Chico Was Not Happy Last Night

Posted by Chris Berry on September 26, 2008 in Local Politics, Roanoke Valley

I attended the public forum on the Market Building last night, and to sum it up as succinctly as possible, I would describe it as a complete waste of time. The session was promoted as an opportunity for the public to share their thoughts with city officials, but since only a handful of council members were in attendance, it was really little more than a love-fest for the food court vendors. I can’t say for certain, but from my vantage point it appeared that Mayor Bowers and Court Rosen were the only two members of council who were there for the entire meeting. My apologies to any other council members if I didn’t see you in the crowd.

Of the 150 or so in attendance, no fewer than one third were food court vendors and their employees, and they brought along a cheering section of family and friends to boost their numbers further. There were also a large number of media on hand, and several officials from the city managers office and the office of Economic Development. Bill Carder of DRI was there, along with a dozen or so downtown business and property owners. The smallest group in attendance by far were the ordinary citizens with no vested interest in the project.

Ed Hall of Hall Associates, and Bill Carder were among the few who made any attempt to present factual information on the history of the building, or the proposed renovations. The other speeches ranged from purely sympathetic appeals to incomprehensible rants. Throughout the entire evening, not a single mention was made of the cost to the taxpayers of any of the proposals, or the fact that the city is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on temporary repairs in a building that will in all likelihood be completely gutted in another year.

The dominant theme of the evening was an unchallenged assumption that the food court vendors were somehow entitled to preferential treatment beyond the term of their lease agreements. No one in the crowd seemed to have a basic understanding of the fact that a lease is a contract for a specified period of time, and nothing more. When the lease expires, as most of them are set to do within a matter of months, the relationship between tenant and landlord is terminated. There are only two tenants in the building with lease agreements that extend beyond 2009, and only one of those is in the food court. The city has made it abundantly clear for quite some time that they have no intention of renewing the current leases beyond 2009, yet none of these vendors appears to have made any sort of contingency plan.

I’ve often been accused of being heartless because I tend to examine situations based on facts without allowing sentimental issues to cloud my judgment. Individuals and private businesses have every right to make decisions based on sentiment if they so desire, but when taxpayer dollars are at stake, a higher standard must be applied.

The majority of speakers last night spoke about the fact that the food court is a unique Roanoke destination, and I agree wholeheartedly with that assessment. Whatever becomes of the market building, it is essential that the unique local flavor is preserved. There was also a great deal of talk about the fact that the livelihood of these vendors is being threatened, and here comes the part where you can call me a heartless bastard. To what extent are the taxpayers of Roanoke responsible for subsidizing the livelihoods of these 10 vendors, and what makes these people more deserving of our generosity than any other small business owner in the city?

The undeniable fact is that the building is in need of a complete overhaul that will require an investment of millions of taxpayer dollars. Should the taxpayers be expected to bear this expense purely for the benefit of the existing vendors? Will any of these vendors be able to afford the massive rent increases necessary to offset the renovation cost, or do they believe the city should pick up the tab without increasing their rents?

Standing up for the little guy has a great populist ring, but let’s look at this from the point of view of all the other little guys who will be footing the bill for this project. If the city decides to pick up the tab for the renovations without passing along the cost to the vendors, doesn’t every other small business owner in Roanoke have a legitimate claim to the same sort of subsidy? If the city uses tax dollars to create a shiny new market space, shouldn’t other entrepreneurs have an opportunity to compete for that space at true market rates?

The food court model served its purpose well for many years, but it no longer serves the needs of the rapidly changing downtown core. If you’ve ever visited Fisherman’s Wharf in San Francisco, or Pike Place Market in Seattle, then you know what kind of opportunity the building presents to further the revitalization of downtown Roanoke. We cannot afford to pass up this opportunity for the sake of making Chico happy.

If you enjoyed this post, please bookmark it to help new readers find it.

Print this Article
Return Home

8 Comments on Chico Was Not Happy Last Night

By RoanokeRnR on September 26, 2008 at 11:25 am

I’m curious…did any one vendor apologize to their customers for what they were serving us?

By Chris Berry on September 26, 2008 at 11:38 am

RnR,
That particular item was not on the agenda last night!

By Matt on September 26, 2008 at 12:59 pm

My first comment is for RnR, who seems to not have really researched the recent situation. If you pay attention to the photos, the majority of them come from one vendor, with a small scattering from two or three other vendors and the area in which the city has designated for our communal waste (boxes and the grease room). Also, having read through the reports available on roanoke.com (in pdf format) and through the actual copies given to the vendors, only one of them had anything resembling contaminated food. So, in all honesty, there was only one vendor in a position where they might need to apologize.

And, honestly, if they need to apologize, so do quite a few restaurants in the Roanoke area (my curiosity got the better of me and I read the VDH files on almost everyone….ugh). Check your facts and don’t try to blanket your opinion over every vendor.

Now, to get on topic with the blog…

I’m employed by one of the vendors and, yet, I agree that the meeting was a waste of time. I didn’t count the total number of speakers, but at least a quarter of them used the time to directly attack city officials rather than focus on the topic at hand. Another half of them were reiterating the same points. Even Carder’s points of discussion were repetitive to anyone who took the time to find and read a copy of the DRI/Coalition proposal that was recently denied approval. In all honesty, I felt a little out of place when, after the audience was asked who had read the proposal, I was one of the few who raised my hand.

My main issue with the meeting deals with the vendors. To a degree, yes, I side with them, as I’m rather partial to the paycheck I take home. However, they used this a venue to voice their displeasure with the city’s management of the building. The only exception was Laura Padgett from Nick’s Pig-n-Chicken, who did offer some ideas for the future of the building. Beyond that, it was more of poorly coordinated defense of their positions and, in some cases, jabs at the city officials. For those of them that had read the proposal, they had missed some important points in it that specifically addressed the current vendors.

The only thing potentially positive that came from the meeting is that the DRI/Coalition representatives talked with some of the vendors and started the process of setting aside some time to discuss proposals with them. Hopefully, this will get both sides on the same page, with the vendors understanding that there is some protection set up for them in the proposal (mostly related to cover costs of transition, though there was some talk last night outside of the meeting about some ‘income revenue’ compensation). No renovation project would prevent them from returning to the building, which is something else I don’t think they’ve given the proper attention. In fact, for any of the food vendor locations in the proposal, the current vendors would most likely have the best chances out of anyone to get them.

So, beyond the political rants, the tirades and the displeasure, we at least have people starting to talk to one another. It still doesn’t mean the City Council will accept any proposal DRI might bring back to the table, but, at the least, it should be one the vendors have actually read and understand.

On a side note, I wouldn’t say a third of the group was vendors and employees…there just aren’t that many of us in the building. We were closer to a quarter of the crowd, which is still a hefty number. I do wish more uninvolved citizens had attended, rather than having it be the battleground between vendors and those wishing to renovate the building. And I wish those that had attended, had focused more on the issue at hand rather than using it as a platform of verbal assault.

By Chris Berry on September 26, 2008 at 1:17 pm

Matt,
Thank you. I always appreciate carefully considered comments from people who have taken the time to inform themselves on the subject matter. I believe that having someone from the city to act as a moderator might have produced a more worthwhile debate. I agree with the Roanoke Times article on the meeting that suggested the overwhelming presence of the vendors probably discouraged some people from speaking their minds.

By RoanokeRnR on September 26, 2008 at 2:36 pm

Matt, you’re right. I haven’t researched it. I just ate there. I was a customer who was served food in that filthy environment. As far as “checking my facts”, my eyes do not deceive as every picture speaks plenty and I have a hard time believing that only “one vendor” had a problem. I guess the mouse that scurried across the inspector’s food didn’t venture any further than Chico’s. So yes, I will blanket my opinion over every vendor because they all had to know what was going on around them, and worse, allowed it to happen. Wait, here’s some research…http://www.wdbj7.com/Global/story.asp?s=9062977

By Matt on September 26, 2008 at 3:42 pm

I wasn’t intending to start an argument on another individual’s forum. I apologize if I came across as being out of line. As an employee of the Market Building, I am, understandably, a bit on the defensive, especially when I read inaccurate reports and articles.

I will, for the moment, take back the ‘check the facts’ comment, as I realize that, beyond the vendors and they’re employees, no one has read the actual inspection results. The pdf files availalbe on roanoke.com are only the revocation of the inidividual licenses and don’t cover the exact elements from each inspection. As such, I do have access to more information than the public has until VDH releases the information on their website.

I do know that my employer was written up for ‘harborage conditions’. Specifically, our front counter storage area (where we keep pens, register paper, etc.) was not designed for easy access and did have droppings underneath on the floor. The same condition existed on the floor behind our fryer and oven, as the gas lines connected to them did not allow us to pull them out and the design of the feet wouldn’t allow for the use of a broom. We did not, however, have any signs near any of our food and none of our containers had signs of chewing/gnawing.

Could we have kept it cleaner? The answer is, obviously, yes… we could’ve found a way to better clean those areas that were hard to access. Still, none of that affected our food, as you would claim it does, since, obviously, if another vendor has possible food contamination, then, by proxy, so do we, even though we don’t share cooking, working or storage rooms.

I would also like to point out that not one of those pictures came from the booth where I work.

As for ‘allowing it to happen’, vendors have tried. However, the City does not allow us to use any form of pest control; it’s their contracted agency (Terminex) who must conduct the control methods. Obviously, it hasn’t worked… and, yes, vendors with their areas of harborage are partly to blame, as are a number of other factors. However, the Terminex contract was all the city did for us… and, to be honest, I never saw them lay down any traps, chemicals, etc. to control mice or flies (a problem we had during the renovation of the second floor, as a number of broken windows were uncovered for about six weeks time). If you take a look at Burger in the Square, their most critical write-up was the use of D-Con in their storage closet to try and control the problem.

I’m not stating you’re wrong to hold an opinion, I was simply trying to point out that there were flaws in the opinion and that it should not apply to every single vendor, because they don’t all deserve the disgust you have.

I’ll ask you a simple question: If you to thoroughly clean your entire kitchen, to include behind/under the refrigerator, stove, sink(s), all of your cabinets/shelves, your pantry/storage, etc., how long would it take you? An honest answer, please. I know my kitched would probably take me at least an hour, but most likely two. And that’s about how long it took my employer to come into compliance with the Health Department…about two hours, with everything disconnected and pulled out. If that’s ‘filthy’, then, heck, nine out of every ten homes is filthy or beyond, mine included, as I’ve only moved the fridge and stove once in the three years I’ve lived in my apartment.

I’m only trying to point this out as common sense. The main reason behind the revocation of every license was due to the fact we do not have the ability to close ourselves off from the other vendors. If even one vendor has a major problem, it provides the future potential for all of us to have the same problem if something isn’t done to correct it.

Or, in respects, if Blues BBQ were to be shut down for a mouse problem, would you then deny 202 your business, as they share the same walls and building structure? I wouldn’t (not that I can readily afford to go to 202, mind you, but I needed a viable example).

You’ve read some facts, done a little research. All I’m asking is that you look a little further. After all, you’re a writer working on a novel… you don’t work on a story without the benefit of good research, do you? No, probably not. Give the individual vendors the same consideration. Find the ones who weren’t the ‘filthy’ ones and give your business to them. It’s easy to do just by looking at past VDH reports (and, perhaps, take a look at other Roanoke vendors…as there are a few I don’t think I will try at present based on their records).

So, if I somehow offended you in a way to deserve a more sarcastic and vehement response, I apologize. I went the wrong way about suggesting you give a bit more research time to the subject.

By Chris G. Muse on September 26, 2008 at 9:16 pm

Matt… R&R can take it. You weren’t rude at all.
In fact your comments on the situation are as clean and crisp as I have read (no offense Berry).

By Matt on September 27, 2008 at 3:47 pm

Thanks, (Other) Chris, though, I wouldn’t call it ‘clean’. I just noticed an infestation of typos and missing words on a quick skim through my comments…

And, of course, I happen to work at the Market Building, so, by association, nothing I type at the moment could be considered ‘clean’.

And, yes, that was a terrible insult to both humor and the english language.

Please feel free to share your thoughts. Without your comments, I'm just some guy talking to myself. Let me know if I'm right, wrong, or completely full of sh*t.