It's a quiet time at the Board of Supervisors. The big controversy over the flood plain ordinance is over. The Comprehensive Plan is what it is, and the amendments made satisfied the worst objections. The County Attorney missed out on his big chance to get extra extra rich defending the county over the flood plain lawsuits. And Charlie Hoke figured out what he could say that would make him sound like he was in tune with the will of the People.
At the end of the last Board meeting, Supervisor Hoke introduced a proposal to deny county services to illegal immigrants. Lee McWhorter, who makes it his function to provide the comic relief at these meetings, suggested that we should check to see if we have any illegal immigrants before we waste the money paying the county attorney to write something up. Tommy LaFrance said we do, because the school board was forced to hire Spanish tutors for them last year. (I don't think that's exactly what he said, remember I'm just a citizen taking notes, and I write down things as I hear them, which is not necessarily exact. My reports are not minutes of the meetings.)
Lee pointed out that other counties who have done this have ended up paying lawyer money to defend themselves over it, and it would be a shame to spend our money that way if it's not really much of a problem.
The meeting wasn't really about this issue -- it was about the dogs at Brenda Jolly's place and about the passing of the Comprehensive Plan more. There were a lot of people there, which was a very good thing. But, although this was just a short comment at the very end, it got a big front page headline in the Page News.
Why? Because most probably, it's a very popular proposal. A lot of people will agree with it, and not many will oppose it. So Charlie Hoke, who made his constituents so angry at the district meeting over the Comprehensive Plan in his district, when he opposed the changes to the Comprehensive Plan about the flood plain -- made them so angry there was murmuring and aggravation so intense that some people started looking up the rules for how to impeach a Supervisor --- pulls himself out of the hot seat by:
1. voting unanimously with the rest of the Board FOR the changes to the Comprehensive Plan, and
2. introducing this illegal immigrants proposal which gets him front page news AND HIS PICTURE in the paper. Although the picture doesn't really look like him. Where's the little beard?
In any case, a lot of people will think "Charlie Hoke -- isn't he the guy who introduced that legislation for the county against illegal immigrants?" and will feel kindly toward him.
Honestly, I can't even think of an argument FOR providing county services to illegal immigrants. I think most people, if you tell them we are hiring special tutors in the schools and providing emergency services to people who came here illegally would say --- "Yo, Not with MY tax dollars, I hope".
I think Charlie came up with a winner, in terms of introducing something that most people will agree with. Although I surely hope we don't have to get involved with lawsuits over it.
Alice
Friday, July 27, 2007
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Green Stuff
This thread is for posts that are about positive actions we can take to help the environment. What organic farming measures do we have in the county? What construction has been done in a green way? What grocery stores are offering naturally grown products? Lots of people here care about the environment, and many are taking actions to make their personal lives considerate of sustainable practices. I know there are small farms here that offer eggs from free range chickens, baskets of produce in a coop way, and hormone-free, antibiotic free beef. Post any information you have about places to buy organic food (not WalMart organic -- real organic, the word's been co-opted). If you know of anyone who has used energy-efficient practices in building, tell us about it. Post about positive actions people have taken in this area. Post about incentives that are offered for people to do these things.
Friday, July 20, 2007
Where do we go from here?
This is the thread for people who want to talk about where we go from here. What do we have so far? We have a proposal to hire a consultant to come in and start the process to rewrite the zoning ordinances. The budget says $25,000, which would pay for what? A couple of weeks of a consultant? I've heard unofficially that that's been raised to $100,000.
Next step: the Planning Commission will be selecting a zoning subcommittee soon, and then the process will probably start. Since the Land Use Map hasn't been done, that will have to be the first step for zoning.
I think once we see a map with the available land use marked on it, it will shed new light on what we can do with what we've got.
Next step: the Planning Commission will be selecting a zoning subcommittee soon, and then the process will probably start. Since the Land Use Map hasn't been done, that will have to be the first step for zoning.
I think once we see a map with the available land use marked on it, it will shed new light on what we can do with what we've got.
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.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Has the Tide Turned?
I wasn't at the first of the five District meetings, held in Shenandoah, but preliminary reports say . . . all is well. What I heard briefly late last night was that Goal 3, Objective 2, line C has been removed and replaced with a substitute language that is . . . just fine.
This would be tremendous news, and frankly it would speak very well of all the Supervisors. It would make peace return to the Valley. When I hear more, I'll post it.
If you were there, or you heard from someone who was there . . . tell us more.
Push the Comments button and Blog.
This would be tremendous news, and frankly it would speak very well of all the Supervisors. It would make peace return to the Valley. When I hear more, I'll post it.
If you were there, or you heard from someone who was there . . . tell us more.
Push the Comments button and Blog.
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
The Line of No Return
Here's what happened:
At the July 3 Work Session, the Board of Supervisors reviewed their changes to the Comprehensive Plan, made at the Retreat.
Their changes were: change the word "prohibit" to "regulate".
Supervisor Gerald Cubbage, District 4, proposed that the newly added goal, 3 C, be removed entirely. The goal says:
"Develop ordinances that REGULATE (instead of Prohibit) buildings and businesses in the 100 year flood plain"
Supervisor John Rust objected to removing it. County Administrator Mark Belton suggested that removing that line might jeopardize our compliance with FEMA. Charlie Hoke recommended that we ask if it would do so. Tommy LaFrance said he didn't see why we couldn't just leave it there.
Chairman LaFrance complimented Natalie Zuckerman on her work to prepare this Comprehensive Plan for the County.
Mark Belton then explained that there would be public meetings held by District, beginning Monday and continuing for five nights. There was a small notice in the July 3 Page News and Courier, in the Classified section, that said these meetings would be held.
At the break, I went up to Tommy LaFrance and said, "what happened to your statement that the flood plain ordinance was dead. If you leave that in there, it's the same as directing the planning commission to revive it" and he said, "okay, he didn't care if it was taken out" and I asked him if he would tell Kevin Henry to take it out, and he said yes, he would do that.
After the break, he moved on to the next agenda item and didn't do it. If one were to assume that he was sincere in what he said to me, one would expect that meant he was planning to do it after the meeting at some point. I will continue to call him and Kevin Henry and let you know if it's taken out.
Here's what's next:
It is entirely unlikely that anyone will show up at these five district meetings. Their importance and the significance of the Comprehensive Plan has not been publicized by the county in any manner, and the notice in the Classified section would not mean anything to many people. There has been no explanation in the Page News about the significance of these meetings. In fact, Virginia Code says a Comprehensive Plan is supposed to contain a Land Use Map to guide zoning. Ours doesn't. Ours guides zoning by saying, "corral all the people into the towns, keep them from building anything outside of the towns, don't let anybody build on any more than a 16% slope, and keep them away from all bodies of water" It's a no-growth plan, which leaves the county areas with fewer and fewer houses over which to spread the exploding tax burden. The landfill continues to be a cash guzzler, and the purchase of a new County Office Building and Regional Jail will require additional tax hikes for years to come.
After the five meetings occur with no citizen pushback, the Comprehensive Plan will be approved on July 17, and the Planning Commission will be free to begin the process of rewriting the Zoning Ordinances. Any complaints about how the zoning ordinances are rewritten will be met with the refrain, "but it was in the Comprehensive Plan, and we tried to take it to the citizens, but the citizens didn't show up at the meetings."
If you would like to attend one of the public meetings, the places and dates are listed in the Blog previous to this one. If you go, please post your experiences here on the Blog, or email me and let me know what happened at the meeting you attended.
Email Research@PageCountyWatch.org
Thank you,
Alice
At the July 3 Work Session, the Board of Supervisors reviewed their changes to the Comprehensive Plan, made at the Retreat.
Their changes were: change the word "prohibit" to "regulate".
Supervisor Gerald Cubbage, District 4, proposed that the newly added goal, 3 C, be removed entirely. The goal says:
"Develop ordinances that REGULATE (instead of Prohibit) buildings and businesses in the 100 year flood plain"
Supervisor John Rust objected to removing it. County Administrator Mark Belton suggested that removing that line might jeopardize our compliance with FEMA. Charlie Hoke recommended that we ask if it would do so. Tommy LaFrance said he didn't see why we couldn't just leave it there.
Chairman LaFrance complimented Natalie Zuckerman on her work to prepare this Comprehensive Plan for the County.
Mark Belton then explained that there would be public meetings held by District, beginning Monday and continuing for five nights. There was a small notice in the July 3 Page News and Courier, in the Classified section, that said these meetings would be held.
At the break, I went up to Tommy LaFrance and said, "what happened to your statement that the flood plain ordinance was dead. If you leave that in there, it's the same as directing the planning commission to revive it" and he said, "okay, he didn't care if it was taken out" and I asked him if he would tell Kevin Henry to take it out, and he said yes, he would do that.
After the break, he moved on to the next agenda item and didn't do it. If one were to assume that he was sincere in what he said to me, one would expect that meant he was planning to do it after the meeting at some point. I will continue to call him and Kevin Henry and let you know if it's taken out.
Here's what's next:
It is entirely unlikely that anyone will show up at these five district meetings. Their importance and the significance of the Comprehensive Plan has not been publicized by the county in any manner, and the notice in the Classified section would not mean anything to many people. There has been no explanation in the Page News about the significance of these meetings. In fact, Virginia Code says a Comprehensive Plan is supposed to contain a Land Use Map to guide zoning. Ours doesn't. Ours guides zoning by saying, "corral all the people into the towns, keep them from building anything outside of the towns, don't let anybody build on any more than a 16% slope, and keep them away from all bodies of water" It's a no-growth plan, which leaves the county areas with fewer and fewer houses over which to spread the exploding tax burden. The landfill continues to be a cash guzzler, and the purchase of a new County Office Building and Regional Jail will require additional tax hikes for years to come.
After the five meetings occur with no citizen pushback, the Comprehensive Plan will be approved on July 17, and the Planning Commission will be free to begin the process of rewriting the Zoning Ordinances. Any complaints about how the zoning ordinances are rewritten will be met with the refrain, "but it was in the Comprehensive Plan, and we tried to take it to the citizens, but the citizens didn't show up at the meetings."
If you would like to attend one of the public meetings, the places and dates are listed in the Blog previous to this one. If you go, please post your experiences here on the Blog, or email me and let me know what happened at the meeting you attended.
Email Research@PageCountyWatch.org
Thank you,
Alice
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
The Scorecard
Here's the Scorecard for the Comprehensive Plan Informational meetings to be held July 9 - 13 and the meeting tonight, July 3.
Tonight's meeting is a Board of Supervisors Work Session at the Luray Courthouse at 7 p.m. This is the culmination of the famous Retreat. The Retreat came about because at the May 15 public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan, where more than 70 citizens came to object to the line "Develop ordinances that prohibit buildings and businesses in the 100 year flood plain", the Supervisors determined that they were "up to the task" of making the necessary changes to the plan themselves. They scheduled a Retreat at Skyland in order to do that.
When they got to the Retreat, they only spent an hour talking about the Comprehensive Plan. They concluded during that hour that all they had to do was change the word "prohibit" to "regulate". They also said that if there were any further changes the Supervisors would like to individually propose, they could do so privately, after the few citizens who were in the audience were no longer there.
At this July 3 meeting, we will find out what changes were actually to be made to the plan.
After this meeting, five district meetings will be held to explain the plan to the citizens. The meetings will be held at the following locations:
July 9 - Shenandoah Elementary School
July 10 - Page County High School
July 11 - Stanley Fire Hall
July 12 - Luray Elementary School
July 13 - Springfield Elementary School
The district meetings all start at 7 p.m.
Go to at least one of these meetings if you can. The questions to ask are:
1. According to Virginia code, a Comprehensive Plan contains a Land Use Map to guide zoning. Where can I see that Land Use Map? (The answer is: one wasn't developed yet)
2. The county is in the process of hiring a consultant to help with a rewrite of the zoning ordinance. Why is the zoning ordinance being rewritten? (The answer is: the Supervisors want to keep our county from becoming too crowded so they want to change the zoning so that people can't build outside of the towns areas, unless they can buy a lot of land)
3. I'm aware that our existing flood plain ordinance is in compliance with state and federal requirements. What is the intention of the Supervisors in refusing to vote changes down and put attempts to throw the people off their land to bed once and for all?
4. Will zoning changes impact me and my family?
And the big one . . .
5. Will these zoning changes increse or decrease our chances for a bigger real estate tax increase in the next two or three years?
Answers to these questions are important to the citizens of this county. Shouldn't you know what the Board of Supervisors intends to do and why?
To comment on this Post and Blog, hit the Comments button. All you have to do is type into the box that comes up, you don't have to do any special codes. Then you can select Other if you want to sign your name, or Anonymous if you don't. Anonymous posts really are anonymous. Nobody can tell where they came from.
Alice Richmond
Tonight's meeting is a Board of Supervisors Work Session at the Luray Courthouse at 7 p.m. This is the culmination of the famous Retreat. The Retreat came about because at the May 15 public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan, where more than 70 citizens came to object to the line "Develop ordinances that prohibit buildings and businesses in the 100 year flood plain", the Supervisors determined that they were "up to the task" of making the necessary changes to the plan themselves. They scheduled a Retreat at Skyland in order to do that.
When they got to the Retreat, they only spent an hour talking about the Comprehensive Plan. They concluded during that hour that all they had to do was change the word "prohibit" to "regulate". They also said that if there were any further changes the Supervisors would like to individually propose, they could do so privately, after the few citizens who were in the audience were no longer there.
At this July 3 meeting, we will find out what changes were actually to be made to the plan.
After this meeting, five district meetings will be held to explain the plan to the citizens. The meetings will be held at the following locations:
July 9 - Shenandoah Elementary School
July 10 - Page County High School
July 11 - Stanley Fire Hall
July 12 - Luray Elementary School
July 13 - Springfield Elementary School
The district meetings all start at 7 p.m.
Go to at least one of these meetings if you can. The questions to ask are:
1. According to Virginia code, a Comprehensive Plan contains a Land Use Map to guide zoning. Where can I see that Land Use Map? (The answer is: one wasn't developed yet)
2. The county is in the process of hiring a consultant to help with a rewrite of the zoning ordinance. Why is the zoning ordinance being rewritten? (The answer is: the Supervisors want to keep our county from becoming too crowded so they want to change the zoning so that people can't build outside of the towns areas, unless they can buy a lot of land)
3. I'm aware that our existing flood plain ordinance is in compliance with state and federal requirements. What is the intention of the Supervisors in refusing to vote changes down and put attempts to throw the people off their land to bed once and for all?
4. Will zoning changes impact me and my family?
And the big one . . .
5. Will these zoning changes increse or decrease our chances for a bigger real estate tax increase in the next two or three years?
Answers to these questions are important to the citizens of this county. Shouldn't you know what the Board of Supervisors intends to do and why?
To comment on this Post and Blog, hit the Comments button. All you have to do is type into the box that comes up, you don't have to do any special codes. Then you can select Other if you want to sign your name, or Anonymous if you don't. Anonymous posts really are anonymous. Nobody can tell where they came from.
Alice Richmond
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
