RESOURCESPlease click on the titles below to be linked to documents and articles that provide the historic, social, economic, environmental and other reasons why we and so many others are opposed to a ballpark's construction in Shockoe Bottom:
"Bottom line: No Shockoe stadium" - Richmond Times Dispatch, Aug. 19, 2012, 2013
This opinion piece, published in the Commentary section of the Sunday edition of the Richmond Times-Dispatch, was signed by Ana Edwards, Chair of the Defenders' Sacred Ground Historical Reclamation Project; King Salim Khalfani, Executive Director of the Virginia State Conference NAACP; Dr. Shawn Utsey, Chair of African American Studies at Virginia Commonwealth University; and Phil Wilayto, Editor of The Virginia Defender. For the pro-stadium position, see “The Opposing Views” section of this website.
Questions & Answers about putting a baseball stadium in Richmond's Shockoe Bottom
Easy-to-read answers to some common questions about this issue.
The Case for Reclaiming Richmond's Shockoe Bottom
The case for reclaiming and properly memorializing Richmond's former slave-trading district is explained in this 4-page brochure produced by the Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality. Based primarily on the ground-breaking research conducted by Richmond historian Elizabeth Kambourian, the brochure locates and explains the significance of many of the sites in Shockoe Bottom that are important to the Black community, as well as to the histories of Quakers, Masons, the Jewish community and others in Richmond.
The Virginia Defender - Spring 2013 (Vol. 9, No. 1)
Includes an overview of the current struggle, a reproduction of the Defender brochure on Shockoe Bottom, an editorial on "Why Shockoe Bottom matters" and a letter from a Richmond resident titled "Sacred Grounds reflections."
The Virginia Defender - Autumn 2012 (Vol. 8, No. 3)
Includes the lead story "Unacceptable! Business interests push for ballpark in Richmond's historic slave district."
Shockoe Bottom stadium: No - Richmond Times Dispatch, July 9, 2013
This op-ed piece examines the economic aspects of building a stadium in Shockoe Bottom. By former U.S. Ambassador Randolph Bell and University of Richmond Professor of Economics Dr. Jonathan Wight.
Team Players - Style Weekly, July 16, 2013
By John Gerner, a Richmond-based leisure industry consultant and chief election officer of his East End home precinct. In the past, he served as Richmond's liaison consultant for the Performing Arts Committee, representing both the mayor and City Council. This Op-Ed argues that "The only realistic way to keep professional baseball in Central Virginia is to once again join in a regional financial solution."
Denver Dreaming - Style Weekly, May 14, 2013
By Brian Glass, a commercial real estate agent who lives in Henrico County. His views do not represent the views of his employer, Collier International / Richmond. This Op-Ed argues that " Richmond should take the time to look a little deeper when borrowing from other cities. Claims made by proponents of new ballparks usually are overstated."
Letter to the Editor, Style Weekly - December 24, 2013,
by Brian Glass: "There is a long-term problem with baseball in a bowl in Shockoe Bottom that no one has yet considered, and that is what do you do with the stadium 30 years from now when it is functionally obsolete? After all, The Diamond is only 28 years old and the plan is to demolish it. The difference is that the proposed stadium will be sunken, and it will be surrounded by a hotel, 700 apartments, retail, a slave museum and a parking deck. Even if the city wants to demolish the stadium in the future it would be far more costly, with the surrounding development in place, and any subsequent development would be extremely difficult as well as expensive."
The Voter Detour, Style Weekly - December 24, 2013, by Michael Rogers
"Whether you're for or against the ballpark proposal, it's worth heeding the lessons of the past. Honest and open community engagement is critical. The nature of the thing is determined by the manner in which it was built. [emphasis added] History, by the way, has proven the highway advocates and their experts wrong. Every contemporary report has determined that urban highways result in net losses for the cities in which they're built: loss of community, tax revenue and cohesive urban fabric. If local leaders had involved communities in their planning process, the highway — if it were built at all — never would have been accepted at such a high cost and could have been designed to truly serve the people of Richmond."