Why does it matter, why should we care about these natural spaces? Because it is our responsibility to ensure our children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren will have the benefits of our foresight. There aren’t any do-overs when it come to preserving these unique special areas. Once you pave over them they are gone,gone,gone.
You can’t buy a wetland or a mature forest by shopping on line. If we want to preserve the Rural Crescent, we must also in turn be fair to landowners. The state offers huge benefits to those who voluntarily conserve their land. Find out more! Don’t miss this great event sponsored by the Prince William Conservation Alliance.
WHEN:
Monday, May 17 – Doors open at 7:00 pm; program 7:30 to 9:00 pm
WHERE:McCoart Government Center, Board Chambers
The speakers will be Congressman Connelly, Supervisor May, Robert Davenport, Bob Lee, and Sara Richardson.
Nature shouldn’t be political. Unfortunately, it isn’t exempt. Look at the struggle the national parks have undergone. Perhaps the worst trouble has been at the Grand Tetons or Yosemite or Crazy Horse Memorial or Shenandoah when all the hill people where moved out in the 1920’s.
Too bad one of our supervisors has been attacked for his environmental interests. A pox on the house of velvet. They and their blogmeister need to grow up and start discussing the issues rather always trying to put some miscreant political spin on a non-story. Hasn’t one of them had their ass handed to them enough lately?
Unfortunately, the Rural Crescent no longer exists thanks to Corey Stewart, who was first elected Chair on a platform of conservation and slow growth. This is because of the Comprehensive Plan update that Corey recently railroaded through the BOCS.
There were three versions of the Comp Plan update. The first was a complete mess devised by the Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC). It went through public hearings and some positive changes were made to it. However, the LUAC version was so bad that the “communists” on the Planning Commission, including Gary Friedman, Kim Hosen and Martha Hendley, developed a citizen/taxpayer-friendly version that protected the Rural Crescent, included conservation, provided for healthy commercial development and put the brakes on out-of-control residential development.
Since the LUAC version was going nowhere and the developers were unhappy, Corey had the Planning Office (Steve Griffin and Ray Utz) write a third version. The PWC Planning Office is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the developers. Griffin told one of the planners who had some integrity (before he fired her) that Mike Lubeley is his best friend and demanded that projects be expedited for Lubeley’s clients. Lubeley is the leading attorney in PWC representing developers. I would bet big money that Lubeley was involved up to his neck in writing the Planning Office version with Griffin and Utz.
The Planning Office version of the Comp Plan erases the boundaries that once demarcated the “rural” and “development” areas. It eliminates phasing and allows developers building mixed-use projects to construct residential first and commercial whenever (if ever) they want. It also weakens the proffer system. It was written by, and for the benefit of, developers.
The Planning Office version of the Comp Plan update was far worse than even the LUAC version from a citizen/taxpayer perspective. From the perspective of developers who want to run roughshod in PWC, it’s their dream come true. They have Corey to thank for ramming it through.
Taxpayers will also suffer from this Comp Plan update as the County continues to be inundated with residential development that does not pay in taxes for the services it consumes. Thanks, Corey, for the skyrocketing property tax bills coming our way in the near future so you can make your developer pals happy and get their money to run for Lt. Governor, or whatever.
I’ve posted this link before but it’s worth seeing again:
http://www.vpap.org/candidates/profile/money_in_industry1/61061?start_year=2008&end_year=2010&lookup_type=year&filing_period=all
This VPAP pages show the money Corey has taken from developers. Note also that some of the other categories include developer money also, such as attorneys representing them.
Three groups have official responsibilities for protecting the interests of PWC citizens and taxpayers. Two, the BOCS under Corey and the Planning Office under Griffin and Utz, have sold out to the developers. The Planning Commission under Friedman is the only one of the three making any effort to represent us rather than the development industry.
As a former Corey supporter myself, I’m asking everyone else who backed him to look at what’s he has been doing rather than listen to what he says.
No problem here Need to Know, Corey has just about back stabbed everyone who once supported him. I can’t imagine anyone trusting his word on anything, he is simply duplicitous on almost every issue. He serves his own needs and not that of the community.
@Elena
One of Corey’s biggest issues is keeping taxes down. To his credit, he has more-or-less done that so far, even though the tax rate he supported this year does increase the average property tax bill somewhat. The problem is that most people don’t look beyond what is happening now, and don’t consider the longer-term implications of policies being put into place, such as the Comp Plan update. Most of the low-tax people don’t yet realize that the knife is already in their back now also.
The main problem is what happens in the next few years as the economy recovers and developers make full use of the free reign Corey is giving them in the Stewart/Lubeley/Griffin/Utz Comp Plan. Many of Corey’s supporters don’t care about conservation and environmental issues but they do care about their tax bills. Many care about both. This Comp Plan update is a festering cancer from both a conservation and tax perspective. People need to consider both the long-term implications of the Comp Plan and its relation to other issues, such as taxes.
Corey knows all of this. However, he plans to be in Richmond or Washington when the chickens come home to roost. It will be someone else’s problem – namely whoever is on the BOCS then and the taxpayers of PWC who will have to foot the bill.
In this sense, Corey is very similar to Obama and his health care plan. Railroad something through despite public opposition; take credit for its positive aspects now; and time the costs to kick in mostly after you are gone.
Based upon the policies they support, the Planning Commission, and even the Conservation Alliance, is far more fiscally conservative than the BOCS. Nonetheless, I can already hear Corey in two or three years proclaiming how he kept taxes down while someone else has to clean up the economic mess for which he is now setting the stage.
Perhaps Friedman, May, Hendley or some other mature, reasonable public official might want to challenge Corey on a platform of fiscal responsibility and low taxes? It would not be a difficult case to make.
So, when does the Corey Stewart Tree Museum open?
@Poor Richard
When Senor Fernandez mows his lawn on Liberty St.
@Vulch–is he letting that lawn go to seed again? Will the city mow for him and send him a huge bill, attached to his property as a lien? I guess he is showing them.
Good one Poor Richard!
@Poor Richard
When trees start forming LLCs to hide their contributions to Stewart for Chair or Lt. Governor.
You guys crack me up sometimes. First, a thread on Dodd and the need for so called “financial reform” from the very same numbskulls that played a major role in getting us into the greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression and now this.
Hopefully it’s just a matter of being misguided but it would serve your self-claimed political independence to at least research the other side of the coin.
“Smart Growth”, “Open Space”, and whatever other feel good name you want to call it is political double speak for land use restrictions and ALWAYS drive up housing prices.
I’d be willing to bet I use federal and state land a hell of alot more then most of you and there’s alot out there.
For the love of God, please at least sip a little from the cup of sanity so our shared community isn’t doomed to repeat failure after failure and quite succumbing to the political rhetoric you claim to despise:
http://www.demographia.com/db-dhi-econ.pdf
@Mando
Mando – Demographia is one of Wendell Cox’s front groups. Cox is an apologist and propagandist for the development industry, much like the “scientists” the tobacco companies hired to try to convince us that nicotine is not addictive and that there is no proven link between smoking and lung cancer.
What’s wrong with housing prices recovering after the crash? Even if controlling growth puts upward pressure on housing prices in a normal market, that increase is overwhelmingly offset by the lower taxes of communities that prevent sprawl, and from less crowding and congestion on our roads and in our schools.
The only failure was on the part of our BOCS over the past decades in giving developers free reign to build all they want.
@ Need to Know
Regardless of the source, you can’t dispute 100’s of credible economists and the basic tenants of Econ 101.
“What’s wrong with housing prices recovering after the crash?”
Nothing. But let’s not exacerbate and repeat the problem with more land use restrictions.
“Even if controlling growth puts upward pressure on housing prices in a normal market, that increase is overwhelmingly offset by the lower taxes of communities that prevent sprawl, and from less crowding and congestion on our roads and in our schools.”
Essentially, you’re saying I got a good deal on my land but I don’t want anyone else to get the same deal. I want to discriminate against others by implementing artificial limits to the use of the land thus driving up the value of my land. All in the name of “Smart Growth”.
What is your opinion of “Affordable Housing”? Mix “Affordable Housing” with “Smart Growth” and you get economic disaster. Middle to Low incomers can’t afford a house where “Smart Growth” legislation runs rampant and are thus more prone to “exotic” financing and the subsequent foreclosure. You cost out the bread and butter of society and you stagnate the economy.
How can you have lower taxes when your land value is artificially inflated?
“The only failure was on the part of our BOCS over the past decades in giving developers free reign to build all they want.”
And allow free-reign to consumers to be able to afford and buy what they want.
Mando,
what is your suggestion then, pave over everything, don’t make an effort to protect our natural resources that provide us with clean drinking water and clean air to breathe? The Rural Crescent is a valuable tool. What you are really talking about is “affordable housing” something developers are so suppose to proffer money that goes into a specific fund. I think you may want to do a little more research on smarth growth. V.O.I.C.E. is an organization that actually addresses this very serious issue of affordable housing. I would say however, in PWC, we are now known for our affordable housing.
Mando – I don’t know where to start. You recited most of the talking points the development industry has come up with over the years.
I can find as many economists to produce studies that support my view as you can yours. That means nothing.
The old boiler-plate directed at Smart Growth arguments that “you’ve got yours and now don’t want to share with anyone else” is nonsense. It’s an argument based on reductio ad absurdum that implies that Smart Growth opposes all new growth. People buy homes expecting a certain quality of life and level of taxation. Developers want to sell as much of their product as possible and get out of town. Giving free reign to developers to build all they want destroys that quality of life for those who live in the community. Yes, I do want to protect my quality of life and not pay increased taxes to subsidize new residential development. However, that doesn’t mean that growth stops the moment I buy a home.
The sensible path to growth is to attract good commercial development. Virtually no residential development pays its way in taxes for the cost of public services it consumes. Commercial, especially high-wage commercial and high-end offices pay more and contribute to their communities by providing this subsidy of public services for residents. In this way, communities can afford to keep taxes down, and maintain the pace of construction of infrastructure such as roads and schools to keep up with residential development.
The path Prince William County has been following for decades is to throw the County wide open to whatever developers want to do and let the citizens deal with the consequences of paying higher taxes for services, sending their kids to schools to be crammed in like sardines, and facing commutes that can take hours in the area’s congestion.
Regarding higher home values and taxes, I suggest you review that Econ 101 book. If we avoid overbuilding by residential developers, we avoid also congestion and the need for expanding public services (subsidies for new development by existing taxpayers). The higher assessed value on the home means a lower tax rate. The actual tax bill (assessed value times the tax rate) is what counts; not the tax rate alone. Even if my home is increasing in value because of Smart Growth, I still won’t have to pay higher taxes if developers aren’t creating the need for new services that I have to subsidize.
Regarding the BOCS meeting yesterday, I’ll give Corey credit for standing up to the guy from COG who wants Prince William County to continue building “affordable housing” and remain the bedroom community of the Washington, DC area. This is one of the points upon which Elena and I, and Corey would agree.
My problem, however, is what Elena wrote yesterday about Corey. I have a great deal of difficulty believing anything Corey says. My suspicion is that Corey’s comments yesterday were based more on what he thinks people want to hear than on what he plans to do. Like I wrote yesterday, watch what he does rather than listen to what he says. He has railroaded through the developer-friendly Comp Plan update, continues to try to get Avendale approved, etc., etc., etc.
Talking down one COG guy at a BOCS meeting does not redeem him for the actual harm he has caused.
“I can find as many economists to produce studies that support my view as you can yours. That means nothing.”
Have at.
You ROCK Need to Know, great post, I think you left Mando speechless.
No. It’s lines like this:
“You recited most of the talking points the development industry has come up with over the years.”
That just makes it not worth my time to debate. Pointless. Plus the diatribe is wrong on so many levels. If someone refuses to at least try to understand the basic concept of supply and demand why waste my time?
How about we reclaim the land your house is built on in the name of protecting our natural resources? Let it go back to its natural state. Essentially you’re doing the same thing preemptively.
@Elena
Elena – representatives espousing the talking points of any industry are never left speechless, even when saying no more would be better for their cause than continuing to talk. Millions of dollars in developer profits and a truckload of campaign contributions are at stake here. We as the citizens and taxpayers of our community need to ensure that we are heard also.
Note how the argument always devolves to reductio ad absurdum. The only choices Mando offers us are (1) no restrictions on developers (allow them to make all the money they want at our expense) and (2) turning our homes into nature preserves. Moreover, anyone who disagrees with him doesn’t understand economics and produces only diatribes.
How about a well-considered middle ground that promotes balanced growth, protects natural resources, and places the interests of the community ahead of developer profits?
From the InsideNova web site:
http://www2.insidenova.com/isn/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/article/letter_save_our_treesp/57378/
LETTER: Save our trees
Your View
Published: May 12, 2010
» 0 Comments | Post a Comment
I am a 6-year-old and a first grader at Mary Williams Elementary School in Dumfries.
I am worried about our trees. Everywhere I ride, I see trees being cut down to build houses. And no one is moving into them.
We will have less and less oxygen to breathe and less clean air and shade with fewer trees.
Our animals need trees for homes.
The county looks prettier with trees, especially in the spring and fall.
Please save our trees.
CASEY WEBB
Dumfrie
what a sweet letter! Thanks for posting need to know.
Trees are a controversial subject. We have got two big and somewhat old oak trees right in front of the house. These trees are still prolific producers of acorns, dead leaves, dead twigs, and squirrels intent on digging up the lawn. One of them I call our “Squirrel Motel.” Both I and Mrs. W occasionally look out the window and agree that, if one of those old trees ever goes over in a storm, we ourselves may become temporary tenants in the “Squirrel Motel.”
Now I find out that Mrs. W has been sneaking out there and “feeding” those trees — not just watering them but feeding them with some kind of strange product whose instructions to me might as well be written in ancient Sanskrit. Can you beat that? I live with a woman who feeds wild trees!! Moreover, if some neighborhood kid starts banging or cutting on those two trees, she runs out of the house screaming like an Irish banshee and then proceeds to hold a class on nature right in the front yard. Those trees are in the common area. They don’t even belong to us. And she feeds ’em!! Even though she, like that child’s letter, keeps talking about how cutting down trees deprives us of oxygen, I think she has also signed a secret rental agreement with those squirrels.
I don’t use her true name much anymore. Depending on the moment, I have all kinds of alternate names: “The Tree Lady”; “The Flower Lady”; “The Shrub Lady”; “The Grass Lady”; “The Tomato Lady”; “Lady Blue Bell”; “Miss Petunia”; “Queen of the Hostas.” She thinks that I am the Nature Killer from the Planet of Doomed Plants, since they all seem to close up and hide whenever I come out the door. And, yes, Moon, I have never had any mercy over that long ago massacre of the morning glories. In certain areas I am not to be trusted and to be monitored very closely.
Note to Elena’s husband: Do we have something in common here?
In all seriousness, I am trying to figure out just where that “Rural Crescent” is in PWC. It must be somewhere on the other side of Haymarket. When we come out of Loudoun on Route 15 to visit our son in Haymarket, we are always witnessing the slow but sure disappearance of the woodlands and pastures between the highway and the Bull Run Mountains in PWC. If a time machine ever brought Col. Mosby back, he might no longer have a place to hide his Union prisoners. So, just where is this so-called “Rural Crescent” in still pristine condition? And is our own organization, the PEC, allied with you in trying to save that crescent?