• These are hard economic times and to raise the costs to developers (which would be passed on to the consumer) were not needed and would, in effect, be a ‘tax’.

Sidewalks, the absence of and the degradation of existing ones have long been topics with citizens and government. What started as a general discussion on a possible ordinance change requiring sidewalks in residential areas went through a series of transmutations that have let us with what will be presented to the public at this meeting. Although not available on the town’s website for quick and easy citizen access, I have been getting copies at each step along the way, and I am providing what I believe to be the most recent copy of the proposed amendment here. Note: this addresses Chapter 26 Subdivisions and Chapter 30 Zoning.

Within Chapter 26 Subdivisions, you will find proposed changes in bold print:

• Sec. 26-7. Generally (d), (1) Dedications: added the phrase: Subdividers choosing the compact development option as detailed in Chapter 30 “Zoning” shall not be compensated for dedications exceeding ten percent.

Within Chapter 30 Zoning, you will find proposed changes in bold print:

• Sec. 20-1. Definitions: Open space. Any space reserved for common use (as among a homeowners association or as common space in apartment complexes) as to provide for outdoor living, patios, pools, lawns, play areas, walks, wooded areas and the like, but not including driveways and parking areas with the exception of driveways and parking areas strictly for community buildings, picnic shelters, ball fields, trails, pools, and similar common use amenities located within the open space.
• Article VII. Residential Manufactured Home Subdivision District R-MS, Sec. 30-63 Yards.: Sidewalks shall be required for all new development. The Zoning Administrator/Town Manager may waive this requirement in circumstances that sidewalks do not provide desired connectivity and/or are not physically practical due to site limitations provided the owner/developer makes a contribution in an amount approximate to the sidewalk installation cost to the Town of Christiansburg to be utilized for sidewalk improvements and/or repairs in other locations. The Zoning Administrator/Town Manager may refer the decision regarding the connectivity and/or practicality to the Planning Commission should there be any doubts. The Town Manager/Town Engineer shall make the determination of the approximate sidewalk installation cost. (Code 1972, § 30-63; Ord. of 6-20-89; Ord. 2007-1 of 4-3-07)
• Article XXII. Miscellaneous Provisions. Sec. 30-200. Compact development option. (This whole section was added. Use the link to go to the document to see it in detail. Essentially, it is a voluntary option that allows developers to obtain higher density in exchange for providing sidewalks/trails in R-1A, R-1, R-2 and R-3 Residential Districts and MU-1 and MU-2 Mixed Use Districts. It specifically excludes any single-family residential and two-family residential development on existing public streets..)

You will note that rather than a Town-wide approach to requiring sidewalks in residential areas, it has become an isolated optional application for certain Zoning designations.

From the Feb. 2, 2010 Town Council Minutes Item 3 in Discussions (http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_02_02TC/2010_02_2TC4.html):

• SIDEWALK REQUIREMENT IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.  Councilman Showalter encouraged fellow Councilmembers to support adopting an ordinance that would require developers to place sidewalks in medium to high density subdivisions.  Councilman Stipes said he supports this as a requirement for all three residential zoning districts.  Councilman Barber commented that lack of sidewalks in Town is a common complaint of citizens and he would like to see this action taken immediately.  Councilman Vanhoozier suggested forming a committee to review the matter since it will require a change to Town ordinance.  Mayor Ballengee turned this matter over to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation to Council within three months.

From the March 2, 2010 Town Council Minutes:http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_03_02TC/2010_03_2TC2.html

• Mr. Craig Moore, Planning Commission Chairman, to address Council regarding open space and sidewalk requirements.  Mr. Craig Moore asked Town Council to clarify its direction that the Planning Commission review open space and sidewalk requirements (see Town Council Minutes of 2/16/10).  Per Mr. Moore, the Planning Commission is unclear as to whether the Town Council wants the Commission to study if open space and sidewalk requirements should be modified; or does Town Council want the open space and sidewalk requirements modified and it want the Planning Commission to focus on design standards.  If the direction was for the Planning Commission to focus on design standards, then the time involvement will be greater than three months.  Some of the areas that would need to be studied for a design plan for sidewalks are:  Cost, drainage, curb/gutter, maintenance, ditches, environmental impact, connectivity, and safety.  Minimum requirement threshold and usage would need to be studied for open space modification.  Mayor Ballengee, noting that Town Council needs to give the Planning Commission perimeters for review, turned to Councilman Showalter for comment.  Councilman Showalter suggested Town Council have a work session to review VDOT’s minimum standards on these issues as a starting point.  The Planning Commission would be involved with this work session.  A work session date of March 23, 2010 was determined by Council, with a time to be announced at a later date.

March 16 Town Council Minutes Town Manager Report: (http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_03_16TC/2010_03_16TC3.html)

• TOWN MANAGER TERPENNY reported that a joint work session with the Planning Commission has been scheduled for March 23, 2010 from 4:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M., to review and discuss VDOT standards, sidewalks, and green/open space.

March 23, 2010 Town Council – Planning Commission Work Session on Sidewalk Ordinance, no citizen comments allowed. Includes Power Point Presentation.) (http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_03_23TCWS/2010_03_23TCWS1.html) (3 parts). This set of videos holds the most information on what citizens have said and what has been seen in the neighborhoods. Even the Mayor indicated that he had clearly seen the need for sidewalks in his own neighborhood. And, the discussion was clearly concerning ALL residential developments. It was also pointed out that this ordinance could remove the ‘case-by-case’ application and create and even ‘playing field’. Currently a total of 4 miles of sidewalks exist with the boundaries of the town of 136 miles of roadway. This 4 miles includes those ‘crumbling sections of sidewalks in older areas of Town per the Town Manager. This was also the first time that ‘citizens might like this but developers not like it’ came up in any discussions and it was brought up by the Mayor. Additional discussion on green space indicated that some Council and Commission members felt that useable green space was key to any ordinance changes. The Town Manager advised that there are differences between green space, open space, and recreation space (either passive or active), but he did not provide definitions those terms. (Definitions found in Town Code follow) The discussion indicated some confusion as to what the State Code actually allowed and it was requested that more information be provided Council.

From the Christiansburg Town Code:

• Open space. Any space reserved for common use (as among a homeowners association or as common space in apartment complexes) as to provide for outdoor living, patios, pools, lawns, play areas, walks, wooded areas and the like, but not including driveways and parking areas.
• Required open space. Any space required in any front, side or rear yard or as delineated on an approved site plan or otherwise specified in this chapter.
• Greenspace. Area of non-impervious surfaces. Landscaping/landscaped areas may be counted toward greenspace.
• Recreation space (active or passive) not found.

That is all of the Town Council input that has occurred in the public eye, PRIOR TO THE ELECTION, on this matter and expresses the intent of Council in referring this to the Planning Commission for review.

Unfortunately, there are no minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting so the agendas will have to suffice (augmented, of course by those videos which are available):

• Feb. 22, 2010 Planning Commission Agenda: 3) Consideration of amendment to the Christiansburg Town Code in regards to sidewalk requirements and open space requirements in Residential Districts. (No video available of this meeting.)

• March 29, 2010 Planning Commission Agenda: 5) Consideration of amendment to Chapter 30 “Zoning” of the Christiansburg Town Code in regards to sidewalk requirements and open space requirements in Residential Districts. Parts 2 and 3 of the Meeting Video Files (http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_03_29PC/2010_03_29PC2.html)
• April 5, 2010 Planning Commission Agenda: 1 ) Consideration of amendment to Chapter 30 “Zoning” of the Christiansburg Town Code in regards to sidewalk requirements and open space requirements in Residential Districts. http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_04_05PCHistDist/2010_04_05PCHistDist1.html
• April 12, 2010 Planning Commission Agenda: 4 ) Consideration of amendment to Chapter 30 “Zoning” of the Christiansburg Town Code in regards to sidewalk requirements and open space requirements in Residential Districts. http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_04_05PCsidewalks/2010_04_05PCSidewalks1.html
• April 19, 2010 Planning Commission Agenda: 4 ) Consideration of amendment to Chapter 30 “Zoning” of the Christiansburg Town Code in regards to sidewalk requirements and open space requirements in Residential Districts. http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_04_19PC/2010_04_19PC2.html
• May 24, 2010 Planning Commission Agenda: 4 ) Consideration of amendment to Chapter 30 “Zoning” of the Christiansburg Town Code in regards to sidewalk requirements and open space requirements in Residential Districts. http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_05_24PC/2010_05_24PC2.html
• June 14, 2010 Planning Commission Agenda: 2) Consideration of amendment to Chapter 26 “Subdivisions” and Chapter 30 “Zoning” of the Christiansburg Town Code in regards to sidewalk requirements and open space requirements in Residential Districts. http://myvaresources.com/VideoFiles2010/2010_06_14PC/2010_06_14PC1.html
• August 16 Planning Commission Agenda: 1) Public hearing for Council’s intention to adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 26 “Subdivisions” and Chapter 30 “Zoning” of the Christiansburg Town Code in regards to provisions for a compact development option and sidewalk requirements and open space requirements in Residential Districts. (Sorry, I’m not that good:), have to wait for the meeting to occur.)

Arguments against requiring sidewalks in all new residential developments have included:

1. Almost all land is already developed. There are few places where such an ordinance would apply. (No discussion of how this would also affect future lands annexed by the Town.)
2. It would be a hardship on developers because it would cost more.
3. It would be a hardship on home buyers because the cost would increase. (That pretty much gets rid of the argument of costing developers more because the cost would be passed on to consumers. And, is recouped by the property owner through increased home value upon resale.)
4. Since there are few sidewalks in existing areas, there is no need to provide ‘connections’ with new developments.
5. Who would be responsible for upkeep and maintenance of the sidewalks? Home owners or the Town?
6. People do not use sidewalks now. (Yeah, it is a fairly common phenomenon that people do not use what does not exist.)
7. Previously, the requirement in Commercial areas for sidewalks have not been fairly applied to all developers. Some did not have to do it and others did.
8. Sidewalks being required for all is not appropriate where there are only one or a few lots in an area where there are no sidewalks. (This seems to have created the shift to new developments only.)
9. VDOT does not hold jurisdiction over Christiansburg roadways and therefore VDOT criteria does not apply.
10. Sidewalks could have a negative impact on on-street parking (which is allowed and encouraged throughout town – on-street parking is necessary where variances on setbacks provide for increased density of developments and more usable land for development).

At one point, it was mentioned that connectivity to existing sidewalks should be considered and a study to see exactly what sidewalks existed and where people are likely to go was suggested. Planning Director Wingfield noted that a document existed for this (developed YEARS ago) that already filled this purpose. (The concept of doing a current evaluation, including recent growth, died on the vine.) Very little of the discussion by the Planning Commission addresses the safety and well-being of citizens. Mostly, an audience driven discussion, the bulk of the focus was on the negative impact to developers.

This may or may not be an important issue to you. Regardless of your personal level of interest, this is certainly something that has a ‘community’ interest. Safe routes to school, the ability to be able to safely walk or ride a bike to key points within the community, saving a bit of gas money, exercising for your health (car dodging does NOT count as exercise), home values, the overall appearance of the town, impact on developers, and other issues abound. Why not take some time to look at one or more of these videos to see what is being discussed. Then come on out to the public meeting and express your views. In a community, every voice is important.



I,  (enter name here ) do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (elected/appointed position).  According to the best of my ability. So help me God.

The words of this, alone, mean little. True value comes from reading the Constitutions. In particular, I took time to look at the Virginia Constitution to see some of what our elected and appointed officials were taking upon their shoulders.

Some of the most interesting items were found in Article I of the Virginia Constitution, The Bill of Rights:

Intro.:

“A Declaration of Rights made by the good people of Virginia in the exercise of their sovereign powers, which rights do pertain to them and their posterity, as the basis and foundation of government.”

Section 2. People the source of power.

That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people, that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them.

Section 3. Government instituted for common benefit.

That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and, whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.

Section 7. Laws should not be suspended.

That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by any authority, without consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights, and ought not to be exercised.

Section 12. Freedom of speech and of the press; right peaceably to assemble, and to petition.

That the freedoms of speech and of the press are among the greatest bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained except by despotic governments; that any citizen may freely speak, write, and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; that the General Assembly shall not pass any law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, nor the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for the redress of grievances.

Although only 1 small portion of a fairly large document (See Article 7 if you are looking for specific information pertaining to local jurisdictions.) These sections contain some pretty important information.

The introductory statement clearly shows the intent of the Virginia Constitution is to function as a guide for governance that is strongly rooted in the rights of the people. (Note the word people, not person, not group, not voters, not political party, not any other subset of the ‘people’. Section 2 further denotes that it is the ‘people’ who represent the power of government. It is government that serves the people, not vice versa.

Section 3 discusses the responsibility of government to provide from the ‘common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community”. Furthermore, it is noted that the best form of government is that “which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety …”. This section also provides guidance for what the people can do if government is “found inadequate or contrary to theses purposes”.

I found Section 7 particularly thought provoking as I pondered whether selective suspension or execution of laws would be acceptable so long as the ‘representatives of the people’ approved. Does this imply that so long as elected/appointed officials approve of something, it is right and proper? If so, then Section 3 and Section 7 would be in direct conflict with each other. It you take Sections 3 and 7 together, you see that it would be through the fair and equal application of codes that things would be okay. For instance, selectively apply certain Town Codes to one party and not another would not be acceptable.

Lastly, and most importantly in my mind, is Section 12 that covers Freedom of speech and of the press; right peaceably to assemble, and to petition. All of the other sections mentioned above would be pretty useless if individuals/groups did not have the right to speak or write of those things which they believe to be incompatible to their basic rights.

Keeping people uninformed and misdirected has become common practice in government and in business. Through the decades, people have been taught to trust where perhaps trust has not been earned. Being a good citizen means taking responsibility for your actions/inactions and accepting your role in monitoring the government that represents you. It is not about political parties, it is about generations of habits that need to be changed and taking an active interest.

More on the topic of the Virginia Constitution will be forthcoming so keep checking back.

This rather makes it appear that the Town Charter and/or Code would have had to have been changed before said 3 year contract could have gone into effect. The other localities that I found to have gone with a longer contract for Town Manager, have specifically generated ordinances/charter changes in order to support those. My guess is that the reason for that was this state code.

So, should the town council have been looking at such a contract without having first established that there was such a need as to warrant Charter and/or Code changes. I never heard of any discussions concerning those changes except for some mumblings on how they could enter into the contract first, then change the  Charter/Code afterwards. Maybe there are some lawyers out there who have a better understand of the intent of this State Code and would care to comment.

Is it possible that the 3 year contract was merely a ‘smoke screen’ simply to get people riled up so that they wouldn’t see what was really going on. If so, then you have to wonder who the ‘they’ is in this situation. Certainly with Showalter and Carter being the last to find out anything, they are ruled out.

Of course, the town attorney was in the meetings so if this was actually an issue, one would expect it to have been raised.

Fortunately, the State Code also makes sure that the public will know the full extent of the severance packages of any individuals to which they have or shall be awarded. If it is consistent with the document read by Mr. Barber, there are some pretty vague places that I hope will be clarified before the deal is finalized.

§ 15.2-1510.1. Public announcement of severance packages for certain officials.

Severance benefits provided to any departing official appointed by a local governing body or school board shall be publicly announced by the local governing body or school board, respectively, prior to such departure.

(2006, c. 254; 2007, c. 257.)

It sounds like the details should be pretty specific to me, but I am sure that someone can argue that the Letter of the Law was met in Mr. Barbers statement. However, I wonder if it will truly meet the Spirit of the Law. After all, it is the citizen’s money being used for any such severance benefits.

This should make it a lot easier for those of you who are using this as a way to look up information. However, let me remind you that while the Charter gives certain powers to the Mayor and Town Council, the Town Code then takes those powers and distributes them to others, well, one other, the Town Manager.

The Town Charter puts the burden of doing these things squarely upon the shoulders of the Town Council and the Town Manager. In giving those responsibilities to the Town Manager, the Town Council & Mayor DO NOT give up accountability. They are accountable for how the Town Manager performs. The Town Council and Mayor have a responsibility to followup, to audit, to monitor, and anything else necessary to insure that the tasks that they have delegated to the Town Manager are being performed properly. Should they find that this is not being done, then they have a right and a responsibility to make the necessary changes to correct the problems. This includes actions up to and including removal of the Town Manager from his position. The Town Manager works under a year to year contract and all that is really involved is for the council to vote against reinstating his contract again.

That said, once again I will point out that it is the responsibility of Town Council and Mayor to monitor the Town Manager’s performance. If they are not doing this, that is not a problem that would go away with removal of the Town Manager. It would simply establish the dynamics whereby similar problems would lead to discontent with any future Town Managers.

Over and over again, in the minutes, at the Town Council meetings, and in discussions with citizens, I have heard where problems have been brought to Town Council’s attention, the problem has been referred to the Town Manager, sometimes (not very often) a followup question asking in the problem was resolved was asked, and the answer was “Yes”. Then, months, and sometimes years later, the problem is again brought forward with citizens asking when the issue is going to be fixed.

This would indicate that there is no index of problems/complaints with documentation noting actions taken by the Town to correct or review the situation, measures taken (or not taken), and verification with the complainant that the issue has been resolved. However, since they are required by law to keep just such a record and to hold complaints in an active file until they are resolved, there must be one somewhere. Obviously, there is no verification by the Town Council other than to ask the Town Manager. It might be a nice step for Town Council to start something new and do followup with citizens to see if things are corrected to the satisfaction of citizens for a change.

Have fun with the Town Charter, it is quite informative.

After you’ve read and/or seen those, take a look at another Roanoke Times article by Christian Trejbal “The registrar’s office needs a change“. While I do like the people at the Registrar’s Office here a great deal, there have been some issues. Now, exactly how many of those issues are a function of monetary cuts to that department by the County is certainly open for debate. There have been times when they have had to rely on volunteers to help get the jobs done.

What links these two articles together? Why the failure of Christiansburg elected officials to read, comprehend, and follows the rules/laws. Mistakes made during campaigns are extraordinarily similar to those made at the Town Council meeting in that there was a was either ignorance of, or disregard for, the laws of the State of Virginia. Verbal promises are pretty much meaningless when the actions undertaken effectively undermine those promises. Those promises are cheapened even further when there is a disregard for the law. Pretty words from politicians also known as empty rhetoric.

I have heard that some Town Council members feel that they are being pressured because of the way citizens are coming to the meetings and people are being kept informed of what is happening because of blogs and video recordings. The fact that citizens are watching to be sure that their elected officials are deserving of citizen respect and future votes should not be a surprise to Town Council. If there is nothing to hide, and you are following the rules, then all should be fine. It is the right of citizens to watch their government perform, to ask questions, to expect (and where necessary demand) answers. It is the right of citizens to hold elected officials accountable and to point out when elected officials talk a good show but do nothing to see that the issues are dealt with.

For example, during the 6/1/2010 meeting, I asked Town Council again to do something about the Urban flooding being caused in Cambria by the Town’s failure to manage stormwater in the area. Through both act (increasing development with impervious surfaces, failing to anticipate the amount of storm water runoff, and channeling storm water from surround areas directly into the floodplain area rather than insuring it runs into an effective storm water management system) and omission (failure to do anything when FEMA determined flooding was the result of inadequate storm water management, failure to do anything when citizens came forward on multiple occasions over the last several years asking the town to correct the issues) the Town has caused the problems at the area where Cambria and Depot St. intersect. (As an aside here, as one person at the meeting pointed out, there was flooding in Cambria during the 1960′s. It was during a little cloudburst named “Hurricane Camille” and the year was 1969 and a record 27″ of rain fell in the mountains of Virginia. Flash flooding took the lives of 153 people. (I wonder what would happen if that same type of storm hit again today.)

The Mayor’s response was that the Town had sent out an Engineer. The fact that the Town had sent out an Engineer was verified by the Town Manager, and I added the fact that Engineers had been out several times. The sending out of a handful of engineers has been ineffective. The perimeter of a berm necessary to hold water away from the historic depot is approximately 400 feet. If you assume an average of 6′ in height for each engineer, you would need 66.66… engineers to build a berm with and that would only be 1 engineer thickness in height. Given that the thicknesses of engineers varies significantly from engineer to engineer, another 30 or so engineers would be needed to equalize the height of the berm for a total of 100 engineers. At the rate of 3 – 4 engineers annually coming out to look at the problem, acknowledging the problem, and still seeing nothing done about the problem, it would take approximately 25 to 30 years for there to be enough engineers in place to protect the building.

I have written the EPA to ascertain if there would be any problems with the use of engineers as berm material due to the byproducts developed by a well fed and maintained berm of engineers. I have yet to receive a response but I anticipate there would be problems. If not properly fed and maintained, the environmental impact could be far worse. Although I do suppose it is possible to make an argument that in either case, an act of nature could be blamed for the problem thus making it okay with the Town of Christiansburg.

All in all, I’m betting that there could be more effective measures taken to control the runoff than to pay 100 or so engineers to lay down on the job.

This shortening of some people’s terms (those who were elected in May of 2008) will mean that those people will need to run again and be elected in the November election.
There is one apparent hitch in this ‘get-along’ in that the shortening is restricted to 6 months. Given that the Town of Christiansburg elected officials don’t take office until September (rather than in July as other jurisdictions do) it appears there will need to be some overlap.

Is it possible that for a 2 month period we could have more than 6 Town Council Members? Suppose the 3 incumbents ran in November and were defeated, could we possibly have a situation where for 2 months we would have 9 Town Council Members?

What a mess? Well, the Town of Christiansburg set their starting dates in September while State Code says they state in July (§ 24.2-222. Election and terms of mayor and council for cities and towns. Apparently, this date was established in the 1954 Charter for the Town of Christiansburg. Since one of those council members affected has put forth that he will be seeking legal recourse to the shortening of his term, it may be that things will get interesting…again.

(Town Council Videos of this meeting should be available later today at myvaresouces.com.)
_________________________________________________

§ 24.2-222.1. Alternative election of mayor and council at November general election in cities and towns.

A. Notwithstanding the provisions of § 24.2-222, the council of a city or town may provide by ordinance that the mayor, if an elected mayor is provided for by charter, and council shall be elected at the November general election date of any cycle as designated in the ordinance, for terms to commence January 1. No such ordinance shall be adopted between January 1 and the May general election date of the year in which city or town elections regularly are scheduled to be held therein.

B. Alternatively, the registered voters of a city or town may file a petition with the circuit court of the city or of the county within which the town is located asking that a referendum be held on the question of whether the city or town should elect the mayor, if an elected mayor is provided for by charter, and council members at the November general election date of any cycle as designated in the petition. The petition shall be signed by registered voters equal in number to at least ten percent of the number registered in the city or town on the January 1 preceding the filing.

The court, pursuant to § 24.2-684, shall order the election officials on a day fixed in the order to conduct a referendum on the question, provided that no such referendum shall be scheduled between January 1 and the May general election date of the year in which city or town elections regularly are scheduled to be held therein. The clerk of the court shall publish notice of the referendum once a week for the three consecutive weeks prior to the referendum in a newspaper having general circulation in the city or town, and shall post a copy of the notice at the door of the courthouse of the city or county within which the town is located. The question on the ballot shall be:

“Shall the (city or town) change the election date of the mayor (if so provided by charter) and members of council from the May general election to the November general election (in even-numbered or odd-numbered years or as otherwise designated in the petition)?”

If members of the school board in the city or town are elected by the voters, the ballot question also shall state that the change in election date applies to the election of school board members.

The referendum shall be held and the results certified as provided in § 24.2-684. If a majority of the voters voting in the referendum vote in favor of the change, the mayor and council thereafter shall be elected at the November general election date for terms to commence January 1.

C. Except as provided in subsection D, no term of a mayor or member of council shall be shortened in implementing the change to the November election date. Mayors and members of council who were elected at a May general election and whose terms are to expire as of June 30 shall continue in office until their successors have been elected at the November general election and have been qualified to serve.

D. In any city or town that elects its council biennially or quadrennially and that changes to the November general election date in odd-numbered years from the May general election date in even-numbered years, mayors and members of council who were elected at a May general election shall have their term of office shortened by six months but shall continue in office until their successors have been elected at the November general election and have been qualified to serve.

(2000, c. 1045; 2002, c. 30.)

(sections from § 15.2-2223. Comprehensive plan to be prepared and adopted; scope and purpose.)

In the preparation of a comprehensive plan, the commission shall make careful and comprehensive surveys and studies of the existing conditions and trends of growth, and of the probable future requirements of its territory and inhabitants. The comprehensive plan shall be made with the purpose of guiding and accomplishing a coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development of the territory which will, in accordance with present and probable future needs and resources, best promote the health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and general welfare of the inhabitants, including the elderly and persons with disabilities.

The plan, with the accompanying maps, plats, charts, and descriptive matter, shall show the locality’s long-range recommendations for the general development of the territory covered by the plan. It may include, but need not be limited to:

1. The designation of areas for various types of public and private development and use, such as different kinds of residential, including age-restricted, housing; business; industrial; agricultural; mineral resources; conservation; active and passive recreation; public service; flood plain and drainage; and other areas;

2. The designation of a system of community service facilities such as parks, sports playing fields, forests, schools, playgrounds, public buildings and institutions, hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, community centers, waterworks, sewage disposal or waste disposal areas, and the like;

3. The designation of historical areas and areas for urban renewal or other treatment;

4. The designation of areas for the implementation of reasonable ground water protection measures;

5. A capital improvements program, a subdivision ordinance, a zoning ordinance and zoning district maps, mineral resource district maps and agricultural and forestal district maps, where applicable;

6. The location of existing or proposed recycling centers;

7. The location of military bases, military installations, and military airports and their adjacent safety areas; and

8. The designation of corridors or routes for electric transmission lines of 150 kilovolts or more.

The plan shall include: the designation of areas and implementation of measures for the construction, rehabilitation and maintenance of affordable housing, which is sufficient to meet the current and future needs of residents of all levels of income in the locality while considering the current and future needs of the planning district within which the locality is situated.

The Christiansburg Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2003, reviewed and readopted without change in 2007, and will not be up for full rewrite until 2013. The Town Council has the right to request a full review and update anytime it sees fit. There may be some resistance to doing that because there is now a State Statute that required that any changes in the Comprehensive Plan or any new versions of the Comprehensive Plan MUST be submitted to VDOT for approval. This means there would be some eyes outside of Town Government that would be taking a close look at traffic issues and where problems need to be addressed. (See: 15.2-2222.1. Coordination of state and local transportation planning.)

This might be a good issue to bring up with those candidates who will be running for Town Council in the next election. Yep! Definitely sounds like a campaign issue to me.

By going to the Legislative Information System website’s code of Virginia Searchable Database, you can view or have a report which contains the particular code section sent to you email address. I have had a copy on file for quite some time now, and I last updated it in December. So, I went ahead and submitted a request for the latest “unofficial version” (although updated constantly, the only actual official version is the hard copy).

I’ve set the copy that I received on June 7, 2009 in a .pdf format for others to access quickly. You can find the document on MyVAResources.com. Click on the Issues and News link to go to that page. Right now, the link to the pdf file is the 3rd major heading down that list. (Take a moment to look around. You might find something else of interest.)

The Conflict of Interests Act you find is a 41 page document.

§ 2.2-3100.1. Copy of chapter; review by officers and employees.
Any person required to file a disclosure statement of personal interests pursuant to subsections A or B of § 2.2-3114, subsections A or B of § 2.2-3115 or § 2.2-3116 shall be furnished by the public body’s administrator a copy of this chapter within two weeks following the person’s election, reelection,  employment, appointment or reappointment.
All officers and employees shall read and familiarize themselves with the provisions of this chapter.
(2004, cc. 134, 392.)

The reference to § 2.2-3115 specifically identifies the local government officers and employees referenced in the above statute and adds some more information concerning the responsibilities of those individuals.

§ 2.2-3115. Disclosure by local government officers and employees.
A. The members of every governing body and school board of each county and city and of towns with populations in excess of 3,500 shall file, as a condition to assuming office or employment, a disclosure statement of their personal interests and other information as is specified on the form set forth in §2.2- 3117 and thereafter shall file such a statement annually on or before January 15.

The members of the governing body of any authority established in any county or city, or part or combination thereof, and having the power to issue bonds or expend funds in excess of $10,000 in any fiscal year, shall file, as a condition to assuming office, a disclosure statement of their personal interests and other information as is specified on the form set forth in § 2.2-3118 and thereafter shall file such a statement annually on or before January 15, unless the governing body of the jurisdiction that appoints the members requires that the members file the form set forth in § 2.2-3117.

Persons occupying such positions of trust appointed by governing bodies and persons occupying such positions of employment with governing bodies as may be designated to file by ordinance of the governing body shall file, as a condition to assuming office or employment, a disclosure statement of their personal interests and other information as is specified on the form set forth in §2.2-3117 and thereafter shall file such a statement annually on or before January 15.

Persons occupying such positions of trust appointed by school boards and persons occupying such positions of employment with school boards as may be designated to file by an adopted policy of the school board shall file, as a condition to assuming office or employment, a disclosure statement of their personal interests and other information as is specified on the form set forth in § 2.2-3117 and thereafter shall file such a statement annually on or before January 15.

B. Nonsalaried citizen members of local boards, commissions and councils as may be designated by the governing body shall file, as a condition to assuming office, a disclosure form of their personal interests and such other information as is specified on the form set forth in § 2.2-3118 and thereafter shall file such form annually on or before January 15.

C. The disclosure forms required by subsections A and B shall be provided by the Secretary of the Commonwealth to the clerks of the governing bodies and school boards not later than November 30 of each year, and the clerks of the governing body and school board shall distribute the forms to designated individuals no later than December 10 of each year. Forms shall be filed and maintained as public records for five years in the office of the clerk of the respective governing body or school board. Forms filed by members of governing bodies of authorities shall be filed and maintained as public records for five years in the office of the clerk of the governing body of the county or city.

D. Candidates for membership in the governing body or school board of any county, city or town with apopulation of more than 3,500 persons shall file a disclosure statement of their personal interests as required by § 24.2-502

E. Any officer or employee of local government who has a personal interest in any transaction before the governmental or advisory agency of which he is an officer or employee and who is disqualified from participating in that transaction pursuant to subdivision A 1 of § 2.2-3112 or otherwise elects to disqualify himself, shall forthwith make disclosure of the existence of his interest, including the full name and address of the business and the address or parcel number for the real estate if the interest involves a business or real estate, and his disclosure shall be reflected in the public records of the agency for five years in the office of the administrative head of the officer’s or employee’s governmental or advisory agency.

F. In addition to any disclosure required by subsections A and B, in each county and city and in towns with populations in excess of 3,500, members of planning commissions, boards of zoning appeals, real estate assessors, and all county, city and town managers or executive officers shall make annual
disclosures of all their interests in real estate located in the county, city or town in which they are elected, appointed, or employed. Such disclosure shall include any business in which such persons own an interest, or from which income is received, if the primary purpose of the business is to own, develop or derive compensation through the sale, exchange or development of real estate in the county, city or town. Such disclosure shall be filed as a condition to assuming office or employment, and thereafter shall be filed annually with the clerk of the governing body of such county, city or town on or before January 15. Such disclosures shall be filed and maintained as public records for five years. Forms for the filing of such reports shall be prepared and distributed by the Secretary of the Commonwealth to the clerk of each governing body.

G. An officer or employee of local government who is required to declare his interest pursuant to subdivision A 2 of § 2.2-3112 shall declare his interest by stating (i) the transaction involved, (ii) the nature of the officer’s or employee’s personal interest affected by the transaction, (iii) that he is a member of a business, profession, occupation, or group the members of which are affected by the transaction, and (iv) that he is able to participate in the transaction fairly, objectively, and in the public interest. The officer or employee shall either make his declaration orally to be recorded in written minutes of his agency or file a signed written declaration with the clerk or administrative head of his governmental or advisory agency, as appropriate, who shall, in either case, retain and make available for public inspection such declaration for a period of five years from the date of recording or receipt. If reason able time is not available to comply with the provisions of this subsection prior to participationin the transaction, the officer or employee shall prepare and file the required declaration by the end of the next business day. The officer or employee shall also orally disclose the existence of the interest during each meeting of the governmental or advisory agency at which the transaction is discussed and such disclosure shall be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

H. An officer or employee of local government who is required to declare his interest pursuant to subdivision A 3 of § 2.2-3112, shall declare his interest by stating (i) the transaction involved, (ii) that a party to the transaction is a client of his firm, (iii) that he does not personally represent or provide services to the client, and (iv) that he is able to participate in the transaction fairly, objectively, and in the public interest. The officer or employee shall either make his declaration orally to be recorded in written minutes for his agency or file a signed written declaration with the clerk or administrative head of his governmental or advisory agency, as appropriate, who shall, in either case, retain and make available for public inspection such declaration for a period of five years from the date of recording or receipt. If reasonable time is not available to comply with the provisions of this subsection prior to participation in the transaction, the officer or employee shall prepare and file the required declaration by the end of the next business day.
(1987, Sp. Sess., c. 1, § 2.1-639.14; 1988, c. 849; 1995, c. 495; 1996, c. 526; 2000, c. 317; 2001, cc.
217, 844; 2003, c. 694.)

This is only part of this particular code, but it is the part that seems most relevant in light of current discussions. You will note, if you read the entire document, that the law is fairly specific and detailed in application. Where most of our recent controversy has arisen, it has not been a matter of the law, but rather one of perception. You do not have to be doing something wrong for someone else to deem your behavior wrong in their belief system.

Someone can operate entirely within the law, and yet still earn the ire of those who see the actions as being ‘wrong’. Laws are intellectual, perceptions are often laced with emotion. Read the Act for yourself so that you know the facts and what is required. Then, look at those who go beyond the minimum requirements of the law to how their behaviors may be perceived….that is good leadership.

Guess what the topic is …. “Stormwater“. There is very little discussion on the page, rather it is a collection of links that I found to be informative on the topic of stormwater. They cover a variety of the issues related to stormwater including: runoff, flooding, health hazards, environmental hazards, property damage, state laws, your rights under those laws, and general information sites.

A reader asked me a while back if I was really ignorant enough to believe that Town officials would read the blog. Well, the answer was and is, of course not! If they were that motivated to know about the problems around town, they would wait for someone to call them, they would be asking questions before making decisions, they would be demanding firm answers rather than “I think so.” They would already know about all of these sites and the information they contain. What I do, I do for citizens. Hopefully, there are some of those citizens who will decide to run for the office of Town Council or Mayor in the next election. It is my goal to be sure that citizens know their rights and that anyone running for office will be able to be effective leaders in the community.

I will note there there is/are one/or more elected/appointed official(s) that do/does read the blogs, does go to the sites, asks for more information, and is/are trying to make change. He/She/They is/are prevented from doing some of the things that need to be done by a block of those with voting power who insist things be done the way they have always been done. That is a problem that it will be up to voters to remedy. I could nearly guarantee that any citizen who spends 15 minutes looking at some of these information sites will know more about stormwater than most Town Council members. (Yes, I am being vague for a purpose. If you think citizens are the only ones that are being intentionally left in the dark, you are wrong!)

I will not provide information on who that/those may be but if you look at some of the vidoes or listen to some of the audios, or better yet, come to some of the meetings and see for yourself, you can tell who has done their homework and who hasn’t. I’ve been working hard to update the videos and all are loaded and ready to go except for the 5/19 Town Council Meeting which I am still working on. (Sorry, but trying to protect Historic Buildings from stormwater damage has to take priority.)

I understand that a citizen’s group is in the process of forming and when I hear more, I will let you know. I will be there! I have a few ideas of my own in the works and as soon as the rain slows down, it is going to be “Katie bar the door!” time. I want to see how the town responds before I get those going so that time and resources can be most effectively used…..planning….they’ll never figure out what I’m up to because they don’t understand planning:)

Anyway, if you have some time, check out the Stormwater page. If you find things on your own that could be added, let me know.

My thanks to all of you for your support and encouragement during these trying times. Your encouragement via emails and phone calls has kept me going! I’m feeling a lot like the David and Goliath scenario is in place. But, we all know how that one turned out!:)

Don’t forget to check out ThinkChristiansburg’s blog on Stormwater and the role of the DCR! Rain, Rain Go Away.
Have a great day!

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.