Author: jayson-whitehead

“I’m not as down on America as Mr. Weed. I believe America was great, is great, and will be great!” Republican Congressman Virgil Goode said on Wednesday, August 9, to a large audience crammed into the Senior Center. Many of the approximately 300 spectators roared in support of his invective.
    The Fifth District representative’s remarks followed those of Al Weed—the Democratic challenger for his congressional seat—who led off the debate with a 15-minute harangue, accusing Goode of blindly following George Bush and linking him with contentious issues, such as support for the Iraq War and rising health care costs.
    Of his support for the war, Goode, who sponsored the debate, was defiant: “I’m not one of those that say we should roll the white flag up tomorrow and get out the next day.”
    But one topic in particular rankled Goode: his alleged illegal campaign contributions from MZM, Inc.—a faltering company that was awarded a large defense contract under his watch.
    “Let’s get to his assertion that MZM got $15 million—totally false,” Goode said. “He must be smoking something like what he’s named for,” he added jokingly, drawing a chorus of boos from the crowd.
    Weed also took on Goode’s strong stance against illegal immigrants: “I’m waiting for him to talk about amnesty for the illegal employers who hire the illegal immigrants,” Weed said, drawing applause from his supporters.
    Goode said the current Senate immigration bill is “worse than nothing,” describing it as a “glide path” for citizenship.
    “It’s a good start,” Weed countered, and proceeded to outline his strategy for dealing with illegal immigration, which included helping to develop the economies of Mexico and Central America, and raising minimum wage, “so employers can’t exploit American workers.”
    When asked whether he supported Goode’s legislative efforts to designate English as America’s official language, Weed replied that he thought it was foolish. “It’s already our official language,” he pointed out.
    Goode was equally adamant. “If we do not, we’re going to end up like Canada,” he said, elaborating that a failure to do so “would balkanize this country.”
    After two more related queries, an audience member objected. “No more immigration questions,” he yelled, and the topic finally shifted. For once, everyone seemed relieved.

This past May, Charlottesville accomplished a first when it held elections at-large, in lieu of an established appointment model, for the City School Board. Shortly thereafter, a School Board Elections Study Task Force was appointed, and on Monday, August 7, task force Chairman Lloyd Snook stepped forward with its recommendations for the next elections in November.
    Altogether, the task force came up with two potential models. In the first, a ward-based system, residents would vote for a representative from their respective ward, along with three at-large candidates. In the second, known as a “Residential District Model,” residents would vote for three at-large candidates, as well as four representatives from specific districts.
    Snook said that the main difference between the two lies with the latter system, where “everybody votes for everybody.” As both are designed to foster geographical diversity, there didn’t seem to be many other differences. “We found no evidence that any one system correlates to a better school system,” Snook said.
    The Council aired their concerns. “One problem with the election is that a lot of the voters didn’t think they knew enough about the candidates and the issues,” said Councilman Dave Norris. Snook had a possible solution: “Should the City pay for a mail campaign on behalf of all the candidates?”
    Councilman Kevin Lynch disputed Snook’s assertion that the current system should be changed. “Most city residents are satisfied,” Lynch said, then addressed a larger concern, saying socioeconomic diversity was more important than geographical. “A single mom with two kids can’t take time off to serve on the School Board.” Perhaps the pay be raised for those who serve on the School Board, he suggested.
    “I think it matters to have geographic diversity,” countered Mayor David Brown, who was worried that such a system would create more safe seats. In the end, it came down to the same old thing: “There’s a lot more discussion to come on this,” Brown said.

Two years ago this month, President Bush signed an energy bill that provided for millions in incentives to build new nuclear plants. Richmond-based Dominion Energy responded almost immediately, proposing two new reactors on Lake Anna in Louisa County, 30 miles from Charlottesville, to add to the two already stationed at the north end of the lake. In mid-August, the opposition will get a chance to voice their concerns at two public hearings held on consecutive nights at Louisa County Middle School.
    For now, the People’s Alliance for Clean Energy (PACE) is focusing their efforts on the August 16 hearing to be held by Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality. The topic of the meeting will be recent design revisions to the third proposed reactor that should help cool the water before it returns to the lake.
    Melissa Kemp of Public Citizen has been working on getting people to both meetings, although she is frustrated that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission scheduled the second hearing, where Dominion’s request for an Early Site Permit will be discussed, for August 15. “It’s hard for people to come to two meetings in a row, and the same people would be interested in both,” she says. PACE’s Elena Day plans to ask, “Why are we not focusing on other options, such as increased efficiency and renewable energy technology?” Kemp hopes to raise a number of concerns regarding the plants’ impact on the local lake and rivers, as well as waste and security issues.
    They both agree on their ultimate message, which is summed up by Kemp: “What we’re saying is, there’s something better to do than just build new nuclear power plants.”

Charlottesville is known as a great place to raise children, and one of the reasons frequently given is the wide array of schools. “As an educator, it gives me a thrill that there’s so many options for my children,” says Patterson Cunningham, head of the Renaissance School (tuition: $10,300), a college preparatory school for grades 9-12 that is one of three private schools moving their campuses this year. With 30 students currently enrolled, Cunningham says that her old space on the Downtown Mall felt like a cramped apartment at times. Renaissance will use the next semester to move into their new, and much larger, location in the old McGuire Woods Building on Court Square. “We simply need the space,” she explains.
    Previously located on Jefferson Avenue in the Christ Church building, Charlottesville Community Jewish Day School’s new home is in the Merrill Lynch Building near the Pavilion. Only in their second year, the school (tuition: $8,400) currently supports K-2 education, with 8-10 students planned for the upcoming year.
    The Montessori School of Charlottesville has three locations in town, but has had to transplant one from its location at ACAC on Four Seasons Drive to 1602 Gordon Ave. While it has slightly less space, administrator Lindsey Schwab is excited to be in what she calls “a beautiful old house with great character and charm.” Forty-nine students will occupy the three classrooms, with two toddler classes and one primary (ages 3-6) class. (Tuition varies, but a three-hour morning primary class is $4,300.)
    Starting August 30, the Charlottesville Day School at ACAC (tuition varies, with an elementary education from 8:30am to 3:30pm costing around $9,000) fills the vacant space left by Montessori, with five pre-school classes as well as K-2 instruction. With 105 kids scheduled to attend, school director Stacy Bruns is excited that she can provide 40 square feet per child. She says the large number of schools for young children is not confined to Charlottesville, but “happening everywhere…. We’re finding that there are more parents starting to understand the importance of early childhood education.”

In recent years, Charlottesville’s Redevelopment and Housing Authority (CRHA)—charged with the oversight and maintenance of Section 8 and public housing—has been notoriously inept. Consequently, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has classified the City for the last three years with troubled housing status.
    To combat the embarrassing boondoggle, the City hired a new director for the CHRA, and on Monday night, July 17, he was ready to give a prognosis of his first year’s work to City Council. First, Councilor and CRHA Chair Kendra Hamilton had a few words. “We are relieved this is in the capable hands of Noah Schwartz, who is leading us out of the valley of the shadow of death,” she said. “We are very grateful for him.”
    “No pressure,” Schwartz replied to scattered laughs. He then ran through an exhausting litany of stats (with a $5.6 million budget, the CRHA manages 376 units of public housing at 11 sites in the city, and also administers 300 Housing Choice Voucher rental units to approximately 2,000 individuals), accomplishments (“What I’m most proud of is our customer service,” Schwartz said) and challenges (HUD doesn’t finance the agency enough to meet public housing needs so it is $100,000 short of revenue every year). As he talked, slides of happy public housing residents flashed on a screen behind him.
    “We have a lot more to do that we haven’t done,” concluded Schwartz, before ceding the floor to the council. New councilor Julian Taliaferro offered the first of many words of praise. “I’d like to commend you for the emphasis you’ve put on customer service,” he said. “People need to be treated with the utmost respect.”
    “We understand where they’re coming from,” Schwartz explained.
    “The first thing we have to do is get off the troubled status so we can get on firm footing,” Hamilton suggested.
    “I just love how you say things,” Schwartz gushed, drawing guffaws.
    New Councilor Dave Norris also congratulated Schwartz for his customer service before offering a broad compliment. “I commend you and your staff for righting the ship.”
    Mayor David E. Brown recounted a brief anecdote of how he once ran a soccer program for low-income kids before summing up the council’s overall affection for the new director. “You really have our support.”

On July 19, 2006, George W. Bush used his veto power for the first time in his presidency to trump a Senate vote which sought to extend federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research. His veto was widely expected, as he had made it quite clear in a 2001 statement that his preference was to largely restrict the scientific research. So how did Charlottesville’s federal representatives fare in this moral showdown? To pass in the Senate, many Republicans had to jump ship, with normally staunch Bush allies like Orrin Hatch and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist parting ways with the president.
    Virginia’s delegation provided an odd twist, as both senators reversed earlier positions. While Warner had commended Bush in 2001 for his policy of limited embryonic stem-cell research, he voted in favor of the Senate bill, saying that “subsequent years of experience in this area have demonstrated that the administration’s policy should be expanded.” George Allen, on the other hand, had earlier invoked language remarkably similar to the passed bill, but when it came time to vote withdrew his support, basing his reversal “on the advancement of science and studying the issue.”
    Over in the House, an attempt to override the veto predictably failed, with Rep. Virgil Goode backing the President. In May 2005, Goode voted against a house bill that mirrored the Senate’s. In a statement, the Charlottesville Congressman said that, while nearly everyone in Congress supports embryonic stem-cell research, there are disagreements about federal funding for the programs. He added that, if embryonic stem-cell research is as great as certain drug companies and speculators claim, “then I think that they should use their own money, and not taxpayer money.”

“Why do we never get an answer/When we’re knocking at the door/With a thousand million questions/About hate and death and war?” So goes the first verse of the Moody Blues’ 1970 song “Question.” Replace the last line with “About Charlottesville’s Downtown Mall,” and you’ve got an accurate description of last Thursday night’s special City Council meeting convened to talk about development issues related to the Mall—in particular, the conflict between the zoning ordinance and Board of Architectural Review (BAR) guidelines.
    Joined by the City Planning Commission, the discussion seemed provoked by a proposed nine-storey hotel to be developed by Oliver Kuttner in the old Boxer Learning building at First and Main streets. Jim Tolbert, director of neighborhood development services, reminded everyone that the City had set the building height in 1975 at 175′, but had lowered that figure in 1983 to 101′, or nine storeys. Then Tolbert presented the approximately 25 people gathered with three topics to discuss. The first—what is the proper scale and mass for the Downtown Mall?—caused a massive ripple effect of query after query.
    “If nine storeys is approved, how can we ensure sunlight for pedestrians and flora and fauna?” Planning Commissioner Craig Barton initially asked. Questions were answered with more questions: “If the building goes all the way to the sidewalk will we lose the chance for cafés?” “How aggressively do we enforce historic preservation?” “Should we move development to Water Street to keep the volume low on the Mall?”
    Despite Mayor David E. Brown’s repeated attempts to manage the discussion, the work session only served to underscore the confusion surrounding the regulation of the Mall’s architecture.