This was posted by Barky Von Schnauzer farther down under another topic. But it is important. We do not have the money to pay for this landfill to continue. And yet it continues. We have about 20 Tons of trash a day in page County.
GUEST BLOG
On the subject of the landfill it does seem that we are not breaking even, with large equipment purchases (Compactor, etc.) and only receiving 100 tons of waste per day and all the ongoing monitoring costs, both gas and ground water monitoring. Keep in mind it takes approximately 200-250 tons of trash per day, paying tons to break even, with a Sub-Title D Landfill. In addition, we have the on-going post closure costs of the Stanley Landfill, this landfill (and many like it) called HB 1205, as in House Bill 1205 is an unlined facility. So chances are there will be additional costs associated with remediation, check out the Ivy landfill in Albermarle County, they are curently in GPS (Ground Water Protection Standards), this is a remeadiation process to abate and take care of any ground water problems the landfill is/or has caused. We have 30 years of post closure care at Stanley. The county already has a passive system for burning off gas the old candle sticks as they have been called, as well as they manage an active gas extraction system which pulls methane gas from the Stanley Landfill, this is the active system. I beleive the county is only in about the 5th or 6th year in post closure care at Stanley. And again this is an unlined facility, Battle Creek is a lined facility meaning a compsoite liner is used to protect the ground, however EPA can not without a doubt say that even a lined landfill will not leak at some point in the future. The solid waste management regs are constantly being amended and changed and their has been discussion to make monitoring 50 years instead of 30 years. Where I am going with this is that costs are going to be ongoing for a long time with both landfills. To close Battle Creek, would mean the start of 30 years of ongoing post closure care while we would still have 24 to 25 years of post closure care at Stanley, and we would still have to construct a Transfer station, which has ongoing costs as well. Hind sight being 20/20 as they say, we should have closed the landfill that is Stanley back in 1994 when post closure requirements were only 10 years in length and not 30, we could have constructed a transfer station, handled only the waste generated in Page County, know that all the waste prior to 1994 would have been only Page Conty's trash being deposited at the Stanley landfill. Ths is what Warren County did, they closed their landfill prior to 1994 constructed a transfer station, and only had to monitor their facility (Landfill) for 10 years. And even with a transfer station, in addition to operational costs their would be transportation costs to Culpeper and that is even if they were allowed by their permit to accept waste from Page County. What is funny to me is their is a transfer station (Warren County's in Bentonville) less than 20 miles from Battle Creek taking their waste almost three hours to a landfill in Richmond. We should be opening up discussions again with Warren County to get their waste (approximately 100-110 tons per day) so we could at least maybe break even. They have quality municipal waste such as Page, and it seems we could offset their transportation cost (traveling 3 hours) to about 30 minutes and offer Warren County a tipping fee palitable to them and Page as well. Again we are only receiving about 100 or so tons now while I believe all three towns are dumping for free in this 100 tons. What is even more interesting, is to follow the Waste Management truck(s) outside of the town limits and watch them pick up green and blue containers and put them in the same truck as the "free" town waste, who is paying for that trash, our tax $$$. What is even more interesting is the businesses who have green/blue trash containers whos trash also goes into the waste management truck, so if we (County tax payers) are really paying for the towns residents to dump for free while are their residents outside of the town as well as businesses dumping in the "free" truck. If this is the case why have conveience sites, allow the WM truck to pick up trash at every household in Page County, on our tax paying tab. Just food for thought to go along with the Crooked County Book and Marvin Bush
Showing posts with label At What Price. Show all posts
Showing posts with label At What Price. Show all posts
Friday, September 28, 2007
Monday, September 17, 2007
The Elephant in the Room
The Elephant in the Room (At What Price, Part 3)
There is a history in this county, that impacts the culture and the way things are perceived to be. Like it or not, that history has something, I'm not sure exactly what, to do with the Landfill. As I've looked at various actions currently, I think it looks like not only the past, but a lot of the present and the future, also have something to do with the landfill. Why? Because the landfill has in the past, and seems to be continuing in the present and the future, to be using up a considerable number of our tax dollars. I don't exactly know why yet.
I'm not talking about the 11 cents on the dollar, oh, yeah, it costs money to get rid of trash, type numbers. I'm not talking about the $400,000 a year in operating expenses plus the $600,000 a year in debt service plus the couple of million here and there that gets classified as new investment to open up new cells.
I don't actually know what I'm talking about yet. I'm still looking to find out.
Maybe someone reading this knows, and will tell me. Gary Gibbs suggested that I go get the court documents from June 2005. I'm doing that. It's in process. I've also been offered a copy of the actual contract buyout documents. But right now, I'm not quite sure what's going on. I'm just uncomfortable that the numbers and the documents I'm seeing don't have all their pieces yet.
Someone else suggested that I go back through the Board of Supervisors meetings from that time period. That would be the time period before electronic records were kept, so it would be quite difficult. Plus the meetings were closed. Perhaps someone out there would like to tell me where to look.
You see, here's what has me uncomfortable. I'm meeting the people who were around a long time, and I'm not meeting any Bad Guys. I read that Ed Kieloch book, but it didn't ring true to me. It didn't seem to present a rounded picture of what was happening, or present motivations, or describe the complexity, of how what looks like a bunch of normal and well intentioned people could have gotten into such a mess. It painted everybody as a Bad Guy, and then I met them, one by one, and they just didn't have any horns. People have flaws. They respond oddly under pressure. And they make mistakes. You can’t elect anybody to do anything, without later finding out they’re not perfect. Human beings are imperfect. Once in a while, one of them lashes out and tells the people not to touch the pastries, but things like that are just human mistakes, not actual character flaws.
It would seem like we could say, “It’s time to forget it and move on.” I would agree, but there are three reasons why we can’t.
First, we can’t forget it because we have the same names running for office or sitting in office that we had at various times during the landfill issue. Raymond Kite. Charlie Hoke. Carol Lee Strickler. Gerald Cubbage. Allen Cubbage. C R Suddith. Ron Wilson. Charlie Campbell. And more. These names appear in the past, the present, and in hopes for the future. If we don’t know what happened before, how will we prevent it from happening again?
Second, we can’t forget it because it hasn’t been fixed. That’s the part we need the contract documents to untangle. It seems it got somewhat fixed, sort of. But you can’t turn your head and look away yet. It’s not gone.
And then there’s a third reason we can’t forget it. The third reason is: you can’t forget what you never knew. People get impressions, perceptions, misunderstandings, half-truths, and just plain wrong information. It gets in their heads. And if nobody challenges it, it rots there, where it becomes a memory of something that never happened. This mistaken memory sits there where it calls and recalls emotion, which eventually triggers rage, frustration, and a sense of powerlessness. It is not empowering to fail to know. It is empowering to know. If we don’t know something, but we think we know it, that is the worst of all worlds.
Right now, in this beautiful county, full of wonderful people, we have a culture that promotes “lack of empowerment”. Because too many people think they know something that never happened. It creates a Boogeyman. It encourages fearfulness. It incubates apathy. It creates a populace that is willing to roll over and play dead. It reminds me of that old saying, “Nobody can be your boss without your permission.” The citizens are the boss of the Board of Supervisors. It’s not the other way around. A long term resident told me once, “There’s no point going in and talking to them (the Board). They just let you talk a while, and then they go do what they want to do anyway.”
Sarah, this man who said that to me was not talking about Allen Cubbage. It doesn’t matter which Board it is, or who the Chairman is. These aren’t professional politicians. They sometimes seem to the citizens to be arrogant baboons, and that is more than likely to happen, no matter who gets the job, once in a while. We just hope that the people who are elected have an intention to be kind, an intention to be responsive, and an intention to respond to the people. Even if they do, there will always be a time or two, under pressure, when it won’t look that way.
So here’s what I think.
I think we have to go back and correct the record on this landfill thing. I think we can’t let the Ed Kieloch book sit out there as the only recorded history of it, with the Karen Kwiatkowsky article as the entry point to Page County that comes up every time a tourist wants to rent a cabin. I think we can’t do well at marketing the county for business and tourism when it looks like people can expect to meet Boss Hogg and Cooter on Main Street.
I’m not talking about writing any books. I’m talking about getting the minutes of the Board meetings during the right period, getting the contract documents, and the court documents, and getting it clear and straight who did what to whom when. Summarizing it. And posting it on the Internet.
I think that’s the only way we’ll know.
Perhaps many people will say we don’t need to know, that it’s a dead horse. But I say . . . it’s a dead Elephant. And its carcass is rotting in the living room, while we all turn our eyes and our focus away from the current landfill issue, and bleed our property taxes onto the living room carpet.
So, whomever would like to help me find out . . . email Research@PageCountyWatch.org or post your clues for where to look right here.
And whomever thinks this isn’t important, just go Blog under a different post.
Alice
There is a history in this county, that impacts the culture and the way things are perceived to be. Like it or not, that history has something, I'm not sure exactly what, to do with the Landfill. As I've looked at various actions currently, I think it looks like not only the past, but a lot of the present and the future, also have something to do with the landfill. Why? Because the landfill has in the past, and seems to be continuing in the present and the future, to be using up a considerable number of our tax dollars. I don't exactly know why yet.
I'm not talking about the 11 cents on the dollar, oh, yeah, it costs money to get rid of trash, type numbers. I'm not talking about the $400,000 a year in operating expenses plus the $600,000 a year in debt service plus the couple of million here and there that gets classified as new investment to open up new cells.
I don't actually know what I'm talking about yet. I'm still looking to find out.
Maybe someone reading this knows, and will tell me. Gary Gibbs suggested that I go get the court documents from June 2005. I'm doing that. It's in process. I've also been offered a copy of the actual contract buyout documents. But right now, I'm not quite sure what's going on. I'm just uncomfortable that the numbers and the documents I'm seeing don't have all their pieces yet.
Someone else suggested that I go back through the Board of Supervisors meetings from that time period. That would be the time period before electronic records were kept, so it would be quite difficult. Plus the meetings were closed. Perhaps someone out there would like to tell me where to look.
You see, here's what has me uncomfortable. I'm meeting the people who were around a long time, and I'm not meeting any Bad Guys. I read that Ed Kieloch book, but it didn't ring true to me. It didn't seem to present a rounded picture of what was happening, or present motivations, or describe the complexity, of how what looks like a bunch of normal and well intentioned people could have gotten into such a mess. It painted everybody as a Bad Guy, and then I met them, one by one, and they just didn't have any horns. People have flaws. They respond oddly under pressure. And they make mistakes. You can’t elect anybody to do anything, without later finding out they’re not perfect. Human beings are imperfect. Once in a while, one of them lashes out and tells the people not to touch the pastries, but things like that are just human mistakes, not actual character flaws.
It would seem like we could say, “It’s time to forget it and move on.” I would agree, but there are three reasons why we can’t.
First, we can’t forget it because we have the same names running for office or sitting in office that we had at various times during the landfill issue. Raymond Kite. Charlie Hoke. Carol Lee Strickler. Gerald Cubbage. Allen Cubbage. C R Suddith. Ron Wilson. Charlie Campbell. And more. These names appear in the past, the present, and in hopes for the future. If we don’t know what happened before, how will we prevent it from happening again?
Second, we can’t forget it because it hasn’t been fixed. That’s the part we need the contract documents to untangle. It seems it got somewhat fixed, sort of. But you can’t turn your head and look away yet. It’s not gone.
And then there’s a third reason we can’t forget it. The third reason is: you can’t forget what you never knew. People get impressions, perceptions, misunderstandings, half-truths, and just plain wrong information. It gets in their heads. And if nobody challenges it, it rots there, where it becomes a memory of something that never happened. This mistaken memory sits there where it calls and recalls emotion, which eventually triggers rage, frustration, and a sense of powerlessness. It is not empowering to fail to know. It is empowering to know. If we don’t know something, but we think we know it, that is the worst of all worlds.
Right now, in this beautiful county, full of wonderful people, we have a culture that promotes “lack of empowerment”. Because too many people think they know something that never happened. It creates a Boogeyman. It encourages fearfulness. It incubates apathy. It creates a populace that is willing to roll over and play dead. It reminds me of that old saying, “Nobody can be your boss without your permission.” The citizens are the boss of the Board of Supervisors. It’s not the other way around. A long term resident told me once, “There’s no point going in and talking to them (the Board). They just let you talk a while, and then they go do what they want to do anyway.”
Sarah, this man who said that to me was not talking about Allen Cubbage. It doesn’t matter which Board it is, or who the Chairman is. These aren’t professional politicians. They sometimes seem to the citizens to be arrogant baboons, and that is more than likely to happen, no matter who gets the job, once in a while. We just hope that the people who are elected have an intention to be kind, an intention to be responsive, and an intention to respond to the people. Even if they do, there will always be a time or two, under pressure, when it won’t look that way.
So here’s what I think.
I think we have to go back and correct the record on this landfill thing. I think we can’t let the Ed Kieloch book sit out there as the only recorded history of it, with the Karen Kwiatkowsky article as the entry point to Page County that comes up every time a tourist wants to rent a cabin. I think we can’t do well at marketing the county for business and tourism when it looks like people can expect to meet Boss Hogg and Cooter on Main Street.
I’m not talking about writing any books. I’m talking about getting the minutes of the Board meetings during the right period, getting the contract documents, and the court documents, and getting it clear and straight who did what to whom when. Summarizing it. And posting it on the Internet.
I think that’s the only way we’ll know.
Perhaps many people will say we don’t need to know, that it’s a dead horse. But I say . . . it’s a dead Elephant. And its carcass is rotting in the living room, while we all turn our eyes and our focus away from the current landfill issue, and bleed our property taxes onto the living room carpet.
So, whomever would like to help me find out . . . email Research@PageCountyWatch.org or post your clues for where to look right here.
And whomever thinks this isn’t important, just go Blog under a different post.
Alice
Saturday, September 15, 2007
The Clique that Rules Page County
According to Bloggers on this site, there is a Clique ruling Page County. The members of this clique are both Republicans and Democrats, although it seems the Democrats usually just voluntarily bow out and let the Republicans primarily win. What NICE Democrats! People who run for office as either a Republican or a Democrat, are subject to being co-opted as members of this clique after they win. So if they are not members before they are elected, they become members after the election, and get enveloped in the arms of the clique, where their minds are influenced, and they change their votes, AGAINST the people, in favor of the dangerous Clique. The only people who are not subject to this seductive pressure to join are the Independents.
Folks, I didn't write that, I'm just summarizing the opinions posted on the Blog.
But this next part, I did write:
Calling on my twenty plus years as a corporate manager, and my seven years teaching Organizational Behavior at the college level . ..
that's not really as outrageous a proposition as it at first sounds.
Every group in humanity has a culture, really a subculture, that defines its “rules of behavior” and its accepted norms. This will happen in every human group, be it a family, a high school, a summer camp, an office, a farm, or a factory. In high school, which is where most of us first noticed that ‘cliques’ existed, this clique will define the measure of what it takes to be cool. Others will copy the mode of dress of the clique they wish to join, as there will be various types of cliques, and membership will center around behaviors such as dress code, language, tattoos, and risk taking. Membership in said Clique confers privileges. You are respected by others. You are associated with high prestige people. It enhances your self esteem. This is true whether the clique is a group that rides motorcycles, or a group that rabble rouses, or a group that governs. A clique runs Page County Watch. Every person chooses which cliques they join, and which cliques they aspire to join, in their daily life choices.
If you are not in the “in” clique, you will be in the “out” clique.
In a few scattered places, there will always be a Lone Ranger, who bears no allegiance, and carries his own flag. But even then, others will associate themselves with HIM, and then there’s a clique of the Lone Ranger.
When we elect our governing officials, we hope that each of them will consider US to be their clique. We hope that their clique allegiance will be to all the people they represent. If we don’t want illegal aliens in our county, we hope they will work to keep illegal aliens out. If we don’t want trucks barreling over 211, we hope they will do what it takes to keep . . . wait a minute. If we don’t want trucks, that pretty much means we don’t want business.
So now we’ve presented our elected officials with a dilemma. We do want business. But we don’t want trucks. We do want jobs. But we don’t want to change the rural nature. We’ve given them a dilemma, and a paradox. One too difficult to solve.
Now even though our elected officials have listened to us, and have wanted to make US their clique . . . they don’t know what to do. The question is too hard. And let’s not forget, these are basically volunteers. We don’t actually pay them enough to quit their day jobs to do this.
So in the time they have to work on this, they say, “what should I do?” They look around to see where to get advice and information. They look in the audience of their meetings, and who do they find? Empty seats, basically. So what else are they going to do? They can’t wait for a referendum on the ballot with every decision. They have to make decisions. So they obviously, as anyone would do, have to call on their own value system, and the people they consider to also have good judgement, which must be, would always be, their own friends. Anybody would do that. And as it happens, in a small town, where people can sit around and rock on the porch, their friends happen to also be in the Rotary Club, or fellow Republicans, or Democrats that are sitting at the next table at the Supper club. Well, who else would it be? What else would you expect them to do?
And then to those who aren’t in that circle of friends, who don’t go to those specific places, it looks like a clique.
By strict definition, it is a clique.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
So, yes, I think there is a Clique that Rules Page County. And by the nature of Humanity, there always will be. You, the voters, get the right to object to or affirm which clique the people you elect are in. If you throw out everybody who is in office right now, because you object to the clique they are in, you will get new people who are in a new clique, and then there will be a DIFFERENT clique who rules Page County. Maybe it will be better, maybe it will be worse. But it will be a clique, just the same. The trick is to get the voice of the people to be so loud it pressures whichever clique is in power to get with the program.
So, speak up and Speak Out. And most importantly, say what you say based on facts and numbers and research, whenever possible. Keep the personal attacks down, and the objective arguments up. There’s going to be a Clique that rules Page County, whether it’s this one or the next one. So give that clique what it needs to do the job right. The Clique isn’t Evil, Bad, or Corrupt. It’s just a natural phenomenon, like weather.
It’s Nature’s Law. So go with it, don’t fight it. And most importantly, don’t throw up your hands in defeat and say, “why should I vote?” Vote and Blog and Call in to the radio show. Your voice will influence the clique. Maybe you think it didn’t in the past, but it did, it just sometimes takes a while.
What do you think? Post your Comments.
Folks, I didn't write that, I'm just summarizing the opinions posted on the Blog.
But this next part, I did write:
Calling on my twenty plus years as a corporate manager, and my seven years teaching Organizational Behavior at the college level . ..
that's not really as outrageous a proposition as it at first sounds.
Every group in humanity has a culture, really a subculture, that defines its “rules of behavior” and its accepted norms. This will happen in every human group, be it a family, a high school, a summer camp, an office, a farm, or a factory. In high school, which is where most of us first noticed that ‘cliques’ existed, this clique will define the measure of what it takes to be cool. Others will copy the mode of dress of the clique they wish to join, as there will be various types of cliques, and membership will center around behaviors such as dress code, language, tattoos, and risk taking. Membership in said Clique confers privileges. You are respected by others. You are associated with high prestige people. It enhances your self esteem. This is true whether the clique is a group that rides motorcycles, or a group that rabble rouses, or a group that governs. A clique runs Page County Watch. Every person chooses which cliques they join, and which cliques they aspire to join, in their daily life choices.
If you are not in the “in” clique, you will be in the “out” clique.
In a few scattered places, there will always be a Lone Ranger, who bears no allegiance, and carries his own flag. But even then, others will associate themselves with HIM, and then there’s a clique of the Lone Ranger.
When we elect our governing officials, we hope that each of them will consider US to be their clique. We hope that their clique allegiance will be to all the people they represent. If we don’t want illegal aliens in our county, we hope they will work to keep illegal aliens out. If we don’t want trucks barreling over 211, we hope they will do what it takes to keep . . . wait a minute. If we don’t want trucks, that pretty much means we don’t want business.
So now we’ve presented our elected officials with a dilemma. We do want business. But we don’t want trucks. We do want jobs. But we don’t want to change the rural nature. We’ve given them a dilemma, and a paradox. One too difficult to solve.
Now even though our elected officials have listened to us, and have wanted to make US their clique . . . they don’t know what to do. The question is too hard. And let’s not forget, these are basically volunteers. We don’t actually pay them enough to quit their day jobs to do this.
So in the time they have to work on this, they say, “what should I do?” They look around to see where to get advice and information. They look in the audience of their meetings, and who do they find? Empty seats, basically. So what else are they going to do? They can’t wait for a referendum on the ballot with every decision. They have to make decisions. So they obviously, as anyone would do, have to call on their own value system, and the people they consider to also have good judgement, which must be, would always be, their own friends. Anybody would do that. And as it happens, in a small town, where people can sit around and rock on the porch, their friends happen to also be in the Rotary Club, or fellow Republicans, or Democrats that are sitting at the next table at the Supper club. Well, who else would it be? What else would you expect them to do?
And then to those who aren’t in that circle of friends, who don’t go to those specific places, it looks like a clique.
By strict definition, it is a clique.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
So, yes, I think there is a Clique that Rules Page County. And by the nature of Humanity, there always will be. You, the voters, get the right to object to or affirm which clique the people you elect are in. If you throw out everybody who is in office right now, because you object to the clique they are in, you will get new people who are in a new clique, and then there will be a DIFFERENT clique who rules Page County. Maybe it will be better, maybe it will be worse. But it will be a clique, just the same. The trick is to get the voice of the people to be so loud it pressures whichever clique is in power to get with the program.
So, speak up and Speak Out. And most importantly, say what you say based on facts and numbers and research, whenever possible. Keep the personal attacks down, and the objective arguments up. There’s going to be a Clique that rules Page County, whether it’s this one or the next one. So give that clique what it needs to do the job right. The Clique isn’t Evil, Bad, or Corrupt. It’s just a natural phenomenon, like weather.
It’s Nature’s Law. So go with it, don’t fight it. And most importantly, don’t throw up your hands in defeat and say, “why should I vote?” Vote and Blog and Call in to the radio show. Your voice will influence the clique. Maybe you think it didn’t in the past, but it did, it just sometimes takes a while.
What do you think? Post your Comments.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Ideas to Stop the Bleeding
Steve Whisler made this comment and it seemed like a good start to begin a Blog Thread about possible solutions, so I'm posting it as its own Blog. Post here ideas for solutions. We can feel confident that the Supervisors will either read this here or someone will print it out for them and show it to them, eventually. And as ideas develop, people who see the Supervisors or call them, or go to public meetings, can talk about it and tell them what they think.
"Steve Whisler said:"
"All of the political rhetoric going on about the very real landfill problem is beginning to sound like a broken record of Alvin and the Chipmunks Greatest Hit.”
Droning on about who did what and when doesn’t do a thing to solve the problem. As a practical matter it is old news. The landfill is what it is. To be sure, a string of bad decisions were made leaving the county in an increasingly troublesome situation. The reality is, as someone mentioned previously, the county has to put its trash somewhere.
There was also a suggestion that the county landfill should be shut down and the entire county’s trash be transported to Culpeper for disposal. What would be cost to haul and pay “tip fees” for disposing of the county’s trash in Culpeper? How and where would you stage the trash for transport to Culpeper? Also consider that there probably would be a bit more truck traffic involved. Would that be acceptable? I guess I just don’t see Battlecreek being shut down. I am not aware of any county that doesn’t have its own landfill.
However, the suggestion to carry the county’s trash elsewhere is perhaps a clue as to where we might look for answers. It is my understanding Fauquier County has a great deal of solid waste reduction and disposal capability they have acquired using state grant money. Could not Page County do the same? If the trash has to be staged at the landfill and then carted away, why not just process it right at the landfill? Many of the technology based solutions are held out as “green” or near “green.” Some of the processes produce energy related by-products and could save some operating costs as well. There may even be a few better paying jobs created.
There seem to be real solutions readily available that Page County hasn’t yet explored. It’s probably reasonable to assume there isn’t enough county staff to do anything significant any time soon. At least not without help!
Problems aren’t solved by wringing one’s hands and continuing to proclaim “We have a problem. Damn those who created it!” Rather than continuing to beat that poor old dead horse, would it not be a better use of time and energy to look for solutions? We can continue to run in circles and watch the landfill bleed or we can do something about it. The sooner, the better!
Moving forward in the near term is possible but doing so would require a few citizens to roll up their sleeves and do a little hard work. Are there any folks out there who might be willing to help find solutions to the problems that plague the landfill?
This all leads me to a question for Jim Turner and J.D. Cave, as well as for any other candidate for Supervisor, “If you are elected, what will you do to solve the existing problems associated with the landfill?”
"Steve Whisler said:"
"All of the political rhetoric going on about the very real landfill problem is beginning to sound like a broken record of Alvin and the Chipmunks Greatest Hit.”
Droning on about who did what and when doesn’t do a thing to solve the problem. As a practical matter it is old news. The landfill is what it is. To be sure, a string of bad decisions were made leaving the county in an increasingly troublesome situation. The reality is, as someone mentioned previously, the county has to put its trash somewhere.
There was also a suggestion that the county landfill should be shut down and the entire county’s trash be transported to Culpeper for disposal. What would be cost to haul and pay “tip fees” for disposing of the county’s trash in Culpeper? How and where would you stage the trash for transport to Culpeper? Also consider that there probably would be a bit more truck traffic involved. Would that be acceptable? I guess I just don’t see Battlecreek being shut down. I am not aware of any county that doesn’t have its own landfill.
However, the suggestion to carry the county’s trash elsewhere is perhaps a clue as to where we might look for answers. It is my understanding Fauquier County has a great deal of solid waste reduction and disposal capability they have acquired using state grant money. Could not Page County do the same? If the trash has to be staged at the landfill and then carted away, why not just process it right at the landfill? Many of the technology based solutions are held out as “green” or near “green.” Some of the processes produce energy related by-products and could save some operating costs as well. There may even be a few better paying jobs created.
There seem to be real solutions readily available that Page County hasn’t yet explored. It’s probably reasonable to assume there isn’t enough county staff to do anything significant any time soon. At least not without help!
Problems aren’t solved by wringing one’s hands and continuing to proclaim “We have a problem. Damn those who created it!” Rather than continuing to beat that poor old dead horse, would it not be a better use of time and energy to look for solutions? We can continue to run in circles and watch the landfill bleed or we can do something about it. The sooner, the better!
Moving forward in the near term is possible but doing so would require a few citizens to roll up their sleeves and do a little hard work. Are there any folks out there who might be willing to help find solutions to the problems that plague the landfill?
This all leads me to a question for Jim Turner and J.D. Cave, as well as for any other candidate for Supervisor, “If you are elected, what will you do to solve the existing problems associated with the landfill?”
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
The Landfill is still bleeding.
ANONYMOUS made this post on September 11.
"Your comments, People have to get involved and pay attention to what the Board is doing, or what will happen may not be the same county and land we all appreciate so much.
This sounds like you could be talking about the Battlecreek Landfill.
People got involved; People Paid Attention; The county and land are not the same anymore! And like the people have tried to tell you over and over....their voices were simply a distant cry to the Board sitting at that time. At least, the flood plain folks had positive results with the present board. And at least the landfill is back in the hands of the county."
Everybody -- post the history here. Who did it. What did they do. I think this is not over. The landfill is still costing us money. Big money, when you compare it to our tax bill. This is not resolved.
"Your comments, People have to get involved and pay attention to what the Board is doing, or what will happen may not be the same county and land we all appreciate so much.
This sounds like you could be talking about the Battlecreek Landfill.
People got involved; People Paid Attention; The county and land are not the same anymore! And like the people have tried to tell you over and over....their voices were simply a distant cry to the Board sitting at that time. At least, the flood plain folks had positive results with the present board. And at least the landfill is back in the hands of the county."
Everybody -- post the history here. Who did it. What did they do. I think this is not over. The landfill is still costing us money. Big money, when you compare it to our tax bill. This is not resolved.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
This is very disturbing
For the Speak Out radio show, I've invited all the candidates to come on and speak. So to kick off the program, I thought it would be good to have our new Registrar give us a summary of the elections process: how it works, and how we can feel confident that our votes count. I called the Registrar, Carol Gaunt, last week and invited her on the show.
As Carol is new, she at first suggested that one of the members of the Electoral Board appear with her, and I thought that was a great idea. She said she had to check with them before committing, which is a reasonable response. The next day, she told me that they "checked with the state board of elections" who told them she could only appear if
a) there were no call-ins allowed
b) she had the questions in advance
c) the interview was taped.
I said we couldn't tape the interview, but I would agree to allow no call ins and give her the questions in advance. She said that would probably be okay. Over the weekend, I emailed her the questions.
Here are the questions I sent:
Questions for Carol Gaunt
1. What is your background (resume)?
2. What are the responsibilities of the Registrar?
3. Who is on the Electoral Board, and how are they appointed? How long have they been on the Board? What are their responsibilities?
4. How many registered voters do we have in Page County?
5. How many people usually come out to vote?
6. How are the votes counted? What is the process for counting them?
7. What about the computer votes? How are they counted? How do the computer votes and the paper ballots get added together?
8. Are the computer votes safe? Are we sure they are being counted correctly? If we have to have a recount, would we be able to do it?
9. What is the procedure for making sure our voting process is clean? Would it be possible for dead people to vote? Would it be possible for illegal aliens to vote? How do we make sure people are only voting one time?
10. How are absentee ballots counted? How do we know they are really coming from the person who is registered?
11. What would you like to say to the listeners about the voting process?
On Tuesday morning, I received an email back from Carol, stating that after further consultations, she would be unable to participate in the broadcast. Her reason is that the timing takes her away from the office during a busy election season.
Now. What I have posted here is a set of facts. If I were speculating, I would say that the voters are not being well served by being told that the Registrar doesn't have time to kick off an informational meeting about the process of the elections. Or that the Registrar doesn't have time to answer questions about the voting process and its integrity.
What do you think? Blog here about your assessment of what just happened, and also tune in to the Speak Out radio show on Friday at 9 a.m., 1330 AM. Call in to the show with your opinion, on 743-5167.
Alice
As Carol is new, she at first suggested that one of the members of the Electoral Board appear with her, and I thought that was a great idea. She said she had to check with them before committing, which is a reasonable response. The next day, she told me that they "checked with the state board of elections" who told them she could only appear if
a) there were no call-ins allowed
b) she had the questions in advance
c) the interview was taped.
I said we couldn't tape the interview, but I would agree to allow no call ins and give her the questions in advance. She said that would probably be okay. Over the weekend, I emailed her the questions.
Here are the questions I sent:
Questions for Carol Gaunt
1. What is your background (resume)?
2. What are the responsibilities of the Registrar?
3. Who is on the Electoral Board, and how are they appointed? How long have they been on the Board? What are their responsibilities?
4. How many registered voters do we have in Page County?
5. How many people usually come out to vote?
6. How are the votes counted? What is the process for counting them?
7. What about the computer votes? How are they counted? How do the computer votes and the paper ballots get added together?
8. Are the computer votes safe? Are we sure they are being counted correctly? If we have to have a recount, would we be able to do it?
9. What is the procedure for making sure our voting process is clean? Would it be possible for dead people to vote? Would it be possible for illegal aliens to vote? How do we make sure people are only voting one time?
10. How are absentee ballots counted? How do we know they are really coming from the person who is registered?
11. What would you like to say to the listeners about the voting process?
On Tuesday morning, I received an email back from Carol, stating that after further consultations, she would be unable to participate in the broadcast. Her reason is that the timing takes her away from the office during a busy election season.
Now. What I have posted here is a set of facts. If I were speculating, I would say that the voters are not being well served by being told that the Registrar doesn't have time to kick off an informational meeting about the process of the elections. Or that the Registrar doesn't have time to answer questions about the voting process and its integrity.
What do you think? Blog here about your assessment of what just happened, and also tune in to the Speak Out radio show on Friday at 9 a.m., 1330 AM. Call in to the show with your opinion, on 743-5167.
Alice
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Who needs a Fancy Road?
By Right or By Wrong?
The Page County Planning Commission is ready to consider changes to the zoning ordinance called the “By Right Subdivision” laws. On August 28, the Planning Commission watched a presentation by our county planner, Kevin Henry, about the consequences of our current By Right subdivision ordinance (county code 100). The problem, according to Mr. Henry’s presentation, is that the county’s code has a loophole. Some time ago, the county passed laws that you could only subdivide your land a limited number of times per so many years. The intention of that law, I can only infer from the presentation, was to slow growth and chase away developers. But there are two loopholes in the county code.
The first loophole is that after you subdivide once, the newly platted land becomes its own “parent tract” and it can subdivide again. This allows the land to be divided into more and more pieces, more quickly than the county intended.
The second loophole is that families can subdivide the land for their own use, and then the new family member can sell off the land.
I’m somewhat confused about what the rules are. As I get more into this, I’ll look up the codes and figure out the point better. As soon as I do, I’ll post them here.
Why is this a problem? Mr. Henry showed that a plot of land could then be fully developed within, say, a ten year period, but the streets would be all private roads, not state roads, and they wouldn’t follow the rules of the Virginia Dept of Transportation, and they wouldn’t be well maintained. Plus, the lot sizes would be all different, and in many cases there would be problems with septic fields for one piece of land actually being on somebody else’s property . The privately owned roads would then cause problems for snow removal, emergency services, fire trucks, etc. Plus, the county would not get a chance to get a developer to offer “proffers” for the development, and services required by the people who live there would not get paid for by the developers of the property.
On top of all that, when a person gets permission for the new plat (and these permission requests are coming into the county office about 1 every 3 days), they don’t have to show the surrounding land on their plat. That means they can get permission for a plat, but when the new owner tries to get a building permit, the county might have to say, “no, this is not a buildable lot because it’s next to a chicken farm and you need a 300 foot setback”. And then the new owner would be mad at the county instead of being mad at the person who sold him an unbuildable lot.
The Board of Supervisors has asked the Planning Commission to take an action to “fix” this ordinance within 100 days.
The Planning Commission set up a subcommittee to look into this and report back. The subcommittee consists of Planning Commissioners: Hammel, Short, DeSerio and one private citizen, Mr. John Sylvester. Another private citizen will be asked to join the committee.
My opinion:
On the one hand, we say we “don’t want developers”.
On the other hand, our County Planner points out that developers bring proffers for payment for roads, new schools, and other payments for services the county needs. Without them, we get development with scraggly roads, people stuck with no access, people with no septic fields on their land, etc. And, the county is left having to raise property taxes because they couldn’t squeeze some bucks out of the developers.
My personal opinion is:
Page County people LIKE scraggly roads with no access.
I personally see absolutely nothing wrong with a development where all the lots are different sizes, all the houses are different styles, and some people have to expect that if it snows, they’re stuck inside until it melts.
And if you lived where I live (and I know many of you do live in places like I live) you have absolutely no expectation that a fire truck or an Emergency Medical Technician would ever be able to show up in time when you need them. Not due to any fault of theirs, but just because they can’t get here that easily. An example: I tried to get somebody to deliver firewood, and they told me there was a $10 surcharge per truckload, just for the inconvenience of driving down my road.
So on the one hand, we have a Board of Supervisors who turns down Danny Comer’s request to build a duplex on his own land, because it’s “spot zoning”, considers giving the airplane owners a break and letting the airport grow so that the Learjets can come in, and wants to change the By Right subdivision ordinance so we won’t have all these unmaintained dirt roads.
And on the other hand, we have nearly universal agreement in the county that nobody wants the Big Bad Developers (hereafter referred to as The Wolves) to come in and turn our beautiful land into Warrenton.
I have to say, I think if you asked the citizens of the county if we should pass laws to prevent people from cutting up their land and selling it whatever way they want, to whomever they want, so that there would be better emergency access for services, the chances are the vote would come out to say, “Keep your emergency services. Let us alone.”
Because, you see, that’s what makes Page Page. We have our Supervisors saying, “we want to maintain the rural nature of the county.”
That’s what the rural nature is. Dirt roads. Poor access. Nothing standard.
I don’t think we can have both. What will it be, Supervisors? Learjets and Planned Subdivisions? Or Country Living?
The Page County Planning Commission is ready to consider changes to the zoning ordinance called the “By Right Subdivision” laws. On August 28, the Planning Commission watched a presentation by our county planner, Kevin Henry, about the consequences of our current By Right subdivision ordinance (county code 100). The problem, according to Mr. Henry’s presentation, is that the county’s code has a loophole. Some time ago, the county passed laws that you could only subdivide your land a limited number of times per so many years. The intention of that law, I can only infer from the presentation, was to slow growth and chase away developers. But there are two loopholes in the county code.
The first loophole is that after you subdivide once, the newly platted land becomes its own “parent tract” and it can subdivide again. This allows the land to be divided into more and more pieces, more quickly than the county intended.
The second loophole is that families can subdivide the land for their own use, and then the new family member can sell off the land.
I’m somewhat confused about what the rules are. As I get more into this, I’ll look up the codes and figure out the point better. As soon as I do, I’ll post them here.
Why is this a problem? Mr. Henry showed that a plot of land could then be fully developed within, say, a ten year period, but the streets would be all private roads, not state roads, and they wouldn’t follow the rules of the Virginia Dept of Transportation, and they wouldn’t be well maintained. Plus, the lot sizes would be all different, and in many cases there would be problems with septic fields for one piece of land actually being on somebody else’s property . The privately owned roads would then cause problems for snow removal, emergency services, fire trucks, etc. Plus, the county would not get a chance to get a developer to offer “proffers” for the development, and services required by the people who live there would not get paid for by the developers of the property.
On top of all that, when a person gets permission for the new plat (and these permission requests are coming into the county office about 1 every 3 days), they don’t have to show the surrounding land on their plat. That means they can get permission for a plat, but when the new owner tries to get a building permit, the county might have to say, “no, this is not a buildable lot because it’s next to a chicken farm and you need a 300 foot setback”. And then the new owner would be mad at the county instead of being mad at the person who sold him an unbuildable lot.
The Board of Supervisors has asked the Planning Commission to take an action to “fix” this ordinance within 100 days.
The Planning Commission set up a subcommittee to look into this and report back. The subcommittee consists of Planning Commissioners: Hammel, Short, DeSerio and one private citizen, Mr. John Sylvester. Another private citizen will be asked to join the committee.
My opinion:
On the one hand, we say we “don’t want developers”.
On the other hand, our County Planner points out that developers bring proffers for payment for roads, new schools, and other payments for services the county needs. Without them, we get development with scraggly roads, people stuck with no access, people with no septic fields on their land, etc. And, the county is left having to raise property taxes because they couldn’t squeeze some bucks out of the developers.
My personal opinion is:
Page County people LIKE scraggly roads with no access.
I personally see absolutely nothing wrong with a development where all the lots are different sizes, all the houses are different styles, and some people have to expect that if it snows, they’re stuck inside until it melts.
And if you lived where I live (and I know many of you do live in places like I live) you have absolutely no expectation that a fire truck or an Emergency Medical Technician would ever be able to show up in time when you need them. Not due to any fault of theirs, but just because they can’t get here that easily. An example: I tried to get somebody to deliver firewood, and they told me there was a $10 surcharge per truckload, just for the inconvenience of driving down my road.
So on the one hand, we have a Board of Supervisors who turns down Danny Comer’s request to build a duplex on his own land, because it’s “spot zoning”, considers giving the airplane owners a break and letting the airport grow so that the Learjets can come in, and wants to change the By Right subdivision ordinance so we won’t have all these unmaintained dirt roads.
And on the other hand, we have nearly universal agreement in the county that nobody wants the Big Bad Developers (hereafter referred to as The Wolves) to come in and turn our beautiful land into Warrenton.
I have to say, I think if you asked the citizens of the county if we should pass laws to prevent people from cutting up their land and selling it whatever way they want, to whomever they want, so that there would be better emergency access for services, the chances are the vote would come out to say, “Keep your emergency services. Let us alone.”
Because, you see, that’s what makes Page Page. We have our Supervisors saying, “we want to maintain the rural nature of the county.”
That’s what the rural nature is. Dirt roads. Poor access. Nothing standard.
I don’t think we can have both. What will it be, Supervisors? Learjets and Planned Subdivisions? Or Country Living?
Anyone need a Learjet?
The Board of Supervisors held a special meeting on 28 August to hold a public hearing on a proposed change in the property tax rate for aircraft kept at the Cavern’s airport. The change would reduce the tax rate from $3.90 per $100 of depreciated value of an aircraft to $.50 per $100 of the current blue book value of an aircraft.
According to Powell Markowitz (Airport Commission) a reduction in the tax rate on aircraft would attract more people and businesses to keep their aircraft in the county. If I understood correctly, the net effect would be to provide more tax revenue in the long run. To be sure, Mr. Markowitz and his associates have clearly done their homework (Lots of numbers and supporting rationale.) The proposed reduction in the tax rate is reasonably consistent with the tax rates levied by other counties within the state. The rates vary from pennies on the dollar to rates slightly above the rate proposed for Page County. The basis for aircraft valuation varies from county to county. The proposed use of blue book value for aircraft kept in Page County seems to be reasonably consistent with how other counties operate. The long term promise from the airport folks is there will be offsetting revenue accruing to the county by virtue of having more taxable aircraft kept in the county (taxed at a relatively constant value (i.e. blue book vs. a declining value based on a straight line depreciation). In addition, it was suggested additional revenues would accrue to the county based on some unspecified increase in better paying jobs in support of the airport operations and some unspecified increase in tax revenue due to more unspecified businesses wanting to come to the county.
The improvement and expansion of the airport would be funded, I assume over time, by Federal grants (95%), State grants (3%), Luray (1%) and Page County (1%). At present, the airport folks have obtained a state grant to begin the process in the amount of $500,000. If I understood correctly, it would be used to add 30 T Hangars. Apparently, there are approximately 15 people with aircraft waiting in the wings, so to speak, for these hangers with promises for more.
One citizen, John Rogerson, spoke at the public hearing. The essence of his concerns seemed to reflect skepticism mostly about the promises offered as part of the rationale for reducing the tax rate in that it benefited the wealthy aircraft owners and would cost the county more money in the future. I believe he was referring to the 1% contribution by both the town and county to support the development of the airport. In terms of real dollars, it is unclear what that cost would be. As a practical matter, I share some of Mr. Rogerson’s concerns. If we build it, will they come?
The airport folks are asking the county to take what I would call a business risk by making an investment. The investment would be a short term loss of some tax revenue with the promise of a long term return on that investment of higher tax revenues and possibly the creation of a few new jobs. Mr. Cubbage asked when the county might expect to begin realizing the promised returns. Mr. Markowitz suggested that it would certainly begin within a year.
Mr. LaFrance offered a very astute observation. If I understood correctly, it would seem the county has to come to grips with what it really wants the county to look like down the road. Should the county strive to maintain its rural character or should it really look to the future and support economic growth opportunities? I gathered the real decision is a tough one. Certainly anything that increases tax revenues and adds jobs to the economy is desirable. The decision would boil down to “at what cost,” not only in terms of financial support but at some compromise with maintaining the rural character of the county. I do not envy the Board having to make this particular decision.
The issue will be offered for vote at the next regular session of the Board of Supervisors.
I have attempted to capture the essence of the hearing. If I have misrepresented anything, comments and corrections are welcomed.
According to Powell Markowitz (Airport Commission) a reduction in the tax rate on aircraft would attract more people and businesses to keep their aircraft in the county. If I understood correctly, the net effect would be to provide more tax revenue in the long run. To be sure, Mr. Markowitz and his associates have clearly done their homework (Lots of numbers and supporting rationale.) The proposed reduction in the tax rate is reasonably consistent with the tax rates levied by other counties within the state. The rates vary from pennies on the dollar to rates slightly above the rate proposed for Page County. The basis for aircraft valuation varies from county to county. The proposed use of blue book value for aircraft kept in Page County seems to be reasonably consistent with how other counties operate. The long term promise from the airport folks is there will be offsetting revenue accruing to the county by virtue of having more taxable aircraft kept in the county (taxed at a relatively constant value (i.e. blue book vs. a declining value based on a straight line depreciation). In addition, it was suggested additional revenues would accrue to the county based on some unspecified increase in better paying jobs in support of the airport operations and some unspecified increase in tax revenue due to more unspecified businesses wanting to come to the county.
The improvement and expansion of the airport would be funded, I assume over time, by Federal grants (95%), State grants (3%), Luray (1%) and Page County (1%). At present, the airport folks have obtained a state grant to begin the process in the amount of $500,000. If I understood correctly, it would be used to add 30 T Hangars. Apparently, there are approximately 15 people with aircraft waiting in the wings, so to speak, for these hangers with promises for more.
One citizen, John Rogerson, spoke at the public hearing. The essence of his concerns seemed to reflect skepticism mostly about the promises offered as part of the rationale for reducing the tax rate in that it benefited the wealthy aircraft owners and would cost the county more money in the future. I believe he was referring to the 1% contribution by both the town and county to support the development of the airport. In terms of real dollars, it is unclear what that cost would be. As a practical matter, I share some of Mr. Rogerson’s concerns. If we build it, will they come?
The airport folks are asking the county to take what I would call a business risk by making an investment. The investment would be a short term loss of some tax revenue with the promise of a long term return on that investment of higher tax revenues and possibly the creation of a few new jobs. Mr. Cubbage asked when the county might expect to begin realizing the promised returns. Mr. Markowitz suggested that it would certainly begin within a year.
Mr. LaFrance offered a very astute observation. If I understood correctly, it would seem the county has to come to grips with what it really wants the county to look like down the road. Should the county strive to maintain its rural character or should it really look to the future and support economic growth opportunities? I gathered the real decision is a tough one. Certainly anything that increases tax revenues and adds jobs to the economy is desirable. The decision would boil down to “at what cost,” not only in terms of financial support but at some compromise with maintaining the rural character of the county. I do not envy the Board having to make this particular decision.
The issue will be offered for vote at the next regular session of the Board of Supervisors.
I have attempted to capture the essence of the hearing. If I have misrepresented anything, comments and corrections are welcomed.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
At What Price - Part 2: The 57% Solution
At What Price – Part 2: The 57 Percent Solution
Why did this happen?
On July 17, The Comprehensive Plan was approved by the Page County Board of Supervisors. By the time they made the amendments which they worked out during the Retreat and in the following weeks, enough changes were made that the plan no longer said the most egregious things that had been added to it. In fact, those of us who call ourselves Page County Watch felt that the process worked in the end, and the final plan approved had the input of a broader group of citizens. We congratulate the Supervisors for listening to and understanding the intent of that broader citizen participation.
Some Supervisors said they were proud of the Comprehensive Plan, that it was a good plan. Page County Watch doesn’t agree. We agree that the changes the Supervisors made were good changes, and that they did manage to make it stop being an exceptionally bad plan. For that, we applaud them. But a Comprehensive Plan, by Virginia Code, contains the county’s Land Use Map to guide zoning. Our plan doesn’t have one.
Instead, our plan says, “Areas of severe development restriction are found along sections of the Shenandoah River and throughout the valley lowlands where Karst topography predominates and flood-prone areas are numerous. Because of these constraints, approximately 57 percent of the land in Page County is not suitable for development.” Understand, 34 % of the county is national and state parks. So that’s 57 + 34 = 91% of the county that “is not suitable for development.” In other words, we just approved a plan that wants to turn the county into a great big wildlife habitat. Great idea, if you’ve already got yours, and you want to make sure nobody else gets theirs. Taking a wild guess, I’d assume that some of that suitable 9% left for development is located on that large flat, non-flood-prone land area surrounding Yogi Bear park along route 211. I’m telling you, if I owned Yogi Bear park, I’d be hoppin’ up and down saying, “wow, what a great plan, let’s quickly move to keep development out,” myself.
So, yes, we’re happy that the Supervisors improved a bad situation, but we don’t go as far as saying, in the end, it was a good plan. Now, the important thing to learn from this situation is: how and why did we get ourselves into this place? We need to know that so that we don’t come here again next year and the year after that.
I think I have an answer to “how and why did this happen”. It’s a theory, yes, and I can’t prove it. Others might propose other theories, and that’s what the Comment button is for at the end of this Blog. How this happened is a matter of historical fact. The motives behind it, however, will remain speculation.
The “How” Part. Historical Fact.How it happened is simple. The time came to update the Comprehensive Plan, which was put together in 2001 by a large group of citizens. The thinking was that this would be just an “update” of the numbers in it, rechecking the population figures, assessing whether things were still true. So a subcommittee of the Planning Commission was charged with this update.
Only two citizens turned up to help the subcommittee write the Comprehensive Plan, and those two citizens both happen to be of the same mind regarding what the county should be. It should be a wildlife preserve, in their opinion. (That’s an editorial comment. I have no idea what their opinions are, except by what I hear them say and write, and that’s what it sounds like they are saying, to my ears.)
So for lack of staff to do the work, the volunteering citizens put a lot of effort into getting new numbers to update the plan, and oh, by the way, they also made a few “minor word changes” on An Unelected Citizen’s home computer. The minor word changes turned out to be similar to the famous “however” addition. That’s the one where “the scenic beauty attracts tourist and vacation cabins” was changed to “the scenic beauty, however, attracts tourist and vacation cabins”. While the changes were minor, they were lethal in their impact. The minor changes turned the TONE of the Plan around. It went from a simple statement of facts about the county, to a more complex statement of facts with moral judgements attached. Little and subtle word changes make a document that leaves a taste in your mouth. The flavor changes.
Don’t even tell me you can’t taste what I’m writing here. That’s what An Unelected Citizen did to the Comprehensive Plan. The citizen gave it a flavor, with a comma here, and a “but” there, and a subtle twist of the knife in the back. Words have the power to do that. I could write a document that could make you feel the nails sticking out of the paper, and yet you couldn’t exactly put your finger on which words were the ones that did that. The Intent of the Author shines through a document. This Author had an Intent based on a Belief and a Value System, and that Belief and Value System weeps from the page. These were not acts taken with evil intention. They were that citizen’s opinion about what was best for the county.
We all have an opinion, and individually, each of our opinions is worth what we pay for them. The key to opinions is that you need a whole large Gaggle of them, from differing viewpoints and broad backgrounds, before they’re worth any more than two cents. You can never do something with the impact of a Comprehensive Plan without actively soliciting that large Gaggle of opinion. Some people are of the opinion that their opinion is worth more than other people’s opinions, and so they try to impose theirs on other people’s houses, bank accounts, and lifestyles. From here on out, for ease of reference, let’s refer to those people as “True Believers”.
So when we look at the “How” of what happened, we can sum it up by saying, “True Believers wrote the plan, and then it got into the Process, and the Process is like a runaway train. It takes one big Bump in the Rail to try to stop it.”
Now that’s the How. What’s the Why?The real Why here is “why didn’t the Supervisors recognize what had happened here and step in and stop it before it got this far?” Why didn’t they acknowledge that the Plan had not been given an opportunity to have widespread distribution and citizen input, before it got to the point of “needing” to be passed before the deadline?
The closest thing I’ve ever heard as an answer to this question is that the Supervisors individually said they liked the plan. They liked the idea that the plan strongly promotes “retaining our rural lifestyle” by limiting development. They wanted a vision statement that says we are managing growth. More importantly, they wanted to get this phase over with, so the more important issue of the specifics of zoning ordinance changes could begin. They didn’t think the plan was bad enough to need changing any more than the changing they actually did do, as a result of their Retreat and followup work. Being pragmatic, they thought it was more important that a general plan be approved, and a specific zoning change process begin, than it was that wider citizen input be introduced late in the process. AND . . . and this is an important AND . . . they weren’t accustomed to having wide citizen input for any reason.
By their reasoning, if any citizens had wanted to have input or cared about the process, those citizens would have shown up three years ago in the beginning and wrested that disk out of the hands of An Unelected Citizen in the first place. So they thought, “if no citizens cared enough to bother stepping in and competing for Air Time to get their opinions included in the Plan when it was being written, then that means they’ve abdicated their right to complain about it after it’s been done.” They didn’t believe they were responsible to proactively inform the citizens about what their government was doing to them. Rather, they believed it was the citizens responsibility to proactively seek out the information for themselves.
This was the attitude the Board showed when they raised the real estate taxes from $6.7M to $11.3M in one year. They didn’t believe it was their responsibility to justify or explain themselves to the citizens about how and why they were doing that. They didn’t think it was necessary for them to explain the budget increase. Rather, they believed it was the citizens responsibility to look into it themselves, should they so desire to be informed.
So the Why of how this happened is:
It happened because the Beliefs and Values of the Board are that they are following the Process, and following the Process is what they are obligated to do. In their Belief, it is the Citizens’ obligation to take the initiative to participate in that Process, and learn how it works. In their Belief, it is not the Board’s obligation to go the extra mile to bring the Citizens into Enlightenment about the process’ inner workings. Once they follow the Process . . . well, then, the Results are “not their fault”.
This is Why it happened. It happened because the leadership of the Board of Supervisors, which sets the stage for its culture, believe that Process trumps Common Sense. I admit that now and then, I have personally seen Common Sense peek out from beneath the curtain. But it spends most of its time, hiding in shame, hoping the Lawyers don’t see it.
Next Installment: Who chased Common Sense into hiding? (And why does it smell like a Landfill)
Got a Comment? Push the Comments button. Anybody can do it. No Names Required.
Why did this happen?
On July 17, The Comprehensive Plan was approved by the Page County Board of Supervisors. By the time they made the amendments which they worked out during the Retreat and in the following weeks, enough changes were made that the plan no longer said the most egregious things that had been added to it. In fact, those of us who call ourselves Page County Watch felt that the process worked in the end, and the final plan approved had the input of a broader group of citizens. We congratulate the Supervisors for listening to and understanding the intent of that broader citizen participation.
Some Supervisors said they were proud of the Comprehensive Plan, that it was a good plan. Page County Watch doesn’t agree. We agree that the changes the Supervisors made were good changes, and that they did manage to make it stop being an exceptionally bad plan. For that, we applaud them. But a Comprehensive Plan, by Virginia Code, contains the county’s Land Use Map to guide zoning. Our plan doesn’t have one.
Instead, our plan says, “Areas of severe development restriction are found along sections of the Shenandoah River and throughout the valley lowlands where Karst topography predominates and flood-prone areas are numerous. Because of these constraints, approximately 57 percent of the land in Page County is not suitable for development.” Understand, 34 % of the county is national and state parks. So that’s 57 + 34 = 91% of the county that “is not suitable for development.” In other words, we just approved a plan that wants to turn the county into a great big wildlife habitat. Great idea, if you’ve already got yours, and you want to make sure nobody else gets theirs. Taking a wild guess, I’d assume that some of that suitable 9% left for development is located on that large flat, non-flood-prone land area surrounding Yogi Bear park along route 211. I’m telling you, if I owned Yogi Bear park, I’d be hoppin’ up and down saying, “wow, what a great plan, let’s quickly move to keep development out,” myself.
So, yes, we’re happy that the Supervisors improved a bad situation, but we don’t go as far as saying, in the end, it was a good plan. Now, the important thing to learn from this situation is: how and why did we get ourselves into this place? We need to know that so that we don’t come here again next year and the year after that.
I think I have an answer to “how and why did this happen”. It’s a theory, yes, and I can’t prove it. Others might propose other theories, and that’s what the Comment button is for at the end of this Blog. How this happened is a matter of historical fact. The motives behind it, however, will remain speculation.
The “How” Part. Historical Fact.How it happened is simple. The time came to update the Comprehensive Plan, which was put together in 2001 by a large group of citizens. The thinking was that this would be just an “update” of the numbers in it, rechecking the population figures, assessing whether things were still true. So a subcommittee of the Planning Commission was charged with this update.
Only two citizens turned up to help the subcommittee write the Comprehensive Plan, and those two citizens both happen to be of the same mind regarding what the county should be. It should be a wildlife preserve, in their opinion. (That’s an editorial comment. I have no idea what their opinions are, except by what I hear them say and write, and that’s what it sounds like they are saying, to my ears.)
So for lack of staff to do the work, the volunteering citizens put a lot of effort into getting new numbers to update the plan, and oh, by the way, they also made a few “minor word changes” on An Unelected Citizen’s home computer. The minor word changes turned out to be similar to the famous “however” addition. That’s the one where “the scenic beauty attracts tourist and vacation cabins” was changed to “the scenic beauty, however, attracts tourist and vacation cabins”. While the changes were minor, they were lethal in their impact. The minor changes turned the TONE of the Plan around. It went from a simple statement of facts about the county, to a more complex statement of facts with moral judgements attached. Little and subtle word changes make a document that leaves a taste in your mouth. The flavor changes.
Don’t even tell me you can’t taste what I’m writing here. That’s what An Unelected Citizen did to the Comprehensive Plan. The citizen gave it a flavor, with a comma here, and a “but” there, and a subtle twist of the knife in the back. Words have the power to do that. I could write a document that could make you feel the nails sticking out of the paper, and yet you couldn’t exactly put your finger on which words were the ones that did that. The Intent of the Author shines through a document. This Author had an Intent based on a Belief and a Value System, and that Belief and Value System weeps from the page. These were not acts taken with evil intention. They were that citizen’s opinion about what was best for the county.
We all have an opinion, and individually, each of our opinions is worth what we pay for them. The key to opinions is that you need a whole large Gaggle of them, from differing viewpoints and broad backgrounds, before they’re worth any more than two cents. You can never do something with the impact of a Comprehensive Plan without actively soliciting that large Gaggle of opinion. Some people are of the opinion that their opinion is worth more than other people’s opinions, and so they try to impose theirs on other people’s houses, bank accounts, and lifestyles. From here on out, for ease of reference, let’s refer to those people as “True Believers”.
So when we look at the “How” of what happened, we can sum it up by saying, “True Believers wrote the plan, and then it got into the Process, and the Process is like a runaway train. It takes one big Bump in the Rail to try to stop it.”
Now that’s the How. What’s the Why?The real Why here is “why didn’t the Supervisors recognize what had happened here and step in and stop it before it got this far?” Why didn’t they acknowledge that the Plan had not been given an opportunity to have widespread distribution and citizen input, before it got to the point of “needing” to be passed before the deadline?
The closest thing I’ve ever heard as an answer to this question is that the Supervisors individually said they liked the plan. They liked the idea that the plan strongly promotes “retaining our rural lifestyle” by limiting development. They wanted a vision statement that says we are managing growth. More importantly, they wanted to get this phase over with, so the more important issue of the specifics of zoning ordinance changes could begin. They didn’t think the plan was bad enough to need changing any more than the changing they actually did do, as a result of their Retreat and followup work. Being pragmatic, they thought it was more important that a general plan be approved, and a specific zoning change process begin, than it was that wider citizen input be introduced late in the process. AND . . . and this is an important AND . . . they weren’t accustomed to having wide citizen input for any reason.
By their reasoning, if any citizens had wanted to have input or cared about the process, those citizens would have shown up three years ago in the beginning and wrested that disk out of the hands of An Unelected Citizen in the first place. So they thought, “if no citizens cared enough to bother stepping in and competing for Air Time to get their opinions included in the Plan when it was being written, then that means they’ve abdicated their right to complain about it after it’s been done.” They didn’t believe they were responsible to proactively inform the citizens about what their government was doing to them. Rather, they believed it was the citizens responsibility to proactively seek out the information for themselves.
This was the attitude the Board showed when they raised the real estate taxes from $6.7M to $11.3M in one year. They didn’t believe it was their responsibility to justify or explain themselves to the citizens about how and why they were doing that. They didn’t think it was necessary for them to explain the budget increase. Rather, they believed it was the citizens responsibility to look into it themselves, should they so desire to be informed.
So the Why of how this happened is:
It happened because the Beliefs and Values of the Board are that they are following the Process, and following the Process is what they are obligated to do. In their Belief, it is the Citizens’ obligation to take the initiative to participate in that Process, and learn how it works. In their Belief, it is not the Board’s obligation to go the extra mile to bring the Citizens into Enlightenment about the process’ inner workings. Once they follow the Process . . . well, then, the Results are “not their fault”.
This is Why it happened. It happened because the leadership of the Board of Supervisors, which sets the stage for its culture, believe that Process trumps Common Sense. I admit that now and then, I have personally seen Common Sense peek out from beneath the curtain. But it spends most of its time, hiding in shame, hoping the Lawyers don’t see it.
Next Installment: Who chased Common Sense into hiding? (And why does it smell like a Landfill)
Got a Comment? Push the Comments button. Anybody can do it. No Names Required.
Friday, July 13, 2007
At What Price - Part 1
At What Price – Part 1 of a Series
Now that the Comprehensive Plan will be adopted on Tuesday, July 17, the next move will be to write new zoning ordinances. This series of Blogs will cover the development of zoning ordinances, their trials and tribulations, and the end result. We begin with a brief history, for those who are joining us late:
History:
• In December, 2006, the Board of Supervisors was set to pass a new flood plain ordinance. It was about to happen. In the nick of time, Jim Turner wrote a Letter to the Editor in Page News describing it. Donna Eames saw the letter, and called everybody in the phone book to get them to come to the Board meeting. As a result of the citizen objection, the Board returned the flood plain ordinance to the planning commission for review. (In their defense, Board members say they were never going to pass it as it was, that they had amendments which would have fixed its problems. However, the amendments don’t seem to have survived the process, and “the public” hasn’t seen any amendments that would have done that)
• From January through April, the Planning Commission received a stack of letters and analysis from the public 8 inches high, screaming in pain over what was written in that ordinance. What was wrong with it? Its objective was to clear the flood plain of all structures, over time. It told existing homeowners they could never repair their houses, no matter what went wrong, flood, fire, lightning, or things that go bump in the night. If their houses were damaged, they would just have to move out and abandon them. Its goal was to turn the flood plain into an extension of the national park, without paying for the land.
• In April, the Planning Commission voted to end debate on the proposed flood plain ordinance and revert to the existing, perfectly fine flood plain ordinance, which meets all state and federal requirements and allows us to have national flood insurance. At the same time, the Planning Commission approved an update of the Comprehensive Plan. Both the Comprehensive Plan and this recommendation to drop the proposed flood plain ordinance went before the Board on May 15, 2007. It occurred to the citizens who live on the flood plain that, given what was written in the flood plain ordinance, we better check the “updates” to the Comprehensive Plan.
• Sure enough, the “updated” Comprehensive Plan had a little more than a set of new population figures in it. Its goals were changed. Subtly. With small word changes. One example: the old plan said, “the scenic beauty of the county also attracts tourist cabins and vacation homes”. The new plan said, “the scenic beauty of the county, HOWEVER, also attracts tourist cabins and vacation homes.” Is that a small change? Unimportant? Minor? In the first case, it’s a descriptive statement. In the second, it’s a moral judgement of the roaches who have invaded our beautiful county with their smelly tourist cabins and vacation homes. Words count. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but WORDS do permanent damage. The attitude of the persons writing the plan come through in the words. Just like this Blog. When you read this, you can see my Attitude. Same thing in the Comprehensive Plan. The Update had an Attitude.
• More than 70 citizens showed up at the Board meeting on May 15 to object to the proposed flood plain ordinance and the Attitude in the Comprehensive Plan. The Board felt unable to answer on the spot. They decided to go on a Retreat to consider what to do. Chairman LaFrance said, “This Board is up to the task” of fixing the problem in the Plan.
• It really P.O’ed the flood plain people, that the Supervisors couldn’t see their way to just vote that ordinance down and get that Attitude out of the Comprehensive Plan, so we followed them to their Retreat, and we took videocameras. By this time, most of the citizens who had been active in January through April, believed they had made their point to the Supervisors, and attendance fell off at the meetings. Most citizens believed the Supervisors had heard them and would do something to fix the problem. After all, the Supervisors said they would fix it, so why wouldn’t everyone just believe them? When the citizens took the Supervisors at their word, and stopped attending the meetings in full force, that’s when the Page newspaper started referring to the citizens who lived in the flood plain as “a small group of activists”.
• At the Retreat, the Supervisors spent only ONE HOUR discussing the changes to the Comprehensive Plan. They decided to change the word “prohibit” to “regulate”. While this was a positive move, it still left the words “Develop ordinances that REGULATE buildings and businesses in the 100-year flood plain” implying that it was specific direction to start all over again with a rewrite of the flood plain ordinance.
• In the ensuing month, Supervisors refined and rewrote enough of the words in the plan so that it no longer gives specificity to attacking the citizens who live on the flood plain. By the time of its adoption, the Comprehensive Plan was no longer directly attacking a group of existing citizens. Peace returned to the Valley.
It took from December 2006 to August 2007 to calm down this issue. Soap opera stuff happened that I can’t even write HERE because it would embarrass and humiliate people who really don’t deserve to be embarrassed. There was a time period when the people under attack (ie the residents of the flood plain) were convinced there had to be a payoff and corruption involved, because the behavior was so irrational, it couldn’t be motivated by anything LEGAL.
I personally FOIA’ed (Freedom of Information Act) everything I could think of, and reviewed the financial disclosures and the campaign financing reports of every Supervisor. And you know what? I couldn’t actually find anything wrong. I turned over every rock. If there was corruption in the County, it was too well hidden for me to find. It confounded me. If this wasn’t corruption, and yet it was so bewilderingly irrational, what was it? WHY would these seemingly sincere public servants, working for essentially FREE, choose to take an action that would harm existing residents of the county, and would not produce the positive benefits it was touted to provide?
In the end, if July of 2007 is the end, the final approved Comprehensive Plan will have the most harmful language removed, as far as residents of the flood plain are concerned. This is a great relief. However (note what an important word “however” is), it was an enormous diversion of time and energy by a large number of people, including the Supervisors and the Planning Commission. This time and energy could have been better used creating a Land Use Map, which is what is supposed to go in a Comprehensive Plan in the first place.
NEXT INSTALLMENT: Why did this happen?
This is the Blogger's version of the History of the Flood Plain issue so far. If you have more to add, or you disagree, or you just want to vent, push the Comments button and Blog.
Now that the Comprehensive Plan will be adopted on Tuesday, July 17, the next move will be to write new zoning ordinances. This series of Blogs will cover the development of zoning ordinances, their trials and tribulations, and the end result. We begin with a brief history, for those who are joining us late:
History:
• In December, 2006, the Board of Supervisors was set to pass a new flood plain ordinance. It was about to happen. In the nick of time, Jim Turner wrote a Letter to the Editor in Page News describing it. Donna Eames saw the letter, and called everybody in the phone book to get them to come to the Board meeting. As a result of the citizen objection, the Board returned the flood plain ordinance to the planning commission for review. (In their defense, Board members say they were never going to pass it as it was, that they had amendments which would have fixed its problems. However, the amendments don’t seem to have survived the process, and “the public” hasn’t seen any amendments that would have done that)
• From January through April, the Planning Commission received a stack of letters and analysis from the public 8 inches high, screaming in pain over what was written in that ordinance. What was wrong with it? Its objective was to clear the flood plain of all structures, over time. It told existing homeowners they could never repair their houses, no matter what went wrong, flood, fire, lightning, or things that go bump in the night. If their houses were damaged, they would just have to move out and abandon them. Its goal was to turn the flood plain into an extension of the national park, without paying for the land.
• In April, the Planning Commission voted to end debate on the proposed flood plain ordinance and revert to the existing, perfectly fine flood plain ordinance, which meets all state and federal requirements and allows us to have national flood insurance. At the same time, the Planning Commission approved an update of the Comprehensive Plan. Both the Comprehensive Plan and this recommendation to drop the proposed flood plain ordinance went before the Board on May 15, 2007. It occurred to the citizens who live on the flood plain that, given what was written in the flood plain ordinance, we better check the “updates” to the Comprehensive Plan.
• Sure enough, the “updated” Comprehensive Plan had a little more than a set of new population figures in it. Its goals were changed. Subtly. With small word changes. One example: the old plan said, “the scenic beauty of the county also attracts tourist cabins and vacation homes”. The new plan said, “the scenic beauty of the county, HOWEVER, also attracts tourist cabins and vacation homes.” Is that a small change? Unimportant? Minor? In the first case, it’s a descriptive statement. In the second, it’s a moral judgement of the roaches who have invaded our beautiful county with their smelly tourist cabins and vacation homes. Words count. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but WORDS do permanent damage. The attitude of the persons writing the plan come through in the words. Just like this Blog. When you read this, you can see my Attitude. Same thing in the Comprehensive Plan. The Update had an Attitude.
• More than 70 citizens showed up at the Board meeting on May 15 to object to the proposed flood plain ordinance and the Attitude in the Comprehensive Plan. The Board felt unable to answer on the spot. They decided to go on a Retreat to consider what to do. Chairman LaFrance said, “This Board is up to the task” of fixing the problem in the Plan.
• It really P.O’ed the flood plain people, that the Supervisors couldn’t see their way to just vote that ordinance down and get that Attitude out of the Comprehensive Plan, so we followed them to their Retreat, and we took videocameras. By this time, most of the citizens who had been active in January through April, believed they had made their point to the Supervisors, and attendance fell off at the meetings. Most citizens believed the Supervisors had heard them and would do something to fix the problem. After all, the Supervisors said they would fix it, so why wouldn’t everyone just believe them? When the citizens took the Supervisors at their word, and stopped attending the meetings in full force, that’s when the Page newspaper started referring to the citizens who lived in the flood plain as “a small group of activists”.
• At the Retreat, the Supervisors spent only ONE HOUR discussing the changes to the Comprehensive Plan. They decided to change the word “prohibit” to “regulate”. While this was a positive move, it still left the words “Develop ordinances that REGULATE buildings and businesses in the 100-year flood plain” implying that it was specific direction to start all over again with a rewrite of the flood plain ordinance.
• In the ensuing month, Supervisors refined and rewrote enough of the words in the plan so that it no longer gives specificity to attacking the citizens who live on the flood plain. By the time of its adoption, the Comprehensive Plan was no longer directly attacking a group of existing citizens. Peace returned to the Valley.
It took from December 2006 to August 2007 to calm down this issue. Soap opera stuff happened that I can’t even write HERE because it would embarrass and humiliate people who really don’t deserve to be embarrassed. There was a time period when the people under attack (ie the residents of the flood plain) were convinced there had to be a payoff and corruption involved, because the behavior was so irrational, it couldn’t be motivated by anything LEGAL.
I personally FOIA’ed (Freedom of Information Act) everything I could think of, and reviewed the financial disclosures and the campaign financing reports of every Supervisor. And you know what? I couldn’t actually find anything wrong. I turned over every rock. If there was corruption in the County, it was too well hidden for me to find. It confounded me. If this wasn’t corruption, and yet it was so bewilderingly irrational, what was it? WHY would these seemingly sincere public servants, working for essentially FREE, choose to take an action that would harm existing residents of the county, and would not produce the positive benefits it was touted to provide?
In the end, if July of 2007 is the end, the final approved Comprehensive Plan will have the most harmful language removed, as far as residents of the flood plain are concerned. This is a great relief. However (note what an important word “however” is), it was an enormous diversion of time and energy by a large number of people, including the Supervisors and the Planning Commission. This time and energy could have been better used creating a Land Use Map, which is what is supposed to go in a Comprehensive Plan in the first place.
NEXT INSTALLMENT: Why did this happen?
This is the Blogger's version of the History of the Flood Plain issue so far. If you have more to add, or you disagree, or you just want to vent, push the Comments button and Blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
