Large turnout presses council over sale and redevelopment plan for Virginia Beach National Golf Course

City staff and a long line of residents and stakeholders spent the bulk of the meeting debating a proposed sale and redevelopment of the 350±‑acre Virginia Beach National Golf Course.

Emily Archer of the city (speaker 26) presented the staff briefing: after an RFP and an evaluation process the top‑ranked respondent is Dragas Companies. Archer said the firm's term sheet would keep a public course, invest an estimated $38.1 million across purchase and private investment and add 659 housing units (about half targeted at or below 120% area‑median income), a childcare site, and upgraded golf amenities. Archer stressed the sale would be contingent on rezoning, site‑plan approvals and all local, state and federal permits; the sale would not close until those conditions and a year of due diligence are satisfied. She said certain up‑front city contributions for roads and utilities of up to $4.3 million and a city contingency cap of $3.6 million were contemplated in the term sheet.

City Attorney Mark Styles explained the legal framework for disposing of public land and said the constitution and state code require a public hearing and a public vote. "Any vote to authorize the sale of Virginia Beach National will require a super majority of 9 affirmative votes of the members of council," Styles said.

Public comment stretched for hours and was sharply divided. Opponents raised multiple concerns: fiscal assumptions, environmental risks, process transparency and potential impacts to school capacity, stormwater and traffic. Venkat Telesorpu (speaker 31) told council the staff net‑present‑value analysis was incomplete and urged an independent cost impact study, saying, "My financial analysis shows the true net present value to the taxpayers is negative $22,000,000 over 20 years." Several speakers urged delay until independent traffic, school‑capacity and stormwater studies are completed and requested verification of suspected bald eagle nests; a speaker said one suspected nest had been entered into a regional conservation database and that federal protections may apply.

Supporters — including representatives from Century Golf Partners and other golf‑industry witnesses — said the plan would restore a deteriorated course, expand sports‑tourism potential and deliver new housing and childcare capacity. Helen Dragas, president and CEO of Dragas Companies, said the proposal "represents responsible stewardship" and emphasized private capital investment to address deferred capital needs while keeping golf public. Partner Tim Liddy, a golf architect, and Century Golf representatives described experience renovating legacy courses and operating high‑quality public venues.

Many speakers alleged problems with the procurement process and the city's early, private interactions with the Dragas group; commenters asked for full disclosure of all proposals and questioned nondisclosure agreements and the city's timeline. Some residents asked whether council members who had received campaign contributions from the developer should recuse themselves; the city attorney described the nondisclosure agreement as a lawful step that contained carve‑outs for FOIA‑required records and said the RFP was later publicly advertised.

Councilmembers repeatedly said they were not ready to finalize a vote on the term sheet at the next meeting. One council member asked to see all nine RFP responses and said "there's no way in the world I'm prepared to do anything with this next Tuesday," requesting additional time to review the term sheet and alternatives. No final council vote authorizing the sale occurred at the meeting; staff said the council could consider action at a subsequent meeting but reminded the public the sale would still be contingent on rezoning and technical approvals.

The next formal procedural milestone is the public hearing (completed) and a potential council vote (the administration noted a tentative July 14 date on the term sheet timeline) if council chooses to move forward; any sale would still require rezoning, site plan approvals, technical impact studies and the supermajority vote Styles described.