URbanStudies

Today’s Style Weekly raises questions about the redevelopment of Chesterfield County’s Cloverleaf Mall into a residential area and how the land will be used…see article below:

http://styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=13768

 This mall, at the intersection of Chippenham Parkway and Midlothian Turnpike, sits upon land owned by both the county and Milmar Properties. There is currently much debate in the county about what type of “redevelopment” will happen to the area following its final sale: if county residents will be responsible for financing purchase, if eminant domain is an option, if a local church will continue to pursue purchasing it for building a new sanctuary? I think the most important question to address here is what the community members hope to see happen to this area. A commercial center is being removed and replaced with a predominantly residential area. Will there be a forum allowing people living close to the mall to share their input? Will rezoning allow for more mixed use development if citizens seek to regain some commercial sites that will be lost? This perspective may not have the financial backing, but is a essential part of negotiations that is too frequently left out of land-use proceedings.

A bill By Del. Vincent F. Callahan Jr., proposed to raise the state minimum wage incrementally from $5.15 to $8.15 an hour by July 1, 2009. Another proposed measure suggested raising the minimum wage to $7 by the same date. The subcommittee of the House Commerce rejected both proposals on Thursday, January 25th.    Virginia businesses oppose raising the minimum wage, arguing that
Virginia should follow the federal wage and that the increase would discourage businesses from hiring low pay workers. Opponents argue that a higher wage hurts job creation and causes skilled workers to compete with unskilled workers for similar jobs.  Opponents further argue that “90 percent of those who would benefit from a wage increase to $7.25 would be teens living with their parents, adults without children and second-wage earners.” On the contrary, many agree that it is impossible to live on the current minimum wage and that the working poor are currently unable to support and sustain the
Virginia economy. The twenty-nine states that have raised their minimum wage already have not seen any blows to their economy.
Virginia should be following the lead of these other states in order to help the many impoverished citizens. Jay Johnson of the Virginia Organizing Project states that “it’s a shame and disgrace for people to work full-time and still live in poverty.” 

Richmond Times Dispatch. “Minimum-wage bills stall.” By Greg Edwards. January 26, 2007.

Is this really a “win” for Richmond? Are Richmond city and more importantly Mayor Wilder really comfortable with denying accessibility for students who are handicapped? Whose responsibility is it anyway—the school board’s or the city’s?

In this article the city of Richmond and the School Board point the finger at each other, both denying responsibility for improving handicap accessibility in Richmond’s school buildings. In the meantime, what will be done to ensure safety and accessibility for disabled students and even staff?

Only four of sixty Richmond school buildings are in compliance with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Attorney for plaintiffs, David Hopper states that Mayor Wilder is “morally wrong” for denying responsibility. Instead, Hopper implies that Wilder’s decision is based on a power struggle between the school board and the city. Many are also outraged because, while the mayor won’t allocate funds to improve accessibility for the disabled, he has agreed to spend $25 million for the opera. On the other hand, Wilder and other city officials say it isn’t their responsibility to improve school buildings for the disabled. Virginia law gives all authority over Richmond public schools to the school board. Now it is up to the school board to implement the five year plan for improving handicap accessibility they agreed to last January. But, that settlement is contingent on funding from the city. Due to the court’s decision– no longer making the city responsible for improving school buildings for handicap accessibility–many are unsure as to whether the settlement will also unravel.

What will happen to all the disabled students and staff within Richmond city schools? While the mayor may not feel the city is directly responsible (due to the law) for improving Richmond school’s handicapped accessibility, isn’t the public school system and its offerings a direct reflection of the city? It seems to me that this court decision would not be viewed as a “win” for the city, but a sad outcome for the many disabled students who are inconvenienced and or even hurt each day trying to attend school, as well as a sad outcome for the city.

Not really having an understanding of the responsibilities of the city and the school board makes this a very complicated issue. In fact,University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias states “Most people don’t think there’s a big difference between the city and the School Board.”

Regardless of who the law states is directly responsible for implementing changes in handicap accessibility for Richmond public schools, it’s certain that something needs to be done. Hopefully this issue will be directly addressed and not hidden or placed on the list of “things to do” for the city of
Richmond.

On Richmond’s Human Rights Commission website the following is stated: “It is the public policy of the City of Richmond to provide all of its citizens equal opportunity for education, employment, access to public conveniences and accommodations and acquisition through purchase or rental of real property including but not limited to housing, and to eliminate segregation or separation based solely on race, religion, color, sex, handicap, national origin or ancestry, since such segregation is an impediment to equal opportunity.”

Because 56 of 60 schools are not providing equal access for handicap students and staff, the city seems to be in violation of Richmond’s Human Rights Commission policies.

Do Richmonders care that their city’s population is continuing to decline? Should they care? Though the article in today’s Times-Dispatch barely scratches the surface on the sprawling trends of Richmond, it gives the numbers and statistics to prove this population migration to the suburbs is a concern.

http://timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?c=MGArticle&cid=1149192815914&pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&path=!news&s=1045855934842

 But one Virginia resident, Mary Thompson of the article, claims the numbers cited about Richmond’s population loss do not scare her and she has faith that good things are happening in this city. I don’t think having faith is enough. Despite revitalization efforts, drawing in Fortune 500 companies, improved restaurant scene or other attempts to vamp up downtown Richmond, people are still leaving the city and opting for suburban, or even formerly rural (now being developed) homes. Should the city be doing more to keep and attract residents? Are there more deep-seated problems that Richmond must come to terms with or is suburban living still the ideal for most families? This article may be enough to raise awareness, but does not facilitate people to take action or even to question the ramifications of such Richmond regional trends on land, transportation, taxes, service provision and many other important factors. Though that may not have been the goal of Macenka’s piece, I can site a valuable source to gain more understanding of such consequences of sprawl in Richmond. Please reference the link below, a study on growth in the Richmond region by the Southern Environmental Law Center and ask these necessary questions.

http://www.southernenvironment.org/cases/vdot_reform/richmond_report.htm

Thursday night at 7 p.m. the Richmond Peace Education Center is hosting an “Edu-Concert” for peace and justice in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr.

The event, “Generation Dream” is being held at the VCU Performing Arts Center, 922 Park Ave.  A wide range of local youth performers will be presenting music, spoken word, and other forms of creative expression. Here’s a poster of the event.  

Can there be a city of Richmond without the Museum of the Confederacy?

We may be about to find out.

The museum reportedly may leave the city for Lexington.

Richmond mayor Douglas A. Wilder gave his annual “State of the City” address this weekend, focusing particularly on education. Here is the RTD’s account of the speech; slightly more extensive notes were published on the city’s web site as well.

Welcome to URbanStudies. This is the class blog of students studying “Governance in the Contemporary American Metropolis” with Dr. Thad Williamson at the University of Richmond this term (spring 2007).

This blog will be discussing a wide variety of issues related to politics, governance, and life in the Richmond, VA metropolitan area. Stay tuned!