Blueweeds

Metro Plans for Rapid-Bus include Falls Church

There's an interesting article in today's Washington Post outlining Metro's desire to increase rapid-bus service in 18 regional bus corridors.  Metro staff has recommended  Leesburg Pike's (aka Broad St. where buses 28AB, 28 FG, 28T travel) Alexandria-Falls Church-Fairfax County corridor as part of the first wave for rapid-bus upgrades.  Some excerpts from the Post article:

The improvements would make bus service along these corridors "much more reliable, shave 15 to 20 percent off your travel time, and make [rides] more pleasant," said Nat Bottigheimer, Metro's planning chief. Unlike the average subway rider, who rides the train to work, these key bus arteries have a more diverse ridership.

"These corridors serve every aspect of people's lives," he said. "There are kids riding, people going shopping and people going to work."

With the region's population forecast to grow 22 percent by 2030, Metro officials say better service on priority corridors will help unclog roadways and get people out of cars and into mass transit.

If Metro and its partners adopt the plan, transportation officials will have to make a fundamental shift in the way they think about traffic, Bottigheimer said.
They are used to thinking about traffic flow by getting the greatest number of vehicles, rather than people, through an intersection.

I think the last line, in conjunction with the statistic about 22% regional population growth by 2030 is telling; the need to start thinking about moving the greatest number of people and not the greatest number of vehicles on Falls Church's roads.  Rapid-bus service will be a great addition to Falls Church.  It has many of the positive attributes of light rail service, will make Falls Church a desirable location for both residential and retail/commercial uses along Broad St. and will offer a viable and effective alternative to car transportation for people coming in and going out of the City.   

Eighth District 2008 District Convention On Saturday

The Eighth Congressional District Democratic Committee will hold its 2008 District Convention  tomorrow, Saturday May 17th, at Francis C. Hammond Middle School in Alexandria, Virginia. 

I will be attending as an Barack Obama delegate from the City of Falls Church, along with my wife Mayor Robin Gardner (Obama Delegate), City Treasurer Cathy Kaye (Obama Delegate), Jeff Person (Obama Delegate), Commissioner of Revenue Tom Clinton (Obama Alternate), and Jeanne Duross (Obama Alternate). 

The ECDDC looks like it has done a good job of organizing the convention (which is typically heavy with resolutions from our reading crazy region), and it will be good to catch up with some political friends. 

The event runs from 10:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m., with registration starting at 9:00 a.m.  Featured speakers will include Alexandria Mayor Bill Euille, Senator Jim Webb, and Congressman Jim Moran.  Additional information on the convention is available at 2008 District Convention.

Sen. Webb (D) New GI Bill Passes House

The New GI Bill championed by VA Sen. Jim Webb (D) has been passed by the House of Representatives and is expected to be approved by the Senate in the coming weeks.  Despite opposition from local Republicans Frank Wolfe and Tom Davis, the legislation sponsored by Sen. Jim Webb (D) and forty others on both sides of the aisle received overwhelming support from legislators and veteran organizations. 

The legislation will strengthen educational benefits available to veterans who have served in the post-911 military.  New GI Bill PDF.

See excellent CQ Politics post on how John McCain and Senate Republicans failed in their attempt to quash Sen. Webb's New GI Bill with a "last train out of the station" amendment on collective bargaining. 

h/t Raising Kaine

Not Your Average Joe's Coming To Falls Church City

Not Your Average Joe's is coming to Falls Church City.  The wildly popular neighborhood eatery, which specializes in "creative, casual, cuisine," is opening a new store on the first floor of the mixed used Spectrum building centrally located on Broad Street in the City of Falls Church.  More at Washington Business Journal.  Directions To Spectrum. 

Just another blow to the anti-development naysayers in the City.  Falls Church just went through a local election in which the anti-everything crowd led by council member Team Dave Snyder and his "bunch of friends" attacked mixed use development, local businesses, and city staff for doing everything wrong ... all the while failing to acknowledge the obvious positive changes happening throughout the City.  Team Dave Snyder voted against the Spectrum project at every phase and continues to speak out against the clearly successful project every chance he gets. 

For ten years Team Dave Snyder and his "bunch of friends" allowed a dangerous and unsightly vacant lot to drain revenue from our main commercial corridor.  A discredited economic "strategy" which nearly bankrupt the City.  For folks that have been here for a few years, the contrast between that huge mud hole in our community and the vibrant, walkable, economic engine which exists there now could not be greater.

Welcome Not Your Average Joe's! Sorry it took so long to get a place for you.  We were busy getting rid of some tired old local political hacks and had to spruce the place up for you.   

BZZZZZT!!!!!!

In the middle of the rain storm the other night--at 12:18 AM to be exact---there were three bright flashes and three KABOOM!!!'s as power transformers went down over here on Poplar Drive. We lost all power until after 5PM the following evening.  When the power came up there was a heaving, zapping sound in our kitchen wall ground fault outlet followed by sparks and smoke from said outlet.  We were relieved to discover the refrigerator returned to active duty, however the rest of the kitchen appliances were no more--as well as our furnace.  Our friendly, reliable electrician gave us a full assessment---all the ground faults in the house were blown....and...as I type, the GE guy is here replacing the fried circuit boards on the oven, dishwasher and microwave.  The furnace guy comes on Friday to offer his own jolly take on things.  Poplar Drive has been a criss-cross of white vans with ladders today.  No doubt I'm not alone in my zappination blues.  No doubt the money we had saved for a 37"  HDTV just went to something else. 

I bet my next phone call goes something like this: "Hello? Homeowner's insurance? Power surges not covered?  Thanks anyway....."

I'm wondering----does anybody know anything about what happened?  Is anyone else living this story too?   

--Bob Burnett

Are We Willing to Afford Affordable Housing?

We had a light Council agenda last night so the FCHC treated us to a small parade of folks speaking in favor of the proposed affordable housing project in City Center South.  I can't say that the move was popular with me (note: Council members usually look forward to the rare light agenda, and bulking it up usually isn't a strategy to engender their goodwill).  Nonethless, it did serve to highlight an important project where the community is going to have to make some hard choices.

I have always been fairly skeptical of affordable housing efforts in the area, not because the issue isn't important or is an inappropriate area for government activity.  I simply think that people talk a bigger game than they are willing to pay for.  It is easy to express concern about housing for local workers and the working poor.  However, the very nature of the problem (high land prices) means that addressing it in any material way is very, very expensive.  By way of example, there are 700 or so "at risk" affordable housing units in the City today.  Just treading water and keeping those units affordable over the long term would require hundreds of millions of dollars.  Our very soft commitment to spend one cent on the tax rate (or about $350,000) per year is spitting in the ocean.

The Falls Church Housing Corporation has been trying to develop a dense affordable housing project for years.  They have had multiple proposed locations and, inevitably, after much work and planning expense is done, the Council and/or the community gets cold feet and says "not now" or "not here".  In 4 years on the Council I sat through two of these exercises (the Agria's parking lot project and the West End project).  I believe that there were others previously.  It is enough to cause one to wonder how serious the folks in the City are about this issue.

With respect to the proposed City Center South project, I am guessing that it will be controversial for two reasons.  First, it will be more residential in a commercial area.  (This is inevitable.  If you and your neighbors are willing to volunteer your residential area for a dense affodable housing project, please raise your hand.)  Second, it will be expensive for the City.  I don't have the exact numbers, but I am estimating a pretty big ticket.  Certainly a lot more than $350,000 per year.

This project should cause all of us look in the mirror and decide whether this issue is important to us, as a community, or not.  This is the right kind of project in the right location -- but if we don't want to do it simply because we don't want to write the check then we shouldn't kid ourselves.  Wanting inexpensive solutions for affordable housing is exactly the same as wanting no solutions at all.  It is highly unlikely that we will be able to kick the can to better option in the future and everyone, politicians and citizens alike, should be honest about that.

How Dare You!

A leading citizen of our fair City stopped me in the CVS parking lot yesterday to complain about my willingness to post messages on Blueweeds. He claimed that I was adding to "divisiveness" by giving this site "credibility." Aside from the fact that I doubt that my willingness to post adds much "credibility" to any blogsite, I also think that sites like Blueweeds ultimately have the potential to lead us away from divisiveness in this City and toward more open and honest conversations about the challenges we face the the things we have to do to address them.

Like many people, I find Blueweeds both very rude and pretty funny (rude and funny are generally a combination that I am attracted to). It is not always fair and it is sometimes so rude as to make even me uncomfortable. But we have to remember that this is a political blogsite that pokes at people with power and influence. I haven't seen Blueweeds take on anyone yet who didn't have their own capacity to respond in many different ways. This country has a very long tradition of outrageous and entertaining methods being used to speak truth to power -- or at least clearly express a political point of view.

For too long in this City, the main issues of the day have been discussed behind closed doors -- or on TV shows that no one watches -- among a very small group of long-term activists. There are 10,000 people in this community and about 1/3 of them or new to the community every 5 years or so. We may be a village, but a huge percentage of the villagers are on the road in and out every year. Out of this mass of transient people, I would estimate that 200 or so active individuals drive most of the decision-making about every issue of importance to our community. Hell, just 1,200 votes in an election will pretty much guarantee you a Council seat.

These 200 folks break themselves into small armed camps -- currently the CBC (with no professed ideology) and the not-CBC (with the ideology of being against the CBC) -- and there is almost no real open or honest dialogue between the two. There are plots and intrigues and polite shivs in the ribs, but all of the harsh words and strong opinions are saved for the living rooms of like-minded supporters. I find it extremely "divisive."

If Blueweeds helps to blow this open by saying "this is what I believe and, by the way, you stink" -- thus generating an equally honest and forthright response -- then we may eventually get somewhere in terms of determining the future of our City. Along the way we might even involve 200 more people who care about the policies of the town and the choices we have to make. The towns that have had real success in forging a new future for themselves (be it Silver Spring or Pittsburgh) all had to grind through terribly difficult conversations about future and directions. We haven't gotten there yet -- so let's get started.

So, in response to the complaints, all I can say that I am sorry that this site offends you -- but I am happy that you care. I will only be happier when you develop your own site that is as fun to read.

David Chavern

Malignant Indeed

The word "malignant" has particular meaning to me and my family.  Meaning which was no doubt not lost on Linda Neighborgall when she wrote and posted an article entitled "Malignant Blueweeds" on the web site run by Sam Mabry, Lou Mauro, Ron Parson, Team Dave Snyder and the rest of the Deathstar charter change crew.  BTW, remember when Sam Mabry vowed he would not use his web site to engage in personal attacks?  Wow.  Whatever happened to THAT promise?

The Linda Neighborgall post reads in pertinent part:

" ... I refer, of course, to the malignant Blueweeds blog published by [Mike at Blueweeds], Falls Church's angry, self-appointed arbiter of permissible political expression.  (The irony of this does not seem to be lost on most people.)  Mike's an excellent example of what playground bullies and mean little children who torture small animals grow up to be ... [he] has become well known for his volatility, meanness of spirit, and lack of good judgment and self-control.  Thus people seem unsurprised by his graceless performance during this election season ...."

There is much more, but you get the picture.  The unfortunately titled post has little value to our community and is of no particular consequence to me.  I am surprisingly comfortable with my randomness and, well, sometimes those small animals deserve to be tortured a bit (;-)). 

But the bad karma created by the unimaginative and poorly written post by Linda Neighborgall is unacceptable to me.  To clear the air and create some counteractive good karma, today I am making a personal contribution of $500 to the Falls Church City Cancer Survivor Relay being run by our own Ellen Salsbury and Gwenn Hoffman.  The event, which will include many of the approximately 300 cancer survivors in our City, is sponsored by the American Cancer Society and will be held at George Mason High School on Friday, May 31st. 

I challenge others, particularly those local politicos desperately in need of some good karma, to match the contribution and/or to lend their support to the worthwhile event.

More info: Falls Church Relay For Life or contact Chris McCullogh of the American Cancer Society at (703) 937-1909 or chris.mccullough@cancer.org. 

A Masterpiece Message From CBC Campaign Chair Phil Duncan

Phil Duncan is indeed a pillar of our community.  Phil recently wrote a message to the CBC organization which is worth sharing.  His perspective on our city politics in light of the recent campaign, in which the CBC won four of six races but was not able to get Vice Mayor Lindy Hockenberry re-elected, is full of wisdom and respect for our community.  I am also very proud to say that Phil joined the Falls Church Democratic Committee this past January. 

The stealth dumpster diving pretender-haters should take note of what real community service sounds like:

" ... I am pleased that [Deliberation Day Falls Church blog] included my quote about Lindy’s distinguished service to the City, which ranks her with other highly effective, progressive leaders in Falls Church history such as Steve Rogers, Jeff Tarbert and Ed Strait — three great CBC City Councilors who also suffered re-election disappointment, in 2002, 1996, and 1988, respectively. It seems that every six years or so, a few dozen swing voters in town see fit to cast the decisive votes that oust a capable incumbent with a proven record of great work in the community. CBC respects these voters’ decisions, of course, even as we lament them.

Taking stock of my 23 years in the City, I’d observe that such occasional disappointment at the polls is the price CBC pays for electing people of vision who are always pushing the City and schools forward — trying to make our local economy more modern and diversified, our community more inclusive, our services to the less-fortunate more robust, and, above all, our commitment to the children and teachers in our public education system the strongest in Virginia. Typically this dedication to progress and excellence requires innovation and change, which discomfits some voters. It would be easier to run campaigns every two years on a stand-pat platform. But what a waste of time that would be. It’s been my great honor to be involved in the campaigns of a long line of exceptional CBC leaders, people who have had the courage to engage and truly lead the citizenry, not just take its pulse, hunker down, get bogged in “analysis paralysis.”

Fortunately for Falls Church, it seems likely that the new Council and School Board that will take shape July 1 will be blessed with experienced, energetic leaders and capable people committed to a vibrant City with great schools and services and reasonable taxes. These folks will have the opportunity to make historic, transformational decisions for Falls Church — on economic development, affordable housing, municipal and school facilities, and other issues. I hope they will proceed confidently, and be bold, keeping up the momentum for progress that has been at the core of Falls Church’s DNA since we carved ourself out of Fairfax County 60 years ago.

My heartfelt thanks to all of you who supported this year’s six CBC nominees for City Council and School Board. Those of you who chose to go another route, I regret that we were not together this time.  - Phil ..."

When Is A Republican Not Really A Republican?

I was going to wait until after I left Council to make my first post on Blueweeds, but the recent campaign bothered me so much that I couldn't wait any longer

I am going to come out of the political closet in Falls Church and state that, yes, I am a Republican.  I never thought it mattered locally because in my view very few, if any, local issues are partisan.  I don’t think there is a Republican or Democratic view on good schools, strong local services and thoughtful, pedestrian-friendly development.  I simply believe in limited – but effective – government, personal liberty and creating environments where businesses can grow and flourish.

That being said, I have been very, very surprised by some of the “anti” sentiments expressed by a few other self-professed Republicans in town.  I don’t view it as “Republican” to be against development -- or, in fact, to be against almost any position taken by the City Council on any topic.  If you are going to claim waste and corruption then point to examples, if you are going to call our schools weak then explain why and how, most importantly, if you are going to complain about a local problem then please also suggest a practical solution.  Being just “against” isn’t consistent with any legitimate political philosophy.

We currently have a very strange situation in which the only other professed Republican on Council (that I am aware of) has routinely grilled developers about their proprietary profit margins, as if making money is stealing.  I simply don’t view this as either appropriate or Republican.  We need to set our terms for development and then let developers respond and, hopefully, make as much money as they can.  Digging into people’s income potential is about as pro-Big Government as you can get.

In that same vein, the most recent referendum was a pointless, Big Brother piece of social engineering.  The voters were – once again – forced to speak on this issue and they were – once again – clear in their views.  They want to be flexible and pursue thoughtful development that responds to the market (and the possibility that some new residents might come along for the ride isn’t terminally scary).

The bottom line is that I don’t view the CBC or the current City Council as “Democratic” and, accordingly, I don’t view opposing those bodies as necessarily “Republican.”  Anyone who alters their political values to simply oppose someone or something, didn’t have very strong values to begin with.

A note from Mike:  First time post from our new Blueweeds author David Chavern!  David is a current member of City Council who is not seeking re-election due to job responsibilities.

Planning Commissioner Sanders Working With Mabry To Stop Hotel Project

Falls Church City Planning Commissioner Christine Sanders, a Republican  lawyer and longtime supporter of our hero Team Dave Snyder (R), is actively working with controversial former City Council Member Sam Mabry to stop the 100 percent commercial hotel project proposed to be built in the block adjacent to St. James Catholic Church. 

Sam Mabry is a member of St. James and was the main sponsor of the Deathstar Charter Change referendum overwhelmingly defeated on Tuesday.  The purported purpose of the Deathstar Charter Change was to encourage commercial development.  Sam Mabry's opposition to a 100 percent commercial project is further evidence the real purpose of the proffered charter change was a personal political agenda of Sam Mabry and his conservative supporters.  Sam Mabry has a long history of political scheming in the City - including initiating a fair housing investigation against the City when he was on City Council which resulted in City taxpayers having to pay off a nuisance lawsuit. 

Planning Commissioners are appointed by the City Council as advisers to the Council and City Manager.  The Planning Commission voted this past Monday, 3 to 3, to recommend the City Council not approve the hotel project.  Professional City planning staff had reported the project met the requirements of the City's Comprehensive Plan.  The Falls Church City Council will hold work sessions and meetings to determine whether the requested zoning variances will or will not be granted.  If they are not granted, the property owner may modify the project to be within code and build on his property by right without any needed approvals from the City. 

At its televised and heavily attended hearing on Monday, at which Planning Commissioner Christine Sanders was openly wearing a campaign button of Republican and Team Dave Snyder (R) political protege Nader Baroukh*, the Planning Commission voted to have the City Zoning Administrator answer a nine page questionnaire of complex and legal-jargon filled questions.  Acting under advice from the Acting City Attorney, the Zoning Administrator reminded the volunteer appointed Planning Commission that it has no authority to compel discovery from City staff, and respectfully declined to play a perjury trap game with the Commission. 

What Planning Commissioner Christine Sanders did not disclose until recently is that she worked with Sam Mabry to draft the perjury trap questionnaire and is actively working to stop the hotel project.  So much for having no conflict of interest in your volunteer "advice" to City Council, right?

* For the chair and other commissioners to allow Sanders to display the  Nader Baroukh  campaign button on the dais the day before the election was unbelievably bad judgment.  It absolutely destroys any semblance of public credibility about the critical  political opinion "planning advice" being received from the Commission. 

Open Thread On Election Results

The day after election day is always a political hangover.  The blog has heavy traffic today, so I know folks are looking for perspective and information on what exactly the election means for the City.  I offer this as an open thread for anyone who wants to comment. 

First, I wanted to acknowledge all council and school board candidates who qualified and ran for office.  Congratulations especially to all who won.

A special thank you to the CBC campaign team.  Phil, Jody, Tom, Cathy and Matt - you all did a great job and overcame a lot of obstacles to keep the entire slate organized on moving in the right direction.  Not that many see how much work you all do - not just for your candidates but also to keep some sense of order in our City during the election season. 

This is my sixth straight local election campaign.  It was a difficult campaign for a lot of reasons.  There is certainly no "mandate" for any issue or campaign.  At the end of day, voter turnout was low and the election was a house-by-house grinding out of GOTV.  The charter change issue dominated, but the issue did not draw overwhelming  voters (like the school bond issue did a few years ago) and the results were split - with two council candidates opposed and one in favor elected and the referendum defeated by 17 percentage points but slightly less than last time.

Congratulations to Robin of course.  She was the top vote getter while also steering the City through a period of historic re-development, working full time, being a mom of six year old twins, dealing with a pain in the ass husband, and working to help get a slate of candidates elected.  She is amazing. 

Lawrence also deserves special congratulations.  His election was a great effort that was well executed.  He figured out that CBC-endorsed candidates cannot rely soley on the ticket to get them elected, they must augment that effort with a personal campaign without pissing everyone off.  Lawrence managed to do this and he deserves credit.

Also, I disagree with the type of campaign Nader ran, but if you are going to run a single issue sole candidate campaign than you may as well do it right.  Which he did.  Now that he is elected, whether or not Nader distances himself from his shrill campaign manager and dissolves his ties to Snyder-Mabry will be interesting to watch and comment on.  City voters took a big leap of faith in substituting a lifelong teacher and school advocate for a newcomer to the City who campaigned on a vision schools are mismanaged and in need of hands on direction from the City Council. 

Lindy's loss is especially disappointing to her supporters.  She is a very good council member with a deep sense of community spirit.  There are some campaign lessons to be learned with her loss, but the vote cannot be seen as personal defeat for Lindy.  People  just get bruised in fights in a phone booth. 

Kim did not win her school board race, but she should be very proud of her performance in a difficult field.  She campaigned hard and had a surprisingly strong showing.  Congratulations to Joan on being top vote getter for school board, and to Charlotte who also ran a good parallel camapign with the CBC-endorsement. 

Okay.  My two cents is up for now. 

Falls Church Elects Lawrence Webb As The State's First Openly Gay African American Elected Official

Falls Church City voters have elected Lawrence Webb as the first openly gay African-American elected official in the state's history.  More from Victory Fund.  Lawrence was elected Tuesday to the Falls Church City Council as the third highest vote getter in a hotly contested field of seven canidates. 

A native of southern Virginia, Lawrence is a graduate of Shenandoah University where he was the first African-American student government president.  After gradutaion, he worked for Senator Chuck Robb (D-VA) leading African American voter registration and education drives among Virginia universities and colleges in rural counties across Virginia. 

Lawrence is a respected advocate for creating and preserving opportunities for higher education in Virgina's African-American communities.  He is a leader in the James Farmer Scholars Program, which provides information seminars, academic guidance, and practical support to African American students interested in attending college.  Lawrence was appointed by Virginia Governor Mark Warner (D-VA) to serve on the statewide Department of Education Corrections Board. 

I have had the privelege of knowing and working with Lawrence through his work as a precinct capatin and election volunteer in Arlington and Falls Church.  Lawrence was the recipient of the 2007 Eighth Congressional District Grassroots Award.

Congratulations to Lawrence on a well run campaign and a well deserved election.

Mayor Gardner Re-Elected Along With Newcomers Webb & Baroukh. Deathstar Charter Change Defeated.

Falls Church City voters elected four of six Citizens for a Better City-endorsed candidates for local office and again rejected a proposed charter change which would have severely restricted the city council's ability to approve economic development initiatives. 

Unofficial election results are available at the VA SBE site.

In the most hotly contested local election in recent memory, the City voters re-elected Mayor Robin Gardner (CBC-endorsed) to the City Council and elected two first time office seekers - Nader Baroukh and Lawrence Webb (CBC-endorsed).  Gardner, who was elected to her third term on council, was again the top vote getter, followed by Baroukh, and the Webb.  Vice Mayor and two term council member Lindy Hockenberry came in a close fourth place  - missing re-election by about forty votes.  Approximately fifty absentee ballots remain to be counted.  Ed Hillegass, Margaret Housen, and Patrice Lepczyk were never in contention. 

On School Board, CBC-endorsed incumbent Joan Wodiska and new comer Charlotte Hyland were top vote getters, followed by Kieran Sharpe for the the third School Board slot.  Kieran Sharpe, who had run as a CBC-endorsed candidate in past elections and was a top vote getter, ran as an independent and did not do as well.  The CBC-endorsed candidate Kim Maller, whose husband Dan Maller is on City Council, came in a close fourth.   

The Deathstar charter change referendum was defeated 57% to 43% in unofficial results. 

There are a lot of angles to the results, and I will have some commentary to follow.  Turnout was very low - approximately 24 percent turnout in an City where about 80 percent of voters are expected to turnout in the November general elections. 

Late Afternoon Update On Falls Church City Vote

Falls Church City, 5:30 pm.:  Just a quick update and some impressions on the local election.  Results will start coming in about 7:30 this evening ... so this is anecdotal.  I can also talk a little more freely at this point about some things.

The CBC mood at the polls has been tense.  The race will be very close even by local standards.  It's a beautiful day.  The early voters were older and more conservative (they usually vote late or stay home).  The pull from the local Republican committee seems to be having some impact ... there were some Republicans who usually will not vote in local elections unless they know there is a partisan issue - those folks were out.

This election looks a lot like the May 2002 local election, with a few key differences. See VA SBE May 2002. 

One of the differences is the turnout will be lower than 2004, 2002, or 2000.  Ward I is a key ward this year for the conservative challengers ... and turnout is low there (although I have to say I did not enjoy working that ward today) .  This I think favors the CBC because it shows that none of the conservative independents have the draw of their better known mentors (Snyder Mabry).  There were also no overt bullet ballot instructions ... so the conservative are likely casting three votes, probably not all for their folks. 

Another difference is there are three rather than four seats available.  So this tightens the race for everyone with seven candidates. 

Families with kids in schools are showing up late.  Turnout from this group is critical to the CBC slate.  I waited until after 3:30 and finally began to see moms with kids after the bus drop off ... word from the wards is the family vote is coming in - just late. 

The affordable housing and VOTE NO poll groups have not been out as far as I can see.  This will be an issue if seats (or the charter change vote) are lost. 

Also, the CBC focused on an absentee ballot initiative this year.  That effort could be very important and help to push a third candidate over the top because the vote spread will be very narrow (high 17%, median 14%, low 11%) ... which translates into something ridiculous like 10 to 15 votes in each ward being the difference between high and low. 

This fight in a phone booth is why I just hate local elections. 

The referendum will be closer than it should be, but will still lose (prediction NO prevails 60 to 40). 

Falls Church City VOTE TODAY

Re-elect Robin Gardner, Lindy Hockenberry, and elect Lawrence Webb. 

Sharon Schoeller Responds To Latest Deathstar Attack On City Schools

The Deathstar charter change candidates Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen did another lit drop attack on the quality of of our public schools over the weekend. Frequent readers know their "no more children" message has always been a particular pet peeve of mine. I think it's just an awful message. So, apparently, does super-school advocate Sharon Scholler. Sharon wrote a scathing reply to the hit piece. Reproduced below (sorry for the length but it's all good):

May 3, 2008 Dear Friends and Neighbors, I just received a flyer, entitled “The Referendum…A Needed Tool for Change” with reasons to vote “Yes” on the referendum, which uses the future of the schools as a reason to do so. I no longer have children in the school system, so lost development in the City will not directly affect my children. I am writing this letter on behalf of all of you who still have children in the school system. I want your children to have the quality of education that mine have had and, to ensure this, I believe that you should vote “No” on the referendum question. Even if you do not have children in the schools, our home values are bolstered by our high quality schools. Here are some facts that counter only some of the misinformation in the flyer: While surrounding jurisdictions are making major cuts to their school systems or raising taxes because of falling residential real estate values, our City has just decreased your taxes, while fully funding the School Board’s request. The Council could do this because tax revenue from the new mixed-developments replaced income lost from the fall in residential values. Net revenues from approved mixed-use developments will add close to $5.5 million a year to the City’s coffers by 2013. These are revenues after the projected costs of additional services and students are deducted. When our City was planning the new middle school and the addition to Mt. Daniel, it was clear, even at that point, that the City would need to fund additional renovations/construction in the future. A “place holder” has been in the Capital Improvements budget for years and a schools’ facilities study is underway to determine what that construction should be. It has nothing to do with new students from mixed-use development. In fact, as Councilman Snyder said at the City Council meeting to approve the budget, mixed-use developers contribute to construction costs generated by new students projected for their buildings. There are one-third fewer children residing at the Byron, the Read Building and the Broadway than projected. A retired Arlington County planning expert at an Economic Development Forum on the possible impacts of the referendum change also noted that the mixed-use developments in Arlington did not bring in huge numbers of school children. The current School Board members all have stated in a letter to The Falls Church News Press (FCNP) in February that the school system can handle the growth in students from these developments. I believe the School Board members on this; they have been studying the issue for years. I will add a few words about development. For decades our City tried to attract commercial development. We could not. Experts at an April 23rd Economic Development Authority (EDA) Forum on the possible impacts of the charter change stated that Falls Church cannot compete with Arlington or Tysons Corner for large commercial development. We also do not have the critical mass of residents at the current time to attract regional retail. Based on our history and the current market, we will not attract this type of development. Council candidates who promise this without understanding the market are making false promises without the knowledge to back them up. Experts at the EDA Forum recommended that we do a visioning exercise and develop plans for particular parts and corridors of the City. All agreed that putting a mandate in the Charter is an extreme move that will stifle development. Also, please read the May 1st FCNP for coverage on this issue. When so many former mayors, the EDA chair and citizens who have been involved in the City for a long time and have worked hard to get it where it is now are against the referendum, please ask yourself why. The articles and many letters on this subject explain why. I think it is telling that no other jurisdiction has such a mandate in its charter and the proponents of the charter change have not given any examples of where else this has been done and how it has worked. I believe that making a radical change like this to our charter is dangerous. There are zoning codes and visioning exercises that can do this far better without trapping us into a certain formula for each development. The much-touted Streetworks project was 60% residential and could not be built under this formula. We could not get development like Shirlington (63% residential). The Read Building, cited as an example of what we want in the City by referendum proponents, is 60% residential. The strict formula in the referendum could force us to say “No” to developments that our citizens want. No one, including current City Council members, envisions a Falls Church City with one mixed-use development after another along Broad or Washington Streets. We will still have our small businesses and restaurants, our Cherry Hill Park and Farm House, the Memorial Day Parade and all the “village” aspects we love about our City. Mixed-use development adds to that a place where our “empty nesters” can sell their houses and stay in the City, where young couples and singles can live close to amenities and where there can be a critical mass of shops and restaurants. It has replaced blighted lots with new, high quality buildings and retail. Will it take some time to complete filling the retail spaces? Yes, but we have a good start and residents in the area and from around town enjoy the new amenities the mixed-use in the center of town has brought. For all of these reasons, I ask you to consider voting “No” to the charter change referendum and to vote for three Council candidates, Mayor Robin Gardner, Vice-Mayor Lindy Hockenberry and Lawrence Webb, who oppose it. Sincerely, Sharon Schoeller (Former Chair, Special Education Advisory Committee, President, Elementary/Middle School PTAs and HS PTSA, PTA/PTSA Budget Watcher, Co-Chair, All Night Grad Celebration)

BREAKING: Local Republican Committee Working For Deathstar

BREAKING:   The Falls Church City Republican Committee is using Republican Party resources to support the controversial Deathstar charter change.  A member of the Republican committee called Republican member lists, identified themselves as calling on behalf of the local committee, and asked its supporter to participate in literature drops of pro-charter change literature.  According to sources close to the effort, the strategy is to increase Republican turnout on the charter change in order to GOTV for council candidates Nader Baroukh and Ed Hillegass.  Election observers have noted that yard signs for Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen have been appearing in predominantly self-identified Republican yards and that late money reported to those candidates has come from Republican donors.

Team Dave Snyder, a Republican, is the only politically partisan member of the Falls Church City Council.  While a member of City Council, Team Dave Snyder was the Republican nominee for the Virginia Assembly and ran against Jim Scott (D) (Snyder lost almost 4 to 1).  Team Dave Snyder has been an outspoken advocate for the controversial charter change and has actively supported the council campaigns of Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen.  Ed Hillegass has been an active member of the local Republican Committee for several years. 

The overt efforts of the local Republican Committee present a Hatch Act issue particularly for Nader Baroukh, who is a federal employee subject to strict prohibitions on partisan political activity.  The Falls Church City Charter establishes the City as a non-partisan political jurisdiction, and local committees have traditionally been careful to avoid direct involvement in local nonpartisan campaigns. 

Hillegass & Housen Lit Drop St. James With Last Minute Attack Flyer

BREAKING:  The "independent" City Council candidates Ed Hillegass and Margaret Housen did a lit drop of cars during Sunday mass at St. James Church here in the City asking parishioners to vote against Mayor Robin Gardner and Vice Mayor Lindy Hockenberry.  Parishioners came out Sunday to find an attack flyer stuck under their windshields blaming Mayor Gardner and Vice Mayor Hockenberry for the current property owner wanting to put an office building and hotel on sites close to the St. James property.  Hillegass and Housen are members of St. James Church and they are running against the mayor and vice mayor.  Sam Mabry, who is the campaign sponsor of Hillegass and Housen, is also a member of St. James.   

Robin and Lindy have been working pro-actively with the historic church community to answer questions and be of service to parishioners seeking information about city approval processes.  They have echoed numerous parishioners of St. James who have requested that the development issues not be used as a polarizing political issues in light of the fact that the City Council has not yet had a chance to hold a public hearings on the development.  The Planning Commission will have its first public meeting on the topic on Monday night.  The Washington Post is expected to publish a story on the St, James development in Monday's edition. 

Opposing The Campaign Of Baroukh, Hillegass & Housen

On Tuesday, Falls Church City voters will go to the polls to elect three School Board Members, three Members of City Council, and vote on a controversial proposed charter change designed to restrict the ability of our City to decide for itself what economic development projects to approve. 

The purpose of this post is to provide readers with specific reasons for not supporting the independent conservative city council campaigns of Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen.  A post endorsing city council candidates will follow.

All candidates who run for local office deserve respect for their willingness to step forward and participate.  Running for local office in a small community is an intensely personal, time consuming, and often expensive, undertaking.

That being said, I write to oppose the city council campaigns of Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen.   As a group, these three candidates were recruited and have run together as affiliated independent conservative candidates seeking to overthrow the current local government and make dramatic reversals in core economic and educational policies of the City. 

The campaigns of Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen are defined by their outspoken support for the controversial and seriously flawed charter change referendum being sponsored (again) by discredited conservatives in our community.  Although some have tried to distance themselves from the unpopular charter change in the last several days, Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen have used the charter change issue as a central plank in their campaigns and have relied on the sponsors of the charter change to run and manage their campaigns for council.  The should all be held accountable for their support of this radical proposal.

The collective campaigns of Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen are also defined by a startling lack of prior participation in the City.  Two of the three candidate have lived in Falls Church for less than two years and have never even voted in a local election.  None of the the three candidates has ever served on a City board or commission, and none has participated in critical school or city budget proceedings.  Lack of experience is not by itself disqualifying, but coupled with a campaign for radical changes in core economic and education policies, their lack of experience itself should disqualifiy them from consideration.

Nader Baroukh

I oppose Nader Baroukh primarily because of his opposition to the City Center South initiative, his support for the proposed charter change, and because of his promise to micromanage changes to our public school system.   Nader Baroukh  has repeatedly, and inaccurately, characterized our excellent public school system as declining in academic standards and overcrowded.  Nader Baroukh has said he would find it "very difficult" to fund new education facilities and staff for a school system he views as mismanaged.

Nader Baroukh lack of public positions on affordable housing and environmental issues is also troubling.  Nader Baroukh entered the campaign as a NIMBY voice opposing the City Center South initiative.  During the course of his campaign, Nader Baroukh has refused, or been unable, to define his positions on affordable housing or environmental issues.  His written answers to direct LOWV-VPIS questions on these topics were limited to simple recitations of existing programs ("...contribute to programs like the Neighborhood Tree Program ...").  The absence of any support or new ideas on affordable housing or environmental issues is troublesome and in stark contrast to more qualified candidates.   

Of concern to me also is Nader Baroukh's plan to relocate the Falls Church City center to the westend of the City.  Under the plan Nader Baroukh has articulated, he adopts the discarded 1997 MUR model of Dave Snyder and Sam Mabry which would locate considerable commercial and downtown development at the westend of Falls Church where the new middle school and high school are now located.  While this might have been the best development plan proposed by Dave Snyder and Sam Mabry in 1997, given developments in the last decade the plan is outdated and proffering it now shows a remarkable lack of insight into what has happened in the City during the last ten years or so.  The experience of the City with the westend MURS has matured because of real experience with the practicalities of a land swap with Fairfax County.  Nader Baroukh has also not addressed what exactly would happen to the school population in the area if it suddenly became the new location for a city center project.  Nader Baroukh has also not addressed the considerable implications of the City abandoning its existing city center plan, voiding its current agreement with Atlantic Realty, and re-shifting the walkable traffic already invested in by mixed use developments near the Broad-Washington corridors.

Lastly, Nader Baroukh has closely associated himself with the discredited conservative politics of Sam Mabry and Team Dave Snyder.  As an outspoken progressive in Falls Church I note our local Republicans have adopted the campaigns of Nader Baroukh, Ed Hillegass, and Margaret Housen.  The willingness of Sam Mabry and