Tri, tri again
The name of the colonial man’s three-sided hat is actually spelled “tricorn” (alternatively spelled “tricorne”), not “tricorner” [“Court Square now officially tourist-friendly,” 7 Days, November 22]. You must have heard the same misinformation in school that I did many years ago when I was told that those hats were called “tricorn” because they had three corners. But the word means three horns, not three corners. It’s from the Latin “tri” + “cornu.” Similarly, “unicorn” means one horn.
David Miller
Stoney Creek
Little High hopes
In response to John Borgmeyer’s update on the Region Ten project on Little High Street [“Work stops on Little High,” The Week, November 29], it’s not that the Little High Area Neighborhood Association wishes to see a project that looks “upscale” (a term I don’t think we’ve ever used). LHANA wants to see a place created where people can live, not just be housed. The “housing project” approach of the last 30 years has been universally unsuccessful for both occupants and surrounding neighborhoods. LHANA continues to question Region Ten’s “housing project” approach to creating high-density development on Little High Street and we are urging them to undertake a planning process that will better integrate their proposed development and its residents with the neighborhood.
Mark Haskins
President, Little High Area
Neighborhood Association
Charlottesville
At-large and in charge
The C-VILLE Weekly coverage of last week’s City Council meeting and the debate about possible wards for election of the school board got it right—the unfortunate big news was the arguing and petty political maneuvering of the Councilors at both ends of the dais [“’Politics of fear’ 101,” The Week, November 29].
But there was another story that could have been written—about the reasoned, smart and civil comments offered by a wide array of Charlottesville citizens during the public-comment segment of the meeting. The thrust of those comments was that the best approach would be a mixed ward-and-at-large system, and that it would be acceptable if the election of the first three positions in May came under the at-large format.
I support a three-at-large and four–by-ward election format for the seven school board positions. So voting on the at-large positions this spring and the ward-based positions in subsequent elections would work well. To achieve that, though, council must keep moving forward to have the ward structure in place well before the spring voting so that we can cast our ballots intelligently.
The people of Charlottesville, and especially city school parents like myself, do not want to see city Democrats or Republicans use the schools as a political football. In the recent election, there was a broad consensus that voters wanted an elected board and there appears to be a broad consensus that a mixed ward-and-at-large system is preferable. I hope the politicians are listening.
Paul Wagner
Charlottesville
Thumb tax
Dear Ace, I saw this written in your recent response to a questioner [“Wheeling and dealing,” Ask Ace, November 29]: “Dear Axl: So, here in America, we pay taxes. It’s part of this little deal we have with the government where we give them some money and they give us free enterprise, private property rights and other incidental things. May Ace suggest that you look into this?”
Ace, I can only hope that you were being facetious. I looked into this, and what I find is that only in Bolshevik/Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Neocon America was/is the government monopoly on rights a franchised business. You could say the same for any oligarchical system in history.
In Jeffersonian America, rights are given by birth and are inalienable (Jefferson is that guy that a lot of our tourism is based on…you might want to look into him.).
The current tax structure is little more than extortion. That you think it’s a “little deal” we have with the government is easily disproven. Try to renegotiate the deal and let me know how you fare.
Jamie Dyer
Batesville
Drawing the lines
I’m certain you had good intentions in writing your recent article on sex offenders living in and around Charlottesville [“Neighbor-hood watch,” The Week, November 29]. Unfortunately you seem to have let those intentions fall to the wayside in your stretch for a hook. Your grouping of the eclectic Belmont, Carlton, Woolen Mills and Fife-ville neighborhoods into one entity is in itself absurd as it spans half the width of the city. The simple facts of the situation reveal that between two and four sex offenders live in virtually every neighborhood in Charlottesville from Rose Hill to Locust to the University to Belmont, regardless of location or real estate values. The neighborhood most locals think of as “Belmont” in fact hosts only one sex offender.
I would have hoped that before publishing an article concerning such a delicate and inflammatory subject, you could have taken the trouble to correctly identify the neighborhoods you were dealing with. The article was otherwise very informative and could have been an excellent addition to your paper had you not distorted the facts in an effort to create shock value.
John Sweet
Charlottesville
CLARIFICATION
In reporting last week about UVA’s football season [7 Days], we should have been more specific about the squad’s season record. This marks the second time in 19 years that UVA has had a losing ACC record. Overall, the team is 6-5, thus eligible for a bowl game.