Navy Hill supporters and opponents were out in force for Monday's Richmond City Council meeting. (Photo by Rodrigo Arriaza)
After navigating a months-long review process and soliciting feedback from constituents and two agencies tasked with assessing the proposal, a majority of Richmond City Council members struck 10 measures necessary to the $1.5 billion Navy Hill project from Monday's docket, essentially killing the downtown redevelopment plan.
The final blow to the project came with a vote on whether to adopt the agenda for Monday’s regular meeting, rather than after a standard public hearing process. That’s because the council's Organizational Development Standing Committee had recommended last week that the 10 Navy Hill papers be removed from the agenda.
Voting to adopt the agenda —with Navy Hill ordinances removed — were 2nd District Councilwoman Kim Gray, 3rd District Councilman and Vice President Chris Hilbert, 4th District Councilwoman Kristen Larson, 5th District Councilwoman Stephanie Lynch and 8th District Councilwoman Reva Trammell. First District Councilman Andreas Addison and 6th District Councilwoman Ellen Robertson also voted in favor of adopting the agenda, though both lobbied to continue the Navy Hill ordinances to council’s Feb. 24 meeting in comments prior to the vote.
Seventh District Councilwoman and President Cynthia Newbille said she was in favor of adopting the agenda, but abstained from striking the papers, while 9th District Councilman Michael Jones cast the lone vote to keep the project alive by not adopting the agenda.
Also at Monday’s meeting, a council majority adopted a resolution asking Mayor Levar Stoney to take the proposed downtown redevelopment back to the drawing board by launching a new request for proposals (RFP) process that engages public feedback from the earliest stages of its development and appraises the value of all city-owned parcels in the development area.
Addison and Robertson opposed the resolution, while Jones and Newbille abstained.
Although the agenda adoption vote doesn’t require public comment, council members unanimously agreed to suspend regular meeting rules to allow a hearing first. For more than two hours, over 100 attendees spoke for and against the project.
Residents who opposed the project voiced concerns about the impact that a proposed arena and associated tax increment financing (TIF) deal would have on funding for essential city services, while Navy Hill boosters said the project would bolster sales at local businesses, create new jobs and increase affordable housing options for city residents in need.
Project developer NH District Corp. promised to redevelop a 10-block downtown area bounded by North Fifth, East Leigh, North 10th and East Marshall streets with a new 17,500-seat arena, a 525-room hotel, 480 affordable housing units, more than 250,000 square feet of retail and restaurants, the renovation of the historic Blues Armory and a new GRTC transit center.
While about $900 million in private funds would have financed most of the project, more than $300 million in bonds would have paid for the arena's construction, existing debt on the Richmond Coliseum and other arena costs. Those bonds were to be repaid using new real estate tax revenues collected from an 80-block special tax increment financing (TIF) district, although the developers have said they were exploring ways to reduce its size.
The planned TIF district was one of the proposal’s major stumbling blocks since its unveiling last August, and drew the ire of community residents and council members who said it would siphon revenues away from Richmond Public Schools and other city services.
Davenport & Co., the city’s financial advisor, projected that Navy Hill would generate roughly $1 billion in net general fund revenue over 30 years after the arena bond debt is paid. Of that amount, Stoney has said $500 million would go to public schools.
Momentum began turning against the Navy Hill plan late last month when Gray, Hilbert, Larson, Lynch and Trammell introduced a resolution petitioning Stoney to withdraw the Navy Hill ordinances and restart the RFP process, indicating that the proposal lacked the votes necessary to pass through City Council.
At Monday's meeting, Lynch called the downtown redevelopment plan one of the most divisive projects she’d ever seen in the city, but she said the resolution backed by the five council members lays a clear pathway forward.
“That’s what tonight is about to me. That’s the more important vote, is what are we going to do after this, because it’s not nothing,” she said. “What we’re saying is, and what our resolution is trying to articulate, is a reset and an opportunity to bring everyone back together.”
A statement released by the five council members who opposed the project says they plan to begin that process by launching a series of public forums, surveys and other outreach efforts within the next month to gauge public interest in a downtown development that includes a new arena.
“If that answer is ‘yes,’ we are committed to using the tools at our disposal, but not at the expense of schools or other critical city priorities and certainly, not by committing tax revenues outside of the project area to repay the bonds for this project,” the council members say in the release.
In a statement issued after Monday's council vote to strike the Navy Hill papers, NH District Corp. called the decision “a missed opportunity.”
“The community spoke – and we listened. We met with hundreds and hundreds of Richmonders over the course of two years,” NH District Corp.'s statement reads. “We were actively working on amendments to incorporate the suggestions we heard, but unfortunately, those who opposed the project voted to end it before learning more – which is regrettable.”
Likewise, Stoney expressed disappointment with council’s decision in a statement late Monday.
“It saddens me that Richmonders won’t benefit from the housing, jobs and economic empowerment this project would bring — and I’m disappointed that council did not follow through on the process they laid out to review and evaluate this transformative project for our city — but I’m resolved to wake up tomorrow and keep working to move our city forward,” he wrote.
