The City has a relatively low commercial tax base. This potentially drives more of the tax burden to homeowners. And, all City residents feel the bite of taxes on water, cable, meals, cars- etc.
If one were to design our area anew, I don't think any one would propose our current set-up: a politically and fiscally discrete central city with a limited tax base, a concentration of high service need individuals, and the financial responsibility forthe area's amenities and safety. What do I mean?
- The mayor has noted that currently all public housing in the area is within the City's limits.
- We have a regional jail. The jail charges the locality where an arrest occurred with the daily charges for an inmate's stay. So, if a Green county resident is arrested in the City, the City pays for his incarceration. The City's cultural life attracts people from all over- and City residents pay for their jail tabs.
- Police Chief Longo has suggested cameras on the downtown Mall, at a cost of $300,000. This would be billed to City residents, although people from all over use and enjoy the Mall. One could argue that the Mall is our cultural and psychological core.
- Despite having less than half the population of the County, the City has exactly the same number of police officers. So, City residents pay more per officer than do County residents.
- And- here we go- why are there 2 discrete police departments, fire departments, school boards, school systems, governments, etc? How does this make sense? And, at what price? No one would set this up de novo. Can tax payers afford this? What is the price of merging the systems, in economic, emotional, symbolic, cultural, and psychological terms?
- Does any one else find it absurd that the County office building is in the City? How about the County school in the City? Is this the Emperor's New Clothes?
- Lots of people have pointed out to me that there is City/County revenue sharing. Invariably, these are County folks. Here are the numbers:
FY05 $4,620,461
FY06 5,877,748
FY07 6,333,816
Meanwhile, this is the City's operating budget:
FY05 $99,646,862
FY06 105,985,272
FY07 110,462,324
So, revenue sharing provides 4-6% of the City's budget. Not a big dent.
Folks have been talking merger of services between City and County. One current candidate for City Council noted that this should be not be a 'shotgun marriage'. My take on that is this: Marriage? "Why buy the cow when the milk is free?" is more likely to be the County's position.
Can the City afford to remain the City?
4 comments:
It would be hard to support a candidate for town Council if she had no historical perspective of the town where she has lived since 1981.
"Charlottesville is a landlocked 10 square miles"
Yes. 175 times larger than it once was. But, if elected, you wouldn't use this history of expansion, often bitterly controversial, to inform your decisions that involve the county and surrounding counties.
"The mayor has noted that currently all public housing in the area is within the City's limits."
Cville has always had all the public housing. Sounds like the city is a victim here. Nobody forcibly located public housing here, except for the city government. They had to: the grant might go to someone else. The county is where most urban renewal refugees moved to. Again, you seem to be a candidate out of touch with the basic history that defines a community.
"Folks have been talking merger of services between City and County. One current candidate for City Council noted that this should be not be a 'shotgun marriage'. My take on that is this: Marriage? "Why buy the cow when the milk is free?" is more likely to be the County's position."
Again if you knew just the highlights of Charlottesville history, you would say "shotgun RE-marriage." Reversion is the term that has the historical connotation.
"Lots of people have pointed out to me that there is City/County revenue sharing. Invariably, these are County folks."
I'm the city native who ran for City Council in 2000 on a platform to eliminate revenue sharing because unaccountable funding always leads to unresponsive government. The bank robber doesn't go around telling people he robs banks, or that it's not a "big dent". The people whose money is stolen have a different perspective. Since annexation is illegal now in Virginia (which may expire 2010), how could revenue sharing possibly be a legal contract? The city sells its annexation right but by current law does not have any such right.
"The County remits yearly to the City one-tenth of 1% of their revenue."
As much as I dislike the Democrats, I'm not likely to vote for someone who doesn't even know the historical or political context of the elected office to which she aspires.
Check out my blog to find examples of how historical knowledge is power. "New YMCA in trouble, new Boys & Girls Club likely: Session invites public input but allows none" July 9, 2007, Blair's Blog
Frankly, I'm delighted that the County Office Building is in the City; the city council at the time supported the re-use of Lane High School by the County precisely because it wanted to have a viable work base in the Downtown area to support downtown business activity. Some 20 + years later, the Downtown benefits from these folks coming over to the Mall for lunch, shopping, errands, etc.
When public housing was built, it was constructed in the most populated areas; public housing no longer is built in one place; instead the approach is "scattered site." Albemarle County was largely rural at the time of Charlottesville's first public housing. Today, Albemarle has low-income housing, although it is privately owned, and Albemarle has a comprhensive plan for creating more affordable housing.
I think it's good that there be competition in the city council elections, but one needs to come forth with plans for how you would change the directions the city is going in.
Also, I miss not seeing some basic biographical information about the candidate.
It is refreshing to read comments from a candidate for City Council that dares to actually discuss the particulars of issues that she cares about. Recently, there has only been a lot of public speeches and interviews full of meaningless buzz words: "afordable housing," "green city," "safe neighborhoods," "quality education for ALL of our children," etc. It's also refreshing to hear someone say that every problem does not require more spending. Please keep up your efforts to encourage real discussions by candidates for Council.
I value Barbara's perspective as an admitted recent entrant to local politics. Historical perspective is a double-edged sword. I understand the saying that "Those who forget history........". But a fresh perspective can be very healthy for the system. Also, some solutions that were not viable in years past might be viable in the current environment. Historical perspective can put blinders on us.
Post a Comment