Is Shockoe Bottom The Best Place for a New Ballpark?

On Tuesday night,

The Times-Dispatch held its 24th Public Square, at its downtown offices. The forum began with a four-person debate between supporters and opponents of building a new minor-league baseball stadium in Shockoe Bottom, followed by comments and questions from the audience. Publisher Tom Silvestri moderated. Below is an edited transcript of the conversation. To watch the entire Public Square online, go to Timesdispatch.com, key word: Public Square.

Tom Silvestri, publisher of

The Times-Dispatch: We're going to start off the Public Square with a debate on the point: Shockoe Bottom is the best place for a ball park . . . .The yes side is leading off.

Paul Kreckman, vice president, Highwoods Properties: We're here tonight be-cause the City of Richmond deserves to have a baseball team. The city invited developers to propose economic development for two underused, underperforming assets: the Boulevard, and Shockoe Bottom. As we looked at both, we saw a generational opportunity to transform our city by replacing, expanding, and realigning important public facilities. Shockoe Bottom is a great location for mixed-use development. But it will remain underdeveloped until a project of sufficient scale comes along to address the flood problem.

Shockoe Center serves as a solution. It is a transit-oriented, mixed-use town center, built around three principles: address the flood plain, preserve and enable interpretation of the Bottom's rich historical heritage as an integral part of the development, and minimize the cost to the city and avoid any obligation. It includes a ballpark, and attached condos, public infrastructure built above the level of the 100-year flood line, which creates the opportunity for young private development. That private development and the ballpark, in turn, will generate new cash revenue to self-finance the ball club.

In 1992, Camden Yards in Baltimore became the first 21st-century ballpark. That model has been even more successful in the minor leagues. More than 100 new minor-league ballparks have been developed since then, most using the Camden urban model. Minor league attendance continues to set records. A group of urban planning professionals studied this trend in American ballparks and identified 10 planning principles for successful ballparks:

One, plan the right capacity for the market. Our ballpark is half the size of The Diamond. Two, locate contiguous to promising development districts -- downtown, historic, and entertainment districts. Three, take advantage of landmarks of unique civic treasures. Four, choose a location oriented towards existing and future transit opportunity. Five, respect the city's street grid. Six, allow fan circulation and ancillary uses outside the building. Seven, orient the ballpark to connect with urban conditions and the city's skyline. Eight, disperse parking in garages and lots within walking distance off-site. Nine, master plan for positive compatible collateral development around the ballpark. And 10, plan to maximize attendance and revenue-generating opportunities.

The Shockoe Center capitalizes on all 10 principles that have worked in more than 80 peer cities across the country. When you look at these planning principles, Shockoe Bottom is, quite simply, the best place in the city to develop a modern ballpark as the catalyst to economic development around it. Shockoe Center is the means to transform one of Richmond's oldest neighborhoods into a functioning urban economic asset again. The question isn't, "Where should the ballpark go?" The real question is, do we as Richmonders have a broad enough vision and the courage to seize a larger opportunity, and try to do something really great for our city?

Silvestri: First up for the nos, Charlie Diradour.

Charlie Diradour, owner, Lion's Paw Development Co.: Five years ago, I raised significant issues about the financial and functional feasibility of the Braves' proposed move to Shockoe Bottom. And today, I continue to be concerned about those issues, and I remain committed to encouraging a thorough public debate prior to committing our city's resources. We'll hear a lot tonight about baseball. But the issue is really not about baseball. I'm a baseball fan. And I know that we ought to have a baseball team here in our region. We'll hear about families and fun from Bryan [Bostic], and I'm all for that. And you'll hear that there's some frustration that the city hasn't done enough to shore up infrastructure in Shockoe Bottom. And guess what? I'm for that, too.

But the premise that minor league baseball is an economic driver cannot be substantiated. Innumerable studies have proven that the sports complexes do not show a solid return on investment for the municipalities that participate in building them. The Shockoe plan proposes the construction of a $70 million ballpark in the center of a development of totally unneeded Class A office space, retail space, hotel square footage, and more restaurant space. All of it built in a 100-year flood plain. Now, the first $150,000 study that Davenport did for the city concluded that 65,000 square feet of new construction was the maximum amount of new construction that could be feasibly leased and/or sold in Shockoe Bottom. Now, why now are we being faced with a 200,000-square-foot proposal? It's simple, folks. The budget won't work at 65,000 square feet.

Now, let me tell you what a bond issuance would mean for us. In May of 2003, the city issued bonds, CDA [community development authority] bonds, to do the Broad Street renovation project. Last year, our city learned that the parking revenues that were intended to pay off those bonds weren't going to cover the debt. Now, let's understand that CDA bonds are not obligations of the local government that created them. Does this sound familiar? City Council last year had to pass legislation that would commit city tax revenue to pay off those bonds. We, the taxpayers, are paying $1.2 million this year to satisfy the bondholders, and we'll be doing so in similar amounts for the next 26 years. The investment bankers got their fees. The lawyers got their fees. The developers, they got their fees. And it was all built on a false premise. And just as I submit, the Shockoe Center is being built on a false premise.

Now, while the developer and the team owner tell us we're getting a free stadium and $3 million in revenue per annum, I want you to remember three things this evening. One, we're now paying the Broad Street project off ourselves. Two, we will have to pay for the infrastructure improvements and modifications to allow for storm water and traffic around the proposed development. And third, ladies and gentlemen, there ain't nothing free. It is my opinion that in the end, the City of Richmond will be forced to back these bonds. We cannot afford this risk.

Look, let's all come together. Let's use land we already own, and do it in a regionally cooperative fashion.

Silvestri: Those were the lead-off hitters on both sides. Now we go to the clean-up hitters, starting with the yes side.

Bryan Bostic, chairman, Richmond Baseball Club: Richmond, Va., is the second-largest city in America without affiliated baseball. Orlando is the first. Why is that? The Richmond Braves left town because they could not make a profit at The Diamond. It is a failed business model, where attendance has been declining for a decade. Attendance dropped from 528,000 people in 1998 to 289,000 just last year. The best place in Richmond for a new urban ballpark is Shockoe Bottom. It's based on the 10 planning principles that Paul outlined. These planning principles have been used in peer group cities all across America, where they've leveraged minor league baseball as a catalyst for growth and revitalization. Minor league cities -- not major league cities.

But we're not hanging our baseball cap on just one study. Let me highlight outside urban planning, baseball, and business experts who have studied Richmond and reached the same conclusion. In 2002, our region was considering spending $18 million to renovate The Diamond. In reality, it was over $30 million. The city's portion of that would have come directly from taxpayers. Our pocket. Your pocket, my pocket. All of us together. Just as it did when The Diamond was built. Business and civic leaders brought in Frank Ricks, a nationally known urban planner and ballpark architect, to identify the best site for a new ballpark. His conclusion? Shockoe Bottom. But not only Shockoe Bottom for the City of Richmond. Frank Ricks concluded, as a national urban planner, that it's the best location he'd ever seen in America . . . .

In November 2007, urban planner James Crupi, updating his regional analysis from 15 years earlier, said the Boulevard should be redeveloped for economic purposes. The ballpark belonged downtown. In early 2008, the city issued an economic development RFP [request for proposals] for the Boulevard that specifically required a ballpark. An unheard-of thing happened. Amazing thing happened: None of those private developers who responded to that RFP proposed a ballpark. None of them. Speaking with their wallet and their research.

Months earlier, we submitted a response to a city economic development RFP to redevelop the Main Street Station area. Shockoe Center did include a ballpark, and a realistic, self-financing plan. So the city asked its nationally known real estate consultant, The Staubach Co., which site they recommended. They agreed with Ricks, Crupi, and the private Boulevard developers. Shockoe Center in downtown Richmond is where baseball needs to be played. Next, the city hired a team of consultants to evaluate the economic benefits to the city of a ballpark -- on the Boulevard or in Shockoe Bottom. Those consultants said, "Put the ballpark in Shockoe Center, in Shockoe Bottom." There are two more key groups that support the ballpark in Shockoe Center. One of them's right behind me. Highwoods and its development partners are willing to invest millions of dollars in private capital around the ballpark in Phase One. That sounds like genuine economic development activity to me. Now Richmond Baseball Club, more than three dozen investors, are also putting up millions of their own money to buy a team to play in Shockoe Center -- not on the Boulevard -- long term.

Silvestri: And the next hitter for the cons.

Jean Wight, attorney and historic preservation activist: I don't represent anyone but myself, butI'm an inner-city resident. I live very close to where this is going to be. And it's going to have a huge impact on my neighborhood. And I think that has to be part of the discussion, too. The Bottom contains a great deal of promise in three respects: It's a mass transportation hub. High-speed rail is going to come in. This is a gold mine. It's a very visible gateway, with proximity to the financial center. And it's also an important and genuine location for heritage tourism. Heritage tourism doesn't expire in 20 years. Heritage tourism is a very good economic generator.

From the moment we chose to live in the inner city, some 10-plus years ago, we felt a part of something greater than ourselves. I recently took an informal poll and discovered that folks up there had spent as much in buying homes as in restoration. I volunteered in Bellevue School's library for four years, by just crossing my street. If you really care about the inner city, all it takes is crossing one street at a time. And it's the inner city, but it's also a village. A village that has suffered for much, but lives on as a caring community, with the old and the young, and neighbors of any race that are your family. For too many years, our community has been regarded -- by zoning and a lack of leadership -- as disposable, or racially in conflict. We are not. We're a community which can only become stronger, if we're respected as such. You talk about bringing families. My families live there. Where some see blight, we see potential. We have experienced a dollar-for-dollar investment in this community with no baseball having been played. Or, these are multiplier dollars. Local jobs, taxpaying homeowners, small businesses that work, that make Richmond richer. The Seventh District is not disposable. We can resent that somehow, after all the community efforts for a master plan, we are told that we don't know what's good for us. What happens next to us impacts us all.

As to project idealists for a ballpark in the Bottom, I don't think they have considered what is important for this community. They seek bond issues in astronomical amounts to finance their engineers and architects. And for what? A mass entertainment venue. Bond issues are not free money. Fiscal choices between schools and other public investments have to compete for those dollars. Throw your balls and have your special-price seating. But it gives nothing back that helps this community. Ball-team ownership is private, not public. Pay your own way. And don't tell us that we're missing this grand employment opportunity to sell peanuts on weekends.

Much of the Bottom is public land. We own it. But it's not the bottom. It's the top. This is prime real estate. It looks bad now, but try to buy this acreage nearby on the cheap. I liken this proposal to giving trade beads for land. And it's not just land. It's a gateway. And very much the early shared heritage of Richmond. Proponents not only want our land for nothing, they want us to pay them to take it. Think a moment. It's a land grab. To put a ballpark there is a tremendous boondoggle to engineers and developers at the expense of every other business, office block, and restaurant that has struggled to survive there. This includes investments in nearby residences. It also tells the people in our community that sport, noise, traffic, and a 20-year plan is something we will have to pay for, with no regard for our accomplishments in the revitalization of the last 50 years, and the vision we've just achieved with the new master plan. The unique heritage of that site is buried under and lost, and incredibly damaged, if this goes forward. If it's hard for some of you to understand how we feel, then explain to us why no one's proposing a ballpark along the James in Windsor Farms.

Silvestri: All right. I invite the public up.

Louise Larus, Bennington, Vt.: My opposition to the stadium is based on 25 years of cheering for Shockoe Bottom as the first individual to buy a large historic building, rehab it into six luxury apartments, over what is now Zupas on 18th Street, directly across from the proposed stadium. In January of 2000, City Council approved a Shockoe Bottom land use and development strategy . . . . It states: "The Shockoe Bottom district will continue to evolve in a manner that respects its architectural character, and protects the historic content of the area. And to preserve the existing scale and character, promote adaptive new in-field development, be compatible in scale and character with the existing buildings." That lets out a stadium, right there.

Sam Forrest, Richmond: The cheapest, most effective, most egalitarian thing Mayor Jones can do that would make Richmond a place that people flee to, and not flee from, is to enforce the existing building and maintenance codes. The collapse of the Eggleston Hotel is a perfect example. According to HUD's best information, there are 20,000 other buildings in various stages of disrepair in the city. Just look around you when you go home. Code enforcement will quickly force absentee landlords to sell or repair their property. Property values will take on a realistic value. People will return to the city. As a stable population of critical mass once again lives in the inner city, their desires will become known and crystallized. And who knows what they will be? That's a decision for the future. And posing some harebrained scheme like the Shockoe Bottom ballpark, hoping that people will return, is thinking backward.

Bostic: I hate to bring up statistics, but I feel I have to. And again, this is another story about baseball. Three hundred thousand people, Memphis, Tenn.. Downtrodden area, very similar to Shockoe Bottom. That's how many people went to games. The year after they built the ballpark, 833,000 people went to baseball games downtown. And it has revitalized their downtown.

Brian Glass, Richmond: Let me start by saying that the Richmond Braves didn't leave town because they didn't make a profit . . . .Paul, you talked about Camden Yards, and growing the tax base and self-financing. Well, the Inner Harbor came before Camden Yards came. That was the economic generator for downtown Baltimore, not Camden Yards.

Kreckman: I think that one of the fundamental pieces that people seem to keep forgetting about this -- this whole project -- we said that the $60 million ballpark would be built at the same time as $100 million of private investment. Now, that sounds like a fair amount of economic development to me, so I'm not sure where we get this notion that somehow we're going build this thing, when $100 million worth of economic development doesn't really count. It's the $100 million of economic development in Phase One that allows the ballpark to be self-financing, so that we're not on the hook. It's not unlike the bonds that were used to finance Pocahontas Parkway, the revenue bonds. Don't talk to me about the city being on the hook, when no one was on the hook for those bonds. When they ran into trouble, they renegotiated and worked it out. But I think that one of the missing pieces here is that we're not talking about speculative economic development. It's all going happen at the same time. The ballpark and the proven, demonstrable economic development -- or isn't going happen at all.

Diradour: Paul, you said it's not about speculative economic development. Who are your tenants? You're asking these folks to back a $70 million bond issue, that -- it's inevitable that they're going have to back it. I don't think the capital markets are going to absorb the $70 million bond issue as a non-recourse bond. So we're basically your lending committee. Do you have a demographic study? Do you have a marketing plan? Where's the beef?

Kreckman: First off, we have to have the ability to go out and do the ballpark at this location . . . .We had to get the community to decide this is what it was going to be. We were then going to get the approvals, and we would go out and get the beef. We don't have the beef today, because we don't have a project yet. We're still talking about it. Just like we've been talking about it for a very long time. Now, once we get the opportunity to go out, we're going to have to prove it. And not just with technical studies of demographics and the rest, but with real developers, who are going to put up real dollars to do this budget. If we don't have that, we're not going to have the ability to sell the bonds. And if we don't sell the bonds, we don't have a project. So, where's the beef? I would answer: right here. What's wrong with seizing the opportunity to try? Are we going to be a community that just is afraid to try, because it might be a little difficult?

John Zeugner, Richmond: I'm concerned about making a few environmental points, a couple of smart growth points, and then questioning the process overall. Everybody already knows that the Bottom has a tendency to flood. And I think the whole location is riddled with problems, if you tried to put a stadium there . . . .It's an 18th-century street network that can't accommodate huge peak crowds. And most of the people who are going to come there aren't going to spend additional money in the businesses down there. They're going to go down and get out. A whole group is in favor of redeveloping The Diamond and incubating new businesses and other attractions in that area, where we've got plenty of transportation, we've got walkability, and bikability, and ancillary parking lots. It just makes so much more sense than shoehorning something into a part of Richmond that's uniquely Richmond. Just incredibly rich with its own history. Walkable neighborhoods.

Greg Kemp, Richmond: Mr. Bostic, you're to be commended for your initiative and passion to bring the baseball team back to Richmond. Double-A is the best level of baseball in the minorleagues. The public doesn't realize that. Secondly, a ballpark would work at either the Boulevard or The Bottom. Yet the best location may lie elsewhere. I am not here to ambush ballpark plans, but let everyone know about a site that has been overlooked. Although the 2007 Crupi report picked Old Manchester as the best spot for a ball park, this has been virtually ignored. This is page 38 from the Crupi report: "Arguably the finest ballpark in the major leagues is Pittsburgh PNC Park, with the view of the Pittsburgh skyline and the river." A ballpark building at the site of the soon-to-be-closed Reynolds plant at Sixth and Bainbridge streets would have a stunning view of the James River and Richmond skyline . . . .Although the timing for my idea may not be optimal, a ballpark in Old Manchester would be the best visual location in Richmond. I've heard from more than one source if the ballpark is to be built in downtown, the river should be incorporated. Old Manchester gives us the chance.

Ann McRee, Richmond: Think about all the money and the trouble that would be spent to put a ballpark down in Shockoe Bottom, and thereby destroying the historic character of the neighborhood . . . .We have a ballpark on the Boulevard. It can be renovated with a lot less money than what it would cost to go through all that trouble of building a ballpark down in Shockoe Bottom. The Boulevard is coming up now. We have a lot of new businesses, such as Movieland and Buz and Ned's, and quite a number of businesses that are coming.

Steve Rossie, Richmond: I think the reason why most of us are here is because -- it's very frustrating in the city. We're tired of being fooled time and time again by these nirvana projects, that if we just build it, everything is going to be great . . . .Minor league baseball exists for one thing. Minor league baseball can't generate the revenue of one day's worth of a Fox television contract for Major League Baseball. They're not in it for money. They're in it to develop the next Chipper Jones or the next John Smoltz. That's what they're in it for. Not to make money. The Braves didn't leave because they weren't making money. They left because of the dysfunction here . . . .No one's addressed the transportation or the highways. The Boulevard area's perfect. It's at the intersection of 64 and 95, with plenty of parking. You haven't addressed the issue of people trying to come in from the counties . . . .How are they going to funnel the traffic [into Shockoe Bottom]?

David Napier, Richmond: There is no organic solution to the flood plain issue in Shockoe Bottom . . . .Baseball or no baseball, we need a concourse if we're going to have development that's in keeping with the master plan. There will be no organic development like there is on the Boulevard. There'll be a building on stilts, or there'll be nothing. Which is what we have had for 50 years down there.

Adele MacLean, Richmond: What I'd like to see is the whole downtown master plan approach used in this case, too, to make this a more comprehensive conversation. For us to actually have a conversation among citizens.

William Shulleeta, Richmond: I was born and bred in Richmond. And one of the last things I need is for these outside interests to come in and tell me what I want. They may be making a fair assessment, but there may be some agendas involved as well. I've been a fan since 1954. I saw the first game when the Yankees played the Virginians at Parker Field. I've been going ever since. I've been involved in baseball in several ways in this city for many, many years. But that being aside, you've got to follow the money. And practicality. The bonds. These bonds began at $50-some million. I followed this since its inception. It's now $60 [million] . . . .You may be able to get the surrounding counties to pitch in on this situation, if it is at the Boulevard.

Herb Sebren, Tappahannock: Richmond is the focal point of this entire state. And I hate to see Richmond being a scapegoat and the laughingstock of the country, in the state, with all these crazy ideas that it comes up with. Mr. Bostic, I admire your desire to bring baseball back to Richmond. But when I first heard that somebody proposed to put a baseball stadium in Shockoe Bottom, I thought, "You have got to be kidding. That is the stupidest idea I ever heard in my life." I'm not pushing any other area. The Diamond could be renovated, I suppose.

Richmond is a lousy professional sports town. The only thing people in Richmond care about is high school sports. And maybe the college -- VCU and University of Richmond sports . . . .I would ask that you do it like Jack Kent Cooke did when he built the stadium for the Redskins. Use your own money. Don't ask the city to contribute a dime.

Richard Bosko, Richmond: I'm a baseball fan. And every year, my wife and I take a trip out to Lynchburg for single-A baseball team. They've got a modern stadium. You go there, you have a good time . . . .I came here tonight with an open mind. I didn't know whether I wanted to have a stadium out in Shockoe Bottom, or whether I wanted to have it at The Diamond. I thought, "Well, maybe we could have a third suggestion, and have the stadium at the old U of R stadium that's closing. Maybe build one there." But I listened to the comments about Shockoe Bottom . . . .Three things came to mind. First, when I went out to Lynchburg, the parking's free. Second, when I go to a baseball game, I want to go to a baseball game. I don't want to walk through a neighborhood, I don't want to stop at a restaurant. I want to go to a baseball game . . . .Shockoe Bottom's not going to cut it. The egress getting out of that place is terrible.

Jay Wilson, Richmond: As far as baseball and the Boulevard -- it didn't work before . . . .Put it behind us. Let's move forward. Let's find something different. It didn't work before, it's not going to work now. The ballpark's good for downtown, because of all the things going on downtown. You've got The National theater, that's brought people in. You've got Richmond CenterStage. That will open later in September. That's going to bring people into town. You've got all the condos that have been put up. You've got these converted warehouse buildings that younger people are moving into. It's so attractive to put a ballpark in downtown. The younger people will swarm, go to games. It's something to do downtown.

When you're a young person and you're graduating from college, and you're saying, "Where am I going to go next?" Well, first, you have to find a job. Obviously. So, that's important. But second on the list is, what's there to do in that city? You're not going to go to a city where there's no night life, there's nothing to do. Richmond's lost out to cities like Charlotte . . . .In order for Richmond to grow, we need a good city. A good, downtown city, with things to do. And when you do something like that, people will want to come to Richmond. The city will grow. I think the plan is just perfect, and we should have a ballpark in the city.

Carol Franco, Glen Allen: I'm from Philadelphia. I'll say hi, or perhaps I should say "yo." One of the first speakers mentioned that he'd like to see people flee to Richmond. Well, we fled from Philadelphia to Richmond, partly to get away from major league sports. I know, it's a major league town, not minor. But people asked us, when we announced that we were moving to Richmond, Va., they said, "Why would you move to Richmond?" And we said, "For three main reasons: History, culture, charm." . . . We shopped up and down the East Coast, when we decided to move from Pennsylvania, and chose Richmond. And shortly after that, discovered Shockoe Bottom. Shockoe Slip. Smart, snazzy, stylish area where we want to spend money -- we are looking at new restaurants every week to spend money in. We won't spend it if there is a stadium there.

Voll Greene III, Richmond: I'm going to give a little bit of history about what's going on. The reason that that stadium failed at The Diamond, is simply because Atlanta kept taking players away. You're not going get anybody to come to a game if you were winning, and you've got a good player, they call him up. So then we go back into a losing cycle. And if you keep getting a losing cycle over eight years, you're going lose patrons coming to the games.

When Richmond was winning, The Diamond was full. When Richmond was losing, The Diamond was empty.

Angela Dews, Richmond: I'm a teacher in the Richmond public schools, so I'm going to take a little different turn on this. I love baseball. I love baseball. I'm not a Richmonder. I came to Richmond about six years ago. But one thing I've noticed about Richmond: the schools are old. The schools are very old. I came from a school system that built new schools every year. Five schools every year. I taught at a brand new school. I came to Richmond by choice. The schools that I work at, the kids are wonderful. The teachers are wonderful. But the facilities are old.

I would love to see the city invest in building and modernizing the schools that we have, before we build a baseball stadium. Before we build a baseball stadium smack dab in the middle of where your children are. The children deserve more. The teachers and all the education employees deserve more. They deserve better. A new high school hasn't been built in years . . . .Show your children that you want to invest in them. You are investing in the future. And if you want to attract people to Richmond, I believe that's where you start. Just start with your school system. Because when you have quality schools, you attract quality students. And then that puts Richmond on the map.

Brian White, Richmond: I thought it was worth noting that the Shockoe Bottom Neighborhood Association and the Shockoe Partners, the two organizations representing that neighborhood, both voted unanimously to support this project. The problems in Shockoe Bottom, from the perspective of those of us in the neighborhood, can all be traced back to the flood plain. There has been tremendous development on the eastern edge -- Tobacco Row -- of the neighborhood, and on the western edge up by Shockoe Slip. But down in the Bottom -- the bottom of the Bottom where this proposal is called for -- is in the flood plain. If you look at the 1700 block of East Main Street, the 1700 block of Franklin, Grace, you see devastation. You see emptiness. You see dilapidated storefronts. It's because that flood plain serves as an economic black hole, sucking the viability out of the surrounding area. Because it is impossible to develop in that area. This project serves as almost a magic bullet for that problem. It makes the entire area developable . . . and makes it attractive again for people to invest.

Lawrence Williams, Richmond: Shockoe Bottom is a very good location, because you can build a stadium of a smaller scale. Sometimes when you want to go out and build mega-stadiums, they get expensive, and become eyesores in 30, 40 years. We need to have a stadium in Shockoe Bottom because it can blend in with the existing fabric there. I have a proposal here that also emphasizes that the stadium should be a multi-use stadium. We talk constantly about baseball, and baseball, and baseball. But there are other issues. We've got high school football, regional games . . . . We've got to -- at some point in Richmond -- get an identity where people want to invest, and the middle class wants to invest in it pridefully, in the neighborhoods around Shockoe Bottom and beyond. Not just Church Hill, but in Eastern Richmond as well. We've got to build something that has character.

John Dodge, Richmond: We are blessed to have Mr. Bostic, who I happen to know quite well, whose success has come from his own vision and determination and hard work, where other people said he couldn't. That's where his money came from. Not from trying to do some scam on you and me and taxpayers. His vision, and his love of the city, is why he is here tonight. . . . When's the last time anybody was at Shockoe Bottom? [Many raised hands] OK? So, you would know, then, that there are 34 For Lease or For Sale signs in a place I used to love to go for entertainment. There are nine alone on Ninth Street. Please, open your eyes. Don't think of yourself, but think of the future of this city. Embrace it, and let us move forward.

Gary Armstrong, Midlothian: I love Shockoe Bottom. I love the history -- we are so fortunate to have the culture we have here in Richmond. But there is room for change. And many of us that are over 40, we cannot see that, and cannot recognize that we can be much better than the way we used to. All these fellows are asking you to do is let the city take a really good, hard look at this. They're looking to study it more. They're bringing their money to the table. There's been a lot of misinformation about how this project's being characterized. But the bottom line is, you've got people that are bringing money to this deal. Sure, they want the community to contribute, support the team. Dedicate some tax dollars that aren't there now, that they're going to create with this development. Think out of the box. We can do this, we really can.

John Gerner, Richmond: The key question tonight shouldn't be about our commitment to baseball, or our commitment to progress. I feel the key question should be our commitment to regionalism. Because in the long run, it's that commitment that will make the biggest difference for us all. In the 1980s, when The Diamond was developed, it was developed as a regional effort. The city and the counties shared the expenses of that stadium. And yet, today we're talking about an approach that would have Richmond go it alone. To pull back from one of the few long-term regional efforts that we have done with the counties. And the question I have is, why? Why would we do this? Why would we go backwards in our commitment to our regional partners in the counties, and tell them, "We don't need your help?" Because frankly, I'm a city resident and taxpayer. We do need their help. Not only in baseball, but in many other areas.