Fireworks’ Future

Oregon Hill residents have had a real love/hate relationship with the annual fireworks displays surrounding the Fourth of July. And if asked, I am sure it would mostly be ‘love’.

That said, this year the RVA Fireworks on The James (usually on July 3rd) is not happening. Before everyone complains and accuses certain Oregon Hill residents of being NIMBY party poopers, it should be recognized that the reason that they are not happening is that major sponsors decided not to support the event this year.

So, fireworks fans can certainly attend other fireworks displays throughout the area, including the free one sponsored by the City at the Dogwood Dell on the 4th. What happens in future years is anyone’s guess, but one way to adjust is to change the nature of the fireworks displays themselves by making them more respectful of nature.

The New York Times has a wonderful recent article on the increasing popularity of ‘quiet fireworks’:

In parts of Europe, quiet fireworks displays have grown increasingly common. In Britain, venues close to residents, wildlife or livestock often permit only quiet fireworks. One town in Italy, Collecchio, passed a law in 2015 that all fireworks displays must be quiet.

By relying on rich color effects and tight visual choreography, designers of quiet fireworks programs can forgo the big explosions and still deliver a stunning show. The hope is that softer celebrations mean less stress for noise-sensitive children, veterans, older people, pets and wildlife.

“We’ve seen more competitors in the last decade or so,” said Rino Sampieri, a senior display manager at Fantastic Fireworks, a company based in England that started selling a quiet fireworks package 30 years ago. “Today, quiet fireworks are part of everybody’s inventory.”

Quiet fireworks are not a new invention. In fact, they are used routinely in classic firework shows as visual effects to accompany the loud bangs. Think of the “comet tail,” which shoots into the sky with a trail of sparkles before quietly fizzling out. Or the “flying fish,” which features tiny tadpole embers scattering away from a silent burst.

What is new is the emergence of a genre of low-key, quiet fireworks displays for audiences that want the fanfare of fireworks without the auditory disturbance.

In addition, there is more development being done on ‘green fireworks’ that do not dump as much heavy metal residue as regular ones. Still, there are a lot of compelling reasons to just not do fireworks altogether. Perhaps the City leaders can take more responsibility and promote better alternatives. Laser light shows, for example, are becoming increasingly sophisticated and crowd pleasing.

Another Editorial From Goldman On Utility Reform

Paul Goldman has yet another Washington Post editorial that follows up on the long-running water utility reform campaign by neighborhood residents. In this one, he gets down to numbers and compares to food tax.

From editorial:

The food tax bill is now about $80 dollars a year for the average low-income family – and it’s still considered too high by such groups as the NAACP and Democratic liberals. We agree.

But in Richmond, the average poor family is paying $150 to $200 a year for regressive, non-existent taxes embedded within their utility bills.

City leaders, aware of these facts, refuse to take action.


Based on Richmond’s new budget, DPU will likely collect between about $30 million of such revenue. Of that, roughly $7 million will be fleeced from the poor.

And again, the real question is how will Council and Mayoral candidates acknowledge and confront this and other financial issues?

Small Richmond is the city’s best local independent news all in one place

sites_map

OregonHill.net and seven other sites are today launching Small Richmond, a new site featuring local independent news in the city.

The eight participating sites cover core Richmond geography and
areas of interest. We are stoked to partner with Church Hill People’s News, Brookland Park Post, Dogtown Dish, Randolph RVA, Richmond Outside, Springhill RVA, and VCU Ram Nation to connect Richmond readers and publishers.

Contact John Murden at murden@gmail.com or (804)564-1360 to suggest a site for inclusion, if you would like to set up a community blog for your area, or for more information.

Click here to check out Small Richmond

Washington Post: Richmond is ripping off its residents

Thankfully, Norman Leahy and Paul Goldman pick up on Oregon Hill residents’ long-running campaign for utility reform.

Will we see responses from Mayoral candidates?

From their Washington Post column:

The government in Virginia’s capital, Richmond, has a dirty little secret: It uses a little-known city charter provision to rip off poor residents by adding a phony, non-existent “tax” — including a bogus federal “tax” charge — to their water and certain other utility bills.

Over the years, this unconscionable rip-off has totaled many hundreds of millions of dollars. It stems from a Jim Crow-era state law added to Richmond’s charter at the request of city leaders.

Monroe Park This Weekend

While the Richmond Police Department prepares security for Presidential candidate Trump’s appearance at the Richmond Coliseum on Friday, protesters are planning an-anti-Trump rally in Monroe Park for that evening and the weekend.

If that was not enough, the Richmond Recreational Dispute Group (RRDG) will be hosting their second annual meeting in Monroe Park this Saturday. From announcement:

Hi! It’s time again for RRDP to host our second event. After our success on Mayo Island we figured we’d hold our second event earlier in the year to fit in a third. We promote engaging in disputes of different varieties including civil, uncivil (shouting matches), and untraditional (Bare knuckle and gloved). WE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTING “TRAIN PEOPLE” AFTER FEBUARIES INCIDENT. At least in the untraditional activities. Large groups are encouraged for group activities. Pizza will be provided but come early. Things kick off at 10PM, possible alternate location is the old Pleasant’s downtown parking lot.

Now, regardless of whether or not any of this is real, Monroe Park supporters are still concerned about the park itself- from Cherry Street neighbor Todd Woodson:

Friends- as of April 14, 2016, its been two years since City Council approved the lease for Monroe Park without, in my opinion, fully vetting the leadership of the Monroe Park Conservancy. The city announced last winter that the park would close in May. I requested updates from both Charles Samuels and the Conservancy months ago on the timeline for renovations and they have failed to even respond. Samuels is not running for reelection to the second district council seat this year.
Perhaps if more people emailed and asked what’s going on, we could get an answer. Please email both Councilman Charles Samuels and Alice Massie with the Conservancy and ask why there has been no progress and in fact, more deterioration over the last two years plus. Thanks- Here are the email addresses:
charles.samuels@richmondgov.com
amassie@monroepark.com

One final note: Despite my best hopes, it does not look like anyone seriously took up my challenge and it does not look like I will be crawling.

TrumpHillary

Times Dispatch Reports Folk Festival Line Up

From Times Dispatch article:

“Our local programming committee has outdone themselves, once again,” said festival director Lisa Sims in a statement. “Dancers from Sri Lanka, zydeco players from Louisiana, virtuosic musicians from Afghanistan, gospel singers from Tennessee and dozens of others will all offer free performances within a half-mile of each other. There’s really nothing else like it in the Virginia.”

Last year, a record-breaking 200,000-plus people attended the festival, up 50,000 from a rainy 2014.

Quick editorial: Hopefully Venture Richmond can become a better neighbor and we can all enjoy it this year as in years past. Still waiting for more agreement to neighborhood’s reasonable requests.

https://www.oregonhill.net/2015/06/24/oregon-hill-proposed-conditions-for-tredegar-green-amphitheater/

There are also still outstanding questions about how this important, historic area of the riverfront will be recognized and preserved in the future.

https://www.oregonhill.net/2015/10/12/folk-festival-and-a-deliberately-missed-opportunity/

Pool Prods On PILOT

Laurel Street neighbor Charles Pool had a “Correspondent of the Day” letter to the editor in today’s Times Dispatch:

Editor, Times-Dispatch:
Your editorial, “Fix it,” makes some good points regarding Petersburg’s troubled water utility, but what about Richmond’s own deplorable water billing? Unlike Petersburg, Richmond tacks on a payment in lieu of federal income tax onto its water bill. Charging federal income tax on the water bill costs Richmond water customers about $5 million annually and is the most regressive way to raise general funds for the city.
Richmond’s monthly water and sewer service charge, the amount the customer pays before drawing the first gallon of water, is almost $10 higher than Petersburg’s. At $29.03, Richmond’s minimum monthly service charge is one of the highest in the country, and disproportionately penalizes those who conserve water. Many Richmonders are not aware of this high service charge because it is still not shown on the customer’s bill, after years of promising to do so.
Richmond is blessed to own its water utility, but it is wrong to use water, which is a necessity, as a cash cow for padding the city’s general fund. Richmond’s water billing may be more efficient but less fair than Petersburg’s.
Charles Pool.
Richmond.

For more perspective on this, click here. Perhaps Mayoral candidates would like to speak to this issue also.

Hydro-Electric Proposal and Future Of James River

This morning some people were surprised by this headline in the Times Dispatch: “Application filed for hydroelectric project at Bosher’s Dam”.
If they had attended the author’s talk earlier this week, they might not have been. Tredegar Iron Works and other Richmond industry relied and used hydroelectric power well into the last century.
For myself and perhaps other Oregon Hill residents, this recalls earlier conversations and speculation about riverfront development and ambitions.

Hopefully, regardless of whether the hydroelectric proposal happens or not, it adds on pressure to do something to improve the river’s health and accessibility AS WELL AS forcing Dominion Power to do more with distributed, renewable energy.

Was the City’s utility department authorized to oppose this proposal, submitted in February? And if so, by who?

This also figures into a Kanawha Canal restoration goal that ‘public private partnership’ Venture Richmond unofficially announced earlier this month. I guess the local media is still not ready to report or discuss this yet, but the devil will be in the details- including water levels and water use, recreational opportunities, whether Venture Richmond will respect neighbors’ very reasonable concerns going forward, and costs in relation to other priorities. The City’s Department of Public Utilities manages the Kanawha Canal level as well as the City’s river level. Yes, there’s a Richmond Riverfront Plan, but we all know how these plans are pretty subjective- for example, there’s no Tredegar Green amphitheater in the Plan and there was a previous canal restoration plan that has been thrown aside.

Going back to this hydroelectric proposal, it may be that upriver (and more affluent) neighbors are able to ‘NIMBY‘ it, or maybe the environmental issues with even micro-hydro-electric at this site are too large to overcome, or maybe there is even more interest in the longterm in getting rid of Bosher’s Dam altogether. But the point is, this proposal and others should be part of a more open, public conversation over the future of the James River, local energy/water policy, and our local government.

Richmond, VA vs. Flint, MI Water Rates

Someone find me a local judge (after trying to draw attention to this issue again, again, and again, I have just about given up on a local journalist or anti-poverty commission)…

After reading this article, entitled “Flint residents paid America’s highest water rates”

If Flint’s bill included both water and wastewater, Richmond’s bill is MUCH higher.
Flint’s bill for 60,000 gallons of water service= $864 annually
Richmond’s bill for 60,000 gallon of water/sewer service annually is $1,069.
748 gallons per CCF of water. 60,000 gallons = 80 ccf 80ccf divided by 12 equals 6 ccf per month.
Richmond’s base service charge for water is $12.99 per month and for sewer is 16.04 per month for a
total base water/sewer service charge of $29.03 per month or $348 per year.
Richmond’s volume charge for water is $3.60 per ccf and volume charge of sewer is $6.42 per ccf for a total of $10.02 per ccf for water/sewer. 6 ccf X $10.02 + $60.12 per month x 12 equals $721 annually.
$348 annual base water/sewer service charge + $721 for 6 ccf water/sewer service annually = $1,069 annually for 60,000 gallons of water/sewer service. This is 20% higher than Flint’s bill which is mentioned as the highest in the country.

Of course, Richmond residents can at least drink our water….for now…

The Story Of How City Council Saved Richmond Mass Transit (And Rediscovered Leadership)

On February 8, 2016, Richmond City Council faced a historic decision on whether to approve the City administration’s BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) proposal for Broad Street. Council members were under a lot of pressure to do so. The corporate and development ‘community’ was pulling out all the stops to make this happen. They enlisted the help of an ‘anti-poverty’ campaign, the Partnership for Smarter Growth (PSG), and ‘young professionals’ to create a slick ‘astro-turf’ or ‘grass-top’ combo that declared BRT the first step towards better mass transit in RVA. Having won state and federal funding, buttressed by promises of hundreds of millions in ‘economic development’, the corporate and developers got the media to portray the GRTC BRT ‘Pulse’ proposal as inevitable, unquestionable, and unstoppable. To top it off, with a few favors pulled, even the Governor issued an unbecoming threat to take money away if BRT was not approved immediately.

In opposition to this speeding vehicle, a plucky and unique coalition of small business owners, neighborhood associations, N.A.A.C.P. activists, and citizens quickly formed to try to head off ‘the Pulse’. This group included members of City Council’s own GRTC Task Force who had resisted previous attempts to strong-arm endorsement of the BRT ‘Pulse’ proposal. The local N.A.A.C.P. expressed its concerns that the current BRT proposal was excluding current GRTC ridership and black East End communities. The local ‘PTB’ (Powers That Be) were furious with this grassroots group, which called itself the RVA Coalition for Smart Transit, and got the local media to wrongly cast them as being anti-progressive/NIMBY, selfish, and solely concerned about parking. Unshaken, the coalition answered back with strong questions about faulty ‘Pulse’ studies, misleading cost estimates, and lack of longterm financing. They reiterated their support for SMART mass transit and suggested an alternative plan. They pleaded with City Council to NOT make a hasty decision, to consider that the real deadline was not till September, and vote for a delay in approval.

To make a long story short, City Council surprised everyone that February night by agreeing to delay the BRT approval vote until August. How did this happen? One Councilperson listened and recognized the concerns of citizens. This Councilperson was part of a younger subset on Council that was tired of the Mayor’s administration’s incomplete and rushed projects. This Councilperson, who planned to eventually announce and run for Mayor, wanted distance from disastrous, wasteful, ill-planned proposals like the Shockoe baseball stadium and Redskins training camp. This Councilperson wanted to establish a new standard of leadership. This Councilperson followed the money arguments and made conclusions with individual attention. This Councilperson was then able to convey those conclusions and convince just enough colleagues to win the delay.

The immediate result was gnashing of teeth by ‘Pulse’ supporters. The anti-poverty campaign and PSG moaned about how mass transit was now doomed. The prominent family that owned the new downtown boutique hotel was visibly upset- one might say miffed even. The family’s patriarch threw a temper tantrum in the lobby of City Council chambers. Corporate special interest group Venture Richmond ‘leaked’ a memo to the media that questioned City Council’s ability to govern. The Mayor retreated to his church and and then to his vacation condo in Palm Beach. The Governor reiterated his bullying threat (but did not act on it). Henrico County officials publicly doubted their future support of BRT and GRTC in general.

But that, my friends, is far from the end of the story. As more days followed the Council vote, new, independent studies started coming out, ones that showed not only flawed projections, but also ways to make better BRT decisions. On top of that, new Federal data reports became known, which showed several missed checklists for ’the Pulse’ and revealed that the City was in danger of future lawsuits if it did not adjust its planning. A month after the vote, City Council was celebrated as a ‘check and balance’ that had adverted disaster. Buoyed by the new information as well as building on GRTC rerouting efforts, a contingency plan emerged from the depths of GRTC, one that had previously been buried, one that was more City-centric, and scaled back the BRT line and instead favored more of a circulator project. This high frequency circulator would touch on Carytown, museums, and Boulevard development to the west on one portion, and touch on Fulton, Church Hill, to the east on another portion. It’s east-west orientation reminded many Richmonders of the old trolley lines and gained favor. The new GRTC circulator plan, while continuing BRT elements, included other possibilities as well- offshoots that could better serve portions of Southside and further Northside, seasonal routes that would connect riders with the riverfront and festival areas.

And that is when suddenly the pent-up interest in mass transit surged. VCU President Dr. Rao, recognizing a sea change, and cognizant of VCU’s role as Richmond’s biggest employer and obviously largest entity on the Broad Street footprint, went to the VCU Board of Visitors with a rewrite of his previously tepid and weak support letter of the BRT project. In the new letter, he made a commitment to Richmond mass transit, BRT and/or circulator. He got the VCU Real Estate Foundation to consider what it could do in terms of land donation and financing support. Dr. Rao announced a real phase out of the private Groom Transportation shuttles and new cooperation with GRTC- as long as planners made a real effort to sit down with VCU planners. Furthermore, University of Richmond President Crutcher declared that U of R would use a small portion of its humungous endowment to double down on its investment in downtown. It would also commit to end its own private Groom Transportation contract and help financially support the GRTC circulator project along with a large increase in the route 6 connection to U of R. Virginia Union University, not to be left out, made its own commitment to utilize and support GRTC. With these new stakeholders coming on board, the longterm financing and ridership outlook for the BRT/circulator was more assured and Richmond taxpayers breathed sighs of relief.

But that’s not all…with more university students and City residents looking forward and excited by the new, reformed proposal, a new optimism and can-do attitude infected not just the City, but the RVA region. GRTC buses noticed new ridership, while building on old ridership. Small businesses wanted to work more with GRTC. Within a year of the vote, the N.A.A.C.P., ecstatic about new, permanent attention to East End mass transit, acknowledged a subtle but real positive change in race relations. Henrico County officials had a change of heart and suggested more, not less, investment in GRTC, as well as redoubled efforts for better bike/pedestrian infrastructure, and not just on the Broad Street corridor either. Perhaps more importantly, Henrico officials agreed to create an express GRTC shuttle from downtown Richmond to RIC airport, as well as a shuttle to Staples Mill Amtrak train station. Suddenly other regional cooperation became tangible (including a Boulevard ballpark and possibly another Amtrak station). Federal matching transportation funds became more possible. High speed rail dreams once again looked closer to becoming reality for the River City.

And the story just keeps going, because what really happened the night of February 8 was not just a sorely needed delay in a lackluster corporate developer-led plan masked in ‘feel good’, half-baked BRT, it was a signal, a real bleat of pulse, if you will, that Richmond’s government, for and by the citizens, was not dead. The Councilperson, the one that took the risk of going against the astro-turf, supposedly unstoppable, corporate campaign for the current BRT proposal, challenged the Mayor and Governor’s bullying, showed that wise leadership was still possible from City Council. That there was fiscal responsibility and care for taxpayers’ money. This Councilperson demonstrated that sincere support for BRT/better mass transit transcended the current proposal, that the haste was manufactured and totally unnecessary, and saw that better information, fiscal diligence, and more stakeholder involvement made all the difference. This Councilperson was later elected Mayor, and was loved by the citizens. This Councilperson made a lasting legacy. This Councilperson kept it real.