By JIM BUTLER
Tip of hat to Peaches & Herb:
“REIGNITE, it feels uncomfortable,
“REIGNITE, we don’t understand,
“There may be a perfect fit,
“But wonder if this one’s it.”
That pretty much sums up Councilman Malcolm Larvadain’s position on the REIGNITE Masonic Drive corridor rejuvenation touted by Jacques Roy’s administration.
Larvadain, seeking to wrest the mayor’s seat from Roy in November, has sent to him what is more demand than request regarding the proposed $82 million project and wants response by October 2, thirty days after sending the request and 30 days before primary voting.
If Roy has responded it has not filtered its way to sharing by City Hall sources.
There’s little doubt the District 1 councilman’s missive is campaign-oriented, yet it does seek information a council member should want, 30 days before an election or 30 after or whenever. Some is already publicly available.
Larvadain tells Roy that he supports investing in Alexandria but seeks answers about the cost of REIGNITE, return on the investment and how it will be paid for.
He wants the mayor to hire an independent financial expert, with no stake in the matter, for a cost/benefit analysis.
Acknowledging a previous study, he contends it fell short by “not telling us when the city treasury will actually recover its expenses” and lamenting absence of a cost-benefit analysis.
His questions seem along lines a private enterprise would ponder while weighing a proposed investment.
Government spending takes such things as public health and welfare into such consideration while also counting dollars.
Larvadain asks about exact costs, payment sources, long-term maintenance of improvements, realistic estimate of annual new tax revenue, timeline to break even, grant expectations, any agreements or private partnerships made, worst-case scenario impacts on ROI, how project spending impacts other higher-priority basics, detailed information including third-party verification of project jobs claims.
The financing structure as proposed when the council signed off early on calls for a $45 million city bond, to be retired by existing sales tax and debt service structure, $30 million in private, state and federal grants and $7 million from existing capital outlay allocations.
Ancillary benefits, the administration says, include drainage and street improvements.
Current cost estimates do not involve operating budgets for the various city departments nor do they note impact on the city’s overall bonding capacity.