THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, October 16, 1996 TAG: 9610150180
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 10 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: COVER STORY
LENGTH: 134 lines
On Nov. 5, Virginia Beach residents will be asked whether they want to give their city government the power to condemn land to remove blight and promote economic development. The Virginia Beach Council of Civic Organizations held a public forum Oct. 9 to air different opinions on the proposed creation of a redevelopment and housing authority, which would have these powers. The following is a shortened version of pro and con comments by James M. Pendergast and H.E. Robertson at that forum:
PRO
First of all, I'm not a lawyer. I'm not an expert in condemnation law. I am not a real estate appraiser. I am simply a resident of Virginia Beach who owned - emphasis on the past tense - some rental property in the East Ocean View section of Norfolk. What I'm going to do is just go through the sequence of events here as to how this all occurred. . .
When you have a piece of property condemned it becomes an emotional experience. It sounds very cut and dried when you read about things that are happening and so forth. But when you lose assets or you lose your home, it gets very stressful.
Anyway, in 1983 (my wife and I) purchased nine rental cottages, nine individual cottages across the street from the beach in Ocean View for $225,000.
In November 1991 tax assessed value of the property peaked at $251,350 after gradual annual increases from a low of $152,950 in 1983.
In July 1983, the newspaper announced the condemnation of the entire eastern section of East Ocean View. What I called ``scorched earth'' - everything comes down. Whether it was built in 1942 or it was built in 1992, it comes down because it's in that section. There were a couple of folks at some of these meetings who had just built some really nice homes in that section. They were very upset. I don't know whatever happened to them. I don't know if they made exceptions for them or not. But that was the policy. Everything comes down. . .
In April 1994, NRHA sent us an unsigned letter with a take bid of $200,000. That was less than my mortgage. NRHA said I could get my own appraisal but there was no requirement that they consider it.
In May 1994, faced with a stonewall attitude at the NRHA and a mortgage of $209,000, we reluctantly made a cut-your-losses offer of $225,000, the same amount we paid for it 11 years ago. That counter offer was refused. We then were told, ``See you in court.''
April 1996, (my) new appraiser appraised the property at $270,000. NRHA made a pre-trial agreement offer of $225,000 - the same amount I had offered to sell it to them for two years ago. I rejected it.
They then offered $235,000. I rejected it.
They then offered $237,500. I accepted it because my lawyer told me that by the time we went to court, even if we won full value of $270,000, it would be cheaper.
I was very reluctant to accept this because I really wanted my day in court and I never got it. And I regret it to this day. Financially, I was probably better off but stress-wise, it didn't help much.
On May, 15 1996, NRHA took Cottage Place property and it's now theirs. As I said, they are in the process of bulldozing it.
So they spent two years and thousands of dollars driving me and my wife deeper in debt and they still paid a higher price than I originally offered. The problem in my mind is not the Redevelopment and Housing Authority. The problem is the Virginia Condemnation Law and I feel very strongly that before Virginia Beach buys into activating the redevelopment and housing authority, we need to wait another year or two to get those laws changed because with the law that exists today - I don't care how well-meaning the authority is - you're going to have these kinds of experiences. I wouldn't wish that on anybody.
PRO
I want to let all of you know at the outset. . . that I'm certainly not an expert or an authority nor an attorney with a particular expertise in this area as it involves many technical requirements. I hope most of you have a great deal of sympathy and empathy for Capt. (Robertson's) situation. I think it's a sad commentary on that experience there and certainly one which I hope the wisdom of our leaders will take every step to preclude happening.
Following a month's worth of study and dialogue with a variety of individuals and experts with involvement with these issues, our organization, (Virginia Beach Vision) reached the conclusion . . . that we believe the redevelopment and housing authority is in the best long-term interest of the city of Virginia Beach and all its citizens.
That conclusion was not reached without some dissenting voices and pointed questions regarding exactly the issues that Capt. Robertson addressed. There's strong sentiment and concern that the power of condemnation is an awesome power. It's one that goes to the core of the values of most American citizens and the way in which we treasure our private property rights. So there's indeed a built-in paradox involved with this issue. . .
As a newer city, Virginia Beach is fortunate in that we don't have the kinds of deterioration or blight problems that face most older cities across the country. However, as age continues to take its toll and deteriorates the housing and commercial property, the tools inherent in such an authority will allow the city to . . . help prevent conditions from ever reaching the blighted situation that would cause, for example, the removal of complete communities.
I believe it's at that juncture that we as citizens, all of us throughout the city, need to stand up and be heard at the public hearings which are part of the process and ensure that the appointed officials who are given this awesome power, if this referendum issue passes, are accountable for those decisions.
The issue of the power of these authorities goes to the core of maintaining the vitality of the community in which we live. Of course, since property taxes are the major component of the revenue which allows our city to operate and provide the services that we all need and enjoy, it's essential that the city be allowed to maintain those property values for all citizens and ensure that the tax burden is shared and continues to grow and provide for the city the wherewithal to provide the services that we all want and enjoy.
The effects of blight and deterioration drive down, not only those property values that are effected, but the adjacent values as well.
Inherent in the powers of the authority is the power of eminent domain, that which allows the taking of property and that which was the sad saga that Capt. Robertson alluded to.
The other area that's troublesome to many of us is the past history of redevelopment and housing authorities and the sad fact that in many cases across the country that the people who suffered most are minorities and those at the lower socio-economic end of the ladder; a disproportionate segment of those who were dispossessed of their property or displaced because of those actions.
However, I think changes to state and federal laws in recent years have helped fortify against that. The recipients of federal funding are now required to adhere to more stringent guidelines in that regard. And ultimately we have the City Council to hold directly accountable for all of these actions because they're the elected officials who must approve any such plan forwarded by a (redevelopment) authority. ILLUSTRATION: Photos
James M. Pendergast, executive director of Virginia Beach Vision,
a group of Virginia Beach leaders dedicated to promoting the city's
fiscal health, spoke in favor.
H.E. Robertson, a retired Navy captain, spoke against the
creation of an authority because of a bad experience he had with the
Norfolk Housing and Redevelopment Authority: by CNB