You’re Protesting What? I’m Confused

I don’t mind smart protesting, I think it’s a courageous way of expressing a unique and dissenting voice. What I can’t stand is stupid protesting… like the kind that showed up to greet Queen Elizabeth II here in Richmond. Unfortunately RTD editorial writer Michael Paul Williams did far too much service to the twelve or so protesters who showed up at the capitol. Read about it here or save yourself the agony and read the list below. The dozen were here to protest (I need to make a list).

1) homophobia (the Queen hates homosexuals?)

2) the land we took from the native americans

3) immigrant policy

4) the failed minimum wage bill

5) government waste (it costs $ to hold an event the public actually wants to go to)

6) WMDs

7) the genocide of native americans

8 ) the instability in the Middle East created by the allies in WWI

9) the Queen’s crown (PETA didn’t like the fur)

10) the color orange (just kidding)

Did I miss any? That’s almost a protest per protester. Way to stay on point. People went to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Jamestown and see the Queen, not to watch a sideshow drag itself through the streets.

Protesters, here’s the thing. I want to help you. I believe you when you tell me homophobia is wrong and that the color orange should never have been created but seriously… now you’re just pissing me off. If you’re gonna protest something here’s a little advice. Focus your message. Because at the end of the day when I think of you all, I’m thinking this would make a funny South Park episode.

 

Another Look at Goldman’s Thoughts on Public Schools

The school board’s resistance to needed change in Richmond’s public school system justifies Mayor Wilder’s decision to withhold funds.  Clearly Richmond public schools are consistently failing to adequately educate their students and something needs to be done to improve the situation.  For this reason there is no excuse and should be no tolerance for the passive stance taken by the school board. Paul Goldman acknowledges that “the school board has dragged its feet” while the Mayor and the City Council actively try to bring about positive changes to the system. Granted, simply changing a poorly performing school system will not necessarily make it better, in fact it risks making the school system even worse. However, given the comparatively high per student spending of Richmond public schools, insisting on a second audit seems perfectly justifiable. When comparing the funds given to Richmond public schools with other similar districts, Wilder correctly concludes that the root of the Richmond’s problem is not inadequate funding, so it seems logical if not obvious to investigate where the money is being spent and to identify potential savings that can be redirect for better uses.

It is not surprising that a determined and impatient Mayor is not coordinating well with a passive school board that wants to maintain the status quo.  Goldman explains that the “school board should be the one finding the waste in the system they shouldn’t be forced to find the waste in the system.” While this may be true, the school board has clearly been unsuccessful at identifying mistakes and inefficiencies within their own system.  If the school board was playing an active role in improving the public schools they would have a much stronger case against Wilder’s seemingly intrusive use of power. Although this dispute did not look favorably for either Wilder or the school board, Wilder made the right decision by applying needed pressure to the school board.  Wilder’s persistence may result in incremental changes to the public school system, but the true test of Wilder’s leadership resides in his ability and willingness to repair a working relationship with the school board, without which transformational change will not occur.

 

Interview W/ Alan Saunders

Alan Saunders is the Chief Financial Officer of the office of the Comprehensive Services Act Program. The Comprehensive services Act administration is an agency within the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Social Services. Its mission is to “provide funding to local governments for thier use in buying services for youth who cannot live in their own home or be educated in local public schools,” as a result of behavioral or emotional problems.

Mr. Saunders felt the most difficult task he faced as CFO was to equitably distribute $350 million in funding, knowing that in many instances the demand will far exceed the funding available to address the demand. Over the course of the semester we have found this sentiment to be true in all areas public areas, the demand of most public funds simply outweighs the supply. Mr. Saunders felt that the state and city government could most help them with their difficult task “by promoting healthy families and family relationships by making prevention services available” which in the long term could reduce the demand for the services the office funds. Education for children and families from the beginning could help to stop the continuing cycle of emotional and behavior problems, however Mr. Saunders noted that funding for prevention programs is very difficult to secure.

When asked about the capacity he works with local schools Mr. Saunders responded, “It was not until 1993 that the Commonwealth of Virginia mandated that all local government components, schools, mental health, social services, juvenile justice, serving youth and their families work together when addressing individual and community issues. The work I do with local schools is perhaps somewhat indirect in that I ensure that before funding is provided to a locality all the local components including the schools are working together as a team when addressing at-risk youth needs.”

Through his relationship with Richmond Area schools, my subject noted that he felt the biggest problem in schools was the state of families today, “Local schools have a very difficult job, a job that has been expanding given the state of families today. Many families have disengaged from the role of functioning as families. Many look to entities such as the schools to address many of the issues that just a generation ago were the responsibility of parents. The biggest problem schools face is the fact that they no longer can focus on providing education. They have to address so much more.”

Mr. Saunders’ office works in close and continuous contact with Mayor Wilder’s staff. Since his administration is “looking for new approaches to address what have been long term problems in the Commonwealth’s urban environments. By keeping the lines of communication open and toward continuing to serve as transfer agents in moving successful practices from one community to another, there is no doubt the city’s problems will diminish.”

 

Interview with Silver Persinger

The subject of my April 10, 2007 interview was Silver Persinger, a concerned citizen and Free Socialist political candidate running for president. I ran across Mr. Persinger’s name while researching articles about the current issues with the Richmond City Council. He defines himself as socialist who believes in political and economic change through the democratic process. Mr. Persinger works at the library, a job that offers him the chance to listen to NPR during the day and is close in proximity to City Council meetings.

When asked about his goals and beliefs, Mr. Persinger described five main principles. He wishes to educate the public about what the council proposes and does. He believes in a government by, of, and for the people, and his political vision is one in which workers should be protected through unionization. He thinks that there is too much emphasis on economic considerations in society, and disagrees with the currency practice, considering it immoral. His job at the library helps him develop a better understanding and appreciation of history, and he considers himself very lucky to have that opportunity to learn during work and observe and participate at council meetings afterwards. Attending formal, informal, and committee meetings of the council since January of 2006, Mr. Persinger says he is shocked by the utter lack of citizen participation in the community; usually, he is the only non-paid and non-business spectator present at these meetings.

Silver Persinger’s belief in the power of free speech motivates him to speak his mind at meetings on issues that are important to him. Spectators are allowed to speak for a maximum of three minutes at the beginning of a meeting, and he has taken advantage of this offer, choosing to speak regularly on topics ranging from national issues to the virtues of good citizenship. When I asked him for suggestions of what citizens can do to be more involved in government, he replied that they should vote, join their neighborhood associations, attend City Council meetings, or run for office themselves.

Mr. Persinger is running for president as part of the Greenback Labor Party. His platform (which can be found on www.votesilver.com) outlines a concise prescription for transforming our economy. This includes a discussion about the currency (Who owns it? How should it be managed?) – questions that, according to the Greenback Labor Party, have not been resolved satisfactorily. Another point of his platform deals with unionizing. He believes that city workers need to be organized to have their interests promoted and disagrees with the policy in Virginia that workers do not hold the right to collective bargaining. The lack of organization among workers was made apparent to Mr. Persinger when no one showed up to City Council meetings to speak or observe proceedings about these issues.

When questioned about the current situation between the City Council, School Board, and Mayor Wilder concerning the withholding of allocated funds for Richmond schools, Mr. Persinger attributed the “mess” to the lack of clarity in the definition of roles of government, especially with the relatively new addition of a popularly elected mayor. He commented that he believed some of the mayor’s actions were unnecessary. I then asked Mr. Persinger if he saw any of these current problems that Richmond faces as failures of leadership. He responded, “I don’t know because I’ve never seen a good leader.” He did like a lot of things about Lincoln and FDR, but saw Mayor Wilder’s resistance to cooperation as a result of the lack of clarity in his description of powers. I asked if he thought this failure was the biggest issue affecting the city, and he replied that the infrastructure needs were most important right now. There is a lot of need and not a lot of money, but Mr. Persinger firmly believes in his plans for economic and political restructuring that are detailed in his campaign platform. It was very interesting talking to Silver Persinger about these issues from the viewpoint of an active and informed citizen of Richmond.

 

Writeup of interview with Greg Wingfield of the GRP

Last month I had the opportunity to sit in the posh offices of the Greater Richmond Partnership (GRP) in the East Tower of Riverfront Plaza overlooking downtown and talk to the partnership’s President and CEO, Greg Wingfield.  I’m here to discuss issues I’ve studied in my urban leadership class at the University of Richmond, specifically Richmond’s new at-large mayor system, how it affects economic development, and urban development in general.

As its name reflects, the Greater Richmond Partnership represents and pursues economic development efforts on behalf of not only the city of Richmond but also for the surrounding counties of Henrico,
Chesterfield, and Hanover.  Each locality provides 12.5% of funding for the GRP for a total of 50% from the public sector, while the Greater Richmond Chamber of Commerce represents the private sector with the other half of funding.  Wingfield describes the array of marketing, research, and business services the GRP provides for the area, saying one organization working for four is more cost effective than each locality attempting to attract and keep businesses on its own.  Although each locality does have its own economic development department, Wingfield says there is a division of labor, with the local departments doing mostly field and ground work, so that there is no duplication but rather multiplication of effort. 

When asked if he supports the new strong mayor system – or more precisely, if the new system is good for economic development – Wingfield answers, yes: the mayor now has the power to set a long-term vision, what Wilder has called the “City of the Future,” a roadmap and directions with the mayor at the wheel.  The role of the council has also changed, Wingfield says; it is more cohesive and engaged in dialogue, looking at the city as a whole rather than by district.  I ask about the description I had heard of the council before the strong mayor system, that each council member considered him- or herself a “mini-mayor.”  Wingfield agrees with the assessment, calling each district a “fiefdom” in the old system, with which the citizens of Richmond were fed up—fed with the corruption and abuse, with council members jailed for taking bribes and the like.  Wingfield says there was general consensus that the system had to change; debate and contention arose only around the details like terms, specific powers, etc.

I ask if Wingfield’s personal/official role has changed in the new government structure; he replies no, so I move on to another question, asking who the other major players in
Richmond’s economic development are.  Wingfield begins with the city and county administrators or managers who instruct the local directors of economic development who in turn report to the local elected legislative body.  The chamber of commerce is the next big player, which unlike the Greater Richmond Partnership engages in political lobbying.  Another group is the “Management Roundtable,” an informal collection of executives from Richmond’s largest businesses who meet periodically to discuss various matters, including support for political candidates, corporate philanthropy, and of course economic development.  I ask if the existence of such an organization hurts area small businesses, but Wingfield says that it does not because there is a “separate track” and “support” for them.  Wingfield is invited to take part in the Management Roundtable’s meetings.

Echoing much of what I’ve learned about the obstacles to urban development, Wingfield cites the cost of redevelopment in the city where there is a lack of land as compared to it being cheaper to locate to the open space in counties.  In the city there are more environmental and zoning regulations, adding to the complexity – and thus cost – of trying to use urban land that may be a brownfield with issues of liability or the site of a historically significant building with some groups intent on preservation.  Another major obstacle unique to Richmond and other cities inVirginia is the commonwealth’s system of independent cities and counties.  This aggravates the already existent competition among cities, extending it to cities and counties, where there is a lack of cooperation.  I ask about the Greater Richmond Partnership, which is an example of interlocality cooperation, specifically inquiring into why Richmond would support economic development in the counties and vice versa.  Wingfield claims that even if a business like Phillip Morris locates to the county, it still benefits the city if employees reside and shop in
Richmond. 

Postwar federal land-use policies, the advent of the car, the construction of interstates, and desegregation (white flight) all contributed to urban decline, Wingfield says.  But times are changing.  Gone, he says, are the old days of developers building out, expecting localities to bring and connect infrastructure and services.  Counties now charge for the building of infrastructure.  When I ask about the most significant changes in Richmond in the past two to four years, Wingfield says new residents are coming “back” to the city, a “renaissance.”  Young professionals, students, and the recently retired are leading this rebirth, helping to transform downtown into a “twenty-four city.”  If this trend is to continue, Wingfield says city schools must be improved and land use tied to environmental and transportation concerns, with an emphasis on higher density and public transit. 

 

Big Tobacco: Spending Less, Profiting More

There was an interesting piece last Thursday in the Richmond Times Dispatch. Apparently Big Tobacco is spending less on marketing these days. That’s good news right? I’m not so sure. Instead of the $15,150,000,000 they spent in 2003, they spent a paltry $13,100,000,000 in 2005. What a bunch of cheapskates, you think they could afford a little more to convince us that smoking is cool (I mean KOOL). I mean we’re pretty dumb, but not that dumb. There’s something else I’d like to point out. The author fails to discuss Big Tobacco profit margins… and there scary.

In the second quarter of 2005, Altria, the parent company of Phillip Morris (Richmond pride!) declared their profit income had increase 4%. That’s $1,300,000,000. Read about it here. Quite a lot of money. You’d think after all the deaths, lawsuits, and taxes (which gets passed along to the consumer) the proverbial man’s back would’ve broke. But Big Tobacco is still making loads of that good old American dollar. I put it to you smokers of America, aren’t you tired of being ripped off? I mean, I’m tired of paying for your health insurance, but I can’t imagine paying all that extra $. I think I’ll go roll my own cigarette now (no filter), it’s finals week and I’m stressed out.

 

Is UR A Part of Richmond’s Culture?

The University of Richmond was once a park for city residents to frequent and enjoy. That explains the origins of the schools beauty. The campus is till open for local residents to wander and enjoy, but do they really do so? I’ll see some locals walking their dogs or power-walking around the lake, occasionally taking a family stroll, but these residents all look like they come from the surrounding well-off neighborhoods. Sometimes I’ll see large crowds of elderly citizens coming to the dining hall. I don’t know if these are groups of old alumni coming to reminisce on their glory days at the University or a local elderly home taking a trip to the dining hall, nevertheless this a rare sight. There are also the shows put on at the Modlin Center for the Arts, where residents are invited and often come frequent. Nevertheless, the seating for the performances is not that large, performances often sell out, and I suspect that these shows only attract residents in the nearby well-off neighborhoods and alumni. Perhaps the newest way that the University has provided for the community is the new gym. Locals can pay for a membership to the Weinstein Recreation and Wellness Center, and it is undoubtedly far better than the YMCA gym that I frequent when home in New Jersey. Nevertheless, there is only a small proportion of the city’s population that uses this. So as for Richmond attracting residents to its services, I would say the school does not succeed. There is a reason it is called “the bubble”, for its isolation from the rest of the city and furthermore the world.

How about the University reaching out to the local community? With Richmond’s high poverty rates and poor public education, there are many opportunities for the University’s students to become involved. There is the Center for Civic Engagement located in the student commons, blatantly in front of every student as he or she walks to class. The center works hard to provide opportunities for students to volunteer, but the question is do the students take advantage of it? I certainly hope so. Unfortunately, I don’t know many who have. The Jepson School of Leadership does have courses such as “Justice, Civil Service, and Society” that requires students to commit to 28-30 hours of community service within Richmond. This definitely is a way that Richmond can contribute to the community, but of course this is only a small proportion of the students population. At a school with an undergraduate population of roughly 2,900 the school would have to require every single student to devote a semester of volunteer work within the community to really make a difference. Perhaps this should be part of the CORE course that all freshmen have to take. This would would put about 725 volunteers compiling roughly 21,750 hours of investment in the Richmond community. If the University of Richmond really wanted to be more than the affluent West-End of the city, this would be a good way to do it. I would like to encourage locals reading this, who do not have an affiliation with the school to contribute what they think of the university on this subject. As a student, I would guess that UR is seen as a removed from the reality of the city.

 

Democracy, Inclusion, and Regionalism

On April 19, I attended the “We are the Change: Democracy and Inclusion Forum” at VCU as part of the Richmond Region 2007’s celebration of the founding of Jamestown.  The two keynote speakers were Mayor Cory Booker of Newark, New Jersey, and our very own  Richmond Mayor Douglas Wilder.  Booker, whose campaign against long-time and arguably corrupt incumbet Sharpe James was featured in the documentary Street Fight, delivered a heartfelt and compelling (and completely memorized) speech that quieted the audience as he paced on stage.  His is truly an inspiring story of perseverence, courage, and idealism, and I can’t wait to see what he does (or doesn’t) accomplish in Newark.  Although Booker’s presence electrified the audience, the one treated as the star of the show was Mayor Wilder, who answered questions from the audience after his speech.  Interestingly (and perhaps courteously), no one asked about the current school funding controvery, and Wilder answered the questions honestly though briefly. 

But the real meat of the program was what happened in between the speeches, the three rounds of “Democracy Cafes,” in which the members of audience sat with strangers, introduced themselves, and talked about the following questions: 1) How does change take place in a democracy?  2) What questions should people in Richmond talk and think about to ensure a vital future for the city and the region?  3) Create a path to engagement around an issue that matters deeply to you, in coversation with others.  I came away with invaluable experiences and thoughts after engaging in meaningful discussion with others who care about these questions.  My answer to the third question/task was to promote regional cooperation, reduce interlocality competition, and merge city and county governance; the only way to accomplish this is to first abolish Virginia’s unique system of independent counties and cities.  Even if merging local governance seems far fetched, getting rid of independent localities will at least allow the counties surrounding Richmond, for example, to not view the city’s expansion as a threat but rather as a boon.  What better step toward democracy and inclusion at the metropolitan level than to bring our cities and counties together in regional government?

 

Interview with Dr. Tom Shields: Richmond Public Schools

Dr. Thomas Shields is the Director for the Center for Leadership in Education at the University of Richmond. The following interview focuses on Richmond Public Schools and suburban sprawl.

 What do you think is the biggest problem in the Richmond School District?

 “I think there are many answers, not just one that can answer all the questions.  You can look at it from resources, that they obviously have adequate resources, but are in the right places to be moving the job forward?  That’s some of the criticism that the Wilder Administration is saying, resources aren’t in the right areas.  Is there waste in spending? There’s a resource question, obviously there are socioeconomic questions? You’re dealing with issues like poverty and issues of lack of education with parents, you’re dealing with truancy, teen pregnancy, you’re dealing with health care issues.” 

“Some people claim that the issues start with prenatal care with infants, and that is you start that early with health issues, and then you have a healthier person in the classroom.  When you look at it and compare urban education to suburban, it’s almost apples to oranges, it’s not even comparable.”

How do you think that the school district can solve these problems? 

“Take a more comprehensive approach rather then just arguing that it’s resources.  Some of the arguments that have been made by the Wilder administration to the school board are that it’s resources.  Instead of looking at the system as a whole and some of the problems faced by the urban education system, maybe we should be looking at it as comprehensive.  The testing component is an issue too.  You have a standardized test that’s trying to fit for the whole system.  So you’re testing people from suburban areas that come from higher affluence and not broken homes and you’re getting a good night’s sleep and your parents are driving you to school in a private car to an intercity area that is very different.  Just by focusing on the test is not even a good way of trying to solve the problem of urban education.   Also by focusing on reason that’s not the best way to say this system is getting so many dollars.  I think it has to do with efficiency, but the next question is, ‘are the resources going to the right area and are they helping the children?’ Are we helping the children with these dollars?  And if we keep the dollars at the same amount, how can we better help the children? Should money be going more into the classroom? Alot of money goes into the central office administration.  There are some models that say that there should be no more than 60% of the funds going into the classroom and if there’s not, then there’s too much money going into the central office. 

“You have to have a more comprehensive approach.  Looking at it with social services, with crime prevention, with other social programs, maybe involve health care.  It’s not one specific answer that’s going to help the urban education system.”

Do you think that a second audit of the Richmond School District would be beneficial? 

“There have been so many audits of the school system.  People know what needs to be done, the next thing is the will to do it and the action to go and carryout that will.  People know that there are schools that need to be closed.  People know that there is a lot of money going in, but it’s a problem with efficiency.  So a second audit would be helpful.  But if you have a second audit, are you going to do anything with it?  There are many audits that are floating around city hall from both the administration and the school board, but if you’re not put any of those into place, if they are just going to collect dust on a shelf, what is the purpose of another audit?”

Is Mayor Wilder restricting the funds because he doesn’t know how to allot them? 

“The executive puts together the budget, and then the city council appropriates the funds.  But you have another body, which is the school board, which is the policy setting body.  So you have three entities, really the money resides with city hall and where the policy resides is with the city school board. [Wilder] has dedicated as much funds as thinks is necessary, he actually thinks there are too much funds going into the school system and that they aren’t doing enough with what they have.  He wants to cut some of the funds that are supposed to go directly to the school system through city hall.  What’s happened is that there are other departments within in the city.  The Richmond paper did a study on the other departments of the city about their funding.  It said, ‘if you think the schools are getting too much funding, then lets look at the other departments in the city and see how they are using their funds.’  First of all, spending during the Wilder administration has gone up by $10 million.  They found that the city schools were actually not spending a whole lot of money in comparison to other school districts.  Finally, other departments were actually spending at a higher rate, using more money than in other areas across the state.  For instance, the city police department was at number one spending at per capita dollars.  In terms of people in the city, they were spending much greater funds, more money, than the rest of the jurisdictions across the state of Virginia.  Schools were in the 30s out of a 120 jurisdictions.  What is his perception of this?  Some people say, ‘maybe he’s right.  Maybe the schools are getting a lot of funds and maybe they are wasteful, maybe there are some efficiencies there.’ Then when the paper did the study, they said ‘well not really, look at these other departments. They are spending at a very high rate, his own city administration has increased funds by $10 million.’ I think that Wilder has kind of backed off a little bit, but he’s still demanding an audit.  He can send over funds whenever he chooses to pay bills.  What the school system had set up was that they were receiving funds almost on a weekly basis from the city administration. So what Wilder wanted to do was slow down and have them come to him for the bills that needed to be paid, instead of giving them any type of money on a weekly basis.  By the end of the fiscal year, he has to give them all the money.”

What do you think is the root of the inefficiency in the Richmond School District? 

“There are a lot of reasons in any bureaucracy for inefficiencies.  The question you need ask is not so much based on the resources, it is: are we doing enough with the money?  Wilder is demanding that they are getting too much money and that he sees too much of the city’s tax dollars being passed through the administration to the schools.  Any bureaucracy has a lot of inefficiencies, weeding them out is a whole different question.  Where would you start?  Do you start within the city administration?  Is it transportation? Is it too much staff in the central office?  Are there too many middle and high managers in the central office that are getting big salaries?”

“It’s older facilities too; the inefficiencies result from a very old system.  It’s demanding a lot in terms of maintenance.  It’s an urban public system.  If you’re in a suburban school system with high socioeconomic status, they are less likely to demand the public services that a student in the same grade, taking the same class will demand in an urban school system because of the type of needs are different being in an urban system.  You can’t say, ‘look at suburban high schools with urban high schools and say lets look at the inefficiencies’ because it’s not even a good comparison.  This is because of the differences in the students, in the infrastructure in the school, the difference in how people learn, the differences in their backgrounds and experiences that they bring in before they even cross through the door of the school.”

“There are arguments that too much money is being given to the central office and that it should shift into the classroom.”

Within Henrico County there is a lot of disparity between the schools, why do you think that exists? 

“That’s pretty perceptive of you.  There is a big disparity between west and east.  Why does that happen? That is the million dollar question.  What happens is as people settle in an area, they need to build a public school system.  If you have a development that’s going in with 200 or 300 homes, you’re going to need to build an elementary school there.  There hasn’t been as much development in the East end as the West end so the infrastructure is obviously getting older in the East end then where you see more development.  When you build a new school you’re going to put in new computers and new desks, and hire brand new teachers.  What you notice is the differences between West and East end.  Northeast is where you want to look. What has happened that over time, African Americans have settled in that area from the city and they moved into the Northeastern section of Henrico
County.  The same is true is you looked at the bottom half of Chesterfield.  Is the question, well if they are blacks and they are poor, are they getting shortchanged?  On some levels, yes, it doesn’t take a researcher to drive from the East end to the West end and say there are definitely differences in the schools.  However, Henrico and Chesterfield have done a decent job recognizing and rectifying the differences between those two.  Anyone in the school system would say that ‘we give as much attention to the Northeast section of the county as we do to the West end section of the county.’ They are not purposively slighting that community.  It’s a market situation, where you are building homes, they are going to get the new school, and they are going to get the new classrooms.  If all of a sudden you see a building boom in the Northeast section, they would get a new school there.  So it does look that way and if you go deep into the numbers, it wouldn’t tell that story.”

Do you think that suburban sprawl is affecting the Richmond public schools?(Summarized)

In the 1970s, there was immense white flight from the city of Richmond into the West end of Henrico County.  This was mostly due to the new busing legislation and integration in the public school system.  When people move outside of the city, they are no longer under the jurisdiction of city hall.  The city of Richmond is not part of a county, it is its own entity—this is what creates a problem.  Soon after the white flight, African Americans also wanted to move outside the city, they moved to Church Hill and the Highland Park areas, right off Chamberlain.  Even though they were also seeking suburban life, were they getting the same resources?  No, because the members of this community were not put on the same boards as the white population in Henrico County and they were basically shutout of the political process.  Now, in Chesterfield County, African Americans hold high administrative positives in the school district.  This is not true for Henrico County—all of the top positions are still primarily white.  This is not an old phenomenon; this has only started to happen about 20 years ago. 

The suburbanization affect is not as applicable to Virginia as it was to Charlotte Mecklenburg or Atlanta. Virginia is one of three states that still abide by the Dillon Rule, which was originally implemented to check the legitimacy of local municipalities to eliminate nepotism.  However, today this rule is only a detriment to policymaking in the state.  Local governments cannot enact policies or changes without the approval of the state government.  For example, in Oklahoma City, city hall just implemented a tax that at most 30% of taxes for public schools from suburbs would to intercity schools to increase resources.  This is not possible for Richmond since the city is not part of the surrounding counties and there is not a large enough tax base to bring in revenue.  Additionally, because of the Dillon Rule, the surrounding Richmond community could not make this tax allotment decision on its own. 

Perhaps with this new trend of urban renewable we will see change of the face of urban public schools.  Maybe as more affluent white people return to the city they will start fighting for better public schools. 

 

8th and 9th St. Office Buildings

On the evening of April 11^th, I attended a forum on the state’s plans for an office complex at the 8^th and 9^th St. office buildings.  In planning the construction and renovation of this site the state has utilized a lot of input from citizens and select members of Richmond organizations. People from the states Department of General Services, the APVA, Historic Richmond Foundation, ACORN, Venture Richmond, Capitol Sq. Preservation Council, Department of Historic Resources, and the City of Richmond aided the local architects, Commonwealth Architects, and the national architects, Perkins + Will, in the design process.

Through using the input of citizens with experience in the field and the future of
Richmond in their minds, the architects were able to work around many of the controversial issues.  The 8^th and 9^th St. buildings are approximately 100 years old and are historic landmarks.  Unfortunately, the 8^th St. building, originally The Murphy Hotel, has become a victim of demolition by neglect.  8^th St. will be torn down and 9^th St. will be totally renovated.  In respect to the old building, it will be recycled and materials salvaged for the new one.  This also helps in efforts to gain LEED silver certification for the future building.

While this will be a modern building it will respect surrounding buildings in terms of elevation.  The design of these buildings will correspond with plans for the whole Capitol Square area, which aim to increase access, walkability, and connection with the rest of the city.  Bank
St. will be made two-way and more pedestrian friendly and 14^th St. will be reopened to all traffic.

Other points of interest from the forum:

1.                            Historic St. Peter’s Church will be at risk during the construction, but many precautions are being taken to avoid all risk to the building.  Where necessary repairs and reinforcements will be made on St. Peter’s.

2.                            The APVA recommended to the state that reports be conducted of all buildings so that unnecessary demolition will not occur in the future.

3.                            The VA State Capitol has been nominated as a potential World Heritage site.

4.                            Concern was expressed about the demolition of 8^th St. before the state allocates funds for the new construction.