Lakefront Meeting Gives Voice to "Public Intelligence" on Lakefront

The regular business portion of the October 1st City Council meeting was eclipsed by a community-based talk-in on the Bergmann draft of the Downtown/Lakefront Plan, facilitated by City Manager Matt Horn. Talk about civic engagement, the banquet room at the Ramada was filled to capacity with interested citizens there to speak and/or to listen.

It was not the typical ‘public comment’ format of Council meetings, where people approach Council, like an attorney approaching the bench, and state their case, with a belated reply from this or that Councilor, later in the meeting, after folks had gone home.

Instead, the Bergmann proposal was divided into six main components, and each component was given its own place on the agenda. Members of the public could speak about that aspect of the project, Councilors could share their views and reactions to what was said, and then everyone would move on to the next component. In the interest of time, speakers were asked not to re-state a position that had already been articulated. The idea was to solicit what Ken Camera calls “public intelligence,” signaling that from the public many intelligent ideas can be found.

Unfortunately, meeting planners did not foresee the time the process would take and discussion of the project’s “Building 12” component went on toward midnight and Council reaction was tabled for another day. Following the logic of the project, the placement of Building 12 on the agenda made sense; but, in hindsight, it’s clear Building 12 merits its own meeting.

When it came to discussing Building 12-- the condo/visitor’s center/interpretive center/parking garage/retail/commercial/catch all building on the lakefront-- not everyone followed the rules, and something of an auditory illusion was created. Those expressing opposition to Building 12 limited their comments to new ideas that hadn’t been previously expressed, while the Chamber of Commerce, the entity that would have its offices in the new building and would staff the visitor’s center component, took multiple turns at the microphone expressing the same point: Build It Now!

According to the Finger Lakes Times (in their editorial opinion piece of October 3rd), this meant that just as many people supported the building as opposed it. Not so (on the numbers), and not so simple (on the reasons)!

From the discussion, three points of view emerged. Here is our attempt to explain and assess them. First, our description of each:

Don’t Build It, or Anything, on the Lakefront: The argument here is that the lakefront is a public asset because it is public. That doing things to enhance the public access to the lake, like a low-impact marina (no repair or gasoline functions), a beach, improved seating areas and walking paths, public art and family-friendly spaces will attract tourists and residents alike and continue to draw people to Geneva who then spend their time and money in our community.

Build Something Limited, but Dynamic: The argument here is that putting a major facility, like the ‘interpretive center’ or museum on the lakefront near the Ramada would, in addition to the public additions named above, be something that could catalyze downtown by providing the kind of dynamic link that would get people moving back and forth across Rtes. 5&20. Within this view, there are some people who think condominiums might be some part of this, and others who favor a standalone facility. But the reason offered in favor of condos. is usually just to offset the operating costs of the public facility and it’s not clear that such a subsidy would be necessary, or if it is necessary, that it would have to come from property taxes, so condos. shouldn’t be seen as the main point of agreement amongst people who fall into this category.

Start Building #12 Now, Before It’s Too Late: The argument here is that we have $5 million in State money that needs to be used now. We also have a visitor’s center that needs to be relocated (because it seems there is unanimous consent in the community that the Chamber no longer belongs in its current city-owned location). Apparently there is some thought that the visitor’s center must be on the lakefront, along with the Chamber of Commerce offices. Because none of these uses are money-makers, we need some commercial and residential space to carry the costs. This option might best be called “Status-Quo-Plus.” It’s status quo because Geneva would still have a building on the lakefront housing the Chamber of Commerce, but it’s ‘plus’ because it that building would be larger and more obtrusive, but it’s status quo because any tax revenue gains would go back into supporting the increased cost of operations,

From this discussion, it was easy to see why Councilor Lou Cosentino was met with such contempt when he tried to start the discussion with a show of hands for people who were “pro-development” vs. people who were “anti-development.” Despite the Chamber of Commerce’s attempts (via its pre-meeting newsletter and some statements from its leadership) to characterize the discussion in this way, it’s just not that simple.

Lucky for Geneva, the attendance at the meeting was high, and the audience seemed willing to engage in a thoughtful consideration of the complexities of the various plan components. Now the City waits to see how the Council adjusts the plan to reflect those realities. We’ll have more to say on the matter, but first, we encourage your feedback on whether our reconstruction of the arguments adequately and accurately captures what you are hearing out there.

Marketing Geneva: We Have What Others Want

Sometimes it’s easy to fall into a ‘woe is Geneva’ frame of mind. Yes, our taxes are high but so is our quality of life, depending on what you’re looking for. Different populations want different things from their communities. We addressed an earlier post “ReThinking City Living” to the needs of young families and did a post on the benefits of downtown living for those seeking a more urban cultural experience [link to ‘downtown’ post]. There’s another group that gets a lot of media attention nationally, but not much attention locally and that’s the ‘baby boomers.’ Each year, Money Magazine issues a report on the “Best Places to Retire.”

The most recent list is prefaced with the following:
“Many baby boomers dream of retiring somewhere by the water. These half-dozen places are on a lake, a river or an ocean - yet won't sink your retirement budget.”

In addition to affordable housing stock, these retirement recommendations also focus on communities with “top-notch health care, loads of culture, lots of green space.” Although Rochester, NY and several downstate communities made the list in 2006, we didn’t find any cities in New York State on the list for 2008. It is worth noting that this is Money Magazine, so when they’re picking a handful of communities to feature they’re likely to go for places with lower taxes, but even when that’s factored into things, we believe that Geneva meets all of the magazine’s criteria as one of the best, and here’s why:

1. You can by more house for less money in Geneva than in most of the places featured.
2. Geneva has its own hospital, with a cardiac practice affiliated with Rochester General Hospital, and is within an easy drive to several highly ranked facilities for various specialties.
3. There are an abundance of golf courses, public tennis courts, and other recreational opportunities.
4. The lakefront is open, accessible and quite active.
5. The Smith Opera House and the local groups affiliated with the performing arts and the Colleges bring a variety of cultural offerings into the community; additional events from festivals to Broadway shows are available year round within a short driving distance.
6. Visiting grandchildren would have lots of things to see and do.
7. The community is ethnically and racially diverse, including the influx of people affiliated with the Colleges, Hospital, and Experiment Station.
8. Downtown features retail, restaurants, and eclectic offerings such as a Natural Foods store, clothing, shoes, and jewelry.
9. The climate is temperate, yet allowing the full experience of all four seasons.
10. Natural beauty is all around, not just at the lakefront but the entire region.
11. Geneva sits at the natural center of a growing wine region providing social, educational, and other opportunities.

So, by most of Money magazine’s key measurements, Geneva is the ideal place for retirees to relocate. But there are a few things that Money is looking for that Geneva lacks. First and foremost is a stable economic environment as it relates to taxes. Based on the city manager’s initial budget proposal, we might be working towards improving that situation, but the tax rate is still a deterrent for many prospective residents. Second, we do not have a sufficient selection of downtown housing (not to be confused with the proposed lakefront ‘suburb’ of downtown). Baby boomers, the research shows, are drawn to housing in a “pedestrian-friendly town center.” They are also drawn to communities that have made a commitment to green and sustainable development practices, because that demostrates a commitment to health and longevity. For instance, Fort Collins, Colorado and the surrounding area gets a nod for its commitment to clean air. These are conditions and initiatives that Geneva can do immediately and successfully. Our downtown buildings and infrastructure are the raw materials we can cultivate.

Perhaps the real challenge Geneva faces in attracting the attention and investment of baby boomers is a matter of self-perception. We need to break of out of the “take whatever we can get” attitude and move towards a “deliver what we deserve” point of view.

Nozzolio (Rightly) Defers to Community-Based Planning Efforts in the City of Geneva

One unintended positive outcome of the City of Geneva’s downtown/lakefront planning process underway this year is that State Senator Mike Nozzolio is now leaving it up to local planners and the City Council to designate the location of a proposed visitors’ center. That’s as it should be.

Earlier this year, the Senator had secured from the New York legislature a series of earmarks for a number of what we felt were worthwhile projects for our community, announced as the “21st Century Geneva Initiative.” Back then, the Senator had announced the center would be on the lakefront, even though we were in the midst of a planning process involving two outside consultants, and that had not been decided. Nozzolio had set up a shadow committee and convened meetings to discuss the lakefront building's operations, even though City Council has never taken up the issue for discussion.

One consultant, Fairweather, placed the center on the lakefront into his feasibility report (concluding that the standalone facility was not feasible); and the other consulting firm, Bergmann, followed suit and incorporated it into their major planning document currently undergoing public scrutiny.

Then, as noted in a previous post, the Nozzolio website re-positioned the visitors center, changing its location from the lakefront to downtown. When or why that happened, we're not sure, but it is significant because the Fairweather and Bergmann documents—the central planning documents of the City— had given its location on the lakefront, and much of the plan for lakefront development, specifically "Building #12,” followed from that.

At last night’s City Council meeting, the Mayor announced that a phone conversation between him and Senator Nozzolio's staff had yielded yet another take on the plan-- the location for the visitors center was now unspecified. The center would be located, the public was told, where Council decided-- if, indeed, it were to become part of the plan. And, as reported by the local paper, Nozzolio's staff denied assertions by Chamber of Commerce leadership that the money would evaporate in short order.

To be absolutely clear about this issue, here’s what Nozzolio's website says, today, October 2, 2008:

"New Finger Lakes Visitor Center in Geneva

A new Finger Lakes Visitor Center located in Geneva will be a signature building for the Finger Lakes region that will serve as a destination for tourists and the Finger Lakes region. The Center will be interactive for visitors and will place an emphasis on the natural beauty of our area as well as the wineries in the region. The Geneva Chamber of Commerce will relocate to the new facility and will continue their work to promote tourism in the region. The Visitor Center will be state-of-the-art and will serve as a destination for all those seeking information on the many attractions of the Finger Lakes region.

The Finger Lakes Visitor Center will be modeled after the very successful New York Wine and Culinary Center in Canandaigua, which highlights the food and wines produced in New York State."

This speaks well for civic engagement and represents a vote of conficdence in community-based planning, now well under way in the City. Thank you, Senator Nozzolio, for listening to the voices of your constituents and responding to their needs.