Following Alice Down the Rabbit Hole
(Guest Blog)
You know folks, last night’s show at the Planning Commission really wasn’t much when you think about it. It was so flawed that what the Zoning Committee does or doesn’t do really is of no consequence. The Board of Supervisors should be embarrassed, just as the honest folks on the Planning Commission and county staff appeared to be last night.
While I do not profess to be a parliamentarian, when read in plain English, Robert’s Rules seem pretty clear to me.
First, there is Article IV, Section 21. Incidental Motions. In the second paragraph it reads “The question of order must be raised at the time the breach of order occurs, so that after a motion has been discussed it is too late to raise the question as to whether it was in order or for the chair to rule the motion out of order. The only exception is where the motion is in violation of the laws, or the constitution, by-laws, or standing rules of the organization, or of the fundamental principles of parliamentary principles, so that if adopted it would be null and void. This is called raising a question, or point, or order, because the member in effect puts to the chair, whose duty it is to enforce order, the question as to whether there is not now a breach of order.” Don’t think that happened! What was Ms. Donato thinking? Is there such a thing as a retroactive "point of order?” I don't think so.
Second, there is Article VI, Section 40. Dilatory, Absurd or Frivolous Motions. The very nature of this potion of Roberts’ Rules is to protect the parliamentary process from continued renewal of issues like the floodplain ordinance.
Third, there is Article VIII, Section 46. Voting. Paragraph 9 reads “A member has the right to change his vote up to the time the vote is finally announced. After that, he can make the change only by permission of the assembly, which may be given by general consent; that is, by no member’s objecting when the chair inquires if any one objects. If objection is made, a motion may be made to grant the permission, which motion is undebatable.” Nothing like what is suggested above occurred during last evening’s show. Also please note that the chair may entertain the motion. The word “may” is permissive not mandatory.
And lastly, the so called "vote" on a matter of great importance was manipulated without notice to the public. Duh!
Poor Ms. Donato was duped into her action. It is ironic that some of the best friends she could have in pursuit of good things for this county were right in front of her, sitting in the audience, and she chose to slap them in the face. It is too bad she fell for the nonsense her disreputable colleagues fed her, embarrassing herself as well as those honest and capable folks on the Planning Commission and county staff, who were not participating in this ruse.
Let the Zoning Committee meet their little hearts out, whenever and wherever they want. If you give them enough time, they may even be able to get it right. If I understand correctly, it took three years for them to produce the first floodplain ordinance abortion. If the same monkeys bang on word processors for an infinite amount of time, eventually they will produce another work of fiction to waste more of the county’s time. PCW has already wasted enough time on this silliness. Let the monkeys play with themselves, as it were.
Time to move on to things that matter!
(This is A Guest Blog by An Anonymous Page County Watch Blogger)
If you would like your Guest Blog to show up here, email Research@PageCountyWatch.org OR hit the comments button and say your piece.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
FLOOD PLAIN Slime Alert!
FLOOD PLAIN slime alert!
May 29, 2007
In the most stunning act of slimy manipulative behavior, the Page County Planning Commission brought the proposed flood plain ordinance back to life tonight, and gave it back to the very same subcommittee to do a "revision."
Tonight's agenda made no reference to the flood plain. In fact, only a few minor zoning issues were on the agenda. Page County Watch had five people present, just in case.
It was lucky we were there.
Chairman John Woodward was absent. Commissioner Dot Donato was chairing the meeting. After all business was attended to, Ms. Donato said she had a "point of order". Her point of order was that she wanted to change her vote from April 23, which ended debate on the proposed flood plain ordinance. Then either Newton or DeSerio, I was too blinded by rage to tell which one, made a motion that they should bring the proposed flood plain ordinance back alive, and give it back TO THE SAME PEOPLE, to make revisions. This motion passed.
Here's who voted for it:DeSerio, Newton, Eldridge, Judd, Otto, Donato
Here's who voted against it:Short, Bosley
Since the Board of Supervisors TOOK NO ACTION in the May 15 meeting when we were all there, Attorney George Shanks sanctioned, hopefully only through temporary insanity, this action to bring the Proposed Flood Plain Ordinance back alive and give it back to the same people.
In the Public Comments section, Alice Richmond (me) pointed out that this item was not on the agenda and should not have been brought up with out public notice. Mr. J D Cave also made a public comment, I'm sorry I can't exactly remember what he said, but he was on our side. I think he said something with the word slimy in it.
I was going to use this space to bring up the June 1 "Meet the Republican Candidates" meeting at 7 p.m. at Browns Restaurant. This would be a good place to make sure that John Rust and Gerald Cubbage, who are up for election, know what the public thinks about how the Supervisors and the Planning Commission are acting.
Planning Commissioner Eldridge, who is Chairman of the Committee that wrote this, named a date and a time for the first meeting of the subcommittee, which he said would be no more than 90 minutes long. If citizens would like to know when these subcommittee meetings are held, I would imagine they will have to call the county office and ask. I won't be posting them on the Page County Watch website.
At this time, I will no longer be attending Planning Commission meetings.
Call your lawyers.
Respectfully,
The Page County Watch Blogger, Alice Richmond
Please print this blog and pass it around to all the people you know who don't have Internet.
You can comment here, but why bother? Best to comment here:
Mr. Tommy LaFrance Telephone: 743-3715
May 29, 2007
In the most stunning act of slimy manipulative behavior, the Page County Planning Commission brought the proposed flood plain ordinance back to life tonight, and gave it back to the very same subcommittee to do a "revision."
Tonight's agenda made no reference to the flood plain. In fact, only a few minor zoning issues were on the agenda. Page County Watch had five people present, just in case.
It was lucky we were there.
Chairman John Woodward was absent. Commissioner Dot Donato was chairing the meeting. After all business was attended to, Ms. Donato said she had a "point of order". Her point of order was that she wanted to change her vote from April 23, which ended debate on the proposed flood plain ordinance. Then either Newton or DeSerio, I was too blinded by rage to tell which one, made a motion that they should bring the proposed flood plain ordinance back alive, and give it back TO THE SAME PEOPLE, to make revisions. This motion passed.
Here's who voted for it:DeSerio, Newton, Eldridge, Judd, Otto, Donato
Here's who voted against it:Short, Bosley
Since the Board of Supervisors TOOK NO ACTION in the May 15 meeting when we were all there, Attorney George Shanks sanctioned, hopefully only through temporary insanity, this action to bring the Proposed Flood Plain Ordinance back alive and give it back to the same people.
In the Public Comments section, Alice Richmond (me) pointed out that this item was not on the agenda and should not have been brought up with out public notice. Mr. J D Cave also made a public comment, I'm sorry I can't exactly remember what he said, but he was on our side. I think he said something with the word slimy in it.
I was going to use this space to bring up the June 1 "Meet the Republican Candidates" meeting at 7 p.m. at Browns Restaurant. This would be a good place to make sure that John Rust and Gerald Cubbage, who are up for election, know what the public thinks about how the Supervisors and the Planning Commission are acting.
Planning Commissioner Eldridge, who is Chairman of the Committee that wrote this, named a date and a time for the first meeting of the subcommittee, which he said would be no more than 90 minutes long. If citizens would like to know when these subcommittee meetings are held, I would imagine they will have to call the county office and ask. I won't be posting them on the Page County Watch website.
At this time, I will no longer be attending Planning Commission meetings.
Call your lawyers.
Respectfully,
The Page County Watch Blogger, Alice Richmond
Please print this blog and pass it around to all the people you know who don't have Internet.
You can comment here, but why bother? Best to comment here:
Mr. Tommy LaFrance Telephone: 743-3715
Sunday, May 27, 2007
The Brenda Merica Story
Page County Watch wondered what the hullabaloo was with the County Registrar.
Here's the scoop.
The County Registrar is the person who makes sure our elections are set up and run in accordance with the rules. Brenda Merica has been doing this for 24 years. Her job is a salaried job, and she has been chosen and reappointed to this job time and time again, by both Democrats and Republicans. She has it down. She knows the rules. She makes sure they are followed, so our elections can be above reproach. This is a good thing.
But the Registrar's job is a political appointment. She is appointed by the Electoral Board, and the Electoral Board has the right to appoint someone else. They don't need a reason. They don't need to have cause to get someone else. They are elected, and the Registrar is apointed by the elected Board. That's it. It's their choice.
The Electoral Board is currently two Democrats (Nancy Bell Gordon and Juanita Sedwick) and one Republican (Bob Forrest). It's two Democrats because Tim Kaine is governor. If we had a Republican governor it would be two Republicans.
The Electoral Board started advertising for the Registrar's position. They will take applications and make a decision at the end of June. It is their right to do this, even though the current Registrar is doing a good job. I looked it up.
The only public concern would be that the new Registrar be capable of making sure our elections are on the up and up, and we don't run afoul of any state rules in the process. In many counties, there is an unpaid "Assistant" to the Registrar, who learns the ropes so that there will not be a glitch during any transitions. Our county didn't have an Assistant Registrar, so the rules are known inside and outside by only one person. Brenda.
If you think failing to reappoint Brenda Merica to this job is bad for the county, you are the citizens who elected Bob Forrest, Juanita Sedwick, and Nancy Bell Gordon to the Electoral Board. It is their decision, and they have not yet formally made it. They have the control over this. This wasn't done by the "imports", or the Sheriff, or the big bad developers.
If you think it's not right to pull this public servant out of her job of 24 years, and expose the county to potential disruption by mistakes in the election processes, call your elected representatives on the Electoral Board and tell them you as citizens want things done differently.
That's all the blogger has to say about this. What's your opinion? Hit the comments button.
Here's the scoop.
The County Registrar is the person who makes sure our elections are set up and run in accordance with the rules. Brenda Merica has been doing this for 24 years. Her job is a salaried job, and she has been chosen and reappointed to this job time and time again, by both Democrats and Republicans. She has it down. She knows the rules. She makes sure they are followed, so our elections can be above reproach. This is a good thing.
But the Registrar's job is a political appointment. She is appointed by the Electoral Board, and the Electoral Board has the right to appoint someone else. They don't need a reason. They don't need to have cause to get someone else. They are elected, and the Registrar is apointed by the elected Board. That's it. It's their choice.
The Electoral Board is currently two Democrats (Nancy Bell Gordon and Juanita Sedwick) and one Republican (Bob Forrest). It's two Democrats because Tim Kaine is governor. If we had a Republican governor it would be two Republicans.
The Electoral Board started advertising for the Registrar's position. They will take applications and make a decision at the end of June. It is their right to do this, even though the current Registrar is doing a good job. I looked it up.
The only public concern would be that the new Registrar be capable of making sure our elections are on the up and up, and we don't run afoul of any state rules in the process. In many counties, there is an unpaid "Assistant" to the Registrar, who learns the ropes so that there will not be a glitch during any transitions. Our county didn't have an Assistant Registrar, so the rules are known inside and outside by only one person. Brenda.
If you think failing to reappoint Brenda Merica to this job is bad for the county, you are the citizens who elected Bob Forrest, Juanita Sedwick, and Nancy Bell Gordon to the Electoral Board. It is their decision, and they have not yet formally made it. They have the control over this. This wasn't done by the "imports", or the Sheriff, or the big bad developers.
If you think it's not right to pull this public servant out of her job of 24 years, and expose the county to potential disruption by mistakes in the election processes, call your elected representatives on the Electoral Board and tell them you as citizens want things done differently.
That's all the blogger has to say about this. What's your opinion? Hit the comments button.
Friday, May 25, 2007
You heard it here first
Why wait for the Page News when you have Page County Watch?
At last night's Democratic Caucus, Larry Sours was selected as thecandidate to run against John Rust in District 2. Raymond Kite will run against Gerald Cubbage in District 4. There will be no Democratic Candidate in District 3.
The most important thing to me was that both Democratic candidates spoke out strongly against the flood plain issue and for property rights. They were willing to be pinned down about what they think. It was an important issue with the audience that the candidates they run not agree with this rezoning idea where you have to have a minimum of 10 acres to build a house. If it takes 10 acres to build a house, that means that the young people growing up here, basically can't stay. 10 acres costs at least $100,000 to $200,000 just for the land. For the board to pass that says, "go ahead and let our kids move on and move out, we won't have businesses or jobs here for them anyway"
Page County Watch, having members from both parties, can be EVERYWHERE. AND, we can report it faster than the newspaper. On Friday, June 1, there is a "meet the candidates" function for the Republicans at Browns restaurant at 7 p.m. Let's go meet them. And let's be sure we pin them down on what they think and believe about issues in the county. Don't let them get away with vague answers.
What questions would you like the candidates to answer? Post your questions as comments, and Page County Watch will try to set up a debate for all the candidates, somewhere, sometime.
Or, send your tips and information to Research@PageCountyWatch.org
At last night's Democratic Caucus, Larry Sours was selected as thecandidate to run against John Rust in District 2. Raymond Kite will run against Gerald Cubbage in District 4. There will be no Democratic Candidate in District 3.
The most important thing to me was that both Democratic candidates spoke out strongly against the flood plain issue and for property rights. They were willing to be pinned down about what they think. It was an important issue with the audience that the candidates they run not agree with this rezoning idea where you have to have a minimum of 10 acres to build a house. If it takes 10 acres to build a house, that means that the young people growing up here, basically can't stay. 10 acres costs at least $100,000 to $200,000 just for the land. For the board to pass that says, "go ahead and let our kids move on and move out, we won't have businesses or jobs here for them anyway"
Page County Watch, having members from both parties, can be EVERYWHERE. AND, we can report it faster than the newspaper. On Friday, June 1, there is a "meet the candidates" function for the Republicans at Browns restaurant at 7 p.m. Let's go meet them. And let's be sure we pin them down on what they think and believe about issues in the county. Don't let them get away with vague answers.
What questions would you like the candidates to answer? Post your questions as comments, and Page County Watch will try to set up a debate for all the candidates, somewhere, sometime.
Or, send your tips and information to Research@PageCountyWatch.org
Thursday, May 24, 2007
This Week with the Sheriff
Okay, the rumors are quelled. No, the sheriff did not resign. Nor did his deputy. No, the sheriff's wife did not leave him.
It's an election year, and all is fair in politics, right?
Grand juries are about looking to see if there is anything wrong. They are not a charge that there is anything wrong. Someone can allege things, imply things, throw innuendo, and start a grand jury based on things that are out of context. The grand jury is meant to go look more closely. Like a fishing expedition. The bad part is then rumors get started, and the next thing you know, people start believing the rumors. It is very easy to get people to believe rumors.
Got something to say about this? You can comment anonymously, but please throw in a fact here and there if you do.
It's an election year, and all is fair in politics, right?
Grand juries are about looking to see if there is anything wrong. They are not a charge that there is anything wrong. Someone can allege things, imply things, throw innuendo, and start a grand jury based on things that are out of context. The grand jury is meant to go look more closely. Like a fishing expedition. The bad part is then rumors get started, and the next thing you know, people start believing the rumors. It is very easy to get people to believe rumors.
Got something to say about this? You can comment anonymously, but please throw in a fact here and there if you do.
Attracting Business? Or Persecuting it?
On May 21, the Planning Commission work session heard an application by Mr. Jody Salyards about his chip mill. He's got an ongoing business that employs 11 people. It's in Page County. I didn't quite follow this part, but it seems that he is located in the "wrong" place. He doesn't have a commercial entrance and he's in the forest, when our Comprehensive Plan says all businesses should be in the industrial parks. So the trees can live free.
Now, the county, it appears, forced him to shut his business down. He is going through the process and agreeing to move his business. He needs a special use permit so that he can operate while he is carrying out these requirements. That's what it sounded like to me. These are not official minutes, just what I heard as an innocent bystander.
But it will take him nearly 3 months to complete the process to apply, and that means he will be out of business for 3 months. Losing revenue for 3 months.
The Planning Commissioners didn't care that he was losing revenue for this time. They were more concerned about being "right" than about being "fair." It was wrong, apparently, to locate a business in the woods, because woods are protected, but jobs and businesses are not protected. Nobody could see their way to giving him permission to stay in business while they mulled through the process to give him permission to stay in business. Which they apparently intend to do, but only after he loses so much revenue that he may not be able to do so.
That's what I heard.
If I were this guy, I'd move all right. I'd move right out of Page County.
Mr. Salyards deserves our gratitude and respect for putting up with such behavior, and for giving up months of revenue just so that he can be allowed, if he forfeits enough, to bring jobs to Page County. Men like this are the heroes we need.
Planning Commissioners. WHAT are you doing???
Now, the county, it appears, forced him to shut his business down. He is going through the process and agreeing to move his business. He needs a special use permit so that he can operate while he is carrying out these requirements. That's what it sounded like to me. These are not official minutes, just what I heard as an innocent bystander.
But it will take him nearly 3 months to complete the process to apply, and that means he will be out of business for 3 months. Losing revenue for 3 months.
The Planning Commissioners didn't care that he was losing revenue for this time. They were more concerned about being "right" than about being "fair." It was wrong, apparently, to locate a business in the woods, because woods are protected, but jobs and businesses are not protected. Nobody could see their way to giving him permission to stay in business while they mulled through the process to give him permission to stay in business. Which they apparently intend to do, but only after he loses so much revenue that he may not be able to do so.
That's what I heard.
If I were this guy, I'd move all right. I'd move right out of Page County.
Mr. Salyards deserves our gratitude and respect for putting up with such behavior, and for giving up months of revenue just so that he can be allowed, if he forfeits enough, to bring jobs to Page County. Men like this are the heroes we need.
Planning Commissioners. WHAT are you doing???
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Holy Moly, now I get it!
Alert! Alert! WE can go to the Retreat! Page County Watch has learned that the Retreat is a public meeting! We are allowed to attend!
By George and By Jove . . . we WILL attend! In fact, we will attend with Bells on. And when you see our Bells, you will know what I mean.
So . . . mark your calendars. Page County Watch will post the date, the time, the location, and the directions to get there. And chances are . . . we will know before it's announced in the paper or posted on the website.
Current thinking: it's going to be mid-June, at Skyland, on a weekday, just one day from about 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.
PLAN to be there!
By George and By Jove . . . we WILL attend! In fact, we will attend with Bells on. And when you see our Bells, you will know what I mean.
So . . . mark your calendars. Page County Watch will post the date, the time, the location, and the directions to get there. And chances are . . . we will know before it's announced in the paper or posted on the website.
Current thinking: it's going to be mid-June, at Skyland, on a weekday, just one day from about 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.
PLAN to be there!
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
The Ongoing Saga
I know you're all just dying to hear what happened at the Board of Supervisors meeting tonight.
We had a lot of people there. We had a great showing and a lot of really good speeches and serious citizen comments.
When we were done talking, the Supervisors decided to go on a Retreat, so they could consider what should be done with the Comprehensive Plan. And they didn't like the two options they had with the motion re: the Flood Plain Ordinance. The options were to accept the motion to end debate until there were definitive maps or to reject the motion and send it back to the Planning Commission. So they decided to consider that after they decided what to do about the Comprehensive Plan on their retreat.
I kid you not.
That's what happened.
Push the Comments button and VENT.
We had a lot of people there. We had a great showing and a lot of really good speeches and serious citizen comments.
When we were done talking, the Supervisors decided to go on a Retreat, so they could consider what should be done with the Comprehensive Plan. And they didn't like the two options they had with the motion re: the Flood Plain Ordinance. The options were to accept the motion to end debate until there were definitive maps or to reject the motion and send it back to the Planning Commission. So they decided to consider that after they decided what to do about the Comprehensive Plan on their retreat.
I kid you not.
That's what happened.
Push the Comments button and VENT.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Page News Suspect?
The Page News and Courier
Small town newspaper, comes out once a week. Everybody reads it.The Fourth Estate. That's what we learn in school that the newspapers are. Journalists play a big part in our government. They keep our government honest. They report the FACTS. Yet, here we are, a few months from an election for Sheriff, and the newspaper puts a big front page headline out that says "Sheriff's Office under federal investigation?" Notice the question mark at the end of the headline. When you read the article, it says, the Department of Justice was in Page County collecting information, but no one knows why or what it was about. They also collected information on other things in the county. But no one knows whether the Sheriff's Office is under investigation, or whether some other office is under investigation.
So why would the Page News use a headline that implies it is the Sheriff's Office? News people know that many people just read headlines. Many people will remember only the words in the
headline, and believe that the article said the Sheriff's office WAS under investigation. That's not fair and balanced news reporting, Jamie Turner and Randy Arrington.
Page County Watch has seen this business of implying and impugning in other articles in the Page News. For one thing, Jamie wrote that the Flood Plain Ordinance came about because there was a letter from the state saying the county's existing ordinance was not in compliance. That wasn't true, but Jamie didn't check her facts. When PCW pointed out to her that she had written something untrue, she shrugged it off, as if writing untrue things was unimportant to a journalist. Then, in an article about the Comprehensive Plan, Jamie cherry-picked the audience comments, reporting the glowing and happy statements, without reporting the disgruntlements.
We don't need a small town newspaper with a bias. Local folks need just the facts. Our newspaper isn't supposed to be some type of Happy Hannah, guiding people's thoughts into one track, and putting light on only what the newspaper thinks is right.
If you have comments about this Blog, push the Comments button. Your opinion will show up immediately, without censorship. Page County Watch will delete anything that uses swear words or refers to taking illegal actions. Other than that, we publish whatever you say. You may post anonymously, or sign your name.
Small town newspaper, comes out once a week. Everybody reads it.The Fourth Estate. That's what we learn in school that the newspapers are. Journalists play a big part in our government. They keep our government honest. They report the FACTS. Yet, here we are, a few months from an election for Sheriff, and the newspaper puts a big front page headline out that says "Sheriff's Office under federal investigation?" Notice the question mark at the end of the headline. When you read the article, it says, the Department of Justice was in Page County collecting information, but no one knows why or what it was about. They also collected information on other things in the county. But no one knows whether the Sheriff's Office is under investigation, or whether some other office is under investigation.
So why would the Page News use a headline that implies it is the Sheriff's Office? News people know that many people just read headlines. Many people will remember only the words in the
headline, and believe that the article said the Sheriff's office WAS under investigation. That's not fair and balanced news reporting, Jamie Turner and Randy Arrington.
Page County Watch has seen this business of implying and impugning in other articles in the Page News. For one thing, Jamie wrote that the Flood Plain Ordinance came about because there was a letter from the state saying the county's existing ordinance was not in compliance. That wasn't true, but Jamie didn't check her facts. When PCW pointed out to her that she had written something untrue, she shrugged it off, as if writing untrue things was unimportant to a journalist. Then, in an article about the Comprehensive Plan, Jamie cherry-picked the audience comments, reporting the glowing and happy statements, without reporting the disgruntlements.
We don't need a small town newspaper with a bias. Local folks need just the facts. Our newspaper isn't supposed to be some type of Happy Hannah, guiding people's thoughts into one track, and putting light on only what the newspaper thinks is right.
If you have comments about this Blog, push the Comments button. Your opinion will show up immediately, without censorship. Page County Watch will delete anything that uses swear words or refers to taking illegal actions. Other than that, we publish whatever you say. You may post anonymously, or sign your name.
Saturday, May 5, 2007
Mike Trader's response to Natalie
This is in response to Natalie Zuckerman’s, request in last week’s paper, to “Don’t throw away proposed flood plain amendments.” I agree! They should not be thrown away. Instead they should be buried in the deepest hole in Page County and cemented over, never to see the light of day again!
Yes, we are a vocal group. We are also diverse, intelligent, of all incomes (from top to bottom) and of various skills: carpenters, lawyers, doctors, physicists, mechanics, small business owners, retirees and even a rocket scientist, (sorry, no developers). We are determined, but most of all, right! When a lifetime investment in your house, cabin or trailer, and water-front property are threatened, we cannot and will not be silent or still! Yes we are land owners but we are also other citizens who are just aghast at this draconian flood plain proposal. We stand by all the statements made in the full page ad. They are all verifiable facts! And, yes we were lied to. This whole thing definitely did not start as a result of an unsolicited letter from the state telling us our current Flood Plain Ordinance was not in compliance, and by the way, the current flood plain law is absolutely in compliance with state and federal guidelines and regulations...period!
Let’s see, you say six structures built along Route 340 Business and three more planned is a problem? I don’t think so. Instead, they represent thousands of dollars in tax revenue to our cash-strapped county; remember the two new high schools?
You say, “... the proposed ordinance... attempts to stop “various” development activities.” Wrong, it stops ALL development as well as repairs, remodeling, putting on decks, fixing driveways, declares mandatory abandonment of a house if damaged 50% by any means, and on and on and on.
If you tried to build a house on your land that was supposedly covered by 20 feet of water in 1996 and 2003 (there was no serious flood in 2003!?) you would not, as you claim in your letter, be able to build at ground level. Under the current law you would have to elevate it to one foot above high flood level.
You mention several times, “community’s welfare”. No one has ever been killed by anything remotely related to all the no-no’s in the proposed new flood plain law and our fine sheriff’s office has never pulled anyone out of a flood. You also say, “The proposed ordinance outlines appropriate by-right activities in flood plains.” It is clear that the only “by-right activities” allowed are building a bonfire or sitting in a fold up chair to watch the river or creek go by, or putting up a tent etc., because nothing, no building or house or shed, no -- nothing can be on any flood plain in Page County under this proposal and those houses etc., that are already there will eventually have to be abandoned .
Natalie, it is clear that this plan that you and a few others have authored has only one objective, to eventually eliminate everything on our flood plains that doesn’t grow in nature...whatever the cost to Page County and whatever the distress and financial loss to flood plain owners. All the other things you say about: safety, welfare, increasing flood damage in the US, it’s broke, false statements, people induce additional flooding, etc., etc., are just baloney and smoke and mirrors for the real intent. I say, “Bury it!”
Mike Trader
Yes, we are a vocal group. We are also diverse, intelligent, of all incomes (from top to bottom) and of various skills: carpenters, lawyers, doctors, physicists, mechanics, small business owners, retirees and even a rocket scientist, (sorry, no developers). We are determined, but most of all, right! When a lifetime investment in your house, cabin or trailer, and water-front property are threatened, we cannot and will not be silent or still! Yes we are land owners but we are also other citizens who are just aghast at this draconian flood plain proposal. We stand by all the statements made in the full page ad. They are all verifiable facts! And, yes we were lied to. This whole thing definitely did not start as a result of an unsolicited letter from the state telling us our current Flood Plain Ordinance was not in compliance, and by the way, the current flood plain law is absolutely in compliance with state and federal guidelines and regulations...period!
Let’s see, you say six structures built along Route 340 Business and three more planned is a problem? I don’t think so. Instead, they represent thousands of dollars in tax revenue to our cash-strapped county; remember the two new high schools?
You say, “... the proposed ordinance... attempts to stop “various” development activities.” Wrong, it stops ALL development as well as repairs, remodeling, putting on decks, fixing driveways, declares mandatory abandonment of a house if damaged 50% by any means, and on and on and on.
If you tried to build a house on your land that was supposedly covered by 20 feet of water in 1996 and 2003 (there was no serious flood in 2003!?) you would not, as you claim in your letter, be able to build at ground level. Under the current law you would have to elevate it to one foot above high flood level.
You mention several times, “community’s welfare”. No one has ever been killed by anything remotely related to all the no-no’s in the proposed new flood plain law and our fine sheriff’s office has never pulled anyone out of a flood. You also say, “The proposed ordinance outlines appropriate by-right activities in flood plains.” It is clear that the only “by-right activities” allowed are building a bonfire or sitting in a fold up chair to watch the river or creek go by, or putting up a tent etc., because nothing, no building or house or shed, no -- nothing can be on any flood plain in Page County under this proposal and those houses etc., that are already there will eventually have to be abandoned .
Natalie, it is clear that this plan that you and a few others have authored has only one objective, to eventually eliminate everything on our flood plains that doesn’t grow in nature...whatever the cost to Page County and whatever the distress and financial loss to flood plain owners. All the other things you say about: safety, welfare, increasing flood damage in the US, it’s broke, false statements, people induce additional flooding, etc., etc., are just baloney and smoke and mirrors for the real intent. I say, “Bury it!”
Mike Trader
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Comprehensive Plan meeting
Don't forget! The meeting to get the line "pass ordinances that prohibit houses and businesses in the 100 year flood plain" out of the Comprehensive Plan is May 15 in Stanley.
Response to Natalie
In the May 3rd issue of the Page News, Natalie Zuckerman wrote a letter to the editor about the flood plain ordinance. This is my response to Ms.
Zuckerman.
1. Page County Watch is a group of 45 citizens who have houses in the flood plain. We are not developers. Instead, we are ordinary people, driven to extraordinary action when we were hit with the realization in December of 2006 that Ms. Zuckerman nearly managed to get a law passed that would take away our homes.
2. Ms. Zuckerman, on her own home computer, wrote the draft flood plain ordinance and presented it to the zoning subcommittee of the Planning Commission, according to our research of the minutes of meetings over the last three years. The minutes verify that the commission members and the Board of Supervisors were told that there was a letter from the state saying our current ordinance was not in compliance. This is not true. Our current ordinance is in compliance. In Natalie's new ordinance, it says that we, citizens of Page County, will have to abandon our homes if they are damaged by any reason -- fire, vandalism, trees falling, termites, whatever. Why? So that the 100 year flood plain can be pure and pristine and only animals and birds can live there. It also says we have to register ourselves as "nonconforming" and APPLY for new occupancy certificates, in our own homes. The flood plain can
only be used to pitch tents and have circuses, in Ms. Zuckerman's plan.
3. There is a current flood plain ordinance. The current plan requires any new building in the flood plain to meet FEMA requirements for floodproofing, meaning it has to be elevated 1 foot above the 100 year mark. That's fine with us. However, it is apparently not good enough for Ms. Zuckerman, as she refers to her own 7 acres (most of us have 1/2 acre) as being "selfish" if she were to build there, since her land is apparently under 15 feet of water. The
current ordinance would not let her build there unless she elevated it above the 100 year watermark. The land we all live on only gets flooded once in a hundred years. That's what makes it a 100 year flood.
4. Ms. Zuckerman calls for reasonable people to meet on common ground. If she had approached us, the people who live in the flood plain, before she tried to get a law passed to throw us out of our houses, and she had named some reasons why she had something specific she wanted done, she surely would have found some reasonable people to talk with about her issues. Having attacked us by attempting to take our houses, however, has made us feel
disinclined to be reasonable.
At least, I am disinclined to be reasonable toward Ms. Zuckerman.
When there is a water quality issue with the river, and the chicken farmers, the industries in Waynesboro, and Merck want to sit down and talk about it . . . I'll be there.
Until then . . . Natalie, go find something else to do.
If any other readers of Page County Watch would like to post a response to Natalie, hit the Comments button. Or, if you would like your own Blog, email me
your letter and I'll post it as a main Blog.
Alice Richmond
Zuckerman.
1. Page County Watch is a group of 45 citizens who have houses in the flood plain. We are not developers. Instead, we are ordinary people, driven to extraordinary action when we were hit with the realization in December of 2006 that Ms. Zuckerman nearly managed to get a law passed that would take away our homes.
2. Ms. Zuckerman, on her own home computer, wrote the draft flood plain ordinance and presented it to the zoning subcommittee of the Planning Commission, according to our research of the minutes of meetings over the last three years. The minutes verify that the commission members and the Board of Supervisors were told that there was a letter from the state saying our current ordinance was not in compliance. This is not true. Our current ordinance is in compliance. In Natalie's new ordinance, it says that we, citizens of Page County, will have to abandon our homes if they are damaged by any reason -- fire, vandalism, trees falling, termites, whatever. Why? So that the 100 year flood plain can be pure and pristine and only animals and birds can live there. It also says we have to register ourselves as "nonconforming" and APPLY for new occupancy certificates, in our own homes. The flood plain can
only be used to pitch tents and have circuses, in Ms. Zuckerman's plan.
3. There is a current flood plain ordinance. The current plan requires any new building in the flood plain to meet FEMA requirements for floodproofing, meaning it has to be elevated 1 foot above the 100 year mark. That's fine with us. However, it is apparently not good enough for Ms. Zuckerman, as she refers to her own 7 acres (most of us have 1/2 acre) as being "selfish" if she were to build there, since her land is apparently under 15 feet of water. The
current ordinance would not let her build there unless she elevated it above the 100 year watermark. The land we all live on only gets flooded once in a hundred years. That's what makes it a 100 year flood.
4. Ms. Zuckerman calls for reasonable people to meet on common ground. If she had approached us, the people who live in the flood plain, before she tried to get a law passed to throw us out of our houses, and she had named some reasons why she had something specific she wanted done, she surely would have found some reasonable people to talk with about her issues. Having attacked us by attempting to take our houses, however, has made us feel
disinclined to be reasonable.
At least, I am disinclined to be reasonable toward Ms. Zuckerman.
When there is a water quality issue with the river, and the chicken farmers, the industries in Waynesboro, and Merck want to sit down and talk about it . . . I'll be there.
Until then . . . Natalie, go find something else to do.
If any other readers of Page County Watch would like to post a response to Natalie, hit the Comments button. Or, if you would like your own Blog, email me
your letter and I'll post it as a main Blog.
Alice Richmond
The May 1 meeting
Here's What happened at the May 1 meeting
The May 1 Board of Supervisors meeting was a Work Session. It just happened to be that we listed that meeting in the ad. We did it to try to reach people that hadn't heard, and to try to get them on the website.
The Flood Plain Ordinance was not on the agenda.
About 30 - 40 people showed up at the meeting in response to the ad, but only 5 of them had an email address. We got as many as would fit in the room to come inside anyway, just to show that people were paying attention and would come to these Supervisors meetings.
Here is my impression of the agenda items. (Remember, this is not "minutes of the meeting." It's just my notes, in my subjective opinion.) If you want the actual official minutes, you can wait until they post them on the county website, in a month or two.
1. The first item was a request from Powell Markowitz to lower the personal property tax for aircraft. He said the current rate of $2.16 is higher than surrounding airports and people will put their planes in Culpepper or Warrenton rather than come here. He said the airport provides jobs and needs to be competitive. Personal property tax for cars is $3.90. There was no action taken by the Board at this time.
2. The Town of Stanley wants to change their boundary lines slightly, to extend water and sewer service.
3. The Stanley Little League needs a new ball park and they want to coordinate investment and actions with the county.
4. The Stanley Fire Department needs an approval letter so their EMTs can give medicines when needed.
5. Charlie Campbell, Commissioner of Revenue, wants a new position approved for his department. He needs a certified appraiser on staff to a) correct the mistakes the Blue Ridge Mass Appraisal company made this time and b) monitor any appraisers hired next time. This sounded like a very good idea. Charlie said the people deserve and the law requires that the appraisals be done correctly.
6. J D Cave, who owns the local radio station, appealed to the Board because his business license was turned down. Something about VDOT sending a letter saying the electric pole was too close to the highway. The electric pole is in a line of electric poles, and for some reason the Page County Zoning ordinance says he can't get a business license without VDOT approval. Actually I may have that wrong, I seemed to get confused over what was happening. In the end, I'm pretty sure the Supervisors said to just give this man a license and stop being goofy about it.
7. Charlie Campbell pointed out that many times people ask for a business license to do an Internet business out of their homes, and they can't approve the license because there isn't a commercial entrance to the building, which is ridiculous because there are no customers or suppliers coming to an Internet business. So he said the county misses out on the revenue, because he doesn't think the business stops operating just because Page County didn't issue it a license. The Supervisors said this is an issue that should be forwarded to the Planning Commission for a Zoning Ordinance change to allow Internet businesses. We'll put a few stars next to this one to see what happens to it.
8. The big news of the night came when Mark Belton asked the Supervisors if they wanted to rescind their vote to buy the Wallace Building for a County Office Building. It turns out the owner of the building does not think there is a valid other buyer for it. The argument FOR buying it was that the county could sell it to another business, and if they didn't buy it, the owner might want to take a 10 year contract to make it a warehouse. But the arguments against buying it were that it should be left to be available for other business and the county should look elsewhere, because it would be more expensive anyway. The vote was to rescind, so the Wallace Building is no longer being considered as the new County Office space. A committee was set up headed by John Rust to come up with a new plan for the county office building.
That was it. The meeting was over.
After the meeting some of us introduced ourselves to the Supervisors and told them about Page County Watch and its purpose. We talked about the problem with the Flood Plain Ordinance and they assured us that it would not be passed. They had been under the impression that the state sent us a letter stating that our ordinance was not in compliance. They are getting a confirmation from Richmond that is not the case, and will end it as soon as they know our current ordinance is fine. We also pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan had been changed to say it was a goal of the county to pass ordinances to get houses and businesses off the flood plain. They said they knew about that and would correct it.
So we had verbal confirmation that all will be well in time. However, we will need to follow up until that is true in writing.
An important part of our discussion was "how can things like this happen?" In a county that is small and depends on volunteers to do its research and work, it can happen that there aren't any volunteers. In fact, it usually to always happens. So there may be some people with a special interest or an agenda, and they turn out to be the only people volunteering. If enough of them volunteer long enough, they can dominate a committee, and the result turns out to be biased toward the special interest, instead of a reflection of the interests of the county as a whole.
The conclusion: we need more participation in the local government so that there will be a wider base of volunteers to get stuff researched and done for the county.
That's what Page County Watch is for. One idea we had is that we could build a "skills database" of people who live in the county. There is an amazing set of skills here from retired people. The Boomers are starting to show up, and this is not your grandmother's retirement. People are showing up from age 55 and up, with their health and their skills well intact. Many people in the county now have experience and time to provide the volunteers county government needs. With a wide base of interests, things like the Comprehensive Plan and the new Zoning Ordinance changes could be made to better reflect the interests of the whole, rather than the interests of one set of special interests. Plan to come to the Planning Commission and the Supervisors meetings. They're better than Reality TV!
Blog about what you think! Hit the Comments button at the bottom. You can sign your name or post anonymously. Others will see your Blog. Get your friends and neighbors to go to the site and sign up for the NewsList. If you want your own blog, email me and I'll post what you write.
Alice Richmond
The May 1 Board of Supervisors meeting was a Work Session. It just happened to be that we listed that meeting in the ad. We did it to try to reach people that hadn't heard, and to try to get them on the website.
The Flood Plain Ordinance was not on the agenda.
About 30 - 40 people showed up at the meeting in response to the ad, but only 5 of them had an email address. We got as many as would fit in the room to come inside anyway, just to show that people were paying attention and would come to these Supervisors meetings.
Here is my impression of the agenda items. (Remember, this is not "minutes of the meeting." It's just my notes, in my subjective opinion.) If you want the actual official minutes, you can wait until they post them on the county website, in a month or two.
1. The first item was a request from Powell Markowitz to lower the personal property tax for aircraft. He said the current rate of $2.16 is higher than surrounding airports and people will put their planes in Culpepper or Warrenton rather than come here. He said the airport provides jobs and needs to be competitive. Personal property tax for cars is $3.90. There was no action taken by the Board at this time.
2. The Town of Stanley wants to change their boundary lines slightly, to extend water and sewer service.
3. The Stanley Little League needs a new ball park and they want to coordinate investment and actions with the county.
4. The Stanley Fire Department needs an approval letter so their EMTs can give medicines when needed.
5. Charlie Campbell, Commissioner of Revenue, wants a new position approved for his department. He needs a certified appraiser on staff to a) correct the mistakes the Blue Ridge Mass Appraisal company made this time and b) monitor any appraisers hired next time. This sounded like a very good idea. Charlie said the people deserve and the law requires that the appraisals be done correctly.
6. J D Cave, who owns the local radio station, appealed to the Board because his business license was turned down. Something about VDOT sending a letter saying the electric pole was too close to the highway. The electric pole is in a line of electric poles, and for some reason the Page County Zoning ordinance says he can't get a business license without VDOT approval. Actually I may have that wrong, I seemed to get confused over what was happening. In the end, I'm pretty sure the Supervisors said to just give this man a license and stop being goofy about it.
7. Charlie Campbell pointed out that many times people ask for a business license to do an Internet business out of their homes, and they can't approve the license because there isn't a commercial entrance to the building, which is ridiculous because there are no customers or suppliers coming to an Internet business. So he said the county misses out on the revenue, because he doesn't think the business stops operating just because Page County didn't issue it a license. The Supervisors said this is an issue that should be forwarded to the Planning Commission for a Zoning Ordinance change to allow Internet businesses. We'll put a few stars next to this one to see what happens to it.
8. The big news of the night came when Mark Belton asked the Supervisors if they wanted to rescind their vote to buy the Wallace Building for a County Office Building. It turns out the owner of the building does not think there is a valid other buyer for it. The argument FOR buying it was that the county could sell it to another business, and if they didn't buy it, the owner might want to take a 10 year contract to make it a warehouse. But the arguments against buying it were that it should be left to be available for other business and the county should look elsewhere, because it would be more expensive anyway. The vote was to rescind, so the Wallace Building is no longer being considered as the new County Office space. A committee was set up headed by John Rust to come up with a new plan for the county office building.
That was it. The meeting was over.
After the meeting some of us introduced ourselves to the Supervisors and told them about Page County Watch and its purpose. We talked about the problem with the Flood Plain Ordinance and they assured us that it would not be passed. They had been under the impression that the state sent us a letter stating that our ordinance was not in compliance. They are getting a confirmation from Richmond that is not the case, and will end it as soon as they know our current ordinance is fine. We also pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan had been changed to say it was a goal of the county to pass ordinances to get houses and businesses off the flood plain. They said they knew about that and would correct it.
So we had verbal confirmation that all will be well in time. However, we will need to follow up until that is true in writing.
An important part of our discussion was "how can things like this happen?" In a county that is small and depends on volunteers to do its research and work, it can happen that there aren't any volunteers. In fact, it usually to always happens. So there may be some people with a special interest or an agenda, and they turn out to be the only people volunteering. If enough of them volunteer long enough, they can dominate a committee, and the result turns out to be biased toward the special interest, instead of a reflection of the interests of the county as a whole.
The conclusion: we need more participation in the local government so that there will be a wider base of volunteers to get stuff researched and done for the county.
That's what Page County Watch is for. One idea we had is that we could build a "skills database" of people who live in the county. There is an amazing set of skills here from retired people. The Boomers are starting to show up, and this is not your grandmother's retirement. People are showing up from age 55 and up, with their health and their skills well intact. Many people in the county now have experience and time to provide the volunteers county government needs. With a wide base of interests, things like the Comprehensive Plan and the new Zoning Ordinance changes could be made to better reflect the interests of the whole, rather than the interests of one set of special interests. Plan to come to the Planning Commission and the Supervisors meetings. They're better than Reality TV!
Blog about what you think! Hit the Comments button at the bottom. You can sign your name or post anonymously. Others will see your Blog. Get your friends and neighbors to go to the site and sign up for the NewsList. If you want your own blog, email me and I'll post what you write.
Alice Richmond
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
