Questions from
2006 Campaign
Question: What differentiates you
from the other candidates running for Town Council, and why are you
running.
Answer:
Experience and being prepared to tackle the job from day one. As the
current chairman of the Leesburg Planning Commission I have hands on
experience in not only dealing with, but directing one of the most
involved and complex aspects of a Town Council member’s job, reviewing
land use applications. As a Certified Virginia Planning Commissioner I
have the knowledge and experience to be ready to handle these issues
from day one. One of my many duties on the planning commission is to
review the Capital Improvements Program making recommendations to the
town council on this very important aspect of the town’s budget. This
involvement in the town budget process combined with my business
experience preparing budgets makes me uniquely qualified to deal with
the important fiscal work of the town. I have been involved in the town
since I managed the Tally Ho Theatre in downtown Leesburg during and
following high school. My
awareness of the issues in the town as well as my experience on the
planning commission has helped to prepare me for a position on the town
council. In contrast to most other candidates,
voters have the distinct advantage of viewing my record on the planning
commission. You can go back and check the minutes to see how I voted.
I am running for Town Council as I find being involved in my
community personally rewarding and I know that my experience and
involvement in the community will be a benefit to the town council. I
will bring my proven record of responsible decision making and my
support for Leesburg’s quality of life to the Town Council.
Question: What party are you
Republican or Democrat?
Answer: I am not now, nor have I
been a member of any political party, I am an Independent. The Town
Council elections are also non-partisan so no candidate declares a party
on the ballot.
Question: What is your position on
the power lines proposed to be run in or around Leesburg.
Answer: The power lines must be
underground and cannot be allowed to scar the landscape of our
community. The power lines pose a clear threat to the character of our
town by threatening to destroy one of our most valuable recreation
resources, the WO&D trail, as well as threatening neighborhoods within
Leesburg, and the safety of the approach to the Leesburg Executive
Airport. The Town must continue to pursue all options on all fronts to
insure the the lines are run underground and do not damage or destroy
Leesburg's community.
Question:
What is your position on the originally proposed Centex/Meadowbrook
rezoning proposal? What is your stance on their current efforts to
develop the property? How will you deal with Centex?
Answer:
As Chairman of
the Planning Commission I voted against the Centex/Meadowbrook
proposal and I stand by that vote. The recommendation for denial was
based upon their failure to meet several ordinance requirements, our
town plan guidelines, as well as properly offset for the impacts they
would have made to the community. In addition the proffer statement
they provided to the Town was unenforceable as among other things it
referenced the incorrect site plan. I also strongly support staff's
rejection of their by right proposal to develop the land as it fails
to meet the Town's minimum guidelines for acceptance.
As
development occurs in this area it must be sensitive to the community
it will be dropping in the middle of and under no circumstances can we
allow there to be curb cuts onto RT 15 and must protect the right of
way for Battlefield PKWY.
I will
deal with Centex going forward in much the same way I have as Chairman
of the planning commission. They were treated fairly and given the
opportunity to make their case. However, I reviewed what they
submitted very closely and identified several issues with their
proposed proffers that made them unenforceable, as well as issues with
the application that failed to address the proposed developments
impacts on the town. It should also be noted that Centex has
litigation before the Town which seeks to compel the town to accept
for review their by right application that in its current form has
failed to meet the minimum acceptance requirements for review. With a
litigious applicant we must be sure that we proceed within the bounds
of state code and review any applications as required by law as they
will be looking for us to say or do something that is actionable.
Question:
Do you support the town council’s recent action of increasing the water
rates on out of town users of the town’s water system?
Answer:
I do not. There was more research that needed to be done prior to any
water rate increase.
Here's a
more-troubling question: How does the town go
from having enough of a surplus in the utility fund to think of dipping
into it for $9.2 million to expand town hall and then, a couple months
later, need a rate increase? At the end of the last fiscal year, the
fund had a surplus of $44 million -- so I think there needs to be some
more research -- and explaining -- before we increase water rates.
Question:
Do you support the way the town handled the removal of all civic
organization signs from the town gateways?
Answer:
The town bungled this in so many ways, starting with the council keeping
the citizens out of the discussion. That's not acceptable. The town had
over a year to deal with the request from the Sons of Confederate
Veterans to put up their sign with the Confederate flag. Rather
than address the issue, the town did nothing until the SCV threatened
lawsuit.
Then the town responded by removing all civic organization signs, and
left the citizens feeling that their government had done something to
them, not for them. This has also left our gateways bare of what used to
be a trademark of small towns, their directory of civic organizations.
The council should have
brought this
matter out into the open, for a public discussion with the groups
involved and the citizens at large. That didn't happen. The town's
after-the-fact solution is to put all the groups' signs on a huge
billboard -- an idea that as most recently proposed will surely be shot
down by the town's Board of Architectural Review. In the end, the Mayor
and Council failed to serve the citizens. It's that simple.
Question:
What is your position on taxes?
Answer:
I will look for ways to reduce your
taxes while
ensuring they are spent wisely. We need to start from the position of a
tax rate each year that will not increase citizen’s tax bill from the
previous year and work to identify ways to live within our means as a
community while still providing the services that our community expects
and deserves. We cannot afford to waiver on this or take the easy road
out as the increases in taxes are driving citizens out of the community,
especially those who have retired or are living on a fixed income. In
the town’s proposed FY 2007 budget the proposed tax rate of 18.5 cents
falls short of accomplishing this goal, to achieve the goal the council
would need to reduce the tax rate by 1.5 cents and identify approx. $1.2
million dollars in savings from the general fund budget. This will
require us to roll up our sleeves and ask difficult questions to achieve
the goal while still providing needed services. My review of the budget
has identified several ways to reach this goal without cuts to town
services or elimination of positions in the town. Long range the town
must focus on economic development to reduce the pressure of residential
property tax payers to cover the town’s expenses.
Question:
Do you think the appointment process for the town’s board and commission
members can be improved?
Answer:
Yes. The board and commission members are currently appointed by
individual council members to serve a term that is coterminous with the
council’s term. While I believe this process provides for great balance
and diversity on the boards and commissions it has had the unwanted side
effect of causing some high turnover on the commissions. My
recommendation would be to stagger the terms of board and commission
members by six months. This would allow newly elected council members
time to get oriented, meet the “incumbent” board and commission members,
consider their appointments over a longer period than the initial rush
after the elections. Council members would make their appointments in
September, with the member’s term beginning in January. This will allow
new members to observe meetings, attend training or orientations, and be
ready to hit the ground running. This will also allow for a better
transfer of “corporate knowledge” during both the council and board and
commission transition periods.
Question: Do you support
building the Chancellor street trail in southwest Leesburg?
Answer: Southwest Leesburg is
currently trapped with only one way out of their community, Route 15 via
car. The lack of connections isolates this part of our community, forces
more people to their cars, and denies them a quality of life identified
as important through the 20 Year Parks &
Recreation Master Plan. I strongly support completion of a safe
trail connection for this community to provide them with connectivity to
the WO&D trail, historic downtown, and other resources. I
am pleased to see that the town council took a step toward solving this
challenge in south Leesburg. By accepting the planning commission’s
recommendation to create a task force of citizens that will work together to
find a solution to the trail connectivity issues in that area. The next
step in this process must be to make a decision on the best and safest
connection and get it built as soon as possible. While I understand the
Chancellor St. option was opposed by some residents, I am not convinced
the current South King Street option is the safest route for our
citizens. I will be anxiously awaiting the proposals from the citizens
advisory committee for the best solution.
