Archive for June, 2006

Don’t Worry, Be Ellen

Friday, June 30th, 2006

This gets to the heart of what we’ve been talking about for three years. From Richmond.com:

System Failure
Caine O’Rear

City of Richmond CFO Harry Black wants city employees to be held accountable for their performance.

Mayor L. Douglas Wilder came into office promising to clean up the “cesspool of corruption and inefficiency” that he called City Hall.

But one of the mayor’s appointees, Chief Financial Officer Harry E. Black, says he doesn’t have the tools to fulfill the mayor’s vision.

A few weeks ago, Black, who began working for the city in November 2005, encountered a problem that he believes is indicative of the culture at City Hall. One of the three departments that Black oversees (finance, budget and strategic planning and procurement) had issues with payroll on payday, which happens to fall on Friday. Rather than working after regular business hours to solve the problem so that the employees would receive their checks, Black said the department merely shrugged its shoulders, saying, “It can wait until Monday.”

Black was thunderstruck. He then told the employees to remain at work until the problem was solved, which it eventually was. But Black said these types of episodes occur frequently.

During Richmond City Council’s informal session on June 26, a visibly frustrated Black urged the council to pass an ordinance patroned by the mayor that would designate employees within the finance, budget and strategic planning and procurement as “unclassified.” The ordinance also applies to the office of minority development.

Wait for it…

Councilman Ellen F. Robertson (6th) took issue with Black’s approach and called his remarks “inappropriate.” She later asked him why he wanted to change the culture at City Hall.

Why indeed?

Ms. Robertson’s history of looking into waste and city corruption is well established. This is the same city councilwoman who, after Save Richmond contacted her with dozens of citizen comments asking for basic public oversight of the proposed arts center back in Jan. 2005, snapped off this retort from her Blackberry:

As councilwoman for this district which this project is located, I find your comments over bearing and very troubling. As a planners, I agree Richmond downtown redevelopment has been done too many times unsuccessfully. In an orderly, productively, solution driven, constructive way, how may I invite you and all stakeholders to a meaningful discussion.

We invited her to expound upon her notion of a public discussion on the matter, but that was the last we heard of Ms. Robertson. The rest is history.

Doin’ a heckuva job, Ellie… heckuva job. (Snoopy at River City Rapids gives his typically insightful take on the situation here).

The Kettle Is Black, says Black Pot

Thursday, June 29th, 2006

Sometimes the most sensible ideas come from the most unlikely places:

Public Partnering
Richmond Times-Dispatch
Jun 29, 2006

Since the late 1990s state government leaders have encouraged public-private partnerships. These arrangements can serve to increase efficiency and lower taxpayer costs. Unfortunately, they also can be exploited to thwart open-government laws.

In the past officials have claimed these partnerships are not within the reach of open-government laws because of their private component. They invert the logic. Because government agencies participate in these projects, they must contain a mechanism for public scrutiny.

A work group formed during the 2006 General Assembly to craft a law that maximizes the taxpayers’ right to monitor the activities of public-private partnership has offered a compromise. Its suggested guidelines would make public-private partnership proposals and agreements available to the public for inspection, and would allow for public hearings on the merits of a negotiated deal.

For all the good that can derive from a public-private partnership, the General Assembly should not allow agencies to use these schemes as black boxes to hide selected information from the citizenry. Even when a government agency works with a private partner to serve the Commonwealth, voters have a right to oversee the work carried out in their name.

This compromise presents a significant and needed change. The General Assembly should treat it as such when it receives the plan during its session next year.

Perhaps the Times-Dispatch editorial page would like to give readers a specific example or two of the kind of public-private partnership they mean when they write of certain entities “hiding selected information from the citizenry” and the need for more public input.

Anyone we know?

Whose Report is This Anyway?

Tuesday, June 27th, 2006

Well, the link to the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation website is back up. And, gee, things are just a wee bit different. Quite tellingly so.

Somehow a “VAPAF Report to the City” has magically morphed into a “Committee Appointed By The Mayor’s Report to the City.”

Just like that.

Two days ago, we gave our daily newspaper a PDF screen capture of the weblink’s past incarnation, along with a link to this latest “corrected” version. We thought the paper would be interested in this information because certain higher-ups seemed a little upset that we dared to criticize the paper’s recent (non-)coverage of the Foundation and the current state of the Hole in the Ground..

So, essentially, we gave the newspaper a scoop to see if it was upset enough to actually start covering this.

Guess not.

We also sent the screen capture and the revised link to the fine members of our city council. So if any of their constituents were to contact them about the latest shell game currently being played with our tax dollars, I daresay that they would have the information right at their fingertips to fully respond. Give it a try!

The Hits Just Keep On Coming

Sunday, June 25th, 2006

From the “We Rest Our Case” files:

Today we are treated to a sensationalist article detailing state-funded cultural “pork” on the front page of the Richmond Times-Dispatch — with only a passing mention of the $4.5 million state payoff to the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation (and no mention of the project in the sidebar, perhaps because the $4.5 million figure is more than twice as much as any other listed state cultural allotment).

All of this while an unquestioning (and truly embarrassing) puff piece on the Foundation’s Opus group sits in the “Arts” section.

Hmmmm…..

The last time we heard from Opus, they were offering “young professionals” free drinks in exchange for writing letters to the state senate on behalf of the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation. Now that’s serious arts patronage. You’d think the writer of this story would want to mention this little fact, especially when she is willing to jot down paragraphs like this:

Crocker and Fisher [of Opus] want to make sure potential Opus members realize that celebrating the performing arts, while social on one level, isn’t just another happy hour.

OK, so if you are keeping score at home:

The Times-Dispatch would have you believe that arts organizations across the commonwealth who receive small bundles of badly-needed operating funds should be designated as purveyors of “pork” (even as it acknowledges that Virginia gives less to its artists than almost any other state) — while the corporate forces behind a notorious, failed cultural construction project that has already wasted millions are deserving of more tax dollars… and no scrutiny.

Nothing on this. (btw: the link has been missing since Save Richmond first reported on it)

Or this.

Or (especially) this.

Yeah, we need to know stuff all right. And the truth would be nice.

Smell It & Breathe It

Saturday, June 24th, 2006

Sometimes those pesky bloggers actually have their finger on the pulse of something:

“When Dr. Richard Florida spoke in January [2003] about creating a environment in the city where new ideas can ‘plug in easily,’ he wasn’t talking about a place that allowed public/private partnerships to largely determine public policy. We ask that the council institute some form of legislative accountability for past downtown failures before considering any other large taxpayer-funded public/private ventures such as a Downtown Performing Arts Complex.

The proliferation of largely unaccountable taxpayer-funded consortiums, such as Richmond Renaissance, the Broad Street Community Development Authority and (now) the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation, ensures that real city planning power in Richmond will continue to remain in the hands of a select few. Yes, Broad Street is a mess. But how galling that the current vision of a future downtown consists of little more than parking garages and huge artificial projects, situated in limbo.

As we contemplate the demolition of 6th Street Marketplace, let’s remember that many of the same people who promoted that doomed project to great taxpayer expense are now promoting this new vision of downtown Richmond as a tourist destination and arts corridor.

We ask for more pubic accountability of public/private partnerships such as Richmond Renaissance and the Broad Street CDA. We ask the city to begin to hold public/private partnerships accountable for the tax money they request from all Richmonders. If these consortiums consistently fail to live up to their own estimates for projected growth from large taxpayer-funded projects they spearhead, these entities should not continue to receive budgetary funds or de-facto governing power from the city of Richmond. — Save Richmond’s “Open Letter to Richmond City Council,”May 2003

Three years later:

City’s Renaissance Done
by Scott Bass

As usual, Mayor L. Douglas Wilder stole the show. But at The Jefferson Hotel last week, a watershed event came and went with little fanfare.

Richmond Renaissance will remain as a legal entity after its merger with citycelebrations, the River District Alliance and Richmond Riverfront Corp. becomes official July 1. At Wilder’s urging, the newly merged group will draw fewer city funds and operate with a combined full-time staff of 10, instead of the previous 15. Membership of the new board will continue to “reflect the racial and ethnic makeup of the City of Richmond’s community,” the new bylaws dictate, as it has in the past.

More importantly, perhaps, the merger marks a dramatic change in how the city’s business elite influence city government, namely in the arena of economic development. All of the major downtown projects of the past 25 years — starting with 6th Street Marketplace — were hatched by Renaissance members.

The list includes the Greater Richmond Convention Center, the Canal Walk, and the now-infamous Performing Arts Center project, which drew the mayor’s ire shortly after he took office last year. At last week’s meeting, the mayor introduced details for his “City of the Future” plan. He trumpeted his “change is here” message, which went over coolly considering he spent most of last year castigating Renaissance members.

“It’s a subliminal wafting across the air,” he said. “You need to smell it and breathe it. It’s there.”

No doubt they smelled it. Since inception, the nonprofit has acted as the city’s de- facto economic development office. Their projects, with the backing of Richmond’s most influential business leaders, were often rubber-stamped by City Hall before Wilder came along. (To date, however, none has produced its intended result.)

At the end of last week’s meeting, John W. Bates III, a Renaissance member and partner at McGuireWoods, told the group that its new downtown advocacy committee, “will help support economic development projects instead of engaging economic development projects” as its predecessors did.

He also mentioned the new board members, which include a list of up-and-comers such as Tim Davey, the Timmons architect who helped lead the push for a ballpark in Shockoe Bottom, and Sheila Hill-Christian, the new Virginia Lottery executive director who most recently served as director of the city’s housing authority.

But they won’t be hatching up new schemes to save the city. — Style Weekly, June 21, 2006

Paging Michael Shear

Friday, June 23rd, 2006

When Save Richmond maintains that the mayor’s new performing arts committee — filled with political cronies and Virginia Performing Arts Foundation members — is nothing more than a front for the Foundation (and therefore a losing proposition for Richmond), we are generally laughed at or ignored by professional “journalists” who should be watching and covering this entire boondoggle… but aren’t.

But how about when the Foundation comes right out and publicly admits that the performing arts committee, and its report, is a sham? [Check out the top right corner]

Again, it’s only millions in city and state tax dollars being played with here. Not to mention the future of Richmond’s performing arts venues. And maybe even its soul.

Hall of Shame Pt. 1

Saturday, June 17th, 2006

In honor of the city taking the performing arts committee report off of its website, we take a look back at the incredible outreach surrounding the $112 million music hall plan that the handpicked committee still won’t close the door on:

“I’ve never been approached by management or members of the artistic advisory committee about my opinion regarding artistic or acoustic issues. I’ve played in both Avery Fisher and Carnegie Halls, before and after their renovations, but I’ve never been able to talk to the acoustician or any of the architects about the hall they’re building here [in Richmond]. I’ve only been asked about a storage room and a practice room.

Management presents information about the hall occasionally. I’ve never been encouraged to ask questions or present my ideas and concerns. And based on what I’ve been ‘told’ so far, I have some significant concerns about being able to perform large works or any pieces that feature a wide variety of percussion instruments. Right now, it seems to be far too small.” — Cliff Hardison, principal percussionist for the Richmond Symphony Orchestra, June 18 2004

Update 6-23: Now you see it, now you don’t. Interestingly, after a few days of broken linkage, the Performing Arts Committee report is now back up. Make yourself a strong drink and give it a read. You’ll laugh, you’ll cry….

I Love a Brain Teaser

Friday, June 16th, 2006

And this one is really, really hard.

November Songs

Wednesday, June 14th, 2006

This is the best news I’ve heard in quite a while [emphasis mine], from the Richmond Times-Dispatch:

…eight hopefuls are seeking the 5th District School Board seat and five seeking to succeed council President G. Manoli Loupassi as the 1st District’s council representative — including Paul Goldman, Mayor L. Douglas Wilder’s former aide.

What you don’t get in today’s buried-on-B7 T-D news story are details about the former mayoral adviser’s unusual but very grass-roots rule (VERY unusual for the “Who Runs Richmond”-controlled 1st District) of not accepting individual campaign donations of over $99. One wonders: Will the other city council candidates in that district pledge same?

Also good news: Virginia Democrats — OK , a small number of Virginia Democratic primary voters — actually thinking with their brains for once:

Former Republican James H. Webb Jr. handily won a Democratic U.S. Senate primary yesterday, setting up a fall contest with Sen. George Allen that will draw national attention.

Webb defeated Harris N. Miller by about 8 percentage points. The Associated Press declared Webb the winner 85 minutes after the polls closed.

Five years of embarrassing George Allen representation can indeed make people pragmatic and teach them to focus harder on results. Harris Miller might be a great guy and have fine ideas, but if you thought that a bespectacled, curly-headed corporate lobbyist from Northern Virginia was going to seriously compete against Allen’s fraudulent (but effective - go figure) conservative schtick in November, you must not be from Virginia — the home of two-faced conservative schtick.

As we have shown on this site, Virginia’s mainstream press doesn’t want to probe George Allen on any of the current controversies he and his staff are embroiled in. But people of both parties (especially those who cry foul about a “liberal media”) should get real: Does anyone seriously think that if Tim Kaine or Mark Warner appointees and campaign higher-ups had failed to repudiate hate speech against the 9/11 widows that it wouldn’t be front page news in certain newspapers, for several days in a row??

Candidate Webb may indeed get beat in November but it won’t be in a cakewalk. And maybe having a more conservative Dem in the race will spur Virginia’s sleeping state reporters to actually get our cowboy boot-wearing senator on the record about some things, and to actually explain his godawful voting record. Who knows? George Allen might just find his nice soft California teeth shoved down his whiny throat come election day. To paraphrase Brian Wilson, wouldn’t it be nice?

Missed Appointments

Monday, June 12th, 2006

Michael Paul Williams hits the bullseye in his Times-Dispatch column today, pointing out some really disturbing contradictions in the mayor’s views on elected vs. appointed school boards:

Well, I guess democracy has its limits.

Mayor L. Douglas Wilder, in his latest power grab, wants the public to decide in a referendum whether the Richmond School Board should be elected or appointed.

Because there has been no clamoring for a return to appointed school boards, we can only assume Wilder supports the idea. After all, his schools advisory committee floated it.

Wasn’t it all about the people having their say when Wilder pushed the elected-mayor drive that would land him in City Hall?

Virginia, in 1992, became the last state in the country to allow school board members to be elected. Since then, 111 of 134 school boards in the state have gone the electoral route. Richmond did so in 1994.

Anyone nostalgic for appointed panels must have forgotten about the politicized Richmond school boards of the 1980s.

You won’t find too many defenders of our current school administration, but anyone who believes that the mayor should appoint school board members hasn’t been paying attention to his recent track record.

As we have documented here at Save Richmond, the mayor’s recent appointments and hiring decisions have been — to be blunt — completely non-sensical and based on qualifications that would seem to be non-existent or disturbingly political. For example: Richmond is currently at the mercy of a performing arts committee made up of Virginia Performing Arts Foundation members and loyalists who have already wasted millions in public money, and wish to be given more… a mayoral spokesman who won’t call reporters back and waits weeks to get basic information to average citizens… and a secretive school advisory committee that would seem to be nothing more than a group of handpicked hacks working for the mayor, not the people.

Now, thanks to the always-wonderful Church Hill News, we find out that the first person that Freed G. Etienne — the city’s first deputy chief in charge of housing, land use and community development — will be investigating is himself. The new “housing boss to spearhead efforts in community development” is also an absentee property owner who has let at least one of his houses in Church Hill sit untended for years.

If this is the kind of “expertise” that Wilder appointees bring to their positions of authority and responsibility — how detailed was Mr. Etienne’s background check, do you think? — I believe we should pass on a Wilder-appointed school board for now. We can elect our own howling disgraces, thanks.

Concerning the mayor’s school advisory committee, and their recommendation for an “appointed school board,” even Paul Goldman is starting to have serious doubts about what is really going on:

“The failure of the Mayor’s Committee to think through their proposal raises legitimate questions in the minds of the people as to what they are really doing,” the mayor’s former adviser says in an e-mail detailing the myriad of legal concerns surrounding the recommendation. “Whenever you fail to be fair in this kind of legal process, it has to make a reasonable person wonder. Clearly, more thought has been given to transferring the power - taking it away from the people and giving it to the politicians - than has been given to [the plan's fairness and legality].”

In other words, Goldman says pointedly, echoing Michael Paul Williams, “the committee failed to do their homework.”

I Know There’s An Answer

Sunday, June 11th, 2006

From the “Hard to Believe” files:

Senator George Allen’s campaign treasurer doesn’t think that Ann Coulter deserves to be condemned or censured for her dispicable remarks about the 9/11 widows.

Allen’s chief money-handler joins a list of slime-trailing GOP insiders and Bush apologists who are now out publicly defending Coulter and her statements.

It’s OK if you didn’t know all of this. You probably also didn’t know that George Allen’s treasurer, Mary Matalin, is the same insider-traitor who betrayed an undercover C.I.A. agent and has been one of the most prominent defenders of the indicted Lewis “Scooter” Libby. Gee, if we had actual, honest-to-goodness reporters covering state politics in Virginia, perhaps citizens could find out what the senator himself thinks about all this… and why he has yet to fire his campaign treasurer or even publicly denounce her for, oh, take your pick.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say that it might just be relevant to know whether or not Virginia’s junior senator believes that the women who lost husbands and children in the World Trade Center attacks are “harpies” who are “enjoying” the publicity surrounding their loved ones’ deaths; or even whether he thinks it is OK to reveal the names of uncover government agents. I would argue that his reaction to Coulter’s partisan hate-spew is at least as important as the juvenile content found in current Democratic campaign literature —the latter is front page worthy stuff for some.

Certainly George Allen supporters should be searching their souls and asking serious questions about his leadership abilities if this is the kind of person included on his “team.” [Thanks to the Fairfax Democrats for bringing this to everyone's attention - incidentially, are you one of those people who wonder why partisan blogs are often more respected as news sources than "impartial" daily newspapers? Hello???]

Maybe all those intrepid state reporters who are diligently and doggedly asking Tim Kaine pertinent and timely questions about his recent budgetary decisions would like to try getting a statement, or a clarification, from Allen on the swell work his treasurer is doing.

I know, I know. I was just trying to make you laugh.

Assault and Pepper (Flashback Edition)

Thursday, June 8th, 2006

Richmond’s war on young people?

Federal suit filed against police, city
17 say force used in ‘04 to break up party violated their rights

Seventeen people still smarting from the pepper spray Richmond police used on them two years ago at a party are suing the city and officers who did it.

The federal lawsuit names Lt. Leonard Brightwell, the ranking police officer at what turned into a small riot the night of May 30, 2004. Two officers identified only as “John Doe” No. 1 and No. 2 are named defendants along with the city of Richmond.

The suit claims the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights were violated by the use of excessive force and seeks damages to be determined at trial….

The 2004 party featured a punk-rock cover band and was given in a small second-floor apartment in a building at Second and Main streets. Many of the 100 or so people there were students…

Partygoers at the time told The Times-Dispatch the police who came into the apartment got the band to stop playing, which brought on some booing and perhaps comments to police from the crowd.

Next, the pepper spray was released without warning, says the lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges it was Brightwell who set off the spray from a large aerosol canister known as a fogger.

All 17 plaintiffs were inside the apartment when the fogger was used, the lawsuit says.

Witnesses told The Times-Dispatch the narrow stairway was immediately clogged with panicked people trying to get out of the apartment.

Others, with no place to go, tried to open the apartment windows to let in some fresh air. But some of the windows were stuck shut, so partygoers broke them. One witness said some people jumped from the windows.

Both witnesses and police told the newspaper at the time that some people inside the apartment threw bottles out the windows, seemingly at police.

The lawsuit alleges that John Doe No. 1, from the street, squirted pepper spray into the faces of three of the plaintiffs as they leaned out of the windows, trying to avoid breathing the pepper spray inside the apartment.

What war on young people?