Posted Jan 27, 2009 at 11:02 AM
This was FUN! Tell me though what being a native or how long someone has been here matters to quality of life or comprehensive planning.
Hey! I didn't write it...just used it. I can't figure out how it the world it would make a difference unless maybe natives get a special rate on taxes or something. I think that particular question was totally inappropriate to ask. If someone is living here now, they have as much say as anyone else. Unless they're not paying for services, not paying taxes, not affected by government decisions. I can't say much about the survey except I'm getting a lot of responses. The data does look to be interesting.
Posted Jan 27, 2009 at 1:06 PM
What I'd like to see: 1. The new Court house to be located in a central location between Christiansburg and Blacksburg and elimination of two seperate court houses in both jurisdictions. This would ulitmaetly be geared towards a formation of a city which would incorporate Christiansburg and Blacksburg. (Long term) 2. The formation of a centralized dispatch call center to eliminate the need to transfer calls to different agencies for service. This would eliminate the need for some personel and equipment. Benefits would be long term. 3. Town of Christiansburg to shift towards a more eco-friendly attitude: recycling all paper within town offices; a shift to bio-diesel garbage, fire, and EMS vehicles; a shift to more energy efficent fleet vehicles (police cars, town trucks, etc. to shift to V-6 vehicles where practical rather than the V-8 engine. 4. The addition of sidewalks which would be paid for by property owners who's property touches Town/State maintained roads. (Owners whos property already have sidewalks pay a reduced or no fee for the installation of sidewalks)
Okay...that's it...I'm starting a write-in campaign .... Jaba for Town Council/Mayor. I might not agree with you on every issue Jaba...but I do love the way state everything clearly, look at the long-term impact, and prepare for the future by today's decisions. What remains to be seen though...is if the public doesn't agree with you, how will you handle it. Will you try to educate the public and sway opinion? And, if that fails to work, will you set aside what YOU think is best for what citizens think is best? I think that's the biggest thing that has been missing in Christiansburg. Just because you think you have the right idea doesn't mean everyone is suddenly going to agree with and support you. It takes time and effort to get information to people so that they are informed and can then give informed feedback. Keeping citizens in the dark and tossing in some organic fertilizer now and then is a great way to insure a good harvest of mushrooms. Unfortunately, a steady diet of mushrooms is not going to meet basic 'nutritional needs' and will result in poor health or death of a community. I want an open and interactive government combined with citizens who participate. It may sound simple but it isn't simple to accomplish. We need highly effective, energetic leaders to make it happen. And, maybe the occasional reporter or blogger:)
Posted Jan 27, 2009 at 1:26 PM
I was thinking why they would have asked that question and the only thing that kept popping in my head was that this was going to be some kind of qualifier on the validity of the respondent's comments or grading. I know that is very negative way to think of it, but I couldn't think of any other reason?
To really look at whether a position is warranted in either of those situations, I would want to know if there have been instances of problems with response times (I am unaware of any). Also, what will be the impact to citizens overall on the cost of their insurance. There can be some significant differences in insurance rates depending upon whether or not these services are volunteer or paid. If there is a likelihood there would be no change, then why bother. If, however, it is possible that each citizens policy could decrease by say $20/year. Then an extra $2-$5/year on the taxes would still show a net savings to citizens while enhancing existing services. It would also serve to provide one more paying job for a local person. At this point in the economy, saving even one job, much less creating a new one, could be a pretty good deal.
Posted Jan 27, 2009 at 2:50 PM
I have no problems with taking input from all. I would first try to inform citizens of the little bit of knowledge I have on the subject then listen to responses. I am very open minded to the concerns of all. I do however like to play the devil's advocate and challenge others opinions and offer a different perspective on relevant issues this town faces.
that'll work for me:)
Posted Jan 27, 2009 at 4:49 PM
to understand, then to be understood, Jaba.
Posted Jan 27, 2009 at 4:54 PM
Enjoyed responding (and did the first time). Once again the question about being native felt odd. Like why? Like race or religious question. A poor attempt at monitoring growth perhaps. I am left wondering who thought up these questions and what town really wanted to learn from it. I don't recall hearing about response rate or council making plans related to the survey results so it now feels like a "well, we have to do this" type thing. Maybe the results weren't what town wanted to hear and play a big part on why they don't ask for feedback anymore. If that was the case, my gut says this won't be better although we know that feedback is our friend.
The town provided me with a copy of the data but no analysis. Sigh...guess who's been working on setting up all the data for analysis:) It should be finished by the time I have the data from this reproduction completed so I can set up the final results as a comparison between the two. I also didn't get a code book for the grouping and valuation of open-ended questions. But, I can set that up myself and the two sets of data will then be consistent. (Thank goodness for all those extra grad courses I took in statistics and research design:) I honestly have no idea why the question of whether someone was native or not. It is just as offensive as any other question that serves to take citizens and break them apart into 'special' groups. However, that has been an effect tool of 'rulership' (definitely not one of 'leadership') for centuries. It is always easier to control small groups. If you can convince people it is more important to focuses on differences than on similarities, you create those types of groups. That usually means the groups fight among themselves rather than come together in a unified manner to deal with issues and get things done. In summary, an effective, if antiquated, psychological tool that only works if people allow it to work. The only real way to make things better if the town council doesn't take action themselves is in the voting booth. Vote, make sure all your friends and family vote. If you are a business owner, try to find a way to make sure your workers get an opportunity to vote (some times work schedules don't allow this). Write your representatives and let them know you support extended times for absentee voting without all the restrictions that currently exist. Let them know that maybe moving election days to a Saturday would be a good thing. Or, what if we had a two day time frame during which to vote rather than 1. Contact your local school/school board and make sure that the importance of local elections is well covered in existing classes. Encourage schools/school board and local government to work together to come up with ways to invovled our youth. Wouldn't it be kewl to have some high school students work together to provide coverage of Town Council meetings....not from our perspective but from theirs. All the blogging in the world is useless if youth don't get involved. We need a 'youth town council' elected by their peers to serve in an advisory capacity to the town council. Why each area high school could have one and each of them could submit reports to town council on what they perceive local issues to be. Just a few of the ideas I've been pondering:)
Posted Jan 27, 2009 at 8:50 PM
I take it no one here has ever done any work for a local planning department. Finding out whether the population is transient in nature versus long-term or lifelong residents is a legitimate issue for planners. It goes to zoning decisions and future planning for what type of construction/housing they need to plan for. Short-term people typically want apartments and duplexes where long-term are more interested in stick built single family residences. It also helps decide how much motel space, etc. the population will support. I have been reading these blogs and the subsequent posts for months now. I have tried to keep an open mind, but I am coming to the conclusion that there are several here who just want to complain about everything and no matter what the Town does, it won't be good enough. Involvement is good, identifying legitimate issues is good and striving for improvement is perhaps best of all. But complaining simply for the sake of complaining, or using a public forum to settle personal grievances, seldom leads to progress. Instead it creates distraction and promotes mistrust. There are so many cries of secrecy, etc., yet every question I have ever posed has been answered promptly and courteously. It makes me wonder about some of the issues raised here and in the other blogs where secrecy is alleged. Does anyone actually ask the question, or are they simply offended because no one volunteered whatever info is at question without being asked?
Paranoia...you raise some good issues. More than once, I've had someone ask me to get information for them and when I suggested they ask the town for it, responses have ranged from: "They'll harass me." "I'm scared to." or just simply "I don't wanna have to ask I want it to be given. Well, it's darned hard to scream about not getting an answer if you don't ask a question. As I've noted before, after getting off to a rocky start, once the town and I both figured out who was required to do what, they have responded to every single request I've made in a timely and professional manner. I know there were attempts made to get people involved in the comprehensive plan process. I'm sure they were the best the town could think to do at the time. However, in that particular case, things could have been done much differently. Trying to get people to be involved takes time and work, and more importantly it takes both trust and mutual respect. When government actions tend to be secretative, trust is undermined. When citizens are 'blown off' by the Mayor in public meetings, mutual respect is slaughtered. There are some problems but those problems could be address by Town Council, Mayor, and Manager if they want to do so. One problem with the issue you address is that the planning department staff must have the latitude to do the jobs they need to do. They must have the ability to work with Planning Commission by finding information and presenting all of that information. If the planning staff is limited in any way (lack of ability, lack of knowledge, lack of personnel, lack of time, or stringent oversight and selection of what is presented by those holding positions over them), the staff's ability to respond effectively to the planning commission/town council request for information. Since you spoke of asking questions, simply go into the Planning Dept. office for Christiansburg and ask for a copy of one of the staff analysis papers for a project. You'll find that no staff analysis has been presented to Town Council or Planning Commission unless the practice has just started. No matter how much work the planning staff does, if that information doesn't make it into the hands of the decision-makers, it is so much wasted effort. Check out this paper on the Ethics of Planners (http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:pf5SvlA9RL4J:www.smrpc.org/landuse/documents/apaethics.PDF+american+planning+association+ethics+statement&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us) . Perhaps something there will indicate why it is the planning staff does not provide much in the way of input to either council or commission beyond "it is consistent with the comprehensive plan map". Or, maybe it is simply a sample of why citizen input is not encouraged. "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean someone isn't out to get you." :)
Posted Jan 28, 2009 at 11:10 AM
RE comment and response above. Mistrust. There is a perception that who you know or who you are guides administration's response. This person didn't list a name, so it's hard to say why and validate the response they got from town (what type of info, which staff members or town leaders, how they perceived you and your request). My interactions with town staff have always been positive. Not so much with manager or council members. They are dismissive and don't really follow up. For years, the mayor (current and former) and council have been satisfied with having minimal input, minimal information, meeting only minimum requirements. It now shows and in my mind presents many areas for improvement at a time when we are seeing an ever deepening global recession with local impacts and must anticipate higher tax burdens due to this and past decisions of council as a group. Personally I don't see any conspiracy, just "a failure to communicate" and is a failure by town leaders more than residents. Yet, to our new president's approach, it is up to the leader to reach out, repeatedly if necessary, to try and engage and channel these into a common purpose. For whatever reasons, past practices have created a culture of exclusion, with the same people always involved rather than extending to wider groups. I have experienced this, I have witnessed this, I have read about it for nearly two decades. I went back to the survey and see where the question about residency could easily have been phrased in a different way, to capture the information Paranoia suggests is needed. Without weighting this with another question relative to whether the respondent plans on staying in the area for any period of time or what drew them to the town, does not provide adequate data for determining stick built versus transient housing. Additionally there is nothing in the questions, and probably not the town's Comprehensive Plan, to show what a preferred mix as a percentage is for professional, commercial, industrial, single family, multifamily, transient, greenway/recreational or mixed use. Personally I see many comments that include complaints but few blog posts that do. I see the posts more as opinion and information and since the town doesn't have its own voice these are the ones I will read, along with local magazines, newspapers and online media sources.