interest in our debate, and appreciate the arguments we have presented here. I hope it has provided you food for thought.

r/ Keith

Mr. Barrett, you fail to mention what happened downtown prior to Waterside being built. Granby Mall was supposed to be the "crown jewel" of Norfolk and the city spent millions of dollars to make Granby street a pedestrian mall with trendy shops, and restaurants. Well they ended up tearing that back apart again and putting it back like it was. Money wasted for nothing. Taxpayers money at that. When Waterside was built, they were also able to take advantage of weekend and Sunday sales while Virginia's Blue Laws were in effect. Cities could enforce Sunday sales laws everywhere else and exempt themselves. Such a crock!
These development companies like Armada Hoffler are not poor by any means. City government has no business subsidizing these companies or being in the shopping mall and marketplace business. Government, in my view has had ice cubes for brains when it comes to conducting business efficiently. This type of venture is for the private sector to handle and also to reap the profits. Government will still get their taxes on real estate and sales, etc. To quote Ross Perot again.."a good deal will sell itself".

I'm learning a lot especially about transportation/roadway issues in the region, & even a lot more. The post was genuine & by no means meant to be disrespectful. All three of you are obviously very intelligent & far more knowledgeable than myself on a lot of issues. I've especially enjoyed the debate about the 6 projects, & all of you have presented logical arguments, well worth reading, & learning from. It looks like on a lot of issues there is no easy solution. On the 6 projects, I'm of the opinion the projects are going to end up being done anyway, but, just going to cost a lot more because of delay. But in the interim I'm sure your heated debates are being read, by the powers that be..(those who still exist).lol

Well, that is an interesting perspective that shows the difference between a libertarian and a progressive. Let me say that neither is wrong, but both bring a view that needs to be considered in any discussion about public policy. Waterside, looked at simply as an independent retail project, may be financially challenged at this point in time, but looking at the effect of that project over time, it is hard to argue that it did not change attitudes about downtown which has led to a Renaissance of retail shops, restaurants, offices, and homes which have brought thousands of jobs, residences who pay taxes, entertainment, visitation at the Half Moon cruise terminal, a new convention center with many more hotels, and on and on. Now if your view had prevailed thirty years ago (the same view advocated by the taxpayers association), most of Norfolk would still be declining warehouses, old bars, a dark and dangerous downtown, and lack of hope for improvement. That's not a good result either.

Fine Mr. Barrett. As long as PRIVATE investors use THEIR money to build the stadium, Town Center, AND ROADS, and that NO Virginia Beach taxpayer money is used to build it or subsidize it before or if the Town Center/Sports Complex fails. I wouldn't want what has befallen the citizens of Norfolk with the failure of Waterside and the $850 thousand dollars yearly that taxpayers now have to cough up for government wanting to get into marketplace business. Taxpayers in Virginia Beach have subsidized enough more than enough public money in the Meyera "build it and they will come" SportsPlex. If it can't support itself, then sell it to someone else. If it is successful, then the investors will get rich.
If a new stadium is built for major league sports teams in this area, I believe that the fan base would be short lived. If they can't support The Mariners, The Tidewater Tides and the like, why would they support major league? Government needs to stay out of it.

Just to make a point, the MLS season opened last night and the Colorado Rapids played against the Los Angelas Galary at Dick's Sporting Goods Park, one of the new breed of soccer specific stadiums built around the country for which I have advocated here at the Sportsplex in Virginia Beach. Now no one can ever know why a stadium is filled; there are many reasons of course, but to my knowledge, Colorado had never had a sell out on opening day, but the place was packed to capacity last night. Of course, Beckham has been in the news quite a bit lately, and the segment on 60 Minutes may have helped. Also, Colorado has signed Christian Gomez who will help draw the Hispanic crowd. It was an electric evening made more so by a capacity crowd. Could we have that at the Sportsplex? Of course we could, and we have the stadium already built, the land around it for a Town Center type development, and a fan base in Hampton Roads that would support a quality franchise. This is a perfect opportunity for a PPEA and national exposure at the same time. Hat trick!

David Beckham is an English Football player (we call it soccer here)who was pretty good at the game and also married Victoria Adams (Posh Spice) who was one of The Spice Girls musical group.
He now plays for Los Angeles Galaxy. Mike Barrett seems to think that of this guy shows up in Virginia Beach to play soccer, that every hotel room in Virginia beach will sell out due to his appearance. I disagree. You can read more about him at the link below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Beckham

To contractorva...Glad you're enjoying your read. I hope you are finding our debate informative as well as entertaining. I am enjoying myself so far.

Who's Beckham?

Funny, that comments on Kerry's column provided the best reading of the morning..Thanks Mr Barrett, Mr Greenmun, & Mr Keith! Weird to bring a laptop into the bathroom instead of the paper, but, times they are a changing..I would like to add that if any major sporting venue ever comes to fruition in Hampton Roads...I will probably be rolling over in my grave with glee, & waving a flag to show support for the team..... by that time..Hey, everyone does agree it's a beautiful spring morning.

Mr Barrett, I doubt the appearance of Beckham would fill every hotel room at the beach. I think you are using the Meyera approach of "build it and they will come" optimism. I don't think there is enough support for such a MLS team. Most folks here have K-Mart pocketbooks and couldn't afford the tickets for such games. Norfolk for instance was prepared to tear down Harbor Park and rebuild a brand new stadium to get The Hornets to settle here. That is an outrageous waste of taxpayers money. Then if The Hornets decided that there weren't enough freebies from the taxpayers and bailed out, guess who has to maintain it? I don't think Harbor Park has ever filled up all the seats and I don't think VB could fill 24,000 even with Beckham. I don't think the support is there.
As long as taxpayer funds are not required to build or subsidize these ventures or build and pay for roads for ingress and egress to these facilities I have no objection. Let the investors put their money where their mouths are and let them reap the profits. True capitalism!

Well, let's bring Greenmun into this discussion. He was an early and vocal supporter of the Towne Center and the Tax Increment Financing and service district aspects of this development. By creating such a financing vehicle, the city can make site improvements and can pay for them with the increase in value of the real estate within the district. With a private developer willing to invest private dollars in the expansion of the stadiem to 24,000 seats, in the surrounding homes, office buildings, retail establishments, hotels, and other amenities of a town center type community, you have the makings of a great asset and you use land far more efficiently that the typical residential subdivision. The MLS franchise would of course pay the 10% admission tax, and would generate significant overnight visitation. When Beckham came to town, every hotel room at the Beach would be filled. With our weather, we could host pre season tournaments that would draw international and MLS teams, and young people would want to live in this kind of community. Let's go!