NO MORE CORPORATE WELFARE.

Related:

styleweekly.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publ…

What royal “we” are you talking about? When I said “we shall see.” LOL. That we would include you, me, and the rest of Richmond. It’s a figure of speech, geez.

As for stimulus funds, considering the Mayor views this as a potentially transformative project, and the projections of revenue, I wouldn’t be surprised to see stimulus funds used for this development if available. I’m opposed to stimulus funds generally, but they are certainly being used for worse things around the country than inner-city development. Again, let’s see how it plays out.

As to the stimulus money remark, your use of the Royal “we” implied that you are directly involved with the developers promoting the stadium effort.

That said, please read what was said in the RT-D article this morning by David Ress.

http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/local/article/BALL20_20090519-223426/268752/P10/

“Boisseau said developers aren’t asking for a guarantee, though he said that would be the simplest way of financing the project.

“He said the group is exploring other options, including using federal stimulus funds.

“Some stimulus money already is headed for the Bottom — the GRTC bus system plans to use much of the $13.8 million it is getting to help pay for a downtown transfer station in the train shed behind Main Street Station.”

The shed is a historic building, and its renovation would generate tax credits from the state — the same kind of credits the Shockoe Center developers once had considered as a source of funds for their project.

“Boisseau said it might be time to re-examine using credits to help pay for the ballpark.”

Nice deflection. I did not attack you. As for Diradour, he is fair game and he is injected himself in the public debate. If the motives of Bostic, Kreckman and others are fair game, so are Diradour.

And nice job putting words in my mouth. I don’t recall suggesting we should use stimulus money for anything, but don’t let that stop you from carrying on with your rant.

Finally, if you haven’t realized by now that this development is not just about “baseball”, there is no point trying to have a discussion. I am not even a baseball fan, but, like Mayor Jones, believe firmly that this development has the potential to transform Richmond.

PS – Do you rely solely on Style comment threads for your talking points?

Before you get too excited here, please explain what the difference is between “credit support” and “financial support.”

Previously, you and others stated that the taxpayers would not be left holding the bag. Now, depending upon what spin you read, it appears that conservatively 11 percent of the city’s debt capacity would have to be designated for this project. As John Gerner, Charlie Diradour, Scott Burger and countless others have noted, we have schools that need to be built and a City Jail that is woefully inadequate.

Our city needs to get its public transportation act together independent of a baseball stadium. It is troubling that you and others want to latch on to the stimulus money that has been designated for that purpose. We need to use some of this stimulus money to train people who are out-of-work (or still in school) to be able to land some of the “green jobs” that the Obama administration sees as part of the financial recovery plan.

To be sure, baseball is a “nice” thing, but it is far from a “necessity.” If the citizens really want this at this time, we might need to seriously consider the Boulevard location.

Your anonymous attacks on people who have the courage to put their own names on their postings is incredibly bad form. For the record, the only reason I asked if you are Bryan Bostic or Paul Kreckman was in the hope that they might actually reign you in since these rogue postings of yours do not help their cause whatsoever.

At a time when the national financial crisis should be calling forth the better angels of our nature, personal attacks on people who disagree with you help no one. Please try to be a part of the solution, FanGuy.

Regarding the Diamond, there are a few items you that aren’t addressed in support for the Diamond location:

The Diamond is a failed location.

No baseball development expert has supported a ballpark there.

No team will agree to play there more than as a temporary measure.

There is no room at the Diamond for any mixed use TIF development that could pay off bonds, therefore every cent spent there would be directly from City taxpayer pockets.

There would be no “highly feasible” bond payment mechanism like in the Bottom proposal.

To make room for mixed use, the City taxpayers would have to pay for new public works storage and maintenance facilites and would lose or have to pay for a new, relocated Ashe Center.

Carol – I would respectfully encourage you to consider these points.

As for the reference to “Nobody’s Fool,” if you look at the Style article on-line this week you will see one of the commenters posted almost exactly the same thing you posted here. I assumed that was you — if not, sorry. Either way, it’s kind of a harmless assumption, don’t you think? Certainly more harmelss than you accusing me of being Bostic or Kreckman! But rest assured, I’m not affiliated w/ this development in any way, shape or form. Bostic and Kreckman are probably uncomfortable with my level of “zeal” (some might say) in challenging some of the points made by the opposition.

Let’s all take a deep breath and wait to see how things shake out. Nothing has been decided. We aren’t even in the late innings yet.

You are wasting our time. There is a facilty on Boulevard that needs fixing, not to mention many public school buildings.

Its time for leaders to lead and put the RIGHT priorities forward for Richmond.

What is your problem?

I simply asked for people to give their opinions about the ballpark now that the report is back saying that the city backing AND taxpayer money is required for this project to have a green light.

You are “anonymously” attacking me for simply noting that the concerns expressed by many posters on this site have been proven true.

Fine. This is America and it is your freedom to post anonymously should you so desire. However, since I posted under my real name, I invite you to do the same.

Even so, what do you mean by taxpayers “ponying up” for this project? You mean backing the bonds? Or do you mean ultimately paying for it? Because the report found the project “highly feasible” with city backing even using projections of revenue that are 2/3 of the most conservative estimates.

I would not be surprised to hear the developers again ask to be given a chance to sell the bonds without backing. If they can’t do it, no harm, no foul. But the numbers from the report tend to support their conclusions about revenue, which just might make it easier for them to sell the bonds now. Not to mention that they may have some other options if they are working with the GRTC project as the Mayor has asked them to do. We shall see.

Joe Richmond, where are you these days?!

It also appears that crd, ptaylor, John Gerner, Joe Richmond, Gray, Scott Burger, ShockoeBottomDweller and others pretty much had the situation nailed.

Given the current economy and the many needs of this city, I am curious to hear what people think now, after the latest round of revelations.

The following observations are based on the January 7th “Shockoe Center – 40 Frequently Asked Questions & Answers.” Keep in mind that there are multiple “developers” involved with the Shockoe Center project.

The proposed $70 million bonds would finance the ballpark and related facilities. The bonds would be issued by the Richmond Sports Facilities Authority (RSFA), created by the City of Richmond. As noted in the Q&A, RSFA would be “a public subdivision of the Commonwealth.” RSFA would own the ballpark and lease it to Richmond Baseball Club LC. This authority, RSFA, would pay interest to bondholders.

Based on the Q&A, “Richmond Baseball Club LC, on behalf of the Richmond Sports Facilities Authority created by the City, will take all the appropriate actions to construct the ballpark and associated public facilities.” Therefore, this private company would functionally act as the “developer” of the ballpark using the bond money raised by the RSFA, but would not own the facilities and not directly pay interest to bondholders.

The “investors” under this plan are the bondholders that buy the bonds sold by RSFA. The amount of money they would have in escrow to secure the bonds would likely need to be equal to at least one year’s bond repayment. This is usually held in a “Debt Service Reserve Fund.” Although not mentioned in the Q&A, RSFA could have a side agreement with the City of Richmond or others to help fund this Debt Service Reserve Fund, thereby guaranteeing annual payment to bondholders if revenues are less than expected. This is what occurred with the Broad Street CDA bonds in Richmond and the Gallery Place TIF bonds in Washington DC. This is the typical backdoor to the City’s general fund that we need to prevent from happening again. Such side agreements could occur at any time, before or after the bonds are sold. That’s why we need to assume that the City of Richmond would ultimately back the bonds unless other guarantees are firmly in place. An example of an alternative guarantee is an irrevocable bank letter of credit, often used in revenue bond financing. Given the current economic situation, such a letter would also likely have to be guaranteed in case the bank goes bankrupt. Sadly, these are the times we live in today.

I’m not familiar with “arbitrage gain”, but it does not appear to be a factor in the proposed financing plan.

Gwinnett officials says stadium still a deal – Despite overruns, and now lean times, 3 officials not sorry
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/gwi…

Play ball? Stadium deal continues to draw criticism as costs rise, slow economy hampers potential benefits
http://atlanta.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2009/01/12/focus1.html

Even more…
http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/index.php/category/gwinnett-braves/

I think I’ll finish my posting on this thread by saying that I’m in support of this project, that after my independent research I’m in favor of TIF financing and I look forward to baseball in the Bottom in 2012.

In my initial comment (#235), I commented generally about the Shockoe Center project, so I won’t repeat those views. I support responsible development in Shockoe Bottom, which is a few blocks away from my home on Jefferson Park, and feel that the community has a responsibility to help it grow.

Criticism does not always destroy positive efforts. I questioned the assumptions for the performing arts center in a Richmond Times-Dispatch guest column in late 2005. A copy is at:

http://www.leisure-business.com/rtd-column.html

I emailed former City Council President G. Manoli Loupassi and others in July 2006, offering to take a more active role in the performing arts center issue. As I said in my email message to him, “I would prefer to roll up my sleeves and be part of the solution rather than simply be a cynic.”

Two months later, I was appointed by former Mayor L. Douglas Wilder as the City of Richmond’s Liaison Consultant for the Performing Arts Committee and represented both City Administration and City Council. After my appointment as the City’s liaison, the Times-Dispatch profiled me. An online copy is at:

http://www.leisure-business.com/rtd-article-1.html

In late 2006, we were able to resolve this challenging issue. The committee’s report recommended a compromise plan. City Council approved that plan, and construction is underway.

During the past three months, I have emailed local leaders and offered to be part of future negotiating team involved with this Shockoe Bottom project. Highwoods Properties has said in its Shockoe Center Brochure that: “It is imperative that the City designate a negotiating team acceptable to the new administration to begin discussions in early November, 2008.”

This is the first blog topic I’ve ever commented on, and I only did so because there was the growing perception that the stadium bonds are privately-backed. I felt compelled to correct that misperception.

David the people who developed Stony point still run it and they as far as I know did not ask for tax payers money for their little enterprise. The Ballpark is not the same thing not even close and the Meetings are just a sales pitch. One they spent several years getting together but it is the same crap they tried to sell the last time All of Shockoe Bottom and Church Hill Said NO
some may have forgot but not all

As I’ve said in earlier posts, I do not consider myself a “love their plan or leave it” person; however, I’ve watched as this area has sat idle for years without anyone making any other realistic proposals to do something constructive with it. I think the current Shockoe Center plan is pretty good overall. Is there any type of development in Shockoe Bottom you would support? Is there anything in the current Shockoe Center plan that you might support? If so, have you approached Highwoods, Timmons or any others involved to discuss with them how they might work on a plan that more people opposed to this one might support?

It’s much easier to destroy something than to build it.

I can sense that you care deeply about this project and your comments all reflect a great deal of sincerity.

Could it be that you are simply seeing what you want to see? For example, these meetings that you reference are all coming at the END of the planning process instead of the beginning.

Some people have difficulty getting out at night during the week — school, work, family. Have there been meetings held on a Saturday morning or afternoon, for example?

Why is this company willing to issue “junk bonds”? When will we ever learn from our mistakes?

What have you done other than arrange meetings at night during the week to solicit public input?

Until the City of Richmond does something to break up the high concentration of poverty within the city limits, any development project will have to contend with the social problems that are created when you crowd too many poor people into too small an area.

The recent RRHA plans are all great and good — but HOW LONG will it take to bring that relief? Is the development project working with RRHA?

All people see are two efforts — targeted at two very different demographic groups — that are largely separate. And, not equal.

So, how to reconcile the issue of how this is to be funded with who will be served? No one wants to beat up on anyone really, but what is needed is some effort to coordinate and communicate in a manner that is respectful of all parties.

Some of the people who have been assigned to advance the cause of this project on this blogsite (and others) have done a great disservice by ignoring hard questions and tossing out easy and condescending answers.

You mean like the development company that wants to come in and build Shockoe Center? Right here where we won’t have to use a car to get there? A development company with offices that have been in Richmond for years? Coupled with an engineering firm with offices in Shockoe?

It’s not like the developers are hiding out in Arizona or something. Have you been to any of the meetings they’ve held (at least 4 that I can think of in the past month) to talk to them about what you want? I’m sure they’re interested in hearing what the community wants as part of the development. Because from a business sense, why would they want to put in stores that the community doesn’t want and won’t patronize? Doing so would guarantee failure. Of course, there’s always the possibility that all these people who are from Richmond want to take $255 million of their and their investors money and bury it in a hole in the ground.

The proposed stadium bonds, as they are described in the materials presented so far, would essentially be publicly-issued junk bonds. This is because bondholders would be paid back with tax revenues from developed property that doesn’t exist yet. The difference is this. If the TIF district doesn’t provide enough tax revenues, there are “deep pockets” the bondholders can legally go after. That’s the City of Richmond, the entity that created the sports authority issuing the bonds. If the City’s credit rating is downgraded from such legal action, the financing cost of everything the City issues bonds for is more expensive. That includes new schools and infrastructure improvements, so this is a very serious concern.

Simply saying that the City of Richmond would have no obligation for the stadium bonds is not good enough. The 2003 Broad Street CDA bond prospectus clearly states on its first page in capital letters that the “bonds shall not directly or indirectly or contingently obligate” the City of Richmond. Yet, we Richmond taxpayers are now paying the shortfall in repayments for these bonds.

TIF district revenue bonds are no different. Four years ago, I talked to Richmond City Council about such bonds that were issued by the District of Columbia for the Gallery Place project. The bond prospectus states in bold capital letters that the bonds “do not constitute debt of the District within the meaning of any debt or other limit prescribed by law.” Yet, the District later had to help repay these bonds.

There is a difference between the legal definition of “obligation” and its practical definition, and that difference could cost Richmond taxpayers millions of dollars. My previous comments are at:

http://www.leisure-business.com/comments1.html

It’s sad to have to talk about this again. We should learn from experience.

Why is it that the state and feds can build in the City of Richmond and bring said projects and buildings in (relatively) on time and (relatively) on budget — and yet, we can’t.

Don’t say it is because there are people like me who simply ask that the city do its due diligence and follow the Virginia Code procurement process.

Just because a bunch of guys in suits make us an offer to do something “for us,” doesn’t mean we should all jump up and down like a bunch of little kids at a birthday party.

We’re grown-ups — or at least we are supposed to be. And, grown-ups know that we are supposed to read the fine print before we sign on the dotted line.

@ John: I have never seen such a thing as an unbacked bond, can you please provide me with some examples? Remember bonds are supposed to be very liquid for their investors – thus the relatively low interest rate – and unbanked bonds would not be liquid (if even being saleable in this market). The bondholders would have no recourse against the city past the dedicated revenue streams.

ptaylor: How about instead of making blanket statements that I am wrong, why don’t you show us what I have ‘misinformed’ everyone about bonds?

Joe, you act like they’re going to have everything built by the end of this year and the recession is going to last 100 years. Why build anything at all? Why do anything at all? Let’s just let Henrico and Chesterfield have everything while we wonder why they feel superior. We don’t ever want to build anything.

Let’s just turn the Lovings warehouse into apartments and let the rest of the vacant losts become free parking lots. All will be happy then.

As I stated earlier: “Caveat Emptor”

Translation:

Latin for “Let the buyer beware.” The idea that buyers take responsibility for the condition of the items they purchase and should examine them before purchase. This is especially true for items that are not covered under a strict warranty. See, e.g. SEC v. Zandford, 535 U.S. 813 (2002).

(And, David thanks for your answers! And, SBD thanks for your support! And, John Gerner & pTaylor, thanks for your questions. Hope we all get some answers sooner rather than later.)

Wrong. Stony Point is in Richmond. As are many of the chain stores mentioned in this post. Many of them are on Forest Hill Avenue off Chippenham. There’s a Target there and a Lowes, and another Lowes at Broad and Allen. So saying that the City doesn’t “play ball” with chains or retail is just flat out wrong.

They said we wouldn’t have to bail them out and, lo and behold, we did.

Maybe I am not buying the story that the taxpayers will not be holding the bag … a few million here, a few million there and next thing you know, we are paying for more boondoggles for the wealthy and the alleged leadership of this town.

You tell me what kind of sense does it make to try to build a freakin’ baseball stadium in the middle of the worst economic crisis this nation has seen since the Great Depression?

You tell me what kind of sense does it make for this city to assume the debts that Bostic and others will gladly, and inevitably, pass our way when things don’t work out?

Tell me why you haven’t answered the questions John Gerner, pTaylor and others, have asked?

“Supposing this thing happens and the bonds don’t sell – what recourse will the bondholders have but to come after the City?”

Huh? Think about that question for a minute and tell me what sense that made.

the space we have where the park would be would be perfect for a Theater and 2 Chain stores (Target, Kols or any mid level group store that sells stuff more than specialty items and a Book Store I would prefer to Get Fountain books to have another store next to a Starbucks ( corporate with Local support in this venture) Across Broad would go the movie theater and the parking lots that they planned to use for the park would go for this but there would be plenty of foot traffic.

Do you know how many MCV people walk by these spots each day? How many residents of Shockoe Bottom and Church Hill have to travel if they have a car to get to the counties? There are no malls in Richmond because Richmond Taxes them to death. ( Also Walmart,Sam Club,Sonic and other big companies refuse to be in Richmond Proper because they don’t play ball.)
No tax payer money they are invited to consider the space they are offered and they are given a tax break that the counties my give. The city would beautify around the area once things are in place and you have a win win situation because people would be able to shop in a place that is not so expensive. Short Pump and Stony Point are both what I love to call High end malls. My plan is more Middle of the road and that is where you might find that it is way more sound than a Ballpark without a team.

Whoever is in charge of this blog, needs to change the descriptive note on our comments. Many of these comments deal with reasons not to build the ballpark in the Bottom, not a comment on the accuracy of the poll of 108 people who responded.

The original post says that “In the February poll, despite stepped-up criticism by individuals and special interest groups in opposition, 75% of the respondents were in support of the proposal.”

I reckon’ that the comments that follow fall under “stepped-up criticism by individuals and special interest groups”, which only serves to underscore the original point.

Ry Now I know your path to work because there is not many Warehouses that are still Vacant that has not has some renovation already. Now if they could revive some of the other buildings but a Ball park won’t help with that.

Joe way to go you have all the skinny about their Rumors of a Ballteam which they will make up later. They don’t want the common citizen to know the facts because they would not have anything to do with a Ballpark after all this.

The Flood Plane is still based on the James river and previous floods even with a wall in place they don’t take chances they don’t want to have to pay for people who actually tried to get insurance after they put up the wall.

Joe some people get insulted with the facts because it hurts to find others know more than you do.

I’m still curious as to what information you intended to provide with the article, JoeRichmond. Its a highly negative article that bears little to no relevance to our situation in Richmond aside from the fact that we are attempting to bring the organization (not its location-based problems) to the area.

I must amend this remark. A friend sent it to me and after reading it, I thought it was information more people needed to have as we try to determine the best course of action for our city.

So, I posted it. It provides cold comfort, indeed, in that Richmond is not the only place that isn’t supporting baseball as many imagine it should be.

The information about Bostic and his buddies getting together to “buy” a baseball team is also troubling, given that these folks are some of the same ones who have taken money for various boondoggles around this town.

Has anyone considered what the closing/bankruptcies of late in the Richmond area will do to promises made by these corporations to the universities, charities and public school systems?

This mess is getting uglier by the minute and we have Brian Bostic and his buddies trying to spend $15 million for a baseball team.

Something is not right with this picture.

Supposing this thing happens and the bonds don’t sell — what recourse will the bondholders have but to come after the city?

It is undeniable that 90% of this thread would be superfluous if the developers had a website with verifiable facts we could all reference or a lack of facts that would make their timeshare-quality scam apparent. Instead they feed ever changing facts to audiences in paper handouts and PowerPoint presentations at controllable locations and times. How 20th century! So where is Shockoe Center.com? This ‘idea’ is four months old. The peanut gallery on both sides have introduced web presences; the developers? Cluelessly none. Ry and Anna are sales staff by proxy, if not by fact.
If this deal goes through, they certainly deserve season passes.

I have several observations, but I’ve got a business to run; and I’m slammed – busier than I’ve been in almost 10 years.
I have a few short observations. There is a major player who is glaringly unmentioned except in passing. Since it’s Valentines Day, consider the queerest (as defined by my New Merriam-Webster Pocket Dictionary, copyright 1964) of queer (as defined previously)Richmond couples, Doug Wilder and Gene Trani. There have been two real estate transfers in the proposed footprint of the RSFA since the RFP competition for the Bottom was approved; one to VCU, the other to the Democratic Party of Virginia. O.K. kids, time for some sleuthing.

Anna – a request. Could you provide the average per game attendance for the Eastern League for 2007 and 2008? if not could you provide a link where the figures can be found. I’m sure that’s well within your skill set and t would be greatly appreciated by an older fella who really needs to get back to work. Thank you.