As was stated today in the Roanoke Times, I have expressed serious concerns over the construction of a new, $14.2 million amohitheater in downtown Roanoke. While I would love to have another great concert and arts venue, I simply do not believe that Roanoke can afford such a luxury item at this time.
The article in today's newspaper was, at its very best, incomplete. A number of items stated as suggestions are are not suggestions at all, but factual. For instance, it is not a suggestion as to what the debt service and subsidy would be for a new amphitheater, it is fact. Because of the incomplete nature of the Roanoke Times article, I have decided to post the letter I wrote to my colleagues here.
- START LETTER -
All,
I wanted to write this email to you all regarding the inclusion of the amphitheater design in the CIP that we discussed Monday. As you recall, the design itself is projected to cost $1.2 million with construction not able to commence until 2013.
My purpose in writing this is because, after really looking closely at the numbers year over year debt and subsidy, I do not believe it is in the best interest of the taxpayers of the city to proceed with this project at this time. Below are my reasons for this conclusion.
First, we are all aware of the enormous infrastructural challenges we face in the city. We have more than $7 million in bridge maintenance and repair, more than $60 million in stormwater needs (this is in today's dollars and does not include additional needs and costs that will arise in five, ten and years beyond that), as well as two pools, the market building and other existing needs that must be addressed.
Second, between the time the design would take place ($1.2 million) and the time the amphitheater would be built ($13 million) is several years and two possible council changes. As we all know, when councils change then priorities change. I do not believe it is fiscally responsible to commit to $1.2 million now when the chances of priorities changing over the next four years is rather strong.
Third, I do not believe we have near the necessary financial information to make such a serious and costly decision. Please see the follow:
-At $14.2 million total cost for the amphitheater, our annual debt payments, given current market conditions and interest rates (which may be higher in four years) would be $1,178,600 (that's $83,000 per $1 million borrowed).
-On top of this, and something we have really hardly discussed, is that the projected numbers indicate that, beyond the nearly $1.2 million in annual debt service payments, there is a $500,000 per year subsidy that is called for - this subsidy assumes the projected numbers are correct - if they are not, the subsidy could be even more than $500k per year.
-So, if market conditions stay the same, and we have unusually low interest rates right now, and the cost of construction remains fairly constant, we as a city will have to pay nearly $1.7 million per year just to meet our debt and subsidy obligations. This does not include maintenance costs.
Fourth, we have had no discussion, and I don't believe that the City Manager or Finance Director have been asked, but have we done any projections as to what we believe the indirect revenue impact would be with an amphitheater?? By this I mean do we have any idea how much tax revenue would be generated or any projections of this from downtown food, shopping and the indirect benefits from an amphitheater? I cannot find anything that even begins to address this, which to me is vital and necessary information to have to know whether the costs of the amphitheater are outweighed by the benefits.
And lastly, the Civic Center in '08 required, debt payment and subsidy, $2.7 million from the city. If we are having to subsidize it to such an extent, it is difficult for me to understand how we would not be required a continued and large subsidy for an amphitheater. And will we be pulling attendance from the Civic Center and thus creating the need for an even larger subsidy. We are hopeful that Global Spectrum will be able to reduce the Civic Center subsidy, but we are no where near close yet.
In closing, I believe that an amphitheater should not be a priority for our city at this time. We have some real needs in our neighborhoods and in the community that I believe have a direct impact on the future prosperity of the city. I would love an amphitheater as one resident, but having spent so much time in the neighborhoods across the community, I believe that concerns over curb, gutter and sidewalk, stormwater, economic development and the need for new and better jobs, and other needs are a much higher prioirty for our residents. We must take care of the facilities we already have, such as our pools that do need significant renovations, before we begin to build new capital facilities.
I would only ask that before we finalize the CIP we address this again and do more homework. I do not believe we have a full understanding of the implications of committing our taxpayers to more than $14 million and believe it would not be a responsible course of action to proceed with so many unanswered questions. Given all this, I will not support moving forward with the $1.2 million design at this time.
Thanks for your consideration and I hope you will agree that we should discuss this more, ask Ann Shawver if she can figure out some projections for indirect tax implications, overall subsidy and debt service and the real numbers that we need, aside from consultant projections, to determine whether this is a wise project or not.
Sincerely
Court
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
City Council: Correcting the media record
Yesterday was the first City Council meeting of the new fiscal year, and one of the main areas of discussion centered on the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which determines what we will build or repair in terms of capital expeditures. Most of the money for any capital improvements would be borrowed and payments, as with any loan, would be due plus interest.
It is important that I correct some errors that a couple of news outlets reported yesterday/last night/this morning. NO project (Market Building, Amphitheater, Washington Park Pool) was approved to move forward yesterday. Yesterday required no votes. It was City Council directing staff to include certain items in the CIP which has to be FINALLY approved in the next month or so.
This said, and knowing these mistakes in reporting by the media were based on a complicated system of legislating, I think it would do the community a service for those outlets to run corrective stories, and hopefully they will.
So, where do I stand on capital projects? I will support moving forward with an extensive renovation of the Market Building. It is sorely needed and badly overdue.
As of now, I will not support construction of an amphitheater ($13 million), municipal operation of a golf course (minimum $2 million known) or a regional waterpark ($3.6 million). I do not believe we can afford these items and that both will require subsidies in perpetuity once they are built. In a city with over $60 million in needed stormwater repairs, more than $7 million in bridge renovation and repair and millions in needed neighborhood improvements, I cannot support building luxury items that will cause increased taxpayer subsidies when we already are forced to subsidize other facilities we own (civic center, market building).
To clarify once again, there was no need for any vote on the CIP yesterday. For instance, I voted yes on putting the Amphitheater on the table for inclusion in the CIP. I could have as easily said 'no,' but again, these were not technical votes. The real debate will begin as the final CIP draft is provided to us.
Just wanted to set the record straight.
It is important that I correct some errors that a couple of news outlets reported yesterday/last night/this morning. NO project (Market Building, Amphitheater, Washington Park Pool) was approved to move forward yesterday. Yesterday required no votes. It was City Council directing staff to include certain items in the CIP which has to be FINALLY approved in the next month or so.
This said, and knowing these mistakes in reporting by the media were based on a complicated system of legislating, I think it would do the community a service for those outlets to run corrective stories, and hopefully they will.
So, where do I stand on capital projects? I will support moving forward with an extensive renovation of the Market Building. It is sorely needed and badly overdue.
As of now, I will not support construction of an amphitheater ($13 million), municipal operation of a golf course (minimum $2 million known) or a regional waterpark ($3.6 million). I do not believe we can afford these items and that both will require subsidies in perpetuity once they are built. In a city with over $60 million in needed stormwater repairs, more than $7 million in bridge renovation and repair and millions in needed neighborhood improvements, I cannot support building luxury items that will cause increased taxpayer subsidies when we already are forced to subsidize other facilities we own (civic center, market building).
To clarify once again, there was no need for any vote on the CIP yesterday. For instance, I voted yes on putting the Amphitheater on the table for inclusion in the CIP. I could have as easily said 'no,' but again, these were not technical votes. The real debate will begin as the final CIP draft is provided to us.
Just wanted to set the record straight.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Brief Hiatus
As you might be able to tell, I have been on a bit of a summer hiatus. We have three weeks between meetings this month (just how the calendar falls this year) but I will resume my posting shortly.
I hope everyone's summer is off to a good start.
I hope everyone's summer is off to a good start.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Retirement of City Manager Darlene Burcham
As has been widely reported, City Manager Darlene Burcham and Roanoke City Council agreed to a March 1, 2010 retirement date for Ms. Burcham. These decisions are never easy, and given the circumstances I believe that yesterday showed great professionalism on both the part of Ms. Burcham as well as the council.
Ms. Burcham has dedicated nine years to the management of the City. While we all will never agree on every decision that has or has not been made, Ms. Burcham has been a dedicated, committed and hardworking member of the Roanoke family. She has accomplished many good things in her time in the Manager's office.
I am confident that the next nine months will be a fruitful time for the City Council and Ms. Burcham to work together to accomplish great things, from hiring a new Director of Economic Development to lead our increasingly important efforts in that area to the much-needed renovation of the Market Building. Ms. Burcham is committed to working tirelessly until the day she retires, and as a council we have come to expect nothing less from her. We will work closely and collaboratively with her to make decisions that are in the best interest of the most residents of the community.
As Council moves forward in its search for Ms. Burcham's successor, my focus and work will be to help find a new city manager with a strong background in economic development and financial management, and someone that recognizes the many wonderful attributes of our diverse community. I think this is particularly important for Roanoke in this economic climate and want to make certain that Roanoke is poised to take advantage of opportunities to attract more and better jobs to the area and encourage business growth and expansion.
Increased and expanded opportunity is in the best interest of each member of our community and I look forward to working to accomplish these goals.
Ms. Burcham has dedicated nine years to the management of the City. While we all will never agree on every decision that has or has not been made, Ms. Burcham has been a dedicated, committed and hardworking member of the Roanoke family. She has accomplished many good things in her time in the Manager's office.
I am confident that the next nine months will be a fruitful time for the City Council and Ms. Burcham to work together to accomplish great things, from hiring a new Director of Economic Development to lead our increasingly important efforts in that area to the much-needed renovation of the Market Building. Ms. Burcham is committed to working tirelessly until the day she retires, and as a council we have come to expect nothing less from her. We will work closely and collaboratively with her to make decisions that are in the best interest of the most residents of the community.
As Council moves forward in its search for Ms. Burcham's successor, my focus and work will be to help find a new city manager with a strong background in economic development and financial management, and someone that recognizes the many wonderful attributes of our diverse community. I think this is particularly important for Roanoke in this economic climate and want to make certain that Roanoke is poised to take advantage of opportunities to attract more and better jobs to the area and encourage business growth and expansion.
Increased and expanded opportunity is in the best interest of each member of our community and I look forward to working to accomplish these goals.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Statement on Personnel Matter
I have received nearly two dozen calls or emails regarding the piece that ran in today's newspaper concerning the future of City Manager Darlene Burcham.
I am a true believer in an open and transparent government and believe that the citizens of Roanoke deserve and should expect that information be shared with them by their elected officials in a timely and succinct manner - our government is only as good as the citizens that support it and the faith that they have in their decision-makers.
Out of respect for the City Manager and the Office of the City Manager, however, I will not address current discussions surrounding a highly sensitive and important personnel matter. Ms. Burcham deserves the professional respect and courtesy to have public comments withheld until the appropriate time.
Thank you.
Court Rosen
I am a true believer in an open and transparent government and believe that the citizens of Roanoke deserve and should expect that information be shared with them by their elected officials in a timely and succinct manner - our government is only as good as the citizens that support it and the faith that they have in their decision-makers.
Out of respect for the City Manager and the Office of the City Manager, however, I will not address current discussions surrounding a highly sensitive and important personnel matter. Ms. Burcham deserves the professional respect and courtesy to have public comments withheld until the appropriate time.
Thank you.
Court Rosen
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Happy Memorial Day
I haven't posted in a little while as I have been decompressing from the long, protracted city budget work period. It had been quite intense for several months so it's been nice to have some quieter time to spend with our son, family and friends.
I hope everyone has a nice Memorial Day. It's a good opportunity for a long weekend and a time to reflect on and think about the hundreds of thousands of soldiers stationed overseas, both in areas with peaceful relations and areas entrenched in war. While we relax for a deserved day off, there are American men and women abroad working seven days a week to keep America safe.
Memorialize them on this day.
I hope everyone has a nice Memorial Day. It's a good opportunity for a long weekend and a time to reflect on and think about the hundreds of thousands of soldiers stationed overseas, both in areas with peaceful relations and areas entrenched in war. While we relax for a deserved day off, there are American men and women abroad working seven days a week to keep America safe.
Memorialize them on this day.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Pools Will Open, Schools a Bit Less Fortunate
Earlier today Roanoke City Council met for what is known as Budget Study. Essentially, Budget Study is where the Council finalizes the next fiscal year's budget before it goes to a formal vote to be adopted into law.
During this meeting, we discussed an item that I believe to be important to the youth of the City. We decided, after weeks of debate and searching for the resources, to open both the Fallon Park and Washington Park swimming pools for the upcoming summer. At one point there was talk of a public/private partnership that would have kept Fallon Park open and seemed to be the only financial way to do so. That fell through, however, and during the course of those negotiations the City projected a slight increase in revenue and other resources that could be available.
I would have had trouble supporting the opening of one pool and not the other. Though public/private partnerships can be a model for good government, in a City as divided as ours, opening one pool without the other would have sent the wrong signal to our residents. So I'm happy we were able to find the resources that will allow children from various parts of town to have recreational opportunities this summer that will hopefully keep kids busy and out of trouble.
On another note, we did not agree to provide the schools with additional resources to help boost enrichment in summer school offerings, stave off elimination of teachers' assistant positions or fill ten empty elementary teacher positions. I believe this is a mistake and, if you recall, made a proposal a few weeks back that would have provided $1.6 million of taxpayer money from the Budget Stabilization Fund (rainy day fund) to accomplish just this (http://courtrosen.blogspot.com/2009/04/proposal-for-additional-funds.html).
Our school division is ranked second worst in the Commonwealth of Virginia. We have suffered from declining achievement for years, and while efforts to attract new business and create new jobs have been many, until we make fundamental changes to the way we educate our children and prioritize our schools, I simply think these efforts will prove to be less than effective. We cannot make small, incremental changes in the way we educate this City - we must make a tidal wave of change to turn around a system that has not improved in many years.
I appreciate my colleagues willingness to increase City funding to the schools... I truly do. The state did not fulfill their financial obligation, and as much as we choose to blame the state for shirking its responsibility, these are still our schools whose success will affect the future of our City. Major policy changes and programs have been enacted over the last couple of years with the by a dedicated school board and superintendant. And it is my belief that until we dedicate ourselves to seeing through a major overhaul of our school division, a tidal wave of change, we will fail to see a major turnaround in our economic climate here and our ability to create new, highpaying jobs for our residents.
Education is the key to fighting poverty in our City and to improving the quality of life for everyone. I'm disappointed that we did not do more to avoid the programatic elimination that RCPS has been forced to undergo. But I know that they will do the best they can with the resources they do have. And we should be grateful for their dedication.
During this meeting, we discussed an item that I believe to be important to the youth of the City. We decided, after weeks of debate and searching for the resources, to open both the Fallon Park and Washington Park swimming pools for the upcoming summer. At one point there was talk of a public/private partnership that would have kept Fallon Park open and seemed to be the only financial way to do so. That fell through, however, and during the course of those negotiations the City projected a slight increase in revenue and other resources that could be available.
I would have had trouble supporting the opening of one pool and not the other. Though public/private partnerships can be a model for good government, in a City as divided as ours, opening one pool without the other would have sent the wrong signal to our residents. So I'm happy we were able to find the resources that will allow children from various parts of town to have recreational opportunities this summer that will hopefully keep kids busy and out of trouble.
On another note, we did not agree to provide the schools with additional resources to help boost enrichment in summer school offerings, stave off elimination of teachers' assistant positions or fill ten empty elementary teacher positions. I believe this is a mistake and, if you recall, made a proposal a few weeks back that would have provided $1.6 million of taxpayer money from the Budget Stabilization Fund (rainy day fund) to accomplish just this (http://courtrosen.blogspot.com/2009/04/proposal-for-additional-funds.html).
Our school division is ranked second worst in the Commonwealth of Virginia. We have suffered from declining achievement for years, and while efforts to attract new business and create new jobs have been many, until we make fundamental changes to the way we educate our children and prioritize our schools, I simply think these efforts will prove to be less than effective. We cannot make small, incremental changes in the way we educate this City - we must make a tidal wave of change to turn around a system that has not improved in many years.
I appreciate my colleagues willingness to increase City funding to the schools... I truly do. The state did not fulfill their financial obligation, and as much as we choose to blame the state for shirking its responsibility, these are still our schools whose success will affect the future of our City. Major policy changes and programs have been enacted over the last couple of years with the by a dedicated school board and superintendant. And it is my belief that until we dedicate ourselves to seeing through a major overhaul of our school division, a tidal wave of change, we will fail to see a major turnaround in our economic climate here and our ability to create new, highpaying jobs for our residents.
Education is the key to fighting poverty in our City and to improving the quality of life for everyone. I'm disappointed that we did not do more to avoid the programatic elimination that RCPS has been forced to undergo. But I know that they will do the best they can with the resources they do have. And we should be grateful for their dedication.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
