Charlottesville Mistaken & Mistimed Mandate
Adapted from comments to the Charlottesville Planning Commission May 9, 2017
By. Neil Williamson, President
The Free Enterprise Forum often speaks of unintended consequences of proposed legislation. We believe staff’s current recommendation regarding regulations around forgiving developer fees heads Charlottesville in the wrong direction.
Please let me explain.
In 2003, fourteen years ago, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development said:
Most housing professionals agree that concentrating assisted-housing for low- and very low-income Americans in dense, urban areas is not an effective use of scarce affordable housing resources. Over the past decade, professionals in the affordable housing industry have turned increasingly to mixed-income housing as an alternative to traditional assisted-housing initiatives. Mixed-income housing is an attractive option because, in addition to creating housing units for occupancy by low-income households, it also contributes to the diversity and stability of American communities.
There have been numerous successful mixed-income developments nationwide. State and local governments have developed incentive programs and initiatives to promote mixed-income housing. In the past decade, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has provided support for public housing authorities to de-concentrate traditional public housing in favor of the development of mixed-income housing. In addition, HUD funding from the HOME Investment Partnerships Program can also be a valuable resource for states and local jurisdictions to finance mixed-income housing initiatives, or to develop, design and implement new mixed-income housing programs that address local housing needs. HOME funds are specifically designed to be flexible in order to meet local housing needs.
In practice, I have seen Charlottesville intentionally moving toward more mixed income neighborhoods as a tapestry of price points for the communities being developed.
Why then would staff recommend the following:
To ensure the affordable units are actually provided in new developments, staff recommends no Certificates of Occupancy be issued until the City confirms the affordable units have been developed and the developer has entered into an agreement with the City that these units will remain affordable for a specified period of time.
While this may look good on paper, the reality is that by DEMANDING the developer build the affordable units prior to receiving certificates of occupancy for the market rate units virtually guarantees the affordable units will not be mixed with market rate rather will be concentrated in one portion of the project. Further, by positioning the affordable units first in the pipeline this well intentioned requirement would create significant financing challenges for the development project as a whole.
If the Planning Commission is committed to mixed income communities that are truly mixed, the Free Enterprise Forum requests that you strike this language and move forward with the concept of development fee forgiveness as a small step to address the larger housing affordability crisis in our region.
Respectfully Submitted,
Neil Williamson, President
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County.
Photo Credit: http://theadvocates.org/tag/liberator-online-2
Charlottesville’s Paid Parking ‘Canary in the Coal Mine’ ?
By. Neil Williamson, President
According to the Fairfax County Times, about five hundred people marched in protest on March 4th of the paid parking system implemented by Reston Town Center (RTC) owner and mana
ger Boston Properties in January.
Yesterday (3/13) The Washington Post ran an article titled End of Free Parking is the Last Straw for Some Reston Residents which highlighted business owners concerns:
But businesses in the Northern Virginia suburb, about 23 miles west of Washington, say there has been a noticeable drop in customer traffic since the fees took effect and parking enforcement officers began writing tickets.
Why should Charlottesville care about what is happening in Reston?
Because we see this push back on this private sector parking operation as a ‘Canary in the Coal Mine’ for Charlottesville
In the early 20th Century, coal miners used to take canaries into coal mines with them. Canaries are more sensitive to dangerous gases than humans are. As long as the bird was singing, the miners knew they were safe but if the canary stopped singing/died, the miners knew to evacuate.
RTC, much like Charlottesville’s Downtown Mall, was a long time in coming mixed use economic success. Founded in 1990 (the same year Charlottesville removed parking meters), RTC is a new urbanist walkable development is surrounded by parking decks for customer/resident parking. The retail mix within both properties is similar in type (banks, clothing, hotel and restaurants) if not specific brands. An important distinction between the Downtown Mall and RTC is that RTC is privately held by a single entity and does not require governmental approval or significant public process to change parking regulations on their private property.
Parking, which in most of Northern Virginia’s shopping districts is ‘free’ has become an issue in both Charlottesville and Reston.
According to the Washington Post story:
Boston Properties, which took over full ownership of the town center in 2015, had planned for years to implement fees for garage and curb spaces. In 2011, when it was moving to acquire town center parcels, the company estimated that the parking fees would generate as much as $8 million per year. Officials now say the amount will probably be lower…
… Im Sun “Sunny” Park, owner of Obi Sushi restaurant, said sales have dropped by about a third since January. As she spoke, she watched a Boston Properties parking enforcement officer outside the restaurant leave a citation on the windshield of a car parked on the street.
“I see them giving tickets all day,” Park said. “They are killing business.”
Charlottesville Tomorrow’s Sean Tubbs reports Charlottesville is moving forward with their test of metered parking:
A six-month test of parking meters around Charlottesville’s Downtown Mall could begin as early as August. Officials believe that if the project is successful, it will improve the chances of finding a parking spot near the mall. “What we hope that it does is open up some of those spaces,” said Rick Siebert, hired last year as the city’s first parking manager. “What we’d like to do is have people drive down a block and actually see an open space.”…
The council also has authorized the establishment of an enterprise fund to support creation of the city parking department, which is overseen by Siebert. The department will be supported by revenue from parking garages, parking meters, fines and payments for permits required for special zones in the city.
It is interesting the different visions of free parking among those involved in the process. One of the commenters to the Washington Post story (hockeymom1) wrote:
I live nearby and will not go to any of the retail or restaurants at Reston. Tysons, Mosaic and Dulles are free. Bethesda, which has less parking available and expensive land, charges quarter an hour! $2.00 an hour is insane! This article was good. I had not realized that once the developer had full control they wasted no time implementing fees!
On the other hand, perhaps not surprisingly since his new department will be funded by such fees, Charlottesville Tomorrow quoted Charlottesville’s Parking Manager:
“When you make something free, people don’t value it,” Siebert said. “People look for those spaces and they tend to camp out in them. Everyone’s heard of the two-hour shuffle, where people drive around the block after two hours looking for another space, adding to traffic congestion.”
Perhaps Charlottesville can learn from Covington’s MainStrasse parking fiasco. A popular neighborhood outside of Cincinnati, their innovative paid parking plan included solar powered parking kiosks. When launched in March 2016, the Covington City Website sounded very similar to Charlottesville’s current parking diagnosis:
“The goal with this plan is to alleviate existing issues and modernize parking on streets and in City-owned lots,” said City Engineer Mike Yeager. “The parking plan was created after working with the community to understand concerns about things like residents having a difficult time finding available on-street parking and businesses being affected by to the unrestricted parking times in front of their buildings.”
According to a January 17, 2017 article on Cincinnati.com the MainStrasse program fell swiftly on its face:
Under the parking program, the city charged for parking in MainStrasse for the first time in the history of the neighborhood. It also restricted many blocks to residential parking only.
But residents and businesses complained it made parking much more difficult. Parking kiosks didn’t work. Businesses lost customers. … The pay parking pushed cars into the residential areas not restricted by permits.
The city commission suspended the parking program indefinitely until the city can come up with a new parking plan.
The pay parking kiosks will be shuttered and the residential parking restrictions in MainStrasse lifted, Mayor Joe Meyer said.
While it is heartening to see Charlottesville position parking meters as a “pilot” and only a part of the parking solutions considered.
Available parking is the life’s blood of most small businesses.
The Free Enterprise Forum hopes the City Council will pay attention when the canary stops singing – local businesses (as well as the jobs and taxes they generate) will be at risk.
Only time will tell.
Respectfully Submitted,
Neil Williamson
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County.
Photo Credits: Angela Woosley, Fairfax County Times, Pete Marovich, Washington Post, Share.America.gov
VDOT Panel’s Pocahontas Problem
By. Neil Williamson, President
This Sunday’s (3/12) Daily Progress Editorial discusses “Beginning Anew on Hydraulic” painting a rather optimistic picture of the regulatory and political process planned to design, secure funding and build improvements to the Hydraulic and US29 intersection.
But the Editorial forgot Pocahontas.
Please let me explain.
Regular readers are aware of the Free Enterprise Forum’s position opposing the Rio/US29 grade separated interchange. Despite that opposition, we have been impressed with the manner the project was completed. Now the Daily Progress editorial board is comparing the Rio intersection process with Hydraulic:
And the process through which the Rio project was completed did, in fact, contribute to its success. That process can be replicated, regardless of what kind of engineering design it eventually produces.
In fact, it is being replicated. The meeting last week of state and community leaders follows the pattern used in the Rio project: A panel of local elected officials, business owners and citizens is meeting regularly to discuss the Hydraulic venture, provide input and help guide decision-making. Their involvement is aimed at ensuring that local interests are represented in the state’s drive to speed traffic through a congested bottleneck.
This is where Pocahontas lesson comes in:
What I love most about rivers is you can’t step in the same river twice – The water’s always changing, always flowing
Just prior to the seating of the so called “29 Solutions” panel, there was significant state and federal dollars allocated and a contract awarded to a project (the western bypass) that had enjoyed (4-2) support from Albemarle’s Board of Supervisors and then Republican Governor Robert McDonnell. In November 2013 elections, the balance of power on the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors shifted left and Democratic Governor Terrance McAuliffe was elected. Then in February 2014, the project was effectively prohibited by a letter from the Obama Administration’s Environmental Protection Agency.
Cvillepedia described the situation in the manner:
Aubrey Layne, Virginia’s Secretary of Transportation, convened a panel in the spring of 2014 to suggest alternatives for money that had been allocated by the Commonwealth Transportation Board.
With the project [Western Bypass] presumed dead, former VDOT commissioner Philip Shucet has recommended alternate uses for at least $200 million that had been allocated to the bypass. The alternatives include $54 million to extend Berkmar Drive across the South Fork Rivanna River, an additional $10 million to further extend Hillsdale Drive Extended to Holiday Lane in Charlottesville, and $81 million to build a grade-separated intersection at Rio Road and U.S. 29. The Commonwealth Transportation Board adopted a new six-year improvement program that included the projects at its meeting on June 18, 2014. [17] That meant the Western Bypass project was defunded. [5]
In addition, in a deft politically savvy move, McAuliffe required ALL the Route 29 “solutions” be completed by October 31, 2017 (coincidentally just prior to Election Day 2017).
The Pocahontas lesson that was not lost on Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) contract facilitator Philip Shucet. In the first meeting of The Hydraulic Planning Advisory Panel last week, he highlighted that unlike the previous panel which was considering how to spend a pot of money already allocated to the district the project or projects would have to compete for limited transportation dollars via VDOT’s Smart Scale evaluation program in 2018.
Secretary Layne’s charge to the Hydraulic panel includes this concern as well as hinting at the potential political in fighting at an intersection that is 3/4 in the City of Charlottesville and 1/4 in Albemarle County:
Secretary of Transportation Aubrey Layne’s charge to the Panel:
To provide general advice and input to the City of Charlottesville, Albemarle County, VDOT and the Commonwealth Transportation Board regarding future land use and mobility improvements in the general area near the Hydraulic Road and Rt. 29 intersection.
The Secretary understands that land use decisions are in the hands of the localities, but also emphasizes that decisions to submit a future Smart Scale application for state-funded transportation improvements are also in the hands of the localities.
The multi jurisdictional work (land use, design and funding) of Hydraulic Road will be significantly more involved than the challenges at Rio Road. While we agree that the process will be informed by the work of Rio, we are also reminded that Pocahontas quote is actually derivative of the ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus:
No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man.
Not only is Hydraulic a very different intersection than Rio,the land use work ahead is different and the funding is nowhere near secure.
Yes the facilitator is the same, as are some of the panel members, but this multi-jurisdictional land use and transportation effort will be a VERY different process and the outcomes (and their timing) are far from certain.
Stay tuned.
Respectfully Submitted,
Neil Williamson, President
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County.
Photo Credits: Disney
Fixing Charlottesville NDS Engine Light
By Neil Williamson, President
If you have ever driven with a “Check Engine” light illuminated, you have an idea of where Charlottesville’s Neighborhood Development Services (NDS) Department has been for some time.
Everyone (land owners, neighborhood associations, developers, etc.) agrees that something is seriously wrong but no one knows specifically what it is or, perhaps more importantly, how to fix it – until now.
In 2016, the City of Charlottesville contracted the Novak Consulting Group to conduct an organizational efficiency study. Their 152 page report reflects significant engagement by this consultant with not only City staff but also the various departmental “customers”. For NDS that interaction included members of the development community as represented by the Charlottesville Area Development Roundtable (CADRe). This type of 360 degree review is to be commended.
The report identifies structural issues with NDS and attempts to quantify the workload of the 37.5 Full Time Employees. The report highlights five recommendations (number 26-30 of the report) to improve the NDS department. Three of these recommendations are rather perfunctory, new software, workload tracking and fee schedule review but two of the recommendations stand out as bold and, perhaps, game-changing. Unfortunately, in reviewing the staff responses to the recommendations (see below), the Free Enterprise Forum is not convinced the culture of NDS will change without significant outside influence.
RECOMMENDATION 27: Designate an Assistant City Manager as the owner of the City’s development review process and Chair of the Pre Development Meeting.
Currently all development related applications are processed and managed by staff within NDS. Front desk staff perform intake, and then an application is assigned to appropriate Planning staff. The Planner assigned to the case reviews the application and sends hard copies of the plans to the appropriate department – such as Public Works, Parks – for comment. All comments are then sent back to the Planner who compiles them and provides them to the
applicant. Then it is the responsibility of the applicant to address all comments.
Unfortunately, this process does not provide an opportunity to resolve issues among comments.When there is disagreement or conflict between comments, the applicant is often put in the position of mediating the resolution between departments or disciplines. The development review process in Charlottesville needs a designated owner. The owner needs to be in a position of authority in order to provide clear and consistent direction to all
development review staff, regardless of their department. This position should also be the face of the process to the development community. It is recommended that an Assistant City Manager serve in this role. [emphasis added – nw]
Staff response:
Staff agrees that a comprehensive review of the development process is necessary. Staff agrees that a consistent process that ensures responses to applicants that have been reached through a cooperative inter-departmental process is absolutely critical. Staff would like to further explore the efficacy of the model suggested and the connection to the City Manager’s office.
On the face of this recommendation it is clear that NDS lacks appropriate leadership. This recommendation is not about personalities but about the need for a titular head that has the authority to get things done. Reading between the lines of the somewhat tepid staff response suggests they acknowledge the lack of leadership issue but are not yet sure how such a reorganization might impact the functions (and individuals) in NDS.
RECOMMENDATION 26: Engage the development community in a process to identify development review reforms.
As noted, NDS under its current Director has made concerted efforts to engage more directly with neighborhoods as well as the development community (process improvements, community outreach efforts, communication efforts). Through some of these efforts a group known as the Charlottesville Area Development Roundtable (CADRE) was formed. CADRE is comprised of
over 120 development community stakeholders (such as land owners, architects, engineers, builders, developers) with interest in the Charlottesville community. The group was formed in large part due to a common sense of frustration about the City’s development approval process.To learn more about these issues, The Novak Consulting Group met with CADRE’s steering committee. The group discussed a series of key issues that they are working to address with the City generally, and NDS specifically:
• Disconnect between Council, Planning Commission, and Staff regarding vision and administration
• Need for strategic planning and urban design
• Poor interdepartmental communication and coordination
• Lack of decision-making authority among staffIt is evident by the stakeholder feedback as well as staff interviews, that the current relationship with the development community is strained. In order to improve the relationship and most importantly identify needed reforms in the development process, it is recommended that the City and the development community engage in an improvement exercise.
The staff response:
NDS initiated this recommendation in February 2016. As a matter of fact, the development community has folded the Developers Roundtable Forum started by NDS into a formal countywide interest organization. NDS Director meets with the organization from time to time. The idea is to discuss mutual ways of addressing improvement to the review process. The development review process will always be a work in process. The developer’s roundtable can be utilized to provide feedback and suggestions.
Amazingly, the staff response honestly believes the creation of CADRe was a part of their outreach to the community. I attended the February 2016 NDS developer meeting – there were specific questions about the feedback loop. At the end of the meeting, staff suggested it was a great meeting and the group should get together again in another year. A meeting once a year is not engagement – it is a checklist item.
Yes CADRe is a result of NDS — it was the absolute failure of NDS to effectively communicate with the development community resulted in CADRe’s creation. Engagement is important. The Free Enterprise Forum strongly encourages the NDS Director to be present at all CADRe meetings not just “from time to time”.
Charlottesville should be saluted for closely examining their organizational efficiency. In many ways now, the city has a diagnosis of what is wrong.
The question now is if anyone (City Council? City Manager? Citizens? CADRe?) will actually advocate for the fix of the NDS problem or simply ignore the engine light until it is too late.
Stay tuned.
Neil Williamson
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County.
Photo Credits: Carpower.com
The Banana Boat and Charlottesville’s Proposed BPOL Reform
By. Neil Williamson, President
My first car was a yellow 1976 Ford Pinto Station Wagon 
(fondly referred to as the ‘Banana Boat’). Over time, I upgraded the stereo and dressed up the interior but it never really changed the fundamental fact that my teenage “ride” was a yellow Pinto Station Wagon.
This car came to mind as I watch Charlottesville consider important and proper changes to their Business Professional Occupancy License (BPOL) tax.
Please let me explain.
On March 6th, Charlottesville City Council will be considering changes to their BPOL Ordinance designed to promote fairness to mid-sized businesses. Currently, any business operating in Charlottesville is required to pay BPOL based on its gross receipts. In fiscal year 2016, the BPOL tax generated $6.9 Million dollars in revenue for the City, 4.4% of all City revenue. All 38 cities in Virginia charge BPOL. The Free Enterprise Forum believes this is an unfair tax as it is based on gross receipts and has called for it repeal.
Staff provided several examples of the challenges under the existing ordinance:
Charlottesville businesses grossing $50,000 or less per year pay a flat fee of $35 and businesses grossing more than $50,000 pay based on a rate (established in State Code and as determined by the particular type of business) multiplied by annual gross receipts.
As an example, a veterinarian grossing $49,000 per year pays $35 for an annual business license. A veterinarian grossing $51,000 per year pays according to the standard rate for veterinarians and other similar professions ($0.58/$100), and would pay a rate-based fee of $295.80.
A graphic designer grossing $49,000 per year pays $35 for an annual business license. A graphic designer grossing $51,000 per year pays according to the standard rate for graphic designers and other similar professions ($0.36/$100), and would pay a rate-based fee of $183.60. The effect is that similar small businesses with very similar gross receipts end up paying very different fee amounts.
Meanwhile in neighboring Albemarle County, businesses earning up to $100,000 pay a flat fee of $50. Therefore the business starting out (>$50,000 gross revenue) pays less in Charlottesville until they cross the $50K threshold and then they pay much more.
The Commissioner of the Revenue has reported of hearing significant concerns from taxpayers about what can be a dramatic jump in their BPOL costs as they cross the $50K gross annual threshold. It is important to recognize that $50K in gross revenue is the point where many businesses may be at the tipping point between viability and failure.
As the staff report outlines:
In an effort to attract, retain, and encourage small businesses in the City of Charlottesville, the Commissioner of the Revenue and City Treasurer are proposing a modest change to the fee structure used to assess BPOL:
- Businesses grossing $50,000 and below continue to pay $35 license fee
- Businesses grossing $50,001 to $100,000 pay a $50 license fee
- Businesses grossing over $100,000 pay the license fee based on applicable BPOL rate
This proposed change would benefit small businesses within the City of Charlottesville by reducing the license fee paid by businesses earning between $50,000 and $100,000. Staff estimates that approximately 450 businesses would benefit from this structural change. There would also be a comparable change in the technology business incentive as well. We are recommending that these changes take place for the upcoming assessment year of 2018.
The Commissioner and Treasurer would note that this is a relatively modest proposal that seeks to provide meaningful relief to small businesses in our community within limited statutory, system, and budget constraints.
These changes do not come without cost. Staff estimates adoption of this proposal would potentially reduce BPOL revenue by $93,000.
While the Free Enterprise Forum has consistently called for the REPEAL of BPOL, we are supportive of the reforms contained in the proposal. In addition, we commend the Commissioner of the Revenue and the Treasurer for thinking beyond the bean counter box and seeking reform. When properly implemented, we see these changes as leveling the playing field with adjoining localities, increasing fairness for small to mid sized businesses and promoting economic development. 
We would be remiss if we did not remind the City that regardless of changing the paint job, adding new tires and a kicking new stereo, you are still driving a Pinto Station Wagon.
Yes, repeal would be better but we support these commonsensical BPOL reforms.
Respectfully Submitted,
Neil Williamson
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County.
Photo Credits: Motorbug.com, Autospost.com
2016 – A Year of Exits (Executive and Grade Separated)
By. Neil Williamson, President
At this time each year, I take time to look in the rearview and see what issues we have covered that have garnered the most attention. As usual, I am amazed, and thankful, for the large number of people who read and financially support our work.
Here are the Free Enterprise Forum Top Ten 2016 Shaking My Head (SMH) Moments
#10 Is Charlottesville the $17.86 Million Court Jester?
Imagine you are a mayor or a City Manager, if a major employer and economic driver in your city was poised to leave, how would you respond?
Perhaps its just me, but I would likely fight like heck to keep them in the city. It is much easier to retain a major employer than to attract one.
But what if the employer is actually an arm of a neighboring government, should that matter? …
If Albemarle decides to bring $17.86 million of ‘County’ economic activity back to Albemarle, Charlottesville may end up looking as wise as the Court Jester this Halloween.
#9 Bananas and Albemarle’s Outdated Economic Opportunity Map
Imagine being in the banana business — and you have no way to obtain fruit.
That is Albemarle County’s current economic development sales position: “Yes, we have no bananas.”
“If a manufacturer calls interested in locating near a highway, we tell them, ‘We have nothing for you,’. Prospect businesses are looking to move within three to six months if they are not looking to build. We tell them, ‘We have no product ready to go today.’” – Faith McClintic, Albemarle County’s economic development director
#8 Greene Supervisors Approve Overspending FY17 Budget
By. Brent Wilson, Field Officer
In just the second month of the new budget cycle, the Greene County Board of Supervisors discussed
two issues last night (8/23) that would allow the county to spend nearly $33,000 over the approved FY17 budget.
The first issue that County Administrator John Barkley explained was that several positions are needed to be brought up to market value. He further explained that supplemental funds are being requested to fund the $27,250 for the reclassification of positions. Surplus funds from the FY16 budget will allow the county to be able to fund this request.
#7 C’ville’s Hydraulic Houdini
What would you call it when Charlottesville works to make a primary pillar of an integrated
transportation program disappear?
The Hydraulic Houdini.
Please let me explain.
Those with even decent short term memory can remember the argument over the now defunct Western Bypass and the Route 29 “Solutions”. Rather than building a limited access bypass around Charlottesville’s congestion (The Free Enterprise Forum supported), Bypass opponents proposed a series of integrated “solutions” would increase the existing roadway capacity.
My friend Jeff Werner of the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC) even had a nifty PowerPoint Presentation regarding the congestion
#6 Albemarle’s Executive Exodus x 2
Albemarle Executive Foley Finds Greener Pastures
With rumors flying around Albemarle County (and Social Media) all day, a 4 pm Stafford County announcement made it official; County Executive Tom Foley is leaving Albemarle County to take up the same post in Stafford County. In the announcement Stafford highlighted Foley’s service and temperament as key qualities they were looking for in their new administrator:
Albemarle is Losing Faith
As anticipated as the sun rising in the east, it is with absolutely no surprise that Albemarle County’s first Economic Development Director, Faith McClintic, will be leaving her position later this year. In her short 18 month tenure, McClintic often found herself at odds with Planning Commissioners, some members of the public, this writer, and some elected officials. In addition, she found herself without product as she said in August of this year:
“If a manufacturer calls interested in locating near a highway, we tell them, ‘We have nothing for you,’. Prospect businesses are looking to move within three to six months if they are not looking to build. We tell them, ‘We have no product ready to go today.’” – Faith McClintic, Albemarle County’s economic development director
#5 Albemarle and VDOT Create US29+Rio Lemonade
While the Free Enterprise Forum lost the battle against the US29/Rio Grade Separated Interchange (GSI), we have found Albemarle County (and Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)) to be working exceedingly well together and significantly positively impacting the challenging business environment due to the roadway construction.
In the most recent Route 29 Solutions Project Delivery Advisory Panel meeting, former VDOT Commissioner and PDAP facilitator Philip Shucet indicated the next phase of the Rio GSI project, where the intersection will close for up to 103 days, “Isn’t going to be a birthday party”. This might be the understatement of the year.
#4 SOMEONE’s Shameful Sensationalism
Over the last dozen years, I have read literally hundreds of Albemarle County staff reports. I tend to find the reports to be professional, concise, factually correct and devoid of generalizations or editorial commentary – until last week when I determined that SOMEONE improperly and sensationally used a tragedy to further an advocacy position in what was presented as an impartial staff analysis.
In an attempt to sensationalize the need for closing of Earlysville Road to truck traffic, SOMEONE has stooped so low as to cite a terrible teenage 2002 drunk driving accident as justification to overrule the technical analysis of professional traffic engineers.
#3 ‘Snob Zoning’ Crozet Master Plan in the Works?
Recently, C-ville magazine cover story posed the question, “Can Crozet maintain its small town charm
as its population increases?”
Perhaps the question should be “After millions of dollars of planning and infrastructure spending, should Crozet residents be allowed to stifle population and economic growth by hijacking the master planning process?”
We’ve recently learned such a plan is in the works. And it is a bad idea….
The reality is the CCAC is opposed to density in the development area that is critical to achieve the philosophical goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The community vetted plan calls for densely populated development areas filled with amenities and services surrounded by less populated rural areas that are supportive of agriculture, forestry and open space.
In her seminal book “Snob Zoning”, Liza Prevost, exposed what happens when NIMBY zealots are able to change plans and regulations
#2 Fluvanna Land Use Fireworks
By. Bryan Rothamel, Field Officer
“I’m a little surprised board members are so happy to push this under the rug,” said Supervisor Tony O’Brien. . .
O’Brien said there were supervisors who should recuse themselves from the vote because they should know they aren’t compliant with the program.
Eager asked O’Brien to name who he thinks is not compliant as she has done everything to be compliant. He replied he never thought she wasn’t but questioned if Supervisor Don Weaver and chairperson Mike Sheridan (Columbia District) were compliant. He also thought Supervisor Mozell Booker might not be compliant but she was in a different arm of the program.
Sheridan said he asked a cooperative agent if he was in compliance and was told his practices were.
Fred Payne, county attorney, gave a legal opinion that supervisors do not have to recuse themselves just because they participate in the program.
O’Brien also suggested Mike Sheridan should recuse himself because Mel Sheridan is his brother.
Payne’s said Mike Sheridan had no need legally reason to recuse himself. He continued supervisors can always recuse themselves if they feel it is necessary but there was no legal reason to do so.
Weaver, who was quiet for the discussion, called for a vote which ended the discussion.
O’Brien said under his breath after the vote, “Embarrassing.”
#1 $52.5 Million Dollar Indecent Proposal – Albemarle Backs Off Threat to Wedding Industry
Last Tuesday evening, a rare joint meeting of the Albemarle County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors heard a great deal from both wedding venues and the vendors that support them. Albemarle staff had prepared a proposed ordinance that, am
ong other things, would limit the ability of wineries, breweries and distilleries to 24 events a year. In the end the supervisors backed away from the most restrictive portion of the ‘indecent proposal’.
The testimony Tuesday was insightful and passionate. Wedding Photographer Jen Fariello asked pointedly “Why are weddings being attacked?” Wedding planner Adam Donovan-Groves [name correction 9:01 6/20 nw] told of one recent wedding whose local fiscal impact exceeded $250,000 musicians, gift packs, invitations, transportation, jewelry, photographer, etc.
Yes, 2016 has been a year of executive exits, speedy construction and threats of overregulation. Through it all the Free Enterprise Forum continues to blog, tweet (@neilswilliamson) and Facebook about local issues of significant importance.
The year ahead is filled with promise: the promise of a national search for a new Albemarle County Executive, the promise of so called “Solutions” 29 being completed earlier than scheduled (looks like June), the promise of new form based code development in Charlottesville, as well as the promise of elections across all localities.
2016 will also bring us the opportunity and privilege of attending and participating in many more government meetings where important policy decisions are made and #SeatsAvailable.
Thank you for your support!
Happy New Year
Neil Williamson
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County.
Is The Jury Still Out on Albemarle Courts Relocation?
By. Neil Williamson, President
Tonight (10/24) the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will take “public input” regarding the 
possible relocation of their courts system. Of the five options on the table, all but one keeps the courts in the City of Charlottesville. While the Free Enterprise Forum would like to have a favored option, we do not believe the case has been made for any option — considering how far along the process is, we are astonished at the basic questions that remain unanswered.
To review here are the five options:
OPTION 1: DOWNTOWN/LEVY EXPANSIONOPTION 2: RELOCATE COUNTY & CITY GENERAL DISTRICT COURTS TO COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING MCINTIREOPTION 3: RELOCATE COUNTY GENERAL DISTRICT COURTS TO COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING MCINTIRE
OPTION 4: RELOCATE COUNTY GENERAL DISTRICT COURTS & CIRCUIT COURTS TO COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING MCINTIRE
OPTION 5: RELOCATE COUNTY GENERAL DISTRICT & CIRCUIT COURTS TO COUNTY SITE
As we examine the decision matrix provided by the county, we have many more questions than answers.
Here are our top ten inquiries:
- Has the city offered any economic incentives to support any of the City based options? (see last week’s blog post)
- Why does option 1 (stay downtown) cost $12,500,000 more than building in option 5?
- Why does it cost $18,000,000 to put the General District Court at the County office building when it appears that most of the infrastructure is already there?
- If you build a new county admin facility, where will it be located and, how much does it cost? Where is that cost shown?
- Do options 2-5 factor in the lost property tax revenue for whatever parcel is acquired?
- The matrix seems to indicate that options 2-5 strongly support the County’s strategic redevelopment/urban place making priorities. Doesn’t that really depend on where the County offices are built and how? It could eat up a bunch of property in the urban area and create little long term value.
- Will option 5 allow a mix of uses on their site? What of creating affordable housing over top of the new county offices?
- It seems that you are assuming any new construction by the County in the County has high economic development value. Why? What assumptions have been made to draw that conclusion?
- Is taking urban county property off the tax rolls good for economic development? Will the development area be expanded to replace this lost land?
- Why is the construction risk higher for option 1 than any of the other options?
The public input offered can only be as good as the information provided to them to base that input. We forwarded these questions to Albemarle County early last week and they indicated they hoped to have answers in their presentation tonight. If that is the case, the public will have limited time to process the information before the public input session closes.
Regardless, these questions need answers before anyone should make a decision on the future location of the court.
The jury is not “still out” — the full argument has yet to be presented.
Respectfully Submitted,
Neil Williamson, President
_____________
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County. For more information visit the website http://www.freeenterpriseforum.org
Photo Credits: Albemarle County
Is Charlottesville the $17.86 Million Court Jester?
By. Neil Williamson, President
Imagine you are a mayor or a City Manager, if a major employer and economic driver in your city was poised to leave, how would you respond?
Perhaps its just me, but I would likely fight like heck to keep them in the city. It is much easier to retain a major employer than to attract one.
But what if the employer is actually an arm of a neighboring government, should that matter?
What if that neighboring government annually gives your city millions in revenue sharing dollars, does that enter into the equation?
As most readers know, Albemarle County is evaluating five options for the needed expansion of their courts system. The Free Enterprise Forum is currently reviewing the cost analysis provided by Albemarle and will weigh in on Monday (10/24) prior to the public input meeting regarding our thoughts on the various options.
Only one, the most expensive, of the five options keeps the courts in their current position in Charlottesville’s Court Square.
This summer, the Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce issued a report: An Economic Assessment of the Current Unified Court Square. The report found $34 million in salaries could be tied to the courts and the related legal enterprises. Further the report highlighted $1.6 million in employee meals spending and another $3 million in “other court attendee spending” . Accepted at face value, the combined courts complex has in excess of $38 million dollars in economic impact.
According to the Chamber report:
- 45.9% of all 2015 General District Court hearings are Albemarle cases
- 43% of Juvenile and Domestic Relation cases are Albemarle cases
- 73.9% of the Depositions are Albemarle cases.
Allow me a little cocktail napkin math – A conservative estimate of the impact of Albemarle pulling both courts out of Court Square would be 47% of the case load. Cocktail napkin math (not a true arithmetic discipline) projects the annual economic impact of moving both courts to be up to $17.86 million dollars (47% of $38 million).
With almost $18 Million dollars on the table, one has to ask – Where is the City of Charlottesville?
Where is the economic development arm that has supported businesses relocating to the city in the past?
Considering the documents released by Albemarle yesterday indicate keeping the courts in court square is the most expensive option ($42.4 million), shouldn’t the city make any offers NOW before the Board of Supervisors hears from the public and chooses to literally “leave town”?
Perhaps Charlottesville is already having such discussions with Albemarle – if so, the public should know.
If Albemarle decides to bring $17.86 million of ‘County’ economic activity back to Albemarle, Charlottesville may end up looking as wise as the Court Jester this Halloween.
Stay tuned.
Respectfully Submitted,
Neil Williamson, President
———————————————-
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County. For more information visit the website www.freeenterpriseforum.org
Photo Credits: dinardaily.net
Singing In The Rain! Albemarle Rain Tax Going Away!
By. Neil Williamson, President
The Free Enterprise Forum has long expressed concerns regarding the 
stormwater fee AKA “Rain Tax”. But now we have reason to join Gene Kelly and be “Singing in the Rain”.
Please let me explain.
Across all localities, we have steadfastly supported funding stormwater programs through the general fund [Albemarle Hears the Siren’s Song of New Rain Taxing Authority]
Since 2013, in both Albemarle and Charlottesville a great deal of educational effort was made to gain an understanding of the import of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and a divisive community conversation regarding who was responsible for water “pollutants” and who would pay was pitting farmers against development area residents.
The Albemarle County staff even prepared a lovely video outlining the new unfunded mandates (they do not refer to them as such) as well as two of the three options currently under consideration: stormwater utility fee and a service District:
Well, Nevermind.
In a March 4, 2016 e-mail to the Stormwater Advisory Committee, Water Resources Program Manager, Greg Harper wrote:
You should be aware that staff will be making the following recommendations to the Board:
· accept the 10-year Program Plan as recommended by the Advisory Committee
· defer moving forward with developing and implementing a dedicated funding mechanism [emphasis added – nw]
What the email revealed, and some thought all along, – Albemarle (and likely Charlottesville) are much better off on the mandated stormwater requirements than originally thought.
In late 2014, staff projected the costs to be nearly $2.5 Million a year. During the preparation of Albemarle County’s Chesapeake Bay TMDL Action Plan they found they would receive credits for the many stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) – both private and public – that were already built. Harper explains:
While the County is required to achieve 5% of its long-term required pollutant reductions by July 1, 2018, the current status of reductions is as follows:
pollutant reductions achieved as percent of total, long-term requirement phosphorus 68% nitrogen 99% sediment 137% All (100%) reductions must be achieved by 2028. As you can see, we are theoretically complete with required nitrogen and sediment reductions and two-thirds complete with phosphorus reductions. [emphasis added-nw].
Wait a minute, where is the parade?
Albemarle has already met the 2028 pollutant reduction goal for 2 out of 3 pollutants!
Why wasn’t there at least a media release trumpeting the good stewardship of Albemarle landowners?
Sure there is still important work to do on the phosphorous levels but the cost for this work is SIGNIFICANTLY ($2,000,000 annually) less than the original TMDL program. Harper explains:
While we will continue to proactively achieve pollutant reductions through our capital program (in fact, we just received a DEQ SLAF to support a stream restoration project), the need to instantly and dramatically expand the program has greatly diminished. We’ve revised the estimated cost to implement the TMDL program as $500,000 per year, recognizing that this may change in the future. The lower total program cost makes it more difficult to justify investing in a discrete, dedicated funding mechanism at this time.
During the busy stressful budget season, it is nice to have a reason to smile and enjoy the inevitable spring showers.
The Free Enterprise Forum wonders how Charlottesville, with their existing stormwater fee, is doing on their plan’s objectives and if soon citizens might be looking for City Hall to repeal Charlottesville’s Rain Tax.
Keep your eyes to the skies.
Respectfully Submitted,
Neil Williamson, President
———————————————————————-
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County. For more information visit the website www.freeenterpriseforum.org
Photo Credits: MGM Studios, Albemarle County, behindthefootlights.blogspot.com
The Economic Development Snowstorm
By. Neil Williamson, President
As I write this, social media is all a buzz regarding projected significant snowfall for the region late this week. It seems as though that despite the differences in the various predictive models (European, American, etc.) all have some amount of snow in the forecast. Latest update, they have just named the storm “Jonas” (hopefully not for the Disney movie based boy band).
A “Storm of the Century”, especially in the Mid Atlantic states requires a specific environment to occur; the same is true for local economic vitality.
The jet stream must have the just proper bend to bring the storm up the coast, but not the warmth to the region; localities must have a clearly stated vision, and actions to match, to let businesses know they are welcome to come or to stay and grow here.
To achieve a super storm, the atmospheric temperatures must be high enough to allow water to condense and low enough to support snow formation; the regulatory environment must be high enough to provide a quality community but low enough to allow businesses to responsibly grow here.
A great deal is being made of the ice damming effect on this storm; just as the storm needs the ice dam to fully develop absent a trained workforce economic development will not reach its full potential.
If there are not specific humidity levels just prior to the storm’s arrival, it does not materialize; if there is not land ready and permitted for business use prior to the prospect business expansion, economic development goes elsewhere.
Just as the winds can’t be too high to push the storm through too quickly; citizens must recognize and acknowledge the value of new (or expanding) business, new tax revenue, new jobs and economic advancement or such advancement will be pushed away.
Unlike the super storm formation, local government controls many, but not all, of the economic development environmental conditions.
How do you think Central Virginia’s local governments measure up?
Are they creating a positive economic development environment?
What letter grade would you give your locality?
Just as with “Jonas” – time will make the results readily apparent.
Respectfully Submitted,
Neil Williamson
Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County.
Photo Credits: Charlottesville Tomorrow, The Weather Channel, Snipview.com, quazoo.com
