RSS

Daily Archives: May 22, 2009

Shhh…it’s a secret. Christiansburg has posted an out of date Town Code on website.

Some of you know that I’ve been pretty busy working on some special projects. Well, I felt it was time to let you know about one of those projects.

Recently, the Town of Christiansburg started posting public documents online, at their webpage, htt://christiansburg.org. Pretty kewl. They finally started letting in a bit of sunshine. Or, did they.

On the main page of the website, click on the Town Codes link on the right hand side.

You will note that you have the option of downloading the Complete Town Code, or you can download/open each individual Section and Chapter from that same page. Pretty kewl…..you can either download a big bulky file that seems to take forever or you can find that same information in a smaller, easier to use version by Chapter.

HOWEVER, that may be what it looks like, but that isn’t the case. You see, some of the Chapters do not match up with the Chapters in the Complete Town Code Document. Sometimes whole pages are missing from the short forms, whole subsections.

That’s not so good. Guess that means you should download the Complete Town Code and use it, eh? HOWEVER, you have to be careful there too. If you do a line-by-line comparison (I really was considered to be a darned good investigator in my day), you will find that the ‘cites’ of state codes are much, much older in the short versions than in the Complete Town Code version.

I kinda felt it was okay since at least one of those sets of documents was being kept up to date. HOWEVER (I gotta get a special key that automatically puts that ‘HOWEVER’ in the way things are going), the cites at the bottom of each entry are used to denote when the ordinance has been changed and what state code was the basis for said change. Going back to that old-fashioned investigative technique of a line by line comparison. There are no changes. Where one document notes a last cite of 2002, and the other shows a cite of 2007, one could reasonably expect the text to be a little bit different. It isn’t. Don’t take my word for it, look for yourself. In fact, I could use some help since I am working on the entire Town Code, not just one section.

One of the best examples of this is the Erosion and Sediment Control portion of the Town Code, Chapter 10.

Now, I am taking all of those references to State Code and comparing them to existing Town Codes. Bet you didn’t know that all of those $100 fines the Town has been diligently NOT slapping on violaters is the minimum fine under state law. Talk about lost revenue. The Town is allowed to set those fines at anywhere from $100 to $1000 dollars. (The Blacksburg Code has them set at $500.)

Just who is the Town trying to help here? Citizens or builders? Gotta wonder.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on May 22, 2009 in FOIA, Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

“So sue the Town”….Christiansburg Town Council

Ever wonder why the some Town Council members are so quick to say “so sue the town”?

How about because they know it won’t hurt them. It puts the responsibility of citizens to sue ‘the town’ which means the taxpayers of the town. There have been many such suits filed against the Town of Christiansburg and they are normally settled ‘out of court’. Even members of the Town Council have been unable to find out exactly what these cost the town as the Town Manager reports he is unable to discuss due to court order (these cases did go to court, the town lost and financial rewards were negotiated).

As to the Town Council members immunity to being held responsible for arrogance and ignorance while in office:

§ 15.2-1405. Immunity of members of local governmental entities; exception.

The members of the governing bodies of any locality or political subdivision and the members of boards, commissions, agencies and authorities thereof and other governing bodies of any local governmental entity, whether compensated or not, shall be immune from suit arising from the exercise or failure to exercise their discretionary or governmental authority as members of the governing body, board, commission, agency or authority which does not involve the unauthorized appropriation or misappropriation of funds. However, the immunity granted by this section shall not apply to conduct constituting intentional or willful misconduct or gross negligence.

(1987, cc. 261, 290, § 15.1-7.01; 1997, c. 587.)

That last line pretty much says it all. Is it malfeasance for the Town Council to continue making bad decisions when citizens have notified them of issues. Does this not constitute intentional or willful misconduct or gross negligence? Does the same not apply when the Town Council refuses to do those things that are common with other jurisdictions in order to obtain information? Does pure out laziness and incompetence meet the legal criteria? Guess we’ll have to ‘wait and see’.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on May 22, 2009 in Citizen Participation

 

Tags: , , , , , ,