Category Archives: editorial

VCUramnation Forum Reveals Continued Falsehoods and Arrogance

Posted on by
7

Fighting them off forever, and believe me, I have no desire to keep rehashing this controversy. It’s unfortunate that a few VCU boosters and sports fans continue to put their school in such a bad light.

From VCUramnation.com :

VRam said: ↑
Whatever happened to those abandoned barns that were falling down? Did they relocate them?

(vcu2008hsep replied:)

If I remember correctly, the stables were dated back to the late 1800s. There was no historical significance to them and were essentially derelict and used for storage. When the Cary St was expanded, those old buildings were torn down….

vcu2008hsep, Feb 26, 2013

All I can do to counter the lies and misinformation is keep posting the truth:

https://www.oregonhill.net/2007/09/03/antrim-photo/

https://www.oregonhill.net/2007/09/04/more-stable-history/

https://www.oregonhill.net/2007/09/12/1994-dhr-letter/

https://www.oregonhill.net/2007/09/23/vcus-parking-lots-alternative-sites/

https://www.oregonhill.net/2009/01/13/no-alternatives/

There were other posts too, but not all of them have survived over time. Thanks to misconceptions spread in the local media, many people have no idea that one of the livery stables, before it was taken by VCU, was completely renovated and occupied as a living space. It was even admired in an article that appeared on the front page of the Times Dispatch’s real estate section (of course the link to that story is long gone).

I would not care so much about responding to this VCUramnation drivel, but in addition to the revisionist history-making, there seems to be constant scheming about how to destroy more of our historic neighborhood. Again from VCUramnation:

“And, this is a contemporary thought – since Williams Mullen built thir skraper on top of the RMA parking deck that was built over the Expressway. Not sure why in our latest athletics complex plan (which seemingly mapped out all of the possibilities in the world) did not include one like this. Parkwood is already pretty much a dead street pass Harrison. Cumberland can be re-routed as a tunnel underneath the new athletics complex. Do the same for Grayland, with impressive entrance/exits to the Expressway.

The new complex, Ram Village, would be bordered by Cary to the north, Harrison to the west, Linden to the east, and Idlewood to the south.”

I am perfectly happy to allow VCU to bask in its continued success and improvement, and I have nothing against good-natured school spirit, but the intellectual dishonesty and continued threats of encroachment are dishonorable and unfitting for an institution of higher learning.

In the end, its up to the VCU administration to set the tone for their community relations, and yet they refuse to recognize it, again and again.

What’s That Number, Part 2

Posted on by
6

Well, the number did not come forward this month, but thankfully, reporter Robert Zullo is following the issue. From the Times Dispatch:

Advocates for lower Richmond water and sewer charges have thus far been stonewalled by the city administration in attempts to obtain a consultant’s study that will be central to the utility rates the mayor will propose this month as part of the city budget.
The city’s Public Utilities Department has denied a Freedom of Information Act request from Charles Pool, an Oregon Hill resident who is among a chorus of city utility customers calling for lower base charges for water and wastewater, for the report by Raftelis Financial Consultants.
….
Before drinking a single drop of water or flushing a toilet, Richmond’s water and wastewater customers pay $49.40 a month, the highest base charge in the area and, some argue, higher than most municipalities in the country. The water, wastewater and gas utilities, after covering their own operating expenses, will contribute an estimated $21.5 million this year to the city’s general fund in the form of a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes, a provision of the city charter that critics say subsidizes city government on the backs of utility customers.
….
The study’s recommendations will be included in the budget the mayor is scheduled to present to the council March 12. And though the council won’t vote on the final budget until May, Bedell argued that once the rates make it into the mayor’s budget, they’ll be more difficult for council members to alter. The rate discussion, he said, should be conducted with the council and public.
“It’s like all the proposals the city tries to push through,” Bedell said, citing the new city jail and Washington Redskins training camp now under construction. “I think their whole philosophy is … hold back as much as you can and spring it on them on the last minute.”

Oregon Hill resident Charles Pool has been bringing this issue for over five years now. Will 2013 mark a turning point?

Dominion and Renewable Energy In The General Assembly Update

Posted on by
Reply

Following up on some earlier news and editorials about our neighbor, Dominion Power….

McDonnell signs Va utility regulation bill.

Activist Ivy Main has written an overview of the 2013 General Assembly session on the Power for the People VA blog:

The Virginia General Assembly will soon wrap up its work on the 2013 legislative session. Renewable energy advocates began the session with high hopes for a series of bills that promised to reform our renewable energy law, expand net-metering, and open up new opportunities for financing solar systems and small wind turbines.
So how did we do? Well, this is Virginia. Progress is slow, the utilities are powerful, and half the legislature doesn’t believe in climate change. On the other hand, they do believe in business. Under the circumstances, we did okay.

Click here for more.

Constitutional Amendment Introduced in Congress Ensuring Rights for People, Not Corporations

Posted on by
17

This topic has been broached here (and here) before. And there has been movement elsewhere in the state. Now, who on Richmond City Council will put forward the resolution of support? Certainly we have seen plenty of corporate manipulation on the local level.

From MoveToAmend.org:

Reps. Nolan & Pocan Respond to Hundreds of Local Resolutions Calling for “We the People” Amendment

(Washington D.C.) – The movement for constitutional reforms that would end what organizers call “corporate rule” has arrived in the chambers of Congress. This morning, two members of the U.S. House of Representatives joined Move to Amend by announcing their sponsorship of the “We the People Amendment,” which clearly and unequivocally states that:

Rights recognized under the Constitution belong to human beings only, and not to government-created artificial legal entities such as corporations and limited liability companies; and
Political campaign spending is not a form of speech protected under the First Amendment.
In making the announcement, lead sponsor Rep. Rick Nolan (DFL-Minnesota), said: “It’s time to take the shaping and molding of public policy out of corporate boardrooms, away from the corporate lobbyists, and put it back in city halls – back with county boards and state legislatures – and back in the Congress where it belongs.”

Ben Manski, a spokesperson for Move to Amend, agreed, saying: “Today, members of Congress join a movement that insists on the fundamental equality of all Americans, and that rejects the idea that the corporate class should have special protections against We the People.”

The Move to Amend coalition was formed in 2009 in preparation for the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision. Today, the coalition of nearly 260,000 people and hundreds of organizations has helped to pass nearly 500 resolutions in municipalities and local governments across the country calling on the state and federal governments to adopt this amendment.

The Move to Amend coalition makes a point of differentiating themselves from the other proposals that have come forward in response to Citizens United. “In every single community where Americans have had the opportunity to call for a Constitutional amendment to outlaw corporate personhood, they have seized it and voted yes overwhelmingly, stated George Friday, Move to Amend spokesperson. “The Citizens Uniteddecision is not the cause, it is a symptom. We must remove big money and special interests from the legal and political process entirely.”

# # #

Read the text of the We the People Amendment by clicking here.

Nuclear Senator

Posted on by
5

Oregon Hill’s state senator, John Watkins, withdrew his bill for uranium mining, but he is still pushing nuclear power.

Please call or email his office to let him know you oppose SB1138.
“We don’t need a nuclear think tank, we need to move away from dangerous nuclear energy and towards safe renewables!”

John Watkins (804) 698-7510

Emails ~
district10 at senate.virginia.gov

Scoop that Poop!

Posted on by
1

Sorry to keep bringing this topic up, but it needs to be heeded. From the James River Association’s blog:

by Amber Ellis, JRA’s Watershed Restoration Associate/Volunteer Coordinator

If you have a dog, then you have a chance every day to take a simple action that will help keep our streams and the James River safe from harmful bacteria. It’s easy…scoop the poop!

Some people think pet waste is natural, so just leave it to fertilize their lawn. Well, it is “natural”, but so is human poop and over the years we have created waste water treatment plants and septic systems to manage it safely.

Over 9,000 miles of our rivers and streams in Virginia are impaired due to bacteria. Pet waste is not the only culprit, but it makes up a big chunk of it and it is something that pet owners can do something about. Other sources of bacteria are agricultural runoff, leaking sanitary and storm sewers, and urban runoff.

Pet waste carries bacteria, such as E. Coli, that is washed into our waterways during rain or snow storms. Even if you cannot see a waterway from your house, that stormwater runoff flows into storm drains where it is then discharged directly into a natural body of water carrying all of that bacteria that it picked up along the way with it. Yuck!

So it’s simple… when you let your dog out to do his or her business, follow these 3 steps. 1) Take a bag with you, 2) use the bag to pick up the waste, and 3) toss it in the trash! This is one of the easiest things that we can all do to help out our waterways.

Keep in mind the City is increasing the fines for not doing this as well.

What’s That Number?

Posted on by
9

Soon the City’s Dept. of Utilities will most likely announce recommendations towards a reduction in the $49 minimum monthly charge to ratepayers for water and wastewater service. The big question is what will that number be?

The expectation is that the planned reduction will be a little less than 20% of the total monthly minimum charge and there will be a new charity rate created for poorer residents who have trouble for paying their utility bills.

It would be easy for the citizens who have petitioned for water rate reform to declare victory and enjoy the hope that bills might be slightly less in the future for all Richmond households.

But, when the history and big picture are considered, they would be wise to not do that and stand behind their stated request- that Mayor Jones and Richmond City Council take immediate steps to lower the minimum monthly charge for water and sewer service to $15 per month, while raising the cost per CCF of water in line with the neighboring counties. There needs to be a change in the volume rate structure change to reward conservation with the first 5 ccf of water/sewer service at a lower rate, and with a premium volume rate for water/sewer over 5 ccf of volume.

My best guess is that City officials will propose a token drop in the service charge along with a large increase in the volume charge that more than makes up for the token decrease in the service charge. They quietly claim that lowering charges too much will create “a hole in their budget”. The reality is that the City can receive the same total revenue from its water works by slashing the minimum monthly service charge to equal that of Henrico’s (which it sells water to!) and instead charging a premium for customers who use more. In other words, make it progressive instead of regressive.

Also, keep in mind that the city paid $200,000 to hire a consultant to examine Richmond’s outrageous water/sewer rates (although reformers said that was not necessary). Despite requests, the consultants have not met with reform activists. In addition, there has been difficulty with getting access to the information given to the utility rate study consultant. The DPU office recently told a citizen that the information will not be put on the city’s web server unless the city receives $287.17 from the citizen.

The utility rates and service charges affect almost all residents and businesses in the city. It is sure to be an important issue during the budget review process (which looks to be extra rushed this year). It would help the Mayor and City Council if the public feels confident that all important information is being freely shared. This speaks to many of the open government concerns raised by activists. In other words, if Richmond citizens want to be treated fairly by the government and utilities that they own, they need to keep the big picture in mind.

The Local Petition That Matters The Most

Posted on by
Reply

From The Richmond Open Government Project:

Not since Paul Goldman successfully led the effort to put the mayor at-large question up for citywide referendum has there been so much interest in local citizen petitioning. Of course, the ease, accessibility, and novelty of online petitioning have added to the attraction. In this past year we have seen local petitions, spread by social media, on Broad Street parking (833 signatures), urban chickens (226 signatures), water rates (1,400 signatures) and the environmental conditions at a public elementary school. That last one gained over 20,000 signatures from all over the world after ‘going viral’.

While there have been a few exceptions, the official response to these citizen petitions, unfortunately, has been tepid at best. Government officials might quickly promise to follow up on issues, but getting the press to follow up on the promises has not been that easy. Despite the fact that many of these local petitions implicitly asked for support and signatures from challengers and incumbents, the fall election rhetoric tended to be superficial and avoided the local petition issues. (One notable exception: Charles Diradour, running for 2nd District City Council, made a valiant attempt to make the City’s inordinately high minimum water rate a top campaign issue). Still, while one can argue about the overall effectiveness of recent petition efforts, they did undoubtedly raise the bar for public debate.

Yet there is one local, online petition whose cause should interest all reform-minded Richmond citizens and most certainly deserves attention from a new Richmond City Council–the one from the Richmond Open Government Project that calls for making Richmond City Hall an open government equal to the best in Virginia – www.thepetitionsite.com/684/909/771/

In a nutshell, this petition asks for commitment from citizens and public officials to raise the City of Richmond’s open government standards to, at the very least, match those of other large cities in the Commonwealth. (In addition, on a sharper edge, the petition clarifies some of the long-standing state code violations by the City regarding its public meeting documentation.) By asking for more open government, this petition puts democratic aspirations for accessibility and accountability front and center for all citizens and, by extension, calls attention to all petitions.

However, as with many of the petitions, though the response to the Open Government petition has been positive, the numbers are underwhelming. It still has a long way to go in gaining broad attention. Of recent candidates, only the aforementioned Diradour, and two City Council candidates in the Fifth District, Lee Shewmake and Parker Agelasto signed it. Of all the incumbent public officials, only 2nd district school board member Kimberly Gray signed on for open government.

At the same time, public statements in response have been very favorable and the picture painted in response to the petition is that open government issues have been addressed or are in the process of being addressed.

The reality is less than satisfactory- after the Open Government petition was launched, city hall announced that it would put videos of Council’s Formal meetings on the city’s website. Videos of the Informal meetings, where the blunt deliberations usually occur, are still not on the website. Three months ago the Council President said “[w]e’ll look at their petition and see if there are some suggestions that would make good sense to keep our citizens better informed.” As yet, the city has not announced that any of the 104 suggestions have been implemented.

So has this petition been a bust? Is that it? Not at all, says the Richmond Open Government Project. It may be an overused cliché, but organizers say their push for reform is more of a deliberate march than an open sprint. They always regarded the 2016 election as a more important barometer of success than the one this fall. The petition has served its purpose already in that it delivered the initial challenge.

So what now? With the New Year and a new city council, the Richmond Open Government Project has a new message: the time of notification is over. The petition is still open to more signatures, but it is time to also move forward with more members and not just signatures. To that end, look for a ‘larger umbrella’ meeting for a new organization with a new name and larger mission for better government.

Rick Tatnall

Scott Burger

C. Wayne Taylor

Silver Persinger

Chicken History

Posted on by
Reply

From letter to editor by Russell B. Rowe in the Charlottesville Daily Progress:

I read with great interest about the chicken problem in Albemarle County.
Let me give you some firsthand witness of living with chickens, as opposed to some “scientific study” or “snooty opinion” on living in a chicken environment, close quarters.

During the Great Depression, my four brothers, mama and daddy lived on Oregon Hill, a working class neighborhood in the heart of Richmond. Most of the houses were tied together, with a walk-through alley sometimes mixed in. My dad, I suppose to keep down trouble with neighbors, built a fence wherever we moved.

Click the link above for more, but the letter concludes:

What I’m trying to get to is we had at least seven people in that frame house with a fenced-in dirt backyard and 48 chickens, and I am 89 years old and in good health. All my brothers got in their three score and 10 years, plus.
The neighbors, in those days, never complained, and apparently the health department didn’t care, so scientific studies were not necessary.
My conclusion is: You have to have one rooster, and he is going to crow at dawn every day, but other than that, chickens never hurt anybody.

Expect some new ordinances to be considered at Richmond City Council in 2013.

Home Economics

Posted on by
1

Excerpts from article/viewpoint Home Economics from American City:

A campaign to retrofit the country’s aging housing stock and commercial buildings could make a major dent in reducing emissions nationwide. But despite all the talk of energy independence during the 2012 presidential campaign, retrofitting buildings received only passing mentions from President Obama. Republican challenger Mitt Romney’s energy platform did not mention it at all.

Yet Democrats, Republicans, environmentalists and financial institutions alike agree that the country must become more energy efficient — not just for the environment, but for the bottom line.
….

“Let’s address communities as communities,” Cochrane said. “We have this perfect alignment of the owners’ immediate needs, the utility’s long-term investment interests and actually delivering these deep savings.”

CDFIs could play an important role here, too. The energy efficiency market is full of uncertainty. From unreliable contracting costs to fluctuating energy prices and shifting weather patterns, there are many unpredictable variables. More standardized data coming from an organized network of local or regional CDFIs could attract more private investment, industry players said.

This is one of the best articles I have seen on this subject. Think about sharing it with your neighbors.