Share Email Print RSS

Public at the Plate

Area residents crowded into Richmond City Council chambers Wednesday night for a chance to weigh in on the Richmond Braves ' $330 million proposal to build a ballpark in Shockoe Bottom.

Compared with a public hearing last spring concerning a taxpayer subsidized $58 million ballpark proposal that drew the ire of the majority of attendees, Wednesday's crowd was more receptive this time around, largely due to the $250 million of private investment the R-Braves have brought to the table.

Those in favor of the proposal urged City Council to work with the Braves, so the city could take advantage of the millions of dollars of economic development the project would bring to a blighted area.

"It's not everyday that a business offers to invest a quarter of a billion dollars into our community," said Paul Miller , Senior Vice President of the Greater Richmond Chamber of Commerce. "This appears to be a win-win-win: for the Braves, for the developer and for the Richmond community."

Miller then took a jab at 7th District councilwoman Delores McQuinn 's proposal to hold a referendum on the matter in next November's election.

"This is an economic development project, not a constitutional amendment," chided Miller. "If Microsoft approached the city with $250 million to build a new office, would council call for a referendum? I think not."

Miller also insisted that keeping the Braves in Richmond is of the utmost importance to the area's economic vitality; this after Braves General Manager Bruce Baldwin was careful to point out that the project would ensure that baseball remains in Richmond for the long term. On Monday, Baldwin told City Council that if the proposal goes through, the Braves would sign a lease to match the term of the bonds issued to fund a projected $80 million of the development, anywhere from 20 to 25 years.

Shockoe Bottom business owners, like Dirk Graham , owner of Bottom's Up Pizza , said the project is crucial to the survival of a struggling district.

"This project will keep the integrity of the area itself and will benefit the Bottom significantly," said Graham. "The area has been hit by crime, murders, stabbings; the roads are crumbling, it's dirty down there…nothing's been done about it."

Bottom's Up has been closed since last year's flood. Graham said he hopes to reopen within a couple months. Even still, he said the future of the Bottom is uncertain at best, but would likely be much improved with a new stadium. "When I heard about [the ballpark proposal] it was a godsend."

But opponents painted the proposal in a much different light, labeling it by and large as an overambitious, unnecessary, poorly planned project that grossly infringes on the historic character of Shockoe Bottom, and one that, despite millions of private financing, would eventually cost taxpayers money which could be better spent on education and crime.

"There's no such thing as a free stadium," said Lee Buffington , co-founder of the local Citizens Organized for Responsible Development (CORD) . "Studies show that stadiums are not good investments for cities and typically do not bring the economic boost promised by their developers. Often stadiums have hidden subsidies and end up costing the public for more than they return." John Gerner of Leisure Business Advisors raised concerns over the project's financing, drawing comparisons to a similarly financed development in Washington D.C. called Gallery Place . According to Gerner, in 1999 developers assured D.C. taxpayers there would be no public costs associated with the project. It was delayed however, and subsequently, the 2005 D.C.budget includes a stipulation to pay $9.7 million out of the general fund in order to meet the project's bond obligations. Gerner is worried the same could happen in Richmond.

"If this project is delayed or goes bankrupt, how will the bondholders be paid?" Gerner asked.

On Monday, Baldwin assured Vice-Mayor G. Manoli Loupassi that the Braves and their development partners would bear the financial burden of any unpaid bond obligations.

It was apparent Wednesday night that the recently demolished 6th Street Market Place development still haunts the minds of many Richmonders. Comments both for and against the ballpark proposal referenced the failed project, as well as Richmond's checkered development past, one often filled with controversy and infighting.

"How many times do you need to send planning committees to other cities to view their success stories while Richmond remains a developmental backwater?" asked Daniel Greenbaum , who spoke in favor of the proposed ballpark.

More than one Braves season ticket holder voiced opposition to the project, professing their fondness for the Diamond and saying they would not likely attend games at a Shockoe Bottom stadium, due to crime, traffic and parking issues. J. David Conmy , a Univeristy of Virginia architecture student, said the Bottom could not sustain a stadium and that by raising property tax assessments, the development would likely displace the district's largely impoverished population.

Former 6th District city councilwoman L. Shirley Harvey scoffed at the notion of a perceived need for a downtown ballpark when 25 percent of the city's population lives below the poverty line.

Mayor L. Douglas Wilder spent the majority of Wednesday's hearing sitting in the front row observing the proceedings. While still maintaining absolute objectivity on the subject, Wilder said he was "very pleased" about the night's "healthy public debate." In a brief interview with Richmond.com, Wilder acknowledged that the Shockoe area is strongly in need of revitalization and that the city must find a way to "maximize efforts" to bring money into the district.

Prior to the public hearing, both Loupassi and chief administrative officer William E. Harrell held that the process is still very much in its early stages and that the city will study every aspect of the proposal in the coming weeks and months. Should the R-Braves build a stadium in Shockoe Bottom? Vote in our poll.