Month: July 2006

The Albemarle School Board will solidify policies that allow schools to discipline students for off-campus behavior.
    Since two parties in Albemarle and Crozet resulted in the death of 17-year-old Western Albemarle student Nolan Jenkins and the ticketing of dozens of teens, schools have been debating their role in battling underage drinking.
    A recommendation presented Thursday, July 13, says schools may discipline misconduct “where 1) there is a nexus between the conduct and school operations; 2) where the conduct has been shown to have a detrimental or harmful effect on the welfare or safety of the school and its students; or 3) where the conduct has caused substantial or material disruption to the school’s operations.”
    This wording puts policy in line with already-existing laws, schools attorney Mark Trank said.
    The board may also ask legislators to allow names of minors who are arrested for alcohol outside school to be released to school officials. (Some of the students arrested at the parties were under 18, so their names were not released.)
    Lisa Moorefield, a parent who spoke at the meeting, said she was on board with the intent of the policy, but couldn’t understand the language. What types of behaviors, exactly, would schools discipline?
    Superintendent Pam Moran said she doesn’t want the School Board to police every illegal behavior, but to address egregious instances that affect schools. “Police have a job to do, parents have a job to do,” she said.
    Staff will look into whether athletic training manuals should be revised, possibly modeling after “Sports Done Right,” a program that’s had success in Maine. Other extra-curricular activities could be subject to alcohol agreements between students, parents and leaders. “Participating in extra-curriculars is a privilege, and if you’re representing the school we have some different expectations about behavior,” board member Brian Wheeler said.
    Staff will also develop alcohol education seminars for grades 11 and 12. Wheeler expects these revisions in time for the 2007-08 school year.
    Board member Jon Stokes cautioned against combining driver’s education with alcohol education, fearing the message would be “if you’re going to drink, don’t drive.” He argued the message to teens should be to abstain from alcohol altogether.
    The board will vote on the policy August 10; they’ll meet with legislators August 24 to determine if schools should have access to information about alcohol arrests of minors.

Crime statistics from January through May of this year show a reduction in violent crime, but a climb in property crimes like motor vehicle thefts, burglary, and thefts from vehicles compared to the period last year.
    The trends mirror county trends reported last week, which saw a hike in larceny, stolen vehicles and burglary.
    Aggravated assaults are down the most (13 percent), falling to 58 incidents from 67 incidents.
    A huge jump in thefts from motor vehicles—up 92 percent to 169 thefts from 88 last year—could be related to a spike in iPod thefts from cars near UVA earlier this year.
    Motor vehicle thefts also more than doubled. There have been 61 cars stolen so far, compared to 39 in this period of 2005.
    So far, this year has also seen more crimes in general: 896 incidents compared to 748 last year.

Pocket bikes, or pocket rockets, those tiny versions of hot street bikes that have teenagers riding with their knees to their chins, are no longer allowed on Virginia’s public roads. Though they are really gangsta, at less than 24" tall the bikes are, um…kind of dangerous.
    The law, (Virginia Code 46.2-100), which took effect on July 1, defines the bikes as “motor-driven cycles.” This means any vehicle with a gasoline engine under 150 ccs (cubic centimeters), with a seat less than 24 inches up from the ground and which lacks a Vehicle Identification Number (VIN). The bikes also usually don’t meet safety standards for distance between turn signals and candle power ratings, and can lack mirrors and brake lights.
    Charlottesville Police Sgt. Mike Faruggio lists numerous problems with the bikes. Among them, riders can’t be seen by other drivers, the brakes work poorly, they overheat easily, they’re unstable on rough surfaces, the de-acceleration is sluggish, and the loud noises they create is a neighborhood nuisance.
    The bikes, which cost about $180 to $3,000, weigh around 60 to 80 pounds. But they can carry several times their weight, and are usually sturdy enough for the toughest 14-year-old rough rider.
    “The intention of that bike is not to be ridden as a form of transportation. Those bikes are meant for the parking lots away from traffic, they’re not meant for getting out on 29,” says Dave Munn of Moto Virginia, a scooter and motor-cycle dealership.
    Thanks to the law, bad-ass tykes and teens will have to be satisfied with riding the bikes in their own driveways, where parents can keep an eye on them.

The Virginia Supreme Court has created a commission that will make changes to courts statewide. The “Commission on Virginia Courts In the 21st Century: To Benefit All, To Exclude None,” or the “Futures Commission” is making about 170 recommendations about court structure, technology, administration and more. But a court clerks’ association is objecting to specific changes, and three out of five “all-inclusive” public hearings have had only sparse attendance.
    The commission is calling for public comment on the courts in letter form, and has held three public hearings so far: July 5 in Roanoke, July 6 in Abingdon and July 10 in Richmond. But Thomas M. Diggs, assistant to the commission chair, says, “We’ve not gotten much response from the public at all.”
    This may be because the commission’s preliminary recommendation is 131 pages long. Also, their public comment form asks for feedback on topics like “standards for new judgeships,” “probate,” and “Commissioners in Chancery.” Pretty tough to decipher if you don’t have a J.D.
    Diggs’ office has received only about five letters, he says, and only eight people spoke at the hearings—one was an attorney, one was a police officer and six of them were court clerks.
    The clerks oppose a recommendation that would eliminate the constitutionally elected circuit clerk office, making it instead an appointed position. Linda Timmons, president of the Virginia Court Clerks Association, says the change is about “control.” The shift means judges would have direct oversight of court administrators.
    The commission’s Diggs says the change was partially motivated by some incidents in which clerks weren’t cooperative with judges. Circuit court clerks are the only clerks in the court system who are not appointed.
    Timmons says there are other changes embedded in the recommendation that will have a big impact on courts. Among them, streamlining the Court of Appeals process to a single step. If that happens, she says, “the citizens would not be properly served…because they’d have a one-shot deal before the court.”
    Overall, Timmons says, “The report is pretty much going to restructure our whole court system as we know it today, if these things follow through.”
    The last two public hearings are set for July 17 in Fairfax and July 24 in Virginia Beach. Deadline for feedback by mail is July 31 to Supreme Court of Virginia, 100 N. Ninth St., third floor, Richmond, VA 23219. The commission will make final recommendations to the Supreme Court of Virginia in October.

Joggers puffing past UVA might notice that the crowd on McCormick Road looks a little younger than usual. They’d be right. No college co-eds, these. With summer here, UVA hosts a number of summer camps targeted at aspiring athletes and other high school students. Here’s a quick run-down, by the numbers.

Number of kids attending UVA summer camps: 10,000
Number of dorm rooms used by summer campers per week: 400-500
Number of meals eaten by summer sports campers per day: 2,520
Projected UVA revenue from summer camps: $3,000,000
Projected UVA revenue from summer sports camps: $1,000,000—$1,500,000
Cost for a high school student to attend a three-day, two-night UVA baseball camp, including room and board: $399
Average salary of a Major League ballplayer in 2005: $2,476,589

Sources: University of Virginia, Major League Baseball

Revitalization or gentrification? Whatever you want to call it, the Charlottesville Planning Commission wasn’t approving it at their July 11 meeting, putting the brakes on two projects that would increase density in the Fifeville neighborhood around Cherry Avenue.
    In an uncharacteristically divided decision, the commission voted 4-2 to deny a rezoning request by Mark Saunders and V.G. Sullivan, developers looking to turn 1000 and 1002 Grove St. into six homes.
    Developers brought a plan that earned general approval from the commission and City staff, a plan designed by the Boston-based urban architecture firm Utile (which is also working on Habitat for Humanity’s Sunrise Court project). But the location proved to be the issue, and neighborhood opposition helped lead the commission to deny the rezoning request. City Planner Brian Haluska recommended rejecting the preliminary plan, based on the City’s comprehensive plan to keep the area a single-family residential neighborhood.
    “It would be nice, if it were elsewhere in the city,” said Cheri Lewis, a commissioner who voted against the proposal. “It’s a tough call.”
    After the vote, both Sullivan and Saunders say they will take the current proposal to City Council, which has the final say. “We feel that we had a deeply flawed review process on the City’s side, and we hope that City Council recognizes the substance behind the split vote and is able to see the bigger picture,” says Saunders in an e-mail. Only one resident appeared at the meeting to speak against the plan.
    On another Fifeville project, the commission deferred a vote on a development at 850 Estes St. that would create 27 residential units on the site of three dilapidated houses near Walker Square Condominiums. Commissioners decided unanimously that they needed more information about canopy cover, current site tree count and the dumpster design for the proposed “mixed-use building.”
    The Estes property is an old ghost for City government. Last fall, developers applied for a special use permit that City Council effectively quashed. But the developers created a similar plan that exploits a zoning loophole: By designating a mere 1.9 percent of the building “office space,” developers may rezone the property at a higher density by-right—which means once the developers address current concerns, the commission is legally obligated to approve the plan though it seems intent right now on putting off that inevitability. Demolition permits are already outstanding on the site.