Economic Development Authority

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RETREAT 2012 MEETING MINUTES November 8, 2012 Committee Member Attendance: Chair Jay Joseph, Vice Chair Anne Shuford, Lewis Arnold, Dr. Lewis Bellinger, Perry Pilgrim, Leonard Sledge, Ben Williams, Frear Hawkins Staff and other Attendees: City Manager Mary Bunting, Pete Peterson, Vanessa Valldejuli, Bruce Sturk, Mike Yaskowsky, Ellen Templeton, Susan Borland, Dan Girouard, Brenda Bailey (recorder) The meeting opened with a brief statement by City Manager Mary Bunting who summarized that the traditional role of the committee has been transactional in nature. With so much talent and intellect on the board and within staff, the City Council would like to express support for the expansion of the committee’s role beyond the traditional scope and the mission of the IDA. This was followed by an overview of the IDA purpose, mission, and statutory authority as given by Vanessa Valldejuli. There was a reminder of several cautions to remember regarding Freedom of Information Act (FOIA): Avoid emailing situations that could be perceived as public meeting conversations such as “chat” discussions where emails are bouncing back and forth quickly. Document requests should be conducted through Teresa Hudgins as the liaison between the IDA and the city attorney’s office. Reminders of Conflict of Interest Act (COIA) were also given. If there is any question, notify the city attorney’s office immediately and be aware that the city attorney’s opinion does not guarantee immunity if there is a challenge or a court case. If there is a conflict of interest, do not participate in closed meetings in any way. A statement from the city attorney’s office can be prepared to be read into the record in the event of a conflict of interest situation. One member questioned if a board member who is not able to participate in the meeting due to absence could conference call a meeting to stay apprised of goings on. The answer is affirmative and a good idea for anyone who will not be able to attend a meeting provided the member gives appropriate notice to staff to arrange a conference call. Asset availability overview/refresher: The board questioned why city holds ownership to properties purchased for future development. Mary Bunting advised that while former councils wanted to hold ownership of purchased properties, the current council is considering the option of IDA ownership for commercial properties and residential land in HRHA ownership. This would allow each committee or department easier access to available land to develop respective projects. Going forward, Council will determine ultimate disposition as IDA or HRHA and transfer ownership since HRHA now has an independent board with similar authority and capability as IDA. In the future, the only properties held in city ownership will be those that are intended for city use as is the practice of many other localities. Some concern was expressed that too much attention is being focused on the Magruder corridor and not enough on other business parks with space available through privately-owned entities because there has been no charge to the IDA to do something different than what has been done in the past. A summary of available property owned by IDA as of August 2013 shows a total of 340.43 acres in Hampton Roads Center Central, North, and South Campuses as well as Langley Research and Development and the Power Plant Parkway and CC Spaulding Drive neighborhood, and approximately 18 acres of wetlands. An overview of land sales in FY08 – FY 12 shows that less than 10 acres in city-acquired land purchases are available as unfulfilled opportunities that could lead to jobs generated. The Economic Development department is working with private sectors in those areas to stimulate development. The observation was made that the lack of ready product, especially office space, is a consideration and it was countered that the Liberty site has an improved site plan and can be ready in as quickly as one day. The Peninsula Town Center and First Potomac sites are also ready to develop and the science park study highlighted the necessity of available flexible office space and business suites. Incentive programs: Questions about the incentive programs as posed by the board members included: Is the program working? Is this the best use of the funds? If it’s working, should we expand it? If it’s not working, should we eliminate it? Should the funds be transferred elsewhere to be used more effectively? Should the IDA subsidize new projects that will focus on infrastructure as opposed to projects that might have happened without IDA funds? Suggestions as to how the funds could or should be used in the future prompted the response that the funds haven’t been considered for other uses because they are assigned to the IDA. Mary Bunting asserted that the present Council encourages conversation about those questions and is open to changes to incentive programs. Remaining discussion involved topics such as: redirection of funds in Economic Gardening program, loosening of requirements for obtaining funds, changing corporate behavior by using funds to effect changes instead of funding maintenance projects that should be done by businesses anyway, utilizing funds to allow employers to train underemployed personnel wanting to rise to next certification level, seeking opportunities to collaborate marketing with other programs in Hampton Roads, targeting small businesses with fewer than 10 employees and helping them grow, providing financial assistance to revitalize established areas of Hampton instead of focusing only on new businesses. This discussion resulted in the need to reevaluate how the loan programs are implemented and managed. Strategic Topics, Issues or Questions: Challenges as identified by board members are the lack of city-acquired land to be developed into revenue generators and created jobs, the perceived lack of readily available, flexible, and necessary office space as highlighted in the science park study, the inhibition of effective City marketing efforts targeted at attracting desired businesses, the transitioning of IDA board- administered loans and resulting changes to loan programs, the revamp of the role of the IDA board as less transactional and more effective economic drivers in the community, determining methods for developing new areas of the city while maintaining older, more historically significant areas, the management of marketing efforts on behalf of economic development, the need for improvement in communication between City Council, IDA board, and Economic Department staff in order to better coordinate efforts, joint cooperation on projects that involve and will mutually benefit Hampton and other municipalities such as widening of Saunders Road or building swing space for Langley, and the updating of the name IDA to EDA resulting in a more contemporary perception. It was decided that the name change from IDA to EDA will be a formal agenda item at the next meeting. Action items: The resulting consensus for the next IDA meeting agenda items are as follows: review all loan programs for effectiveness and potential for combining funds, obtain City of Hampton strategic plan for review and alignment with board initiatives, discussion of infrastructure concerns and solutions, and expanding the IDA board role in marketing. Adjournment: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:01pm. Respectfully submitted, Michael A. Yaskowsky Secretary-Treasurer MAY/bsb