Politics

Regina V.K. Williams: Why is she still here?

Sep 28th

Posted by 757HR in Local Politics

The city called for the removal of former HRT CEO Michael Townes after it became known that he had not directly informed the City Council about missing fare box money and cost overruns on the light rail project. So far, we have found out about a number of situations in which people being paid by or spending city tax dollars have been using them improperly. Despite what our city manager, Ms. Williams, says about it not being her or the city’s responsibility, she is wrong. In a city manager form of municipal government, the city is operated as a company with the city manager as the acting CEO. Any business person should know that if a company has an employee acting against the best interests of the company, it is the responsibility of the supervisors and, ultimately, the CEO, to have that employee removed. The city should have a routine auditing process in place for any department that receives city money. Currently, we don’t even have a tip line for fraud and abuse.

The International City Managers Association (ICMA) has a Code of Ethics that it expects its members to follow. Number 3 on their COE list states:

Be dedicated to the highest ideals of honor and integrity in all public and personal relationships in order that the member may merit the respect and confidence of the elected officials, of other officials and employees, and of the public.

The guideline for Public Confidence further expands on this:

Members should conduct themselves so as to maintain public confidence in their profession, their local government, and in their performance of the public trust.

I do not want to detract from Ms. Williams’s past contributions. She has been City Manager for eleven years because, at one time, she had something to offer to the City of Norfolk. Until recent years, I would have agreed that she was doing a fine job. Unfortunately, times have changed. I firmly believe that in almost any situation, a person should not hold a position of authority for longer than ten years. What was good for an organization ten years ago may no longer be in its best interest. This is one such case. As such, Ms. Williams is operating the City of Norfolk in a way that is eroding the public’s trust in her and her office as well as the trust in City Council and government in general.

, ,

Forget $5 Million, Try $1.5 Billion

Sep 24th

Posted by 757HR in Automotive Transportation

The other day I wondered how VDOT could have an extra $5 million dollars for an HRBT study. Today I am wondering how they have $1.5 billion to spare. If you hadn’t heard, an auditor recently determined that VDOT had around $1.45 billion just sitting around. The money can be used for new projects, although they haven’t stated any particular ones. My fear is that Northern VA will get the bulk of the money. That money would do well to help get the proposed tolls down at the Midtown Tunnel. Or it could help Chesapeake pay for their new Dominion Blvd, which is an important corridor into North Carolina. It could be set aside as the state’s first payment to fund a Third Crossing. Whatever the scenario, the money should be used in Hampton Roads to start to make up for the shaft that we have received for years.

,

VDOT has $5 million extra?

Sep 16th

Posted by 757HR in Automotive Transportation

VDOT has $5 million to spend on yet another study? If they had spent half as much on roads as on studies, we might have a world class transportation network here in Hampton Roads. As a region, we need to focus on building a well-planned “third crossing.” Expanding the HRBT will absolutely reduce congestion on that route. The Third Crossing, however, will reduce congestion and add options for a variety of routes. It will allow direct highway access for all of the Port of Virginia’s Southside facilities. Why is this important? It is important because truck traffic will not have to use Hampton Blvd, the HRBT, or any other artery in Hampton Roads. These truck bound for the western part of the state and beyond will be able to be on their way without impacting our major roadways. In the current age of tight budgets and no money for expanding highways, we, as a region, need to make our dollars count. The current Third Crossing plan already is fairly well thought out. It includes a link from Norfolk (near NIT) to I664. It includes a parallel crossing next to I664′s MMBT. It also includes a widening of I664 and a connection to the Western freeway. When coupled with the proposed connector for the MLK Freeway in Portsmouth, The Third Crossing would allow Downtown Portsmouth to have a near direct connection to the Peninsula, possibly boosting Portsmouth’s overall economy. The Third Crossing plan also includes a plan to make it multi-modal, meaning that it could accommodate a light rail line to the Peninsula and/or a freight line out to the west. The light rail line could vastly enhance the economic appeal of Downtown Newport News, spurring investment. A freight line would enhance the appeal of all of Hampton Roads’ ports, meaning increased port traffic without increased road traffic.

View

Hampton Roads Third Crossing in a larger map

The biggest question here should not be which road to widen, but how to fund the Third Crossing.  The estimated cost of the Third Crossing is nearly $6 billion (adjusted for inflation since 1997). That is obviously not going to be funded by Hampton Roads alone. $6 billion is approximately the same as the all of the Seven Cities’ budgets combined. This is the part where we need to get creative. The only way to get this built is to explore a combination of funding streams. Here is my plan:

First, we need to identify all stakeholders and get contributions. For example, the military will benefit from a Third Crossing, so they should chip in around half a billion dollars. The ports will benefit enormously, so the VA Port Authority should chip in around a billion dollars. The state should definitely chip in close to a billion dollars. The federal government is going to have to supply most of the money, perhaps 2.5 or three billion. The rest is going to have to be made up for with tolls. Of course, a Public-Private partnership could be reached that would allow the state, federal, and port subsidies to be reduced (but not eliminated). A one- or two-cent region-wide sales tax could also help reduce the subsidy from the state.

I know everyone hates tolls and taxes. I do to. However, nothing is free. Like I said, the cost of this project is the total of the budgets for all of the Seven cities. If we rely solely on the state or federal government, it will never get built. As for the HRBT, why waste $2-3 billion to build something that we may not need if we build the Third Crossing

, , , , , , , , ,

VA Requiring Light Rail for VB?

Sep 3rd

Posted by 757HR in Light Rail Transportation

According to a VP article today, the Virginia Department of Transportation may require Virginia Beach to use the Norfolk Southern corridor for light rail in exchange for the $20 million dollar contribution for its purchase. This should not be new. That was the stated purpose when the state approved the grant to assist in the extension of the Norfolk light rail line. Its also a great way for our State officials, who apparently can be leaders, to do what is necessary for the progress of the City of Virginia Beach and for Virginia. They have done what Virginia Beach’s leaders have been unable to do. Besides, why are VB residents surprised that state money comes with strings? Nearly all the money that we as cities receive from state and federal sources have strings attached. I can only hope, though, that the state sticks to its requirement and doesn’t back off.

, ,

Chesapeake’s New Red Light Camera

Aug 23rd

Posted by 757HR in Crime

As Chesapeake begins its quest to join Virginia Beach as a photo-enforced city, I once again must question the need for red light cameras. Before I go further, let me say that I do not believe in their effectiveness. I think that increase the number of rear-end accidents at each intersection and I do believe that each jurisdiction uses them for a source of revenue and not to actually protect the public. You can’t really argue too much with the part about accidents increasing. VDOT’s own study in 2007 (The Impact of Red Light Cameras [Photo-Red Enforcement] on Crashes in Virginia) indicated that accidents increased at many Virginia intersections with red light cameras. True, they did reduce accidents at some, but the effectiveness is relatively unpredictable. The reason that I think that cameras are use for revenue rather than for safety: If it was truly about safety and the public was in danger, Police Departments would divert resources from other areas to fight the epidemic of red light running. A police-issued summons would add points to a driver’s license, a hefty fine and/or community service, and increased insurance costs for that individual. The impact of a camera-issued summons? $50. That is of course, if you choose to pay it. Thats the best part. By law in Virginia, you do not have to pay your ticket just because a ticket came in the mail. I discovered this recently in a Virginia Motorists Association article from 2009. Their article was commenting on an editorial at the time in the Washington Post. Basically, they cited two Virginia laws. The first, § 15.2-968.1, specifies how to send the summons. It says,

G. A summons for a violation of this section may be executed pursuant to § 19.2-76.2. Notwithstanding the provisions of § 19.2-76, a summons for a violation of this section may be executed by mailing by first class mail a copy thereof to the owner, lessee, or renter of the vehicle. In the case of a vehicle owner, the copy shall be mailed to the address contained in the records of the Department of Motor Vehicles; in the case of a vehicle lessee or renter, the copy shall be mailed to the address contained in the records of the lessor or renter. Every such mailing shall include, in addition to the summons, a notice of (i) the summoned person’s ability to rebut the presumption that he was the operator of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation through the filing of an affidavit as provided in subsection D and (ii) instructions for filing such affidavit, including the address to which the affidavit is to be sent. If the summoned person fails to appear on the date of return set out in the summons mailed pursuant to this section, the summons shall be executed in the manner set out in § 19.2-76.3. No proceedings for contempt or arrest of a person summoned by mailing shall be instituted for failure to appear on the return date of the summons. Any summons executed for a violation of this section shall provide to the person summoned at least 30 business days from the mailing of the summons to inspect information collected by a traffic light signal violation monitoring system in connection with the violation.

In other words, the city can send you a violation notice if you run a red light. It will be address to the registered owner. You can use the information contained on the violation to file an affidavit affirming that you were not the driver at the time of the violation. If you fail to pay or appear in court, the city must them serve a second summons. The next law tell the city how that summons must be served. § 19.2-76.3 says,

A. If any person fails to appear on the date of the return contained in the summons issued in accordance with § 19.2-76.2, then a summons shall be delivered to the sheriff of the county, city or town for service on that person as set out in § 8.01-296.
B. If such person then fails to appear on the date of return as contained in the summons so issued, a summons shall be executed in the manner set out in § 19.2-76. C. No proceedings for contempt or arrest of any person summoned under the provisions of this section shall be instituted unless such person has been personally served with a summons and has failed to appear on the return date contained therein.

That means that they have to physically serve you with a summons before you can be  fined for running the red light or for failing to appear. So what should you do if you disagree with the use of traffic cameras and you happen to run that red light? Forget about the violation. Chances are they wont serve you with anything. That costs a lot of money and cuts into the potential profits. If they do, its no big deal, just go pay the ticket.

Note: Running red lights is dangerous and you should never run a red light just in spite of it. Please, for the sake of everyone else, this is only for those times that you, say, don’t want to be rear-ended by the moron tailgating you three inches from your back bumper. Also, I have presented the text of the law for you to interpret and use as you see fit. While I have pointed out that the law requires the hand-serving of a second summons, my opinion does not constitute legal advice. If you want that, talk to a lawyer. Or, just don’t run red lights. If you do, it is your responsibility to know the law and to make appropriate decisions.

, ,
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »