Author: chiara-canzi

Cuccinelli: UVA gun policy does not prohibit concealed carries

In a legal opinion issued at the request of Senator Emmett Hanger, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli argues that UVA’s firearm policies may not restrict an individual with a concealed carry permit from bringing a weapon into University buildings.

"With respect to persons who have a concealed carry permit, because the University adopted a policy rather than a regulation, it has not ‘otherwise prohibited by law’ persons with a concealed carry permit from possessing a handgun," writes Cuccinelli. "[A]nd, therefore, the policies may not be used to prohibit persons with such a permit from carrying a concealed firearm into the buildings covered by the policy."

In short, UVA policies may function as regulations unless they conflict with law, which means the school can prohibit the open carry of firearms on campus, but not concealed carries. As it exists, UVA’s policy prohibits individuals from carrying a firearm into campus buildings without prior approval from the Chief of Police for both staff, faculty as well as visitors.

“In addition to other individuals authorized by University policy, University of Virginia police officers are lawfully in charge of University property and University facilities for purposes of forbidding entry upon or within, or prohibiting remaining upon or within University property and facilities while possessing firearms, weapons or other devices in violation of this policy,” reads the policy.

According to the Virginia Pilot, UVA spokesperson Carol Wood said that UVA is reviewing Cuccinelli’s opinion.

"The safety and security of our more than 20,000 students and 10,000 employees — in addition to the safety of the more than 10,000 patients and visitors who come to the University each day — are of utmost importance to us," she added. "Any steps we consider in our review of the opinion will certainly take that responsibility into account," she is quoted as saying.

Categories
News

Another Moonscape?

Much like the Hollymead Town Center development, the new project at the intersection of Hydraulic Road and U.S. Route 29 North will displace significant amounts of soil and vegetation to make way for 1.2 million square feet of retail, commercial and residential space. But unlike Hollymead, Edens & Avant, developers for The Shops at Stonefield, have a much shorter time window to help stabilize and revegetate vacant land in an effort to limit stormwater runoff.

After the Hollymead Town Center prompted sediment concerns, developers for The Shops at Stonefield say their lot on Hydraulic and Route 29 (pictured) will mind county regulations passed in 2009 to ensure soil stability.

Within the last decade, excitement over construction of Hollymead—and the arrival of Target, among other things—turned into concern when sediment from the development site began seeping into Lake Hollymead and making its waters muddy. According to a Hollymead Lake Sediment Survey, although the lake was healthy, “there are significant thicknesses of sediment appearing to be of recent origin that are impacting the lake’s viability.”

“Should this sedimentation continue or be accelerated, serious damage is predicted,” reads the report.

Considering the magnitude of the current project, could The Shops at Stonefield, which will include a Trader Joe’s, Regal Cinema, restaurants, a hotel and a 245-unit residential project, be the next Hollymead? Those involved say such a fate is not likely.

“There are a couple of, I guess, fortunate differences,” says Albemarle County Engineer Glenn Brooks. “This is lower than the road, Hollymead was higher than the road, so that made it more difficult.” In addition, The Shops at Stonefield is a more straightforward development “with just a commercial development plan and a grade for everything that goes with it,” he says.

The worst-case scenario, says Brooks, would be if the main pipe system failed.

“We would get some discharge through the piping system under [Route] 29,” he says, then adds that the system goes under the shopping center adjacent to the nearby post office “and it would eventually hit Meadow Creek.”

A spokesperson for Edens & Avant tells C-VILLE that the work at Stonefield is “consistent” with the county’s erosion and sediment control plans.

“The first work taking place at the site is the construction of county-approved erosion and sediment control ponds that ensure any runoff from disturbed areas is treated before it leaves the property and enters any watershed,” writes Robbie Robertson, Edens & Avant communications director, in an e-mail. He adds that a county inspector visits the site regularly.

“In the Hollymead case, they took a long time to get [the construction grading done],” says Brooks. “The economy shut down, they had to leave some parts of the project and then come back.” That allowed grounds to be washed away with every rainstorm.

This time around, Albemarle County is armed with an ordinance that addresses the issue. In 2009, the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved an amendment to an ordinance that puts a nine-month deadline for developers to plant permanent vegetation and stabilize soil for all exposed land.

“The purpose of the ordinance was to prohibit situations where you would have large areas of construction sites that weren’t under active construction sitting there, denuded and creating an erosion problem every time there was a significant rainstorm,” says Morgan Butler, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. Butler drafted a report with the Rivanna Conservation Society and UVA law school’s Environmental Law and Conservation Clinic recommending the change to the county code.

According to Brooks, Edens & Avant will likely have to ask the Supervisors for an extension. “It’s just not going to get done in nine months,” he says. However, Brooks says that the areas the developer won’t develop right away will be planted with grass to stabilize the soil and look better.

“Our mandate is to make sure that it doesn’t erode, so we’d like it to be green as soon as possible,” he says.

Categories
Living

July 2011: Real Estate

 Falling in love makes people do foolish things. Falling out of love, however, can be a calculated business transaction—at least in real estate. What happens to a homeowning couple’s largest asset when they file for divorce?

“It will always depend on the couple’s financial situation,” says Tanja Milanovic, local real estate agent with Roy Wheeler Realty Company.

In the current housing market, under the shadow of recession, divorcing couples have resorted to creative strategies in order to survive both financially and emotionally. One such tactic is to wait it out until the economy improves. According to the National Marriage Project, many couples who may have thought of divorcing before the housing bubble burst ultimately decided to stick together. In fact, the recession seems to have helped decrease the overall divorce rate.

But with matters of the heart, nothing is ever certain. And many couples still find themselves entering divorce proceedings and starting down the difficult road of splitting their assets.

If the couple wants to keep their home, one option is for one spouse to move out, while the other stays put. More often than not, says Milanovic, the woman remains in the house with the children, “so there is not going to be any change to the kids involved, so that they don’t have to go to a new school.”

With one spouse in the home, “the other would pay [the house] off, and the mortgage would be transferred if the bank decided that one partner was able to financially carry the loan,” she says.

Alternatively, the partner who chose to remain in the home has the option to refinance, thus using the acquired equity to buy out the other spouse. The lower interest rates for refinancing can work in favor of the spouse who takes over the mortgage. For example, if the couples owes $100,000 on the mortgage and both spouses have agreed to split distribution of equity—$50,000 each—one spouse would have to borrow $150,000 to pay off the existing loan and buy out the other.

However, says Milanovic, that is not always possible.

“The cleaner and less complicated way is for a couple to sell the house even before the divorce,” she says. Milanovic knows couples who have sold their home in the middle of divorce proceedings, “which is more stressful.”

For those couples who can neither afford to keep the house, nor sell it, a short sale (where the amount the couple owes the bank exceeds what the house is worth) is a plausible solution.

“It’s a lengthy process, because the short sale first needs to be approved by the bank,” says Milanovic.

To speed up the process, some homeowners choose to advertise the short sale even before it has been approved by the bank. “At times, the advertised price is not always the one the banks approves,” thus endangering the couple’s financial lifeline, she says.

Some divorcing couples end up renting out their former love nests.

“For a job transfer or for a divorce or any family situation, it’s becoming a more popular option because of the lack of funds and lack of ability to qualify to get a mortgage,” says Denise Ramey, a local agent.

Some homeowners even rent one bedroom at a time. “In one case I know, [the couple] decided not to do anything with the house, but one partner who stayed in the house has found a roommate, who shares the financial responsibility,” says Milanovic.

It is also not unusual to hear of one spouse moving into the basement of the couple’s home. For cash-strapped divorcees, even that awkward situation might be preferable to moving in with relatives. Breaking up is tough business—and it’s rough on the finances, too.

Albemarle County residents happy to live here

Albemarle County residents are happy to live where they do. According to a survey conducted by National Research Center, Inc., “most residents experienced a good quality of life in Albemarle County and believed the County was a good place to live." The overall quality of life in Albemarle County was rated as “excellent” or “good” by 90 percent of respondents.

A majority reported that they plan on staying in Albemarle County for the next five years. In fact, 51 percent of the survey’s respondents said they would recommend Albemarle County as a place to live to whoever asks. The county received praise for its reputation, its appearance, the quality of the environment and schools. However, “ease of rail travel,” the lack of affordable child care and “ease of bus travel and ease of bicycle travel” failed to earn wide approval numbers.

The survey also reveals that, generally, county residents trust in the local government and rate the direction of the leadership as either “good” or “excellent.”

To read the survey report in its entirety, click here.  

Colette Blount joins City Council race

Charlottesville School Board member Colette Blount formally announced her candidacy for the Democratic nomination for City Council yesterday outside Jackson P. Burley Middle School, where she will begin the new academic year as a civics teacher.

“Colette is somebody who has over the years demonstrated her commitment to the betterment of our youth," said Mayor Dave Norris during his introduction. "She is somebody who has a strong commitment to our natural environment, somebody who has a strong commitment to community engagement, somebody who will be an effective leader for City Council, for our community."

Blount, who moved to Albemarle County in 1994, said her campaign will be based on the value of education, protecting the environment and engaging people to move the community forward. Her overarching principle, she said, is “equal access to the future for all.”

More after the photo.

Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris introduces Democratic candidate Colette Blount

“A sound education program is a requisite resource for a community,” she said. “When our children have the tools to actively engage in the 21st century and beyond, then the community is on a good path,” she said.

While on the School Board, Blount voted against controversial issues such as an artificial turf field at Charlottesville High School and a nine-acre easement for the Meadow Creek Parkway.

“I voted against the Parkway on the principle of going through McIntire Park,” she said. “Nothing is wrong with open green space.” Kathy Galvin, a fellow school board member and council candidate, voted in favor of the easement.

 

VDOT work begins on busy 29/250 bridge

Starting tonight, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) will begin overnight repair work on the bridge that takes the 250 Bypass over Route 29 Business (near Best Buy). 

According to VDOT, crews will work on repairing the decks of the bridge, among other parts, from 7pm to 4:30am. After a quick stop for the July 4th holiday, work will resume Tuesday, July 5. From the following Sunday, July 10, crews will work from Sundays through Thursdays, though VDOT points out that no work will take place on Friday and Saturday nights.

The repairs are slated to be complete in late August.

In the meantime, motorists beware: traveling at that intersection could be a nightmare most nights for several months.

Virginia “Top State for Business” according to CNBC

The Commonwealth was named "Top State for Business" by cable network CNBC’s fifth annual study, which tests all 50 states on 10 categories including infrastructure and transportation, cost of doing business, education and business friendliness.

Virginia had the best overall score in the study’s history—1,660 out of 2,500 points—but although the state was recognized for its ideal location and friendly business atmosphere, the study found a few bumps.

"But not all is rosy in Virginia," CNBC noted. "The state fell eight spots to number 26 in Quality of Life, which, among other things, measures healthcare. The number of uninsured residents in Virginia has risen steadily in recent years."

Virginia also lost points for its small pool of available workers, in contrast to other states. That dropped the Commonwealth to No. 12 from No. 3 in the "Workforce" category.

Naturally, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell took some credit for the ranking, pointing to his administration’s focus on creating private sector jobs.

“We’ve done that by keeping taxes low, getting government spending under control, having a strong Right to Work law, and making smart investments in transportation, economic development and higher education,” he said in a press release. “It is paying off. CEO’s and entrepreneurs have responded to our efforts and found that Virginia is a great place to start and grow a business.”

The Commonwealth last topped this list in 2007 under then governor and current U.S. Senate candidate, Tim Kaine.

Categories
News

Down, but not out

Last week, in a lawsuit filed against Charlottesville, five homeless men claimed that City Council’s soliciting ordinance unlawfully restricts panhandling on the city’s Downtown Mall. With the support of the ACLU of Virginia and local legal representation, the plaintiffs claim that the ordinance violates their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights—free speech and equal protection.

 

Michael Sloan (with his dog, Jeda) has been homeless for several years, and is one of five plaintiffs in a lawsuit that calls Charlottesville’s soliciting ordinance unconstitutional.  

Local attorney Jeffrey Fogel spoke about the suit during a press conference before the Thomas Jefferson Center’s community chalkboard, a free speech monument and a setting that Fogel called “ironic.”

“Do we want to live in a society where it is a crime for a poor person to stand without interfering with anybody and ask for help?” asked Fogel. “My answer is no. The Constitution’s answer is no, as well.”

Last August, City Council approved an ordinance that restricted “soliciting” (formerly “panhandling”) within 50′ of vehicular crossings on Second and Fourth streets, as well as within 15′ of bank ATMs and entrances, during business hours. The ordinance also restricts soliciting “from or to” any person seated at the Mall’s various outdoor cafés and vendors—but too vaguely, claims the suit.

“I understand what soliciting from somebody means, but soliciting to somebody?” asks Fogel. “Does it mean that if I go to somebody at an outdoor café and hand a $20 bill, am I a criminal?”

The suit alleges that the ordinance criminalizes “the solicitation of money or things of value” but not other forms of solicitations.

“It’s O.K. for a musician to set up close to a building to play their music, but when we sit up against a building and fly a sign, we get harassed,” said plaintiff Earl McCraw at the press conference. McCraw has received one citation for violating the ordinance, and tells C-VILLE, “We are not harassing people who are sitting there eating. We are just sitting there holding a sign.”

Plaintiff Michael Sloan, who usually sits in front of the Jefferson Theater with his dog, Jeda, agrees. “They are doing essentially the same thing we are,” he tells C-VILLE. “They are panhandling, they just don’t fly a sign. But if I take the sign down and sit here with my dog, it’s still panhandling.”

Since August, Charlottesville Police have issued three panhandling citations on the Mall. According to Lt. Ronnie Roberts, city police took a “proactive approach” and educated those who were panhandling on the restrictions of the ordinance, then issued warnings for first infractions.

City Attorney Craig Brown said he won’t comment on a pending litigation, but tells C-VILLE that the city has up to 21 days to file an answer to the suit. Mayor Dave Norris says the changes made to the ordinance were “very modest.”

“Most of the Mall…is still open for solicitations, and the changes that we made had to do with protecting pedestrian safety in the vehicular crossings,” he says in an interview.

He would have preferred to go a step further. In addition to limiting soliciting to 15′ from banks and ATM machines, “there was a proposal to extend that to 15′ of anywhere there is cash exchanging hands, including outdoor cafés,” says Norris. “Our city attorney thought that went too far in restricting people’s freedom of expression.”

Neither Downtown Business Association chair Bob Stroh nor Main Street Arena owner Mark Brown—previously involved in a failed campaign to direct panhandling cash to the Thomas Jefferson Area Coalition for the Homeless—feel the ordinance is unconstitutional.

“The lawsuit is not a genuine lawsuit brought on by the plaintiffs,” says Brown. “The lawyer has been working on this for a year.”

Fogel tells C-VILLE that he has appeared in front of City Council to oppose amendments to the panhandling ordinance and presented its members with an alternate ordinance from the City of Indianapolis, where “passive forms of solicitation” are permitted.

“If somebody doesn’t verbalize anything, if they simply hold up a sign, holding a cup, have an open guitar case, those things are excluded from any prohibitions,” explains Fogel.

McCraw and Sloan, who have each been homeless for multiple years, say they do not enjoy asking for money, but their disabilities make finding work close to impossible.

“I don’t like what I do,” says Sloan. “I hate it, but I have to do it.”

Cannon formally announces City Council candidacy

Brevy Cannon, writer for UVA Media Relations, formally announced his candidacy for City Council on the Downtown Mall last night, surrounded by current and former elected officials and friends.

Cannon, 36, is running as a "pragmatic progressive Democrat," and says he is ready to give City Council a “younger voice.”

“I am young and I am ready to tackle the issues,” he said. “I am ready to do my homework.”

A bike commuter, Cannon stressed the need for a better, updated trail system that would run from Biscuit Run to Downtown to Crozet and beyond. But Cannon, who lives on Ridge Street and is the leader of Left of Center, a group for young progressives, also highlighted to need for communication and collaboration between the city, county and UVA as a basis for progress and success.

More after the photo.

Brevy Cannon (left) with his supporters outside Eppie’s Restaurant on the Downtown Mall.

Citing job creation as a Council priority, Cannon said that UVA-based research has led to “the beginning of a biotechnology hub” right here in the city. One such example, said Cannon, is Indoor Biotechnologies, the company that bought the old Coca-Cola bottling plant on Preston Avenue with the idea of transforming it into a biotechnology center. That center "will be staffed with middle-class jobs," he said.

Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris told the crowd that Cannon “has what it takes” to make a positive impact on the city, and added that he would be “thrilled” to serve alongside Cannon on Council.

Cannon joins five fellow Democrats—Incumbent Satyendra Huja, Kathy Galvin, Paul Beyer, Dede Smith and James Halfaday—and four Independents—Bob Fenwick, Brandon Collins, Scott Bandy and Andrew Williams—for three open seats on City Council. Do your homework, readers, and learn about them here.
 

Pending lawsuit calls panhandling ordinance unconstitutional

Local attorney Jeff Fogel is representing five panhandlers who will be filing a lawsuit against the City of Charlottesville over parts of the soliciting ordinance City Council approved last fall.

“Both I and the ACLU had opposed the amendment of this ordinance when it came up last year,” Fogel tells C-VILLE. “I testified before the Council against the ordinance. My testimony wasn’t really focused on the Constitution, as much as it was focused on it’s the wrong thing to do. There is not reason to treat this class badly.”

The lawsuit is expected to claim that the cited portions of the ordinance criminalize some form of speech, such as soliciting money, and violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

Last fall, City Council approved an ordinance that banned "soliciting," which was changed from "panhandling," in numerous locations: within 15′ of any entrance or exit of banks during business hours or ATM machines; from any person seated at the Mall’s various outdoor cafés; from any vendor or cart; and within 50′ in any direction of the Mall’s two vehicular crossings on 2nd and 4th streets.

Fogel says that he has approached Council with an alternate ordinance similar to that of the City of Indianapolis.

“This ordinance is almost identical to the ordinance that we have. The only thing it does different from ours is to say not included with these prohibitions are passive forms of solicitations,” says Fogel. “If somebody doesn’t verbalize anything, if they simply hold up a sign, holding a cup, have an open guitar case, those things are excluded from any prohibitions.”

City Attorney Craig Brown said he won’t comment on a pending litigation, but tells C-VILLE that the City has up to 21 days to file an answer to the suit.

Read more about the lawsuit in next week’s C-VILLE.