Dear Shanna……….

One of my hopes with this blog is, as much as possible, to use the site for media interviews and responses to reporting. So here itgoes with Shanna Flowers (shanna.flowers@roanoke.com) and her commentary in today’s Roanoke Times. I have emailed her requesting a response.

One of the more difficult parts of council life and media relations is I often completely agree with a reporter’s comments but they twist it so the perception is I am somehow forever on a different side. Shanna should know that I have visited the market building over the last week, attended the public input session and played a major role last year in getting council to reverse itself on the rankings of downtown capital priorities such that the Spanish Steps concept was pushed aside and the Market Building was put on top of the list. Since then work has been underway to secure a major renovation while at the same time performing some long over-due cosmetic improvements. And then we all know what happened nine days ago.

So- for the record, I completely agree with Shanna’s observations about the Market Building and what a jewel it is- absolutely an incredible and very important city asset. I am glad the city owns it and I am glad it is getting broad attention to bring it and it’s historic flair up to standards and with usage that will lead us many many years down the road.  All week, several council members and myself have been weighing next steps and how to quickly and efficiently do the building right, define the renovations, work and be fair with the vendors and utilize the input we have gotten from citizens as well as businesses and DRI in regards to usage. We all plan to have an open discussion on this subject Tuesday morning. I have been quoted many times that this building is the capital priority facing council well before this unfortunate emergency.

But Shanna and presumably others at the Times have decided to connect this issue to me and the amphitheatre? Does everyone at the Roanoke Times have “amphitheatre on the brain”- everything, every issue and anything I do seems to be always connected to the amphitheatre. The Roanoke Times continued for years to fuel the flames of the Victory Stadium debate and successfully helped drag it out over a decade so as to still (including today) discuss it and help promote a continued black eye for the city (I had thought this Victory Stadium debate was well over, but not according to the Roanoke Times).

For the record, the Market Building is a bigger and more urgent priority for the city than an amphitheatre. That much is clear and obvious. The Market Building- all three floors- is awesome, is authentic and has much opportunity and potential. It has not been maintained or managed well, its “usage” needs some revisions and all floors need to be utilized. It has an enormous quality of life vibe.

But that is about all the Market Building and Amphitheatre have in common. The amphitheatre is an entirely different project, on a different and slower track. This project has been in process well before my arrival at council and at each decision point has had at least four votes from council members in support of it.  I, like most council members, are active on many projects and are on many committees. There are many acute and chronic issues I have spent considerable hours on such as passenger rail service, storm water management, marketing and tourism just to name a few. One of the pleasures of being on council is the ability to work with many great and caring groups around many “pet projects”.

Over the last 10 years the city has focused on capital projects mostly involving infrastructure, parking, fire/ems, police and other “municipal” issues. Two years ago, council supported a plan to finally focus on Park and Rec initiatives and quality of life amenities. This often includes healthy and green initiatives. We approved two staggered bond packages each at $15 million for a total of $30 million over several years to follow some of the Park and Rec Master Plan. This plan can or may include important assets like: greenways, athletic fields, an amphitheatre, recreation center, an aquatic center, and a “bigger” William Fleming football field and track and field complex. This money cannot be used on other things such as libraries or the Market Building. Each of these amenities have a clear economic impact for our city.

Today the Roanoke Times mixed two important issues together in order to create false perceptions. They are two very different issues, with two different funding streams and need to be dealt with differently. Yes these are incredibly difficult financial times and city council with the professional advice from our finance department needs to navigate the next few months and years very carefully. Due to the two biggest capital projects in the history of Roanoke coming on line over these last few years (the two new high schools) we knew 2009 and 2010 would be difficult years. Now you add the current economy to the mix and it is even tougher. Some projects may need to be stopped, delayed or reconfigured. The article today implied that council should shelf many projects especially entertainment projects in order to focus on the Market Building. The city does this shelving all too often. I intend to take a broader and longer term view- we need to keep our city vital, competitive with similarly sized cities and grow our population. One building or asset doesn’t do that, it is the thought out synergy of several assets that will.

While I take my broad look, I do know one thing and I think Shanna agrees- the Market Building is first and should be tended to now.