Yes, it looks like it. Here are some excerpts from a recent RT editorial.
Jeb, er, I mean, JOHN Bush: Churches in general are not good neighbors...
Unnamed RT editor, potential anti-religious zealot and apparent town spokesman: This is not a dispute between faith and history. It is a request from a property owner. The Baptists in this case are a business like any other. The town should afford them no special treatment. Besides, if the Baptists stage an exodus, so what?
Sensible Mayor Ron Rordam: The church is an anchor for that neighborhood and an anchor for that corner.
Victimized Church Pastor Tommy McDearis: Everything that we've needed to do to stay down here has been zoned out of our reach.
Contrast this with a story that ran the same day about a church site in Radford: The university plans to pursue recognition through the Virginia Department of Historical Resources for the on-campus site of one the area's oldest black congregations, known in 1871 as Lovely Mount and today called First Baptist Church.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
From the horse's mouth..or whatever
Well, here is proof of the real issue behind the F&M big box fiasco. According to my source, this quote came from an email discussion between some BURG folks. I can't verify the accuracy of that, but it sounds like what I have heard this person say in the past. Grammar and spelling mistakes are his, not mine:
"I can't really judge if BURG would have been so successful had the
misrepresentation of the project had not taken place during the re-zoning
process or if the location had been chosen a little more carefully.
I can say that I would not necessarily have felt or acted any differently
because I have strong feelings about the way Wal-mart treats it's employees
- here in the US and especially overseas, thier union busting policies,
abuse of social service systems to increase their profit margins, their
impact on local businesses that people I know own and work at, the
infrastructural demands on the town created by the traffic it take to keep a
big-box open and on our over worked police department, the potential for the
damage to the wetlands that surround that area by outdoor storage / runoff
of fertilizer and other Ag chemicals, and the other deleterious affects
that their business model has rained down on other towns and communities
across the country and the world .... Anyway, I know that they are not the
kind of neighbors, who company I enjoy."
"I can't really judge if BURG would have been so successful had the
misrepresentation of the project had not taken place during the re-zoning
process or if the location had been chosen a little more carefully.
I can say that I would not necessarily have felt or acted any differently
because I have strong feelings about the way Wal-mart treats it's employees
- here in the US and especially overseas, thier union busting policies,
abuse of social service systems to increase their profit margins, their
impact on local businesses that people I know own and work at, the
infrastructural demands on the town created by the traffic it take to keep a
big-box open and on our over worked police department, the potential for the
damage to the wetlands that surround that area by outdoor storage / runoff
of fertilizer and other Ag chemicals, and the other deleterious affects
that their business model has rained down on other towns and communities
across the country and the world .... Anyway, I know that they are not the
kind of neighbors, who company I enjoy."
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Roanoke Times Looks Back on Economic Development
First, for all my crazy republican friends (not the regular ones, just the crazy ones), I post this cartoon that explains the health care plan that is creeping through Congress at the pace of a slug in the garden. I have to admit that I was baffled by all the rhetoric about the various plans until I saw this cartoon. Now it's all perfectly clear.
More importantly, the RT is just chock full of interesting tidbits today. A tingle ran up my leg when I was reading all the stories and editorials that were held back until after the election. I don't even know where to start.
First, the Old BMS property. Since this is an editorial, I can't call it slanted journalism. So I will just call it normal editorializing from the RT board. There is too much to tackle here for a blog entry, so I'll just point out a couple of things. First, the editor seems to imply that somehow the School Board is responsible for delaying disposition of the property. In fact, the School Board was only using the property as a gun to the head of the Board of Supervisors to stick to their promise about securing land in Prices Fork for the new school. And it worked. The SB said that as soon as the land was secured, they would surplus the OBMS, and they are in the process of doing that. Even better, they are taking themselves out of the picture altogether by rewording the original resolution. Second, the RT says it agrees with the town that the property should not be heavily developed, but they don't list anybody in the town who actually said this. Typical.
Next, the big article about F&M which, in summary, says that it will fail without the two anchors originally envisioned; a movie theatre (to compete with the Lyric) and a large anchor store. Wait, isn't that what anybody with any economic sense has been saying for the past 3 years? Isn't that what I have been writing about for the same amount of time? Isn't that supposedly what the whole recent election was about? Some new information, at least new to me, was that some of the tenants have sued the developers. Now, this is rich. The developers made some promises with a cloud of doom hanging over them from the 1450 fiasco; the tenants rented space knowing the situation was not resolved; the town blocks one of the anchors; the development is in trouble; now the developers will request a CUP for the anchor; the town will turn it down; the tenants will lose their suits because the developer is blocked by the town.
Wow, didn't see that coming. HA HA HA. Anybody could see that coming.
Stosser says she is willing to consider developing a mixed commercial-residential property where the big box was going to go, but even the RT says that it won't pull in enough foot traffic to keep the specialty shops in business.
Wait, where have I heard this before. Oh, yeah. It was ME.
It was also the developers as they modified their plans toward reality, for which they were eventually punished.
Well, I'm not going to say I told you so. But it is satisfying to know that a publication as prestigious as the RT has validated my blog (again) by "reporting" what I have been preaching for 3 years.
That and three bucks will buy me a great cup of coffee at Barnes and Noble in.....CHRISTIANSBURG.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
BMS starts to percolate again
In an article in the Roanoke Times today, the Montgomery County School Board is reported to be backing out of the decision-making process for the eventual disposition of the property.
The original wording of the resolution before the Board included a reference to their remaining involved in how the property would eventually be used. Now they are striking that language from the resolution and distancing themselves from the process. In fact, Penny Franklin, made the following statement:
"I just want to say, 'It's yours.' We are done with it as a school district. I don't know what the benefit for us would be other than, quite frankly, going round and round with the Blacksburg Town Council."
In spite of the questionable grammatical construction here (implying there would be benefit from 'going round and round with the Blacksburg Town Council', which I must admit sounds fun to me), the School Board is rightfully backing out of the process now that they will have surplussed the property.
So, after this becomes effective in January, the fireworks will really start. The new BTC will have to work with the BOS to disposition the property.
As a county taxpayer, I expect the BOS to obtain a pretty reasonable compensation for it. Of course, in spite of the rhetoric, some of the council have indicated they think the property should just be given to the town for free, since in their eyes the town residents have already paid for it.
Not so fast there, buckaroo. All county residents paid for it, just like we all pay for all the county school facilities. We all have a stake. So, it's not just about Blacksburg, even though you think the world revolves around you.
And this is where the BOS becomes political again.
Sometime in the past, I suppose in order to prevent infighting on the BOS, they adopted an unwritten rule that all supervisors would vote with the supervisor in whose district a project resided. It will be interesting to see if that rule is applied this time. I see real opportunity for a dogfight here, since there will be a couple of sups from Bburg who will be heavily lobbied by the TaliBURG faction to help make the land into a park, which most of the sups from other areas in the county will think that is absurd.
I am all for a fight. I'd like to see some real discussion on the BOS for a change. Duke it out, guys and gals! Stand up for something!
But more likely it will all be decided in the back room, or closed session, and the only thing we citizens will get to see is the theater version that is performed in the public meeting.
Sigh.
The original wording of the resolution before the Board included a reference to their remaining involved in how the property would eventually be used. Now they are striking that language from the resolution and distancing themselves from the process. In fact, Penny Franklin, made the following statement:
"I just want to say, 'It's yours.' We are done with it as a school district. I don't know what the benefit for us would be other than, quite frankly, going round and round with the Blacksburg Town Council."
In spite of the questionable grammatical construction here (implying there would be benefit from 'going round and round with the Blacksburg Town Council', which I must admit sounds fun to me), the School Board is rightfully backing out of the process now that they will have surplussed the property.
So, after this becomes effective in January, the fireworks will really start. The new BTC will have to work with the BOS to disposition the property.
As a county taxpayer, I expect the BOS to obtain a pretty reasonable compensation for it. Of course, in spite of the rhetoric, some of the council have indicated they think the property should just be given to the town for free, since in their eyes the town residents have already paid for it.
Not so fast there, buckaroo. All county residents paid for it, just like we all pay for all the county school facilities. We all have a stake. So, it's not just about Blacksburg, even though you think the world revolves around you.
And this is where the BOS becomes political again.
Sometime in the past, I suppose in order to prevent infighting on the BOS, they adopted an unwritten rule that all supervisors would vote with the supervisor in whose district a project resided. It will be interesting to see if that rule is applied this time. I see real opportunity for a dogfight here, since there will be a couple of sups from Bburg who will be heavily lobbied by the TaliBURG faction to help make the land into a park, which most of the sups from other areas in the county will think that is absurd.
I am all for a fight. I'd like to see some real discussion on the BOS for a change. Duke it out, guys and gals! Stand up for something!
But more likely it will all be decided in the back room, or closed session, and the only thing we citizens will get to see is the theater version that is performed in the public meeting.
Sigh.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Proffers and developers and governments, Oh! My!
A while back I was appointed to a special working group by the BOS to study the possibility of utilizing the cash proffer option for rezoning.
The state has allowed any locality with a 10% (now 5%) decennial (not annual, as I originally mistakenly posted) growth rate to decide if they wanted to require developers to make cash proffers to partially offset the impact of new residential development on the cost of local infrastructure, including school systems. Montgomery County qualified, and the BOS wanted to study the possibilities.
The working group consisted of representatives of both towns, the planning commissions, and various other groups that included some representation by real estate folks and developers.
The way it would work is this. Upon request for a rezoning action, a developer would voluntarily offer cash on each lot developed. The county could not require a particular amount of money, but it could make it known to the developer that a certain number would be looked on favorably. For example, a developer might offer $10,000 per lot, or maybe $20,000 per lot.
The number would be calculated to actually offset a particular infrastructure element, such as water, sewer or schools. It would have to be used for a capital project, not to offset operating costs.
The cash would be collected when the building permit for the lot was issued.
While this system is used routinely in NoVA, where growth rates of 100% are not uncommon, it did not seem to fit in this area. The cost of the capital projects would have been far above what a developer could have practically provided - i.e., tacking on $50k to the price of a house on a lot just wouldn't fly around here. In addition, collection in piecemeal fashion did not really do much for the local budget, because with only a 10% growth, it would be many years before the cash was actually practically collected. In addition, this would only have been allowed in new developments where rezoning was requested, not in already overcrowded areas.
However, the real reason it was not considered is that the BOS had already decided that all the localities had to buy in, or they would not consider it.
Imagine if you will, why an incorporated area of high growth in the county would even consider such a system. The BOS would collect the proffer, and likely use the money to fund a project they were already going to fund with a tax increase. So in effect, they would just use a developer to dribble money into the building of, say, Prices Fork Elementary, which they had to build any way, rather than building another new school to handle the new demand created by the development. So in effect, it would be like a budget cut to that locality.
Of course, Prices Fork Elem was a bad example, because there won't be any high growth in the Blacksburg area. But other localities are trying to handle the overflow, and those areas would suffer the same problem, because the BOS would just consider this as a way to avoid the political hit of a tax increase while the communities were no better off.
Bruce in the other thread correctly recalled that at least 5 years ago it was estimated by the BOS that a rate of $1.20 would provide the minimum services and capital improvements needed by the county. And yet they did not have the intestinal fortitude to actually make that decision.
The state has allowed any locality with a 10% (now 5%) decennial (not annual, as I originally mistakenly posted) growth rate to decide if they wanted to require developers to make cash proffers to partially offset the impact of new residential development on the cost of local infrastructure, including school systems. Montgomery County qualified, and the BOS wanted to study the possibilities.
The working group consisted of representatives of both towns, the planning commissions, and various other groups that included some representation by real estate folks and developers.
The way it would work is this. Upon request for a rezoning action, a developer would voluntarily offer cash on each lot developed. The county could not require a particular amount of money, but it could make it known to the developer that a certain number would be looked on favorably. For example, a developer might offer $10,000 per lot, or maybe $20,000 per lot.
The number would be calculated to actually offset a particular infrastructure element, such as water, sewer or schools. It would have to be used for a capital project, not to offset operating costs.
The cash would be collected when the building permit for the lot was issued.
While this system is used routinely in NoVA, where growth rates of 100% are not uncommon, it did not seem to fit in this area. The cost of the capital projects would have been far above what a developer could have practically provided - i.e., tacking on $50k to the price of a house on a lot just wouldn't fly around here. In addition, collection in piecemeal fashion did not really do much for the local budget, because with only a 10% growth, it would be many years before the cash was actually practically collected. In addition, this would only have been allowed in new developments where rezoning was requested, not in already overcrowded areas.
However, the real reason it was not considered is that the BOS had already decided that all the localities had to buy in, or they would not consider it.
Imagine if you will, why an incorporated area of high growth in the county would even consider such a system. The BOS would collect the proffer, and likely use the money to fund a project they were already going to fund with a tax increase. So in effect, they would just use a developer to dribble money into the building of, say, Prices Fork Elementary, which they had to build any way, rather than building another new school to handle the new demand created by the development. So in effect, it would be like a budget cut to that locality.
Of course, Prices Fork Elem was a bad example, because there won't be any high growth in the Blacksburg area. But other localities are trying to handle the overflow, and those areas would suffer the same problem, because the BOS would just consider this as a way to avoid the political hit of a tax increase while the communities were no better off.
Bruce in the other thread correctly recalled that at least 5 years ago it was estimated by the BOS that a rate of $1.20 would provide the minimum services and capital improvements needed by the county. And yet they did not have the intestinal fortitude to actually make that decision.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Cultural differences in sport - no political content
A friend of mine posted a note on FaceBook that said how much he hated Yankees.
Turns out he was talking about the baseball team.
Boy is my face red...
Turns out he was talking about the baseball team.
Boy is my face red...
Staying home
OK, so there is a bit of disagreement over whether or not more than the expected number of voters turned out this election cycle. I have earlier blogged that in Blacksburg voters did not show up in what I would consider to be appropriate numbers. No question that more people voted in town elections than last time, but that's sort of apples and oranges. This wasn't a town election, so you really need to compare to something else. I will quote numbers from a generous commentor, without checking them, because I am too lazy.
May 2008 town elections 1827 people voted. In May 2006, the duel in the sun between Rordam and Langrehr for Mayor drew 3117 votes, up from the 2006 election when about 2500 people voted.
This year was easily twice what would have been expected, so yes, moving the vote created increased participation.
However, note the the vote totals in Christiansburg and Riner were both higher than in Blacksburg. That's strange. ALso note that almost no students voted even though the undergrad candidate worked very hard to get them registered. They let him down, big time.
So, even though the total numbers in Blacksburg are up, they are relatively low in comparison to the percentage of the population, when compared to Christiansburg and Riner. So my finger wagging stands.
Interesting point to consider. I am pretty sure that the number of votes for Paul Lancaster, about 1140, if divided equally between Krisha, Tom and Greg, would have been enough to completely change the election. I think only Susan would have remained from the TaliBURG ticket, with Tom and Greg replacing Cecile and Jeb...I mean John...Bush.
So, I know Paul was hoping he could work his way in even though he could not campaign, because he was expecting to be recovered enough to serve by the time the term started. And frankly, I would have been happy to see him returned to council. But I think he should be expecting to receive a big ol' organic fruit basket from Susan, Cecile and Jeb/John, and maybe even Don and Leslie. I think they have already sent one or two to the Roanoke Times editorial board with a note saying "We couldn't have done it without you".
May 2008 town elections 1827 people voted. In May 2006, the duel in the sun between Rordam and Langrehr for Mayor drew 3117 votes, up from the 2006 election when about 2500 people voted.
This year was easily twice what would have been expected, so yes, moving the vote created increased participation.
However, note the the vote totals in Christiansburg and Riner were both higher than in Blacksburg. That's strange. ALso note that almost no students voted even though the undergrad candidate worked very hard to get them registered. They let him down, big time.
So, even though the total numbers in Blacksburg are up, they are relatively low in comparison to the percentage of the population, when compared to Christiansburg and Riner. So my finger wagging stands.
Interesting point to consider. I am pretty sure that the number of votes for Paul Lancaster, about 1140, if divided equally between Krisha, Tom and Greg, would have been enough to completely change the election. I think only Susan would have remained from the TaliBURG ticket, with Tom and Greg replacing Cecile and Jeb...I mean John...Bush.
So, I know Paul was hoping he could work his way in even though he could not campaign, because he was expecting to be recovered enough to serve by the time the term started. And frankly, I would have been happy to see him returned to council. But I think he should be expecting to receive a big ol' organic fruit basket from Susan, Cecile and Jeb/John, and maybe even Don and Leslie. I think they have already sent one or two to the Roanoke Times editorial board with a note saying "We couldn't have done it without you".
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Voter apathy strikes again
Wow.
I must say that I am surprised by a couple of results of this election cycle.
Not the winners and losers; I pretty much had that pegged, except for the Blacksburg Town Council, which I could not guess at.
No, I am surprised by the pounding the Democrats took across the board, and also by the low voter turnout.
For weeks now the media have been saying that this election would be a referendum on Obama. I didn't buy it much. I subscribe to Tip O'Neill's notion that all politics is local. Well, mostly anyway. So I wasn't buying the reverse coattail effect predicted by the pundits.
Wow, I think I'll have to rethink that conclusion. The Dems were absolutely hammered almost everywhere. You can't lose that many races by 20-point margins and think that something isn't underlying that result. Dems better get their act together very quickly. Actually, Dems aren't very good at getting their act together, so I'll bet they get hammered again next year, possibly to the point of losing too many seats in the Congress to get anything accomplished. I predict that you will see a huge push by the leadership to get some things passed before they lose the ability to do so. The question will be how many Dems up for re-election next year will go along and risk losing their seats.
The Move the Vote referendum in Cburg passed easily, but that was no surprise. However, given the results in the Blacksburg TC elections, I wonder if there is any point to it.
OK, the TaliBURG candidates won their seats, along with Krisha Chachra. So the council will revert to its previous make up of the voice crying in the wilderness. This is exactly the result I had predicted two months ago before the campaigns heated up. I was pretty sure Krisha would win, but the question was whether or not she could pull anybody along with her. And I believed that was going to be decided purely on how many people voted.
BECAUSE
The TaliBURG folks are well organized and large enough to dominate an election when only 3 or 4 thousand people vote. The point of moving the election to November was to obtain a higher percentage of participation. Well, more people voted for sure, but not in the proportion that would have made a difference. Blacksburg's vote totals apparently trailed both Christiansburg and Riner, which is astounding, given the difference in population.
If you look at the voting results you will see that Susan and Krisha both received about 3000 votes. You will also see that Cecile and John both got almost exactly the same 2500 votes. So, that pretty much means that no more than about 4000 people probably voted in the TC election. [UPDATE - official totals show about 5200 voters in Blacksburg]
I know that some people probably voted for only one or two candidates, and that would inflate the number of voters a little, but in practice if you didn't vote for 4 then your vote was diluted, and the math is still approximately right.
This means that the number of people voting this time was approximately equal to the number who voted last time. Moving the election in this case had no effect. [UPDATE - not correct. The number of voters in this election seems to have been approximately equivalent, or maybe even slightly higher than the last gubernatorial election, although I don't have those numbers in front of me. But vote totals for Blacksburg are proportionally lower than those in Cburg, for example, in comparison.]
Furthermore, for all the talk about building bridges to the student population, they once again came through for me and stayed at home, like they always do. I personally spoke to many students and found most had no clue about voting and didn't really care. I daresay that for all the hard work put forth by the student candidate to get them registered (kudos for that, by the way), it was all for naught. I lived through the time when the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18, and all those kids who clamored and protested about getting the vote never showed up at the polls.
No doubt the TaliBURG candidates will now be crowing loudly (again) about how they represent a majority of the town, and once again I will point out that when only 10% of the population even bothers to vote, you don't have a mandate. But they do have the power to continue their limiting policies, at least until the day comes when those policies bring disaster on the town.
So, as I said at the beginning of the campaign season, you folks in Blacksburg will have exactly the government you deserve. And I better not hear any complaints out of you, because if I hear griping about the situation, I will be the first to remind you what miserable, lazy slugs you are.
As for me, I am happy. I would be angry about the result if I lived in Blacksburg, but I don't. So what I have to look forward to is several more years of free material for my blog.
And, now you have a council dominated by women of the female persuasion. That's going to get you some cool press for a while. And I already have a list of blog subjects just waiting for triggers.
Life is good.
I must say that I am surprised by a couple of results of this election cycle.
Not the winners and losers; I pretty much had that pegged, except for the Blacksburg Town Council, which I could not guess at.
No, I am surprised by the pounding the Democrats took across the board, and also by the low voter turnout.
For weeks now the media have been saying that this election would be a referendum on Obama. I didn't buy it much. I subscribe to Tip O'Neill's notion that all politics is local. Well, mostly anyway. So I wasn't buying the reverse coattail effect predicted by the pundits.
Wow, I think I'll have to rethink that conclusion. The Dems were absolutely hammered almost everywhere. You can't lose that many races by 20-point margins and think that something isn't underlying that result. Dems better get their act together very quickly. Actually, Dems aren't very good at getting their act together, so I'll bet they get hammered again next year, possibly to the point of losing too many seats in the Congress to get anything accomplished. I predict that you will see a huge push by the leadership to get some things passed before they lose the ability to do so. The question will be how many Dems up for re-election next year will go along and risk losing their seats.
The Move the Vote referendum in Cburg passed easily, but that was no surprise. However, given the results in the Blacksburg TC elections, I wonder if there is any point to it.
OK, the TaliBURG candidates won their seats, along with Krisha Chachra. So the council will revert to its previous make up of the voice crying in the wilderness. This is exactly the result I had predicted two months ago before the campaigns heated up. I was pretty sure Krisha would win, but the question was whether or not she could pull anybody along with her. And I believed that was going to be decided purely on how many people voted.
BECAUSE
The TaliBURG folks are well organized and large enough to dominate an election when only 3 or 4 thousand people vote. The point of moving the election to November was to obtain a higher percentage of participation. Well, more people voted for sure, but not in the proportion that would have made a difference. Blacksburg's vote totals apparently trailed both Christiansburg and Riner, which is astounding, given the difference in population.
If you look at the voting results you will see that Susan and Krisha both received about 3000 votes. You will also see that Cecile and John both got almost exactly the same 2500 votes. So, that pretty much means that no more than about 4000 people probably voted in the TC election. [UPDATE - official totals show about 5200 voters in Blacksburg]
I know that some people probably voted for only one or two candidates, and that would inflate the number of voters a little, but in practice if you didn't vote for 4 then your vote was diluted, and the math is still approximately right.
This means that the number of people voting this time was approximately equal to the number who voted last time. Moving the election in this case had no effect. [UPDATE - not correct. The number of voters in this election seems to have been approximately equivalent, or maybe even slightly higher than the last gubernatorial election, although I don't have those numbers in front of me. But vote totals for Blacksburg are proportionally lower than those in Cburg, for example, in comparison.]
Furthermore, for all the talk about building bridges to the student population, they once again came through for me and stayed at home, like they always do. I personally spoke to many students and found most had no clue about voting and didn't really care. I daresay that for all the hard work put forth by the student candidate to get them registered (kudos for that, by the way), it was all for naught. I lived through the time when the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18, and all those kids who clamored and protested about getting the vote never showed up at the polls.
No doubt the TaliBURG candidates will now be crowing loudly (again) about how they represent a majority of the town, and once again I will point out that when only 10% of the population even bothers to vote, you don't have a mandate. But they do have the power to continue their limiting policies, at least until the day comes when those policies bring disaster on the town.
So, as I said at the beginning of the campaign season, you folks in Blacksburg will have exactly the government you deserve. And I better not hear any complaints out of you, because if I hear griping about the situation, I will be the first to remind you what miserable, lazy slugs you are.
As for me, I am happy. I would be angry about the result if I lived in Blacksburg, but I don't. So what I have to look forward to is several more years of free material for my blog.
And, now you have a council dominated by women of the female persuasion. That's going to get you some cool press for a while. And I already have a list of blog subjects just waiting for triggers.
Life is good.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Election Day
Finally, it's here. Election Day.
I promised some folks that I would make some endorsements before this was all over, so I am going to do that now.
Blacksburg Town Council -
First, I appreciate that so many citizens of Blacksburg were motivated to step up and subject themselves to the grueling process of campaigning. While I definitely don't agree with the ideology and positions of some of the candidates, I think it's great that so many want to work for the town and help shape its future. I regret that some of the local candidates for other offices in this election are running unopposed - I think somebody should challenge every candidate on every opportunity, so that the widest possible range of options can be publicly debated.
You might ask why I should even be endorsing candidates for an election in which I am not able to vote. Well, although I don't live in Blacksburg, I have a business there, and so I am definitely affected by what goes on in the town, especially in the area of economic development and growth. I note that the TaliBURG candidate slate (or their supporters) openly stated that anybody not able to vote in the town election should not be influencing it. Of course, they sang a different tune when they wanted signatures on the 1450 resolution petitions, but they seem to have conveniently forgotten that.
But more importantly, I understand that Blacksburg, Christiansburg, and Virginia Tech are all parts of Montgomery County, and the New River Valley Region. We all sink or swim together, and what is done in one locality affects what happens in all the others. So we all have a responsibility to be involved in the region, and not think our little neighborhoods are islands unto themselves.
It will come as no surprise that I endorse Krisha Chachra, Tom Rogers and Greg Fansler for Town Council. The current makeup of the TC is loaded pretty heavily in the direction of what I call the Green Party or TaliBURG. I know they mean well, and frankly I think the town needs some of those people to be represented so that unconstrained growth doesn't occur. However, having the whole TC composed of this ideology is a recipe for disaster for the town, and so I think some balance needs to be restored. Chachra, Rogers and Fansler are all reasonable folks, who try to study the issues from all sides and come to a conclusion that is not ideological. Having these folks on the TC will keep the decision-making process honest and respectful of all viewpoints. They won't be able to force anything on the town without consensus with the no-growth council members, and vice versa.
That's it. I'm not endorsing for the 4th seat. Frank Lau threw in with these three late in the game, and if the commentor on my blog is correct, he was responsible for the apparent misunderstanding on the part of a couple of people regarding who they were endorsing in the infamous letter. I have not seen Frank step up and admit this, but if he is responsible, he should take his lumps and not dirty the reputations of the other candidates, as the Roanoke Times is trying to do with their 'reporting'. Another student on council might be ok. Of the other candidates, I am fairly ambivalent. I would love to have Paul Lancaster back on there. He's a great guy, and I'd like to see him enjoy improved health right now more than I'd like to see him on TC, if a choice had to be made.
School Board -
I'm not going to get into the school board election issues. I have only personal opinions to offer in that regard, and I prefer to keep them to myself. It's a thankless job without much authority, and my biggest regret is that sometimes a district doesn't even have a candidate on the ballot. It should be more important than that to the County.
Christiansburg "Move the Vote" issue -
This is a no-brainer. It needs to move. I know some of the powers that be throw up a smokescreen about lack of local focus or whatever if the elections are lumped in with the statewide offices, but that's just horse hockey...road apples...whatever else you want to call it. More participation should always be the overriding goal of a democracy. Just do it.
Well, that's it, for what it's worth. I think my reasoning is better than that put forth by the Roanoke Times. Not that anybody cares.
I promised some folks that I would make some endorsements before this was all over, so I am going to do that now.
Blacksburg Town Council -
First, I appreciate that so many citizens of Blacksburg were motivated to step up and subject themselves to the grueling process of campaigning. While I definitely don't agree with the ideology and positions of some of the candidates, I think it's great that so many want to work for the town and help shape its future. I regret that some of the local candidates for other offices in this election are running unopposed - I think somebody should challenge every candidate on every opportunity, so that the widest possible range of options can be publicly debated.
You might ask why I should even be endorsing candidates for an election in which I am not able to vote. Well, although I don't live in Blacksburg, I have a business there, and so I am definitely affected by what goes on in the town, especially in the area of economic development and growth. I note that the TaliBURG candidate slate (or their supporters) openly stated that anybody not able to vote in the town election should not be influencing it. Of course, they sang a different tune when they wanted signatures on the 1450 resolution petitions, but they seem to have conveniently forgotten that.
But more importantly, I understand that Blacksburg, Christiansburg, and Virginia Tech are all parts of Montgomery County, and the New River Valley Region. We all sink or swim together, and what is done in one locality affects what happens in all the others. So we all have a responsibility to be involved in the region, and not think our little neighborhoods are islands unto themselves.
It will come as no surprise that I endorse Krisha Chachra, Tom Rogers and Greg Fansler for Town Council. The current makeup of the TC is loaded pretty heavily in the direction of what I call the Green Party or TaliBURG. I know they mean well, and frankly I think the town needs some of those people to be represented so that unconstrained growth doesn't occur. However, having the whole TC composed of this ideology is a recipe for disaster for the town, and so I think some balance needs to be restored. Chachra, Rogers and Fansler are all reasonable folks, who try to study the issues from all sides and come to a conclusion that is not ideological. Having these folks on the TC will keep the decision-making process honest and respectful of all viewpoints. They won't be able to force anything on the town without consensus with the no-growth council members, and vice versa.
That's it. I'm not endorsing for the 4th seat. Frank Lau threw in with these three late in the game, and if the commentor on my blog is correct, he was responsible for the apparent misunderstanding on the part of a couple of people regarding who they were endorsing in the infamous letter. I have not seen Frank step up and admit this, but if he is responsible, he should take his lumps and not dirty the reputations of the other candidates, as the Roanoke Times is trying to do with their 'reporting'. Another student on council might be ok. Of the other candidates, I am fairly ambivalent. I would love to have Paul Lancaster back on there. He's a great guy, and I'd like to see him enjoy improved health right now more than I'd like to see him on TC, if a choice had to be made.
School Board -
I'm not going to get into the school board election issues. I have only personal opinions to offer in that regard, and I prefer to keep them to myself. It's a thankless job without much authority, and my biggest regret is that sometimes a district doesn't even have a candidate on the ballot. It should be more important than that to the County.
Christiansburg "Move the Vote" issue -
This is a no-brainer. It needs to move. I know some of the powers that be throw up a smokescreen about lack of local focus or whatever if the elections are lumped in with the statewide offices, but that's just horse hockey...road apples...whatever else you want to call it. More participation should always be the overriding goal of a democracy. Just do it.
Well, that's it, for what it's worth. I think my reasoning is better than that put forth by the Roanoke Times. Not that anybody cares.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
