Archive for March, 2006

Grand Slam

Wednesday, March 29th, 2006

Once again, while the rest of us are distracted by the theatrical chest-bumping and dirt-kicking next to the dugout, Style Weekly All-Star Scott Bass stays on the field and keeps his eyes on the ball:

The Braves Drain
Could the Richmond Braves have a negative impact on the regional economy?
by Scott Bass

With the Richmond Braves and Mayor L. Douglas Wilder locked in the proverbial blame game — and which side will take the heat if, or when, the Braves leave — a bigger question has yet to be addressed: Does Richmond lose money on the Braves?

Almost everyone agrees that the Braves’ franchise is a “quality of life” attribute rather than a major economic engine for the region. In the past, the team’s owners have admitted as much. But here’s a more radical precept: The amount of tax dollars and new money brought in by the franchise may actually be less than what the region puts into the team. In other words, the Braves may well be a drain on the local economy.

It’s not so far-fetched, experts say. Nearly all of the independent research on the economic impact of big-league sports comes up nil. That is, pro basketball, football and baseball teams generate no substantial economic benefits in the regions where they are located. Typically, big-league cities are on the hook for multimillion-dollar sports stadiums, which negate any benefit by way of ticket sales, food-tax receipts and other ancillary benefits such as player salaries and merchandise sales.

Fans typically come for a game and spend their money inside the stadium, experts say, and that money fails to trickle down significantly to surrounding retailers and restaurants. There are fans from outside the region who bring in new dollars, but not enough to offset the typical debt service taxpayers pay on, say, a $300 million arena.

“In all major league sports, the economic impact is virtually nonexistent,” says Robert A. Baade, a sports economist at Lake Forest College in Illinois. “In order for a team to have an economic impact, it really has to somehow induce spending from outside the area. And then the money has to stay in the community.”

…and so on. Read the whole thing, folks. Regardless of what you or I may think about Mayor Wilder’s bush league negotiating tactics, today’s Style article is a sobering report that invites us all to re-itemize some civic priorities.

Ugh!

Wednesday, March 15th, 2006

I realize that this statement is unnecessarily fiesty, but maybe that is for a reason. Seriously: What more could the City of Richmond have done for the Richmond Braves to make them happy?

Myth of the Performing Arts Center #1

Sunday, March 12th, 2006

You’ve read an awful lot about it…

The Performing Arts Center was planned, funded, and supported by a grassroots group of people who care about Richmond — people who want the city to be more than it is… Now we are forced to sit on the sidelines while we watch Wilder and Goldman dismantle all the work that was done.

The “In-People” just couldn’t stop talking about it for the longest time…

“If we just let them try to raise the money, they can raise the money.”

Those with a “dog in the hunt” — or a bigwig contributor or two on the board — were rewarded with ample space to expound upon it:

“What else would it be with Doug Wilder?” asked Thomas Shields, director of the Center for Leadership in Education at the Jepson School of Leadership Studies at the University of Richmond.

“He wanted to establish himself in the bounds of his office. He wanted to fight with somebody, and this was the perfect fight.” The arts foundation and its leaders were “sitting ducks,” Shields said, because their project relied on city support. City Council committed $27.8 million to the arts center in 2003 when it increased the meals tax from 5 percent to 6 percent.

Shields said that Wilder, by halting payments and declaring the deal on the arts center dead, was able to squelch fundraising and then complain about a lack of progress…

Perhaps, after all of that expert commentary, you even believe it.

The mayor continues to express concerns about the proposed performing arts center. It is clear to those close to the project that he doesn’t fully understand the project, its genesis or its long-range goals.

Yes, it’s a Myth of the Performing Arts Center — an accepted-as-”fact” narrative with details about Richmond’s messiest white elephant and its complicated, sordid history that would seem to totally contradict what is actually in the public record. Since “Sunshine Week” is here, it might a good time to go back and soak up some of those truth rays still being blocked and/or reflected away. In other words, those of you who still think the blame for the huge hole on Broad and a boarded-up Carpenter Center belongs anywhere but on the door steps of the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation and Richmond City Council need to finally sit down and read all of the financial documents, bank statements and assorted inter-office memoranda we uncovered some months ago.

[In the case of this particular howler, you don't even have to do that if you don't wanna. Just a short trip through the ol' press clips will solve the mystery.]

This week’s myth: Mayor Doug Wilder is and was somehow responsible for the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation’s poor private fundraising… and that the Foundation was somehow doing just fine until he came along.

Travel back one year ago, to March 2005 and those innocent and carefree days BEFORE the villainous L. Douglas Wilder entered the picture and ruined the good times. Only thing is: Times weren’t that good. On March 3rd, the Foundation admitted to the Times-Dispatch (in an article that the paper would seemingly lose and never refer to again) that it could not meet its fundraising goals. At that point, the Foundation’s failure to find money was (according to them) the fault of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Mayor Wilder was not mentioned:

Plans to open a performing-arts center in downtown Richmond in 2007 probably would be delayed if the project doesn’t get more than the $5 million offered by the state Senate, the project’s top official said yesterday. “At a $5 million level, I doubt we’ll be able to stay on that schedule,” said Brad Armstrong, president of the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation.

Before that, it was the tragedy of 9/11 that was to blame for the VAPAF’s private fundraising travails. At least that’s how Chief VAPAF apologist and downtown white elephant enabler Ross Mackenzie saw things on Feb. 16, one month before the state was blamed:

[T]he bitter fact of the matter is that this endeavor launched in one of the worst climates for charitable giving ever. Richmond-area donors have been magnanimous — the Robins Foundation, for instance, gave $5 million last year — but no one, understandably, wants to throw money at a doomed enterprise; lackluster funding could become a self-reinforcing pattern.

Ross would tell yet another story about the “doomed” venture later in the year — this time, there would be an added twist [emphasis mine]:

Richmond’s anticipated performing arts center has followed a path to nowhere. What has held center stage is a tragicomedy with no discernible plot. Good people were tracking toward good results. Then issues arose with the new city administration over e.g. public funds, ownership of the site, building permits, personalities, and who should — or shouldn’t — be talking to whom.

Uh-huh. Of course, the very astute Mackenzie never explains how a mayor in office only a few short months could put the ka-bosh on more than three years of prior fundraising efforts. [ The truth on all of that can actually be found here. ] But who gave Mackenzie the idea to start shifting the blame? Clues can be found in an April 2 T-D article, which details the mayor’s first initial queries about the Foundation’s finances. He sent a letter to CEO Brad Armstrong and the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation — with simple questions. Like how much money do you really have and how much is this really going to cost? Those kinds of questions.

The PAC didn’t respond for nearly a month, blaming the silence on “a lack of communication.” When Brad Armstrong finally got back to the mayor with a written response to his query, he didn’t just suggest that the new mayor permanently waive the Foundation’s approaching fundraising deadline — the deadline that held the PAC’s “feet to the fire,” remember? — he began laying the groundwork for the blame game [emphasis mine]:

Armstrong also tells Wilder that with “your personal involvement and support” the foundation expects to have the $93 million raised by Dec. 31, 2006. “Several important donors will not currently commit because of the perceived uncertainty of the city’s support for this project,” Armstrong said.

So here it is, folks — just a few months into Wilder’s term, and after one month of stonewalling by the Foundation, the place where the “myth” first drew breath.

“My personal involvement?” he said incredulously, of Armstrong’s suggestion that the mayor help with fundraising.

Wilder also reacted skeptically to other details, some of which have been previously questioned by critics of the project. For example, he wondered how the foundation could report having raised $67.7 million for construction when the total includes $15.8 million in city funds that will apparently be lost if the July 1 deadline is enforced.

He also questioned whether the foundation could realistically expect to raise $12 million from Richmond-area localities when the current proposal — an increase in local-lodging taxes — has been opposed by him and officials in Chesterfield County.

If this crawl through the public record doesn’t convince that we all swallow pure hogwash whenever the “Doug Did It!” excuse is cited, check the Save Richmond archive. Months before the new mayor took office, we were warning on this very website that the Foundation’s uncertain finances and wasteful spending could bankrupt the Carpenter and leave the city with a big hole it couldn’t fill. If a buncha freelancing rubes like us could see a looming iceberg on the horizon, I daresay a man like Doug Wilder can recognize the obvious too.

Yes, the roots of many fanciful urban myths are murky, their origins hard to trace. But “Doug Did It!” is relatively easy to pin down — Richmond finger-pointers can map this particular piece of lively propaganda back to its original sources: Brad Armstrong of the VAPAF and Ross Mackenzie of the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Next time: Myth #2— Osama was to Blame!

Petersburg, Contemplated

Sunday, March 12th, 2006

“We talk about reinventing Petersburg into the Montmarte of Virginia.”

Petersburg isn’t just doing OK with its new theatres, art co-ops and cultural amenities. Spurred, no doubt, by those visual artists that Richmond just couldn’t find the time and energy to keep in town once Shockoe Bottom had been successfully canaried (Memo to Manchester: This Could Be You!), some Petersburgians are getting downright cocky.

Another highlight of the Sycamore Rouge is when watching a performance in the Virginia K. Patton Auditorium, you can eat and drink while sitting at a cozy, cabaret table or lounging in one of their vintage couches. There’s even a side room with patio windows for private viewing that has its own bar, couches and perfect VIP style. It’s intimate, classy, and comfortable.

Think the Birchmere, but better.

Damn.

It’s good to see a community so confident about its culture and its future that it seems giddy with itself. What a sharp contrast to Richmond, where the Carpenter Center currently sits boarded up with marquee in tatters; taxpayers have no idea when, or if, they will have a functioning downtown performing arts theatre again. By all evidence, Richmond’s premier arts venue will continue to be closed and shut-off for years to come.

And the urban myths continue

Your Winnings, Sir!

Saturday, March 11th, 2006

Did anyone else out there have to take a hot bath with lye soap after reading about this not-at-all-unseemly assembledge, the latest grand party for high-powered lobbyists thrown by Congressman Eric “My Wife Sits on the Board” Cantor (with a special appearance by nationally-known GOP walking-metaphor, Dennis Hastert)?

So many great quotes and unintended guffaws in this T-D article [emphasis mine]:

The GOP in Congress has been tarred by scandals and its control may be threatened in the November elections, when the House of Representatives is up for re-election. Hastert acknowledged “our ratings are bad,” but said, “We are alive, we have a majority because we have ideas.” The Democrats are playing gotcha politics, the Illinois congressman said.

At the center of one of the scandals is lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who gave political donations to multiple members of congress, including Cantor. The congressman announced in January that he was giving about $10,000 in donations from Abramoff and his wife to the William Byrd Community House.

Cantor said the scandal has turned up “a few bad actors and they are going to jail.

The House is proposing reforms that will bring “further disclosure and transparency” to the process of raising money and associating with lobbyists, he said. Commenting on what lobbyists do, Cantor said, “The right for anyone to petition the government — that’s protected by the Constitution.”

Context, of course, is everything. Please remember that Rep. Cantor is evoking the U.S. Constitution and humming the “Stars and Stripes” while he is surrounded by THESE poor and huddled masses:

The guest list at the breakfast included representatives of Altria Group Inc., Verizon Communications Inc., LandAmerica Financial Group Inc., the American Health Care Association, the American Bankers Association, Bank of America, Universal PACS and Northrop Grumman Corp.

Feedbag: $10,000….

Private Time at the Slop Hole: $100,000…

Getting a lecture in governmental ethics from Dennis Hastert and Eric Cantor at a shindig for tobacco, defense and drug company lobbyists:

Priceless.

Anger Management

Wednesday, March 8th, 2006

Virginia Governor Tim Kaine is not a happy man today. He believes the General Assembly (particularly the House of Delegates) is treating him unfairly.

Welcome to the club, governor and glad to finally have you with us.

If Gov. Kaine wanted to fight back against having his nominee for Secretary of the Commonealth rejected by this particular castratin’, prejudiced, gun-mandatin’, predatory lender-friendly mob, he could always fight them tooth and nail with everything he has in his arsenal — not just threaten to do so under his breath.

I know, I know — it’s crazy talk. I just wanted to make you giggle. But think for a moment— If Kaine ever did remind himself that he was a Democrat and start seriously standing up to these blowhards, he could find no better place to start than on the issue of equal rights for all Virginians.

So by all means, get mad, governor. Purse those lips and speak through your teeth and feel free to loudly fire a gun off in a cramped senate office!! Or don’t get mad, get even. There are many within the Virginia GOP who only understand the language of getting even.

But, please, don’t get so vindictive that you can’t honestly look at yourself in the mirror. Why does it take THIS to get you mad at the General Assembly? A little fire in the belly is good for a new governor but so is a sense of knowing where the real battles are. If you are truly worried about the “McCarthy-style” tactics of the Virginia GOP, I would respectfully suggest that basic freedoms might be a wee bit more important to fight for than the failed nomination of Daniel G. LeBlanc.

From the Duh! Files

Friday, March 3rd, 2006

Thanks to Snoopy at River City Rapids for locating this very interesting item in Tuesday’s Roanoke Times:

Roanoke asks young people for feedback
By gathering ideas about what young people want from their city, officials hope more of them will stay here.

If you ask young people in Roanoke what they think about their city, chances are you might hear a few complaints. City officials want to change that with a comprehensive plan.

[City officials] invited young people to a meeting Monday evening at the Roanoke Civic Center to hear their thoughts for making the city a better place for youths. The ideas from the meeting and the ideas from another similar meeting next week will be put in a youth plan that will be presented to the planning commission and then to the city council before being incorporated into the city’s overall comprehensive plan.

I realize that we’ve talked ourselves blue in the face on this subject at Save Richmond— but it always bears repeating. You don’t have to be a hip twentysomething trendspotter to recognize that, in Richmond, the young people (and, yes, 39 is considered young here — so maybe we should say “young-ish”) are the ones making the progress these days — quietly forging a modern 21st century identity for the city that has little to do with Philip Morris tobacco, race bait politics, Civil War nostalgia or taxpayer-funded white elephants.

The folks I’m talking about are the ones creating new media outlets & magazines, fostering vital (and often woefully unsubsidized) cultural organizations & musical co-ops and starting many of the city’s most popular restaurants and recognized new businesses. [Those are just a few examples. I could link all day.]

But does Richmond really tap into this energetic resource when it comes to putting together high-minded commissions in charge of investigating problems and brainstorming solutions? Not often.

Have you ever heard of a Richmond official publicly soliciting the views of Richmond’s younger demographic — especially those in their ’20’s? Very, very rarely. And usually only if the “young-ish” people in question happen to work for the government, a large bank or a well-connected law firm; or have indulged in the expensive pay-to-play process of Leadership Metro Richmond. Other than that, I just don’t see it. [Richmond business leaders will, however, spend outrageous sums of money to invite visiting "experts" to come in and tell us all how important young, creative people are to a city's economy — gosh, no disconnect there].

Even when Richmond identifies and acknowledges the obvious problem that it has in satisfying, including and retaining its youthful sparkplugs — remember this expensive study and this time-wasting dead-end? — nothing is ever done about it. The definitive findings are usually nodded at, ignored and/or swept under the rug.

No one knows what Star City will do with its new Youth Plan. But by inviting input at the Roanoke Civic Center — can you even imagine Richmond politicians arranging a similar summit meeting of that scale? — it would appear as though Roanoke, at least for now, “gets it”:

When Roanoke Parks and Recreation Director Steve Buschor first started talking to young people, “the answer nine times out of 10 was no one listens to us.”

And when young people don’t feel like they have a voice or a reason to stay, they’re more likely to leave [town] and not return.

Welcome to New Ukropia

Thursday, March 2nd, 2006

So, you don’t think that the Ukrops really run things around here?

Among their other wonderful accomplishments of late, the Virginia General Assembly is responsible for this latest eye-opening piece of legislation (emphasis mine):

[The Senate Commerce and Labor Committee] endorsed a bill, passed 98-0 by the House, that would prevent Wal-Mart or other retailers from opening bank branches in their Virginia stores under the auspices of an industrial loan association.The proposal contains a grandfather clause to exempt First Market Bank, which is located in Ukrop’s Super Markets.

The normally sympathetic Jim Bacon is having trouble understanding this one:

I’m a big fan of the Ukrops brothers, who have contributed generously to worthy Richmond causes, and I shop regularly at their stores. But I don’t see why they should be allowed to put branch banks in their stores while their competitors cannot. There may be more to the story than appears, very briefly, at the bottom of Greg Edwards’ article in the Richmond Times-Dispatch today. If so, I would like to know what it is.

Let us know what you find out, Jim.

The Schoolhouse Door

Thursday, March 2nd, 2006

This is hardly City Hall’s finest hour :

A federal judge ruled yesterday that Mayor L. Douglas Wilder, the city and the City Council must help pay to make Richmond public schools accessible to people with disabilities.

But talk about making a bad situation worse:

Wilder says that ruling should be appealed.

In his opinion, U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson wrote, “None of the City Defendants dispute, nor could they, that the Richmond City Public Schools fail to meet the accessibility requirements imposed by the [Americans with Disabilities Act].”

But Wilder said, “The judge’s decision points out that the city has done nothing wrong and, for that reason, we think that the decision should be appealed, so as not to give the impression that the city had done anything wrong.”

Wha….

Yeah, go back and read that again if you want.

Does it make any sense yet?

Rightfully, the mayor is being raked over the coals for this by those who have argued that there is an imperial streak in his administation. It’s hard to argue with the outrage :

No one, not Wilder or City Council or the School Board, disputes that these buildings do not provide proper access for disabled students, parents, teachers or visitors. In fact, the School Board has agreed to a five-year-plan to fix the schools and it is that plan the judge has adopted as the legal remedy. But Wilder insists that it’s not the city’s responsibility. It will be interesting to see how far he takes this tantrum, how much time and energy he spends and how much taxpayer money he wastes that could be used to do what is right and just fix the problem.

Other Wilder critics — even with right on their side — might want to seriously consider taking a course in Remedial Rhetoric, chased by a second viewing of “Eyes on the Prize” and some chill from Steve Johnson’s secret stash:

Reacting to Wilder’s plans for an appeal, School Board member Carol A.O. Wolf said, “I’m so disappointed, he’s continuing to stand in the schoolhouse door,” a reference to Alabama Gov. George C. Wallace’s 1963 attempt to block the racial integration of the University of Alabama.

Wanna know how to make a bad situation that just got worse, worse? Just add Race.

To be fair to the mayor, he’s stalling for time while he gets his “City of The Future” plan together — the call for new schools in that proposal does include revised accessibility for disabled students (something the city council acknowledged on Monday night). But this is hardly a righteous fight. Mayor Wilder doesn’t help his reputation, or his ambitious “City” plan, with this defiance of a Federal judge.

You would think that a politican as savvy as Wilder would know that flipping a middle-finger at such a fair-minded decision — about providing fair access for handicapped kids, for crying out loud — will just feed into the (increasingly popular) notion that he is running an imperial administration and that he thinks he is above the law.

As someone who hopes that his “City of the Future” initatives succeed, I really hope that the mayor will remember that political capital can be easily wasted. This secretive and imperialist dude’s approval ratings once stood near 70% too .

Murphy’s Law

Wednesday, March 1st, 2006

The Virginia General Assembly is made up of very reputable people discussing and debating extremely noteworthy legislation. They have been so very wise and efficient in performing their duties during recent sessions — so sensitive to what’s really important — that I know exactly what you’ve been thinking out there. Same thing I was: How can we, the citizens of Richmond, make it easier for the General Assembly to do their very important business?

“Why, you can watch us destroy an important Richmond landmark, the Murphy Hotel,” the legislators have replied. “That way a magnificent parking lot can be built on its hallowed site. Not just any parking lot, mind you, but a parking lot that is very convienient for us. You see, by not having to walk too far or take too long in getting into our luxury town cars, we — distinguished senators and delegates — can do those many meaningful things that we do even faster.

[In case you wondered, the august body isn't forgetting that a 2005 Virginia House Appropriations report on the Murphy concluded that "the site is extremely significant" and is "probably eligible for both the state and federal registries" and that "preservation efforts are more costly [but] the cost differential is believed to be within a relatively narrow range.” They just didn’t read it because they were too busy dealing with the ramifications of bureaucratic swordplay and other very important matters.]

Our beloved two-month-a-year visitors also say that the city of Richmond can forget all this hoo-ha:

[Mayor Wilder's "City of the Future" plan] calls for renovating the old Murphy Hotel — a decaying architectural landmark — to become a downtown law-school campus involving a partnership between the University of Richmond Law School and Virginia Commonwealth University.

Take it from here, Alliance to Conserve Old Richmond Neighborhoods :

Richmond Mayor Doug Wilder plans to show support for preserving and adaptively reusing a city landmark–the 1911 Murphy Hotel –which state legislators are considering demolishing for a parking facility for themselves and state employees.

The Mayor will discuss his plans for the Murphy Hotel and the future of other threatened downtown architectural treasures at a rally sponsored by The Alliance to Conserve Old Richmond Neighborhoods (A.C.O.R.N.) on Wednesday, March 1, noon to 1 pm, at the corner of 9th and Broad streets.

In the last session of the Virginia General Assembly, A.C.O.R.N. thwarted efforts by the Commonwealth to demolish the Murphy and is threatening a lawsuit against the state in an effort to turn control of Richmond back to Richmonders. “For decades the state has been running roughshod over our city, doing violence to the very historic buildings that attract local, state, national and, even, international visitors,” says David Herring, A.C.O.R.N.’s Director of Properties and Programs. “There’s no process for the protection of Richmond’s remaining, state-owned landmarks and it’s time City Hall and the citizens of Richmond assumed control.”

In the next few weeks, the General Assembly will decide the fate of the Murphy Hotel. An anonymously sponsored budget bill authorizes $16.8 million to demolish the Murphy this summer.

Even if you can’t make the rally, drop your state legislators a line and tell them to save the Murphy Hotel. You can add that, while you are so appreciative of the General Assembly’s recent efforts, you think some extra time outdoors in the fresh air would do many of them a world of good anyway.