THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, February 19, 1995 TAG: 9502170265
SECTION: PORTSMOUTH CURRENTS PAGE: 02 EDITION: FINAL
COLUMN: Ida Kay's Portsmouth
SOURCE: Ida Kay Jordan
LENGTH: Medium: 77 lines
Residents will have their chance to say what they want Portsmouth to do about riverboat gambling at 7 p.m. Feb. 28 at Willett Hall.
That's the regular City Council meeting night, when two important questions on gaming will be on the agenda. (In addition, the council agenda also will include a final vote on the Capital Improvement budget and the Vision 2005 plan.)
Last Tuesday, after several unsuccessful attempts from various forces on council to pass motions to abort, continue or shelve negotiations with a company that wants an option on available Portsmouth waterfront land, council members finally agreed 7-0 to put the question officially on the public agenda for the next meeting.
In addition, council will consider a suggestion that it urge the state legislature to turn down riverboat gambling in Virginia.
These issues of gaming are controversial. The meeting was moved to Willett Hall to provide additional seats for citizens.
Until now, residents have had little official opportunity to voice their feelings and thoughts to council.
Actually, there are more than moral issues involved here and many unanswered questions about the negotiations.
Among the questions I have heard asked:
Why did city officials choose to negotiate with one company after a staff recommendation favoring another bidder?
Why can't Portsmouth negotiate with both bidders to get the best deal?
Why have citizens not been able to review both proposals?
Why have some council members, including the mayor, been unable to get specific financial data they seek about the companies?
Why should we commit our valuable waterfront property to a project that has no guarantees?
Is it feasible to think Portsmouth will get one of five licenses for river boats in view of the fact that the legislation has had a ``grandfather'' provision for a boat in Norfolk and that there are 44 waterfront communities that might be competing?
The fact is, Portsmouth appears to be on the short end of the stick as the legislation is written so far. Perhaps, if the citizens want riverboats, we should be lobbying our legislators to change the ``grandfather'' clause to include Portsmouth's Carrie B tour boat.
David Jordan, an owner of the Carrie B, tells me he's interested but his boat carries only 300 persons and the legislation, aimed at accommodating Norfolk, ``grandfathers'' only 400-passenger boats (i.e. Spirit of Norfolk).
Whatever your feelings or thoughts, Feb. 28 will be the time to speak before council.
We can be sure the conservative religious groups will pack the house; they have every right to do that. But the city leaders need to hear from a broader segment of the population, people who will ask tough business questions about the project.
The city is spending a lot of time and money to negotiate with the group that wants the option on the old Coast Guard base and nearby property in PortCentre. A law firm is being paid to represent the city. The city manager and other employees are spending time on the matter.
Maybe the city's money and time would be better spent seeking other economic development projects that could be more immediate than riverboat gambling. At this point, it seems a long time off because the gaming laws first must pass the state legislature, then a state referendum, finally a local vote.
Maybe the citizens want to continue the costly negotiations because they feel the long-term possibilities are worth the cost.
The fact is, council needs to make a hard, cold business decision - not an emotional decision, not a political one.
For that reason, it's important for citizens to ask tough questions and to let council members know how citizens feel about this issue that seems to explode in all directions.
KEYWORDS: RIVERBOAT GAMBLING by CNB