Conference center? Why? won't this cannibalize the conference business that JMU does? when i worked in the catering unit, the ballrooms and other meeting spaces all over campus were rented to host all manner of groups.

(10-09-2014 03:14 AM)MRD_DUKE Wrote:  Conference center? Why? won't this cannibalize the conference business that JMU does? when i worked in the catering unit, the ballrooms and other meeting spaces all over campus were rented to host all manner of groups.

According to an article a few months ago, some groups have to reserve Festival a year in advance now because its so booked up. This would supposedly ease Festival being jammed up and allow more groups to host events.

I do agree that this should be a privately financed deal. Municipal funds shouldn't be used on these kinds of projects, and there are plenty of examples as to why.

(10-08-2014 03:12 PM)JMU_Degenerate Wrote:  Furthermore, The city's statements about this project are always along the lines of "This is new tax revenue that we are using to pay back the $10m". This is not true. No hotel opens and automatically creates new demand. This hotel will only be successful by stealing market share from existing hotels in the marketplace and doing so at a rapid pace. This means that the tax revenue will not be new $$ but will just be displaced $$ which means that existing city tax $$ will be directly used to pay back the $10m. All of this while meeting and event business globally is declining at record paces as more and more companies and government agencies are mandating the use of virtual meetings.

Isn't the reference to a new tax revenue related to the fact that the land is owned by JMU and not currently taxed. With the lease to a developer, the city can now tax the land? If that is the case, it is new tax revenue. Stealing market share seems irrelevant to the quoted comment, though it is an area of concern (although the conference center could bring in groups and guests that would not otherwise come to the city).

(10-09-2014 07:29 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  I do agree that this should be a privately financed deal. Municipal funds shouldn't be used on these kinds of projects, and there are plenty of examples as to why.

You've got to be kidding, right? I suppose you can stake out the Private vs. Publicly incentivized argument as some sort of theoretical ideal for pure Capitalism, but in truth governments utilize tax incentives and other forms of financial deals to promote economic goals they feel are important all the time.

We can debate the merits of each deal, but "these kinds of projects" (your words) also have a track record of success demonstrating more positive outcomes than bad. Take for example the tax incentives helping underwrite the revitalization of downtown Harrisonburg....a program associated with H'Burg's establishing the first historic "Arts District" in Virginia that provides tax breaks for business that invest in rehabbing old buildings. All the new downtown restaurants and apartment options are a direct result of "these kinds of projects." You can't claim you like the energy and options of the emerging downtown scene in H'Burg without crediting the involvement of government incentivizing private investment through tax breaks.

While I fully grasp the argument for conservative management of public funds, the flaw in Degenerate's argument against this project is that his view sees the business world as a zero-sum game, and can't imagine the value and potential economic and cultural growth of the stimulus package outweighing the costs which he thinks will take away from some other sector.

I disagree with his view, which I would define as an overly pessimistic and negative outlook. It is an outlook that has worked to the detriment of Harrisonburg's economic and cultural health, and often benefitted other nearby communities like Staunton whose governments have invested in their communities, by in some instances actually stealing projects from H'Burg (like the Blackfriars Theater).

Thank goodness H'Burg is finally waking up, and it's municipal leaders are throwing off that sleepy cloak of non-involvement that darn near killed off historic downtown. Townie attitudes (such as the one which wanted Rose to reduce enrollment at JMU to pre-1960s numbers) are seriously out of touch with the needs of the Harrisonburg of today. I'll finish my rant by simply saying I am a tax paying resident of Harrisonburg, and I strongly support the Hotel Madison and Conference Center project, and hope like heck it gets built ASAP.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(10-09-2014 08:27 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 07:29 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  I do agree that this should be a privately financed deal. Municipal funds shouldn't be used on these kinds of projects, and there are plenty of examples as to why.

You've got to be kidding, right? I suppose you can stake out the Private vs. Publicly incentivized argument as some sort of theoretical ideal for pure Capitalism, but in truth governments utilize tax incentives and other forms of financial deals to promote economic goals they feel are important all the time.

We can debate the merits of each deal, but "these kinds of projects" (your words) also have a track record of success demonstrating more positive outcomes than bad. Take for example the tax incentives helping underwrite the revitalization of downtown Harrisonburg....a program associated with H'Burg's establishing the first historic "Arts District" in Virginia that provides tax breaks for business that invest in rehabbing old buildings. All the new downtown restaurants and apartment options are a direct result of "these kinds of projects." You can't claim you like the energy and options of the emerging downtown scene in H'Burg without crediting the involvement of government incentivizing private investment through tax breaks.

While I fully grasp the argument for conservative management of public funds, the flaw in Degenerate's argument against this project is that his view sees the business world as a zero-sum game, and can't imagine the value and potential economic and cultural growth of the stimulus package outweighing the costs which he thinks will take away from some other sector.

I disagree with his view, which I would define as an overly pessimistic and negative outlook. It is an outlook that has worked to the detriment of Harrisonburg's economic and cultural health, and often benefitted other nearby communities like Staunton whose governments have invested in their communities, by in some instances actually stealing projects from H'Burg (like the Blackfriars Theater).

Thank goodness H'Burg is finally waking up, and it's municipal leaders are throwing off that sleepy cloak of non-involvement that darn near killed off historic downtown. Townie attitudes (such as the one which wanted Rose to reduce enrollment at JMU to pre-1960s numbers) are seriously out of touch with the needs of the Harrisonburg of today. I'll finish my rant by simply saying I am a tax paying resident of Harrisonburg, and I strongly support the Hotel Madison and Conference Center project, and hope like heck it gets built ASAP.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jeez, you sure do take liberties with words.

"These kinds of deals" was talking about municipal financed hotels and conference centers. I am NOT talking about revitalization projects. Publicly financed hotels are NOT a revitalization project. If H-Burg finds a developer to finance the deal, then by all means, accommodate them with tax credits and roll out the red carpet.

I am involved in private equity real estate financing. The NUMBER 1 red flag is when no private dollars want to get in. The market is littered with failed hotel projects that publicly financed. Private $$$ is almost always smarter than public $$$.

http://watchdog.org/104297/as-portland-c...e-failing/

If it is a great idea, smart money will come in. That hasn't happened yet.

"The common thread, though, is that the projects wouldn't have taken place without government intervention. But why intervene on such a massive scale to build a facility that private developers view as a bad investment? That, says Anne Raymond, was the question her side raised in Dallas. "If this was a good real estate transaction, the private sector would do it," she says. "Dallas is filled with optimistic real estate investors, but no one would step up." In her view, that's because they knew more about the market than the local government did."

http://www.governing.com/topics/economic...Be-in.html

I think this hotel would be great for JMU, alums, and the hospitality majors at JMU. However, I don't think H-Burg residents should foot it.

Here's hoping it gets built, its an impressive looking building:





Looks like it will front South Main St. (with the old RMH Cancer Center [now Madison Hall] behind it).

more info here

Why do we even need this? Jeff Bourne is going to make sure we are always small time small town. I heard he's moving us to D-2. WHY IS NO ONE ELSE YELLING ABOUT THIS?

(10-09-2014 08:56 AM)DarkHollow Wrote:  Here's hoping it gets built, its an impressive looking building:





Looks like it will front South Main St. (with the old RMH Cancer Center [now Madison Hall] behind it).

more info here

There's a definite possibility that other hotels will suffer and that it might not be in Harrisonburg's best interest - initially. But my allegiance is to JMU, and I think this hotel will be a great addition to JMU for several reasons. First, the renderings are beautiful and it should blend right into campus. Second, it will provide a fantastic amenity to JMU. Third, the architect's website says it will connect to a "future hospitality school" at JMU - this will benefit that school and students. And as for Harrisonburg, even if other hotels close, they'll likely be the ones either located farther away from the school, or be more low-end. That's often not a bad thing to cities - the nice new hotel stays and the unattractive limited service one goes away. That's what happens in thriving towns. And finally, having such a nice hotel right on edge of campus and within walking distance to downtown will likely be a boon to those downtown restaurants, bars, and shops.

stayed at auburns hotel when i was down there for a wedding. It was a great experience and I believe a lot of students were working there as a part of their hospitality and tourism management majors.

(10-09-2014 08:59 AM)PurpIeHazed Wrote:  Why do we even need this? Jeff Bourne is going to make sure we are always small time small town. I heard he's moving us to D-2. WHY IS NO ONE ELSE YELLING ABOUT THIS?

Do you have a problem with the JMU Administration? I can't tell from your hundreds of posts saying the same thing in every thread on this board.

PurpIeHazed is joining us to play our newest member role "That guy that hates Jeff Bourne"

(10-09-2014 09:20 AM)NovaDukes Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 08:59 AM)PurpIeHazed Wrote:  Why do we even need this? Jeff Bourne is going to make sure we are always small time small town. I heard he's moving us to D-2. WHY IS NO ONE ELSE YELLING ABOUT THIS?

Do you have a problem with the JMU Administration? I can't tell from your hundreds of posts saying the same thing in every thread on this board.

In case you didn't realize, PupIehazed is trying to impersonate Purplehazed. They are not the same poster.

(10-09-2014 09:23 AM)JMU Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 09:20 AM)NovaDukes Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 08:59 AM)PurpIeHazed Wrote:  Why do we even need this? Jeff Bourne is going to make sure we are always small time small town. I heard he's moving us to D-2. WHY IS NO ONE ELSE YELLING ABOUT THIS?

Do you have a problem with the JMU Administration? I can't tell from your hundreds of posts saying the same thing in every thread on this board.

In case you didn't realize, PupIehazed is trying to impersonate Purplehazed. They are not the same poster.

I don't know what you're talking about, I think Jeff Bourne changed my username, I KNOW IT WAS HIM! JEFFFFFREEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Currently, Harrisonburg has a very reasonable real estate tax rate of $0.63/$100 of value. Your friends over the mountain in Charlottesville are paying $0.95/$100.

It is very reasonable to assume that your rates will be increasing as Harrisonburg continues to grow and projects like this will eventually trickle down to your own pockets with pressure on the city to increase your rate. It will happen, count on it. You are very fortunate to currently have such a modest rate.

Be thankful you aren't funding a NASCAR Hall of Fame or a Coliseum for the Hornets (formerly Bobcats). Both were promoted to be self funding, they are not even close.

I realize this is an apples to oranges comparison, but almost everything that has a government stamp on it in some form or fashion, does not play out as is originally promoted to the tax payer.

I will say that I am witnessing one exception, the Charlotte Douglas airport has been a huge success towards our bottom line and now we are in the fight of our life to keep it under our city's control as the state is maneuvering and pressuring for it to be run by a state appointed commission.

(10-09-2014 08:59 AM)PurpIeHazed Wrote:  Why do we even need this? Jeff Bourne is going to make sure we are always small time small town. I heard he's moving us to D-2. WHY IS NO ONE ELSE YELLING ABOUT THIS?

This is great!!!

(10-09-2014 11:58 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 08:59 AM)PurpIeHazed Wrote:  Why do we even need this? Jeff Bourne is going to make sure we are always small time small town. I heard he's moving us to D-2. WHY IS NO ONE ELSE YELLING ABOUT THIS?

This is great!!!

I'm not sure that we don't need Hburg to step in on this. You've been taken to a whole new level.

(10-09-2014 08:46 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 08:27 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(10-09-2014 07:29 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  I do agree that this should be a privately financed deal. Municipal funds shouldn't be used on these kinds of projects, and there are plenty of examples as to why.

You've got to be kidding, right? I suppose you can stake out the Private vs. Publicly incentivized argument as some sort of theoretical ideal for pure Capitalism, but in truth governments utilize tax incentives and other forms of financial deals to promote economic goals they feel are important all the time.

We can debate the merits of each deal, but "these kinds of projects" (your words) also have a track record of success demonstrating more positive outcomes than bad. Take for example the tax incentives helping underwrite the revitalization of downtown Harrisonburg....a program associated with H'Burg's establishing the first historic "Arts District" in Virginia that provides tax breaks for business that invest in rehabbing old buildings. All the new downtown restaurants and apartment options are a direct result of "these kinds of projects." You can't claim you like the energy and options of the emerging downtown scene in H'Burg without crediting the involvement of government incentivizing private investment through tax breaks.

While I fully grasp the argument for conservative management of public funds, the flaw in Degenerate's argument against this project is that his view sees the business world as a zero-sum game, and can't imagine the value and potential economic and cultural growth of the stimulus package outweighing the costs which he thinks will take away from some other sector.

I disagree with his view, which I would define as an overly pessimistic and negative outlook. It is an outlook that has worked to the detriment of Harrisonburg's economic and cultural health, and often benefitted other nearby communities like Staunton whose governments have invested in their communities, by in some instances actually stealing projects from H'Burg (like the Blackfriars Theater).

Thank goodness H'Burg is finally waking up, and it's municipal leaders are throwing off that sleepy cloak of non-involvement that darn near killed off historic downtown. Townie attitudes (such as the one which wanted Rose to reduce enrollment at JMU to pre-1960s numbers) are seriously out of touch with the needs of the Harrisonburg of today. I'll finish my rant by simply saying I am a tax paying resident of Harrisonburg, and I strongly support the Hotel Madison and Conference Center project, and hope like heck it gets built ASAP.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jeez, you sure do take liberties with words.

"These kinds of deals" was talking about municipal financed hotels and conference centers. I am NOT talking about revitalization projects. Publicly financed hotels are NOT a revitalization project. If H-Burg finds a developer to finance the deal, then by all means, accommodate them with tax credits and roll out the red carpet.

I am involved in private equity real estate financing. The NUMBER 1 red flag is when no private dollars want to get in. The market is littered with failed hotel projects that publicly financed. Private $$$ is almost always smarter than public $$$.

http://watchdog.org/104297/as-portland-c...e-failing/

If it is a great idea, smart money will come in. That hasn't happened yet.

"The common thread, though, is that the projects wouldn't have taken place without government intervention. But why intervene on such a massive scale to build a facility that private developers view as a bad investment? That, says Anne Raymond, was the question her side raised in Dallas. "If this was a good real estate transaction, the private sector would do it," she says. "Dallas is filled with optimistic real estate investors, but no one would step up." In her view, that's because they knew more about the market than the local government did."

http://www.governing.com/topics/economic...Be-in.html

I think this hotel would be great for JMU, alums, and the hospitality majors at JMU. However, I don't think H-Burg residents should foot it.

Strictly speaking, you are correct in thinking this is not a "revitalization project"...but in a larger sense it is very much related to revitalization. The Hotel and Conference center will spur continued growth and investment in the historic area of Harrisonburg, which is in the best interest (economic and cultural) for the residents of H'Burg.

(10-09-2014 09:19 AM)Centdukesfan Wrote:  stayed at auburns hotel when i was down there for a wedding. It was a great experience and I believe a lot of students were working there as a part of their hospitality and tourism management majors.

Exactly. The same is intended for JMU.

Texas also has one of these Hotel/Conference setups, located on 19th street right across from the State Capital project. While the UT center is far bigger than the JMU proposal, ours will serve much the same purpose albeit at a smaller scale.

(10-09-2014 09:52 AM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  Currently, Harrisonburg has a very reasonable real estate tax rate of $0.63/$100 of value. Your friends over the mountain in Charlottesville are paying $0.95/$100.

It is very reasonable to assume that your rates will be increasing as Harrisonburg continues to grow and projects like this will eventually trickle down to your own pockets with pressure on the city to increase your rate. It will happen, count on it. You are very fortunate to currently have such a modest rate.

Be thankful you aren't funding a NASCAR Hall of Fame or a Coliseum for the Hornets (formerly Bobcats). Both were promoted to be self funding, they are not even close.

I realize this is an apples to oranges comparison, but almost everything that has a government stamp on it in some form or fashion, does not play out as is originally promoted to the tax payer.

I will say that I am witnessing one exception, the Charlotte Douglas airport has been a huge success towards our bottom line and now we are in the fight of our life to keep it under our city's control as the state is maneuvering and pressuring for it to be run by a state appointed commission.

Their real estate rate sounds reasonable. Like you said, I'm sure it will go up in the future.
I do notice whenever I get a meal in Harrisonburg the sales tax is about 12%

What you mention about Charlotte reminds me of Philly. Over a period of 15 years the crooks at the Delaware River Port Authority, a political patronage dumping ground, diverted about 500 million of toll $$ for the public financing of non transportation related so called "community redevelopment projects". Just off the top of my head the Linc (Eagles), Citizens Banks Park (the Phillies), PPL Park (MLS stadium in Chester), the Kimmel Center for the Performing Arts, museums, a cancer center, the Army/Navy FB game, etc. At the same time were borrowing hundreds of millions to maintain the 4 bridges and rail line. Meanwhile since 2003 bridge tolls over the Delaware have gone from $2.70 with EZPass ($2.00 with commuter discount) to $3 to $4 to $5, and will probably have to go up more because the DRPA is about 1.6 million in debt. OK, end of rant.

Edit: 500, not 5000