THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, June 19, 1994 TAG: 9406190037
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B3 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY DEBBIE MESSINA, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: 940619 LENGTH: VIRGINIA BEACH
After a 7-3 council endorsement June 7 to dump enough sand on Sandbridge to fill Norfolk's Scope 100 times over, Moss wants another vote in July when three new council members are seated.
{REST} Based on recent interviews and campaign promises, the majority of the new council would still support rebuilding the shrinking beach.
``This will definitely come back in July with the new council,'' Moss said. ``And I suspect that will not be the end of it. There's at least one more City Council election before the first sand is dumped on the beach.''
But Moss will have to make some pretty convincing arguments to sway his new colleagues.
``I don't see anything that's changed since the campaign to change my mind,'' said Councilwoman-elect Louisa M. Strayhorn, who supports Sandbridge.
W.W. ``Bill'' Harrison Jr., a councilman-elect who steadfastly endorsed sand for Sandbridge in his campaign, said he will keep an ``open mind'' before voting.
Barbara Henley, who is returning to the council after a four-year absence, said she will vote for sand only if it's financed by Sandbridge money, including the 25 percent of the 4 1/2-mile beach already owned by the city.
Henley and Harrison were among eight City Council candidates who each received a $2,125.50 campaign contribution last month from the Sand for Sandbridge Coalition, according to reports filed last week. Strayhorn did not receive money from the political action committee.
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf was out of town for the council vote earlier this month. She said that she has to study the details of the newest proposal, but added that she does not support spending taxpayer money on sand for Sandbridge.
Even if Moss gets Henley's and Oberndorf's votes, they probably won't be enough to reverse the action.
The key to the debate is whether taxpayers in other parts of the city would have to pay for Sandbridge's sand. Many are concerned about bailing out private-property owners who voluntarily assumed the risk of oceanfront living.
Under the proposal, the local costs of the project would be funded almost entirely from sources other than the general fund. But the city would have to kick in about $100,000 a year from local taxpayers to pay for land it already owns at Sandbridge (such as Little Island Park and the city beach parking lot).
The other three funding sources are:
A $2.8 million refund from the state from the sale of land at Camp Pendleton.
Revenues from a special tax district at Sandbridge. Depending on how often the beach is replenished, the real estate surcharge would be 6 cents, 10 cents or 12 cents. The lodging tax surcharge would be 2 1/2 cents or 4 cents.
Money from redirecting to Sandbridge its share of lodging taxes earmarked for the Tourism Growth Investment Fund (TGIF), about $130,000 a year. (The Resort Area Advisory Commission supports using the TGIF funds for the project and has proposed that additional TGIF money be used to create more parking at Sandbridge.)
Under three scenarios developed by city staff, the beach would be replenished every two years, every three years or alternating two and three years.
Under this funding plan, the project would never be in the red, city data indicates. And at the end of the 50-year project, there would be fund balances of anywhere from $1.2 million to $2.6 million.
The council's recent vote commits the city to joining the Army Corps of Engineers in the project for half a century. It would be funded 65 percent by the federal government and 35 percent by the city. Virginia Beach's share would be about $3 million initially and about $1.8 million every two to three years.
Before the first grain of sand is dumped on the beach, Sandbridge property owners would have to grant the city public easements, making the private beach public. Plus, Sandbridge land owners would have to agree, by mailed petition, to higher taxes to help pay for the sand haul.
``I'm not going to sign onto an unlimited liability with uncertain financing,'' Moss said. ``Whether it's state money or federal money, it's still money pouring out of people's pockets.
``There's no justification to spending money to fill up the ocean with sand.'' by CNB