Councilman Court Rosen

Vote Tomorrow

2012-02-03T11:10:00.000-08:00

Please vote tomorrow at William Fleming High School anytime between the hours of 9am and 3pm. Support stability and continuity in Roanoke government.

Also, please encourage others to join you.

* Please give 1 hour of your time Saturday, February 4th *

2012-01-23T11:05:00.000-08:00

On Saturday, February 4th from 9AM until 3PM, the primary election for Roanoke City Council will be held at the new William Fleming High School. Any registered voter in the city is able to participate. All you have to do is come vote, then leave.

We have been getting a lot of good things done in the city and with our regional partne...rs over the past several years. With gridlock at higher levels of government, stability and continuity is critical at the local level. We have a formula that is working and we should continue the momentum. Vote for me, Sherman Lea and Anita Price for Council and David Bowers for Mayor.

Please come vote Saturday, February 4th between 9AM and 3PM at William Fleming High School. It will take no more than an hour of your day.

Thank you.

The Lost Art of Congressional Compromise

2011-08-22T06:49:00.000-07:00

From today's Roanoke Times commentary section

The Lost Art of Congressional Compromise

"In executing the duties of my present important station, I can promise nothing but purity of intentions, and, in carrying these into effect, fidelity and diligence."
- President George Washington in a Message to Congress, July 9, 1789

Recently, as Congress fanned out across America to their districts, I observed with amusement the desperation to vacate Washington to begin campaigning for the November 2012 elections with backslaps for a job well done regarding the debt ceiling standoff. I am certain that a significant amount of this month-plus off will be spent collecting campaign cash for re-elections nearly fifteen months away. This
last month observing Congressional gridlock has caused me to reflect on the origin of Congress during the founding of our country.

The structure of the U.S. Congress was determined through The Great Compromise in July of 1787 following months of negotiations between representatives from the largest states and representatives from less populous states. After eleven days of formal debate prior to the vote, in the sweltering Philadelphia heat, the Second Continental Congress voted on and adopted a compromise that provided proportional
representation in the House of Representatives and more equal representation in the Senate. It was a divided vote, but the compromise that passed became the foundation of our legislative branch. Our Founding Fathers, with differing interests, opinions and goals, worked towards and accepted this compromise as being in the best interests of the new nation.

Our country now faces some of the greatest challenges imaginable – two wars costing thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars, an economy on the brink of another recession, a coming societal restructuring caused by an aging population, a tax code with more holes in it than Swiss cheese, and a Congress that fails to meet even the basic expectations of our Founding Fathers. Compromise has become a dirty word in Washington, and political self-interest and an unwillingness to work in the best interests of the country threaten to cause severe, long-term and irreversible damage to our nation.

As governments have struggled for the last several years, localities have been forced to absorb significant cuts in funding. The City of Roanoke, for example, has cut more than $25 million - 10% of our budget since 2007, all while fulfilling our obligations for outstanding debt. Councilmembers, with the aid of a skilled professional City staff, compromised with one another and reduced spending to match revenue through spirited debate, disagreements, and ultimately, compromise. Congress, on the other hand, adhering to rigid political ideologies and with no electoral incentive to compromise, is likely to make our economic situation worse.

As Americans worry about keeping or finding jobs and businesses worry about making payroll, I question whether members of Congress have the ability to pass meaningful laws that provide stability to our economy. It appears that after a month-long debate about our debt ceiling and a capitulation of responsibility, they do not – and now they are on vacation until after Labor Day.

Political gridlock has already caused one rating agency to downgrade the U.S. credit rating and markets across the globe have tanked. This will result in higher interest rates for homeowners, small businesses, local governments and others, all because of Washington’s inability to work together to pass compromise policies that satisfy the vast majority of Americans in the political center. In fact, a recent CNN/ORC poll
shows that 86% of Americans disapprove of Congress – 86%.

All Americans must hold our “representatives” in Congress to the same standards our Founding Fathers expected of themselves. We must expect that members of Congress cease playing political games with our future and place the interests of their country ahead of their own interests. We must expect that, while our country is facing economic disaster, Congress not take the entire month of August off while the rest of us contend with uncertainty, fear of lost jobs or worry about meeting payrolls and interest payments.

Washington is broken. We must not fool ourselves into thinking it is one party or the other – the only party that is winning is self-interest. Glad-handing, fundraising and photo ops do not make for a good Congress. Hard work, commitment to advancing the interests of our country and basic levels of respect for one another, even those on the other side, should be the standard.

Americans should expect members of Congress, in President George Washington’s words, to “promise nothing but purity of intentions, and, in carrying these into effect, fidelity and diligence.”

In fact, our future demands it.

Budget Reality (again)

2011-04-06T06:59:00.000-07:00

On Monday, City Council was presented the working documents for the FY 2011-2012 fiscal year budget. While it's a better year than the past several, we still expect to have to make $4.8 million in additional cuts to the budget. This will be a painful process and we will do our best to find the program and service reductions in the least impactful areas possible. But we need to be realistic that we will all feel the reductions.

It's important to share that of the city's +/- $250 million annual budget, nearly $75million of this goes to RCPS off the top. Then the city must provide certain programs and services, carry out certain required and necessary administrative functions (managing and operating the city generally, collecting taxes and administering the courts and legal functions, funding public safety and human service programs and services required by the state etc.). So at the end of the day, the city has only a little more than 1/4 of the budget to discretionarily spend - the money that funds our more typical activities, maintenance of the city, operation of parks and greenways, management of infrastructural operations and systems etc. With nearly $25 million less money in the last three years, and having to cut this out of the discretionary areas (while maintaining public safety, increasing funding to schools to offset state funding cuts as best as possible), it has been a challenge.

Our city manager, Chris Morrill said it best when he said that we have cut the low-hanging fruit, the medium-hanging fruit and the high-hanging fruit. Now we are cutting limbs.

So this is the less than positive news but I think it's important to try to be as realistic as possible so that folks understand the "new normal" we are living in where we have to find ways to adapt to less revenue and increasing costs - clearly a daunting challenge.

The great news is we have excellent city personnel who are working tirelessly to deliver services and programs, provide public safety to the city and its residents, educate our kids, provide recreational amenities and keep the city looking wonderful and other services - all with 188 fewer staff positions and no raises or cost of living adjustments for several years (we are working to find the resources for a one-time bonus by une 30 of this year). Our budget staff are some of the best around and our administration is handling the many challenges with a genuine understanding of the effects additional cuts will have on the daily lives of our citizens. The initial budget we just received truly reflects this. And council recognizes the need to be fiscally responsible while continuing to position Roanoke and its residents on a positive course for the future.

We will get through this difficult period and I really believe come out in a stronger position on the other side. We've worked through the most challenging financial times faced in a long while, and believe we have generally done well and worked with our partners in the business, non-profit and other outside agency community to more efficiently operate and deliver for the taxpayers.

I hope folks will continue to call and email to provide input on areas to protect and areas where reductions may be palatable.

Thank you.

A possible future for Huff Lane

2011-03-09T10:59:00.000-08:00

Last evening, I was invited and attended the Dorchester Court neighborhood meeting for the second time in two months. I've also attended the Grandview Area neighborhood meetings multiple times in the last several months.

Nearly a year ago, School Board Chairman David Carson and I were charged with coming up with a recommendation for the disposition of the Huff Lane property, the site of the former elementary school that was closed last year, the victim of budget cuts and the desire to take two neighborhood schools (Round Hill and Huff Lane) and merge them into one. Because of this, many students are currently in trailers and Round Hill needs additional classroom space constructed.

As we approached disposing of the property, we had three goals in mind:
1) To protect the neighborhood from further encroachment.
2) To gain a large portion of the resources to build out Round Hill.
3) To improve the existing, heavily used Huff Lane park.

At the neighborhood meeting last night, a local blogger was in the audience and though a recommendation was NOT imminent, it appears that an abridged story is being written.

The meeting last night was one of the most productive I've ever attended. By the end, each attendee indicated they supported moving forward, recognizing that at any time in the process City Council can stop it and not move forward.

No plans have been drawn for the park. Until we put the property for sale, it's hard to know what, if anything, would be an addition to the area and not a detraction.

I'm confident that we will find a solution to the existing Round Hill property that actually prevents further encroachment into the neighborhood while adding significant amenities to the existing park, and as a result, more greenery.

It's not always possible to get everyone on board with every effort. But we can find a great solution that's a win-win-win for everyone.

Common sense in Richmond

2011-01-17T08:07:00.000-08:00

As the General Assembly begins its new session, I'm hopeful that some common sense will prevail. Roanoke has gone through enormous budget cuts - many of which should have occurred, and we've gotten to the point where we have very few areas to reduce services without having long-term impacts on our local economy, social network and core service levels.

I understand that, like Roanoke, the Commonwealth of Virginia has a significant budget deficit. I also understand that raising taxes during a struggling economy reduces short-term economic recovery. And I largely agree (meals tax not indicative!).

The result of continued cuts to public education and comprehensive services that the city must offer citizens creates short-term budget balancing capabilities, though I would contend the long-term economic recovery will be weaker and less stable. Once we eliminate core functions of schools and local government, those who use these services as foundations to future success and an ability to break cycles of poverty will be set back years. This isn't in the best interests of our communities or the Commonwealth, and though politically the short-term benefits seem desirable, the long-term implications are less than desirable.

Let's hope that common sense prevails in Richmond this year. Let's hope that there's a high expectation for civil and productive discourse. Disagreeing on issues is understandable. Attacking others for this philosophical divide at a personal level, or a level solely intended for political gain and targeted towards the next election cycle, is not what those we represent expect or deserve.

September meals tax up 2.6%

2010-11-11T07:40:00.000-08:00

September 2010 meals tax collections exceeded September 2009 by 2.6%. Additionally, we remain ahead of budget projections for the current fiscal year. This is great news as it indicates that overall business for restaurants has increased - people are spending more money at restaurants in the city than expected.

Year to date, Roanoke City Public Schools have received $35,000+ more than they had expected or budgeted for. If the trend remains and meals tax revenues continue to meet or exceed expectations, our schools will receive the funds budgeted for and our city restaurants will have improved business overall.

I'll continue to update the numbers monthly.

City Approves Much-needed Updates to Financial Policies

2010-11-04T10:53:00.000-07:00

Over the course of the last couple of years, we've discussed at length the need to put in place stricter and more financially sounds practices, saving money for economic conditions like the one we are in presently. Though it's taken a bit longer than I would have hoped for, Council adopted new policies to create "savings" accounts that will help to stabilize our bond rating, provide adequate reserves for risk management and self-insured claims, and provide a fund that has resources to dip into if necessary during a "rainy day."

I don't think this accomplishment of the city received enough attention last week. This was a policy passed based on economic conditions and the belief that we should be much better prepared for potential future downturns. It is an aggressive and responsible step towards ensuring the long-term financial stability of the city. I'm proud we took this step.

Below is a summary of the new policies:

1) Maintain the undesignated reserves at 10% and structure the risk management reserve. The city should fully fund those two reserves first by dedicating incremental revenue of $250,000 to $500,000 (.1% to .2% of today's budget) to funding of reserves, subject to funding availability and our overall progress in funding of reserves. We will fund those two reserves by FY 2016.

2) Once revenues recover to their peak level (FY09) as adjusted for CPI
and any permanent tax rate increases, establish an Economic Downturn/Budget Stabilization reserve of up to 5% of the budget. This reserve will be funded by allocating incremental funding of 10% of the growth in local revenues annually until the reserve is at the 5% level.

3) If we reach revenue recovery as mentioned in #2 but have not yet
completely funded the reserves cited in #1, it is understood that the
funding must first be used to complete the reserves listed in #1 before
contributing to the reserve in #2.

4) The city will use real estate, personal property and public service
corporation assessed values in our formal AV ratio policy, however we will maintain compliance from an internal perspective by applying only real estate assessments to the 4% limit.

New Police Chief Chosen

2010-10-13T10:46:00.001-07:00

Congratulations to new Chief of Police Chris Perkins, who was introduced this morning in the Police Headquarters Community Room. Over the past two years or so, I've gotten to know Chief Perkins and have been incredibly impressed by his knowledge, creativeness, and involvement in the community. He has proven to be an excellent leader who uses innovative methods of policing to make the community safer and the police force more responsive to the needs of our neighborhoods. Chief Perkins was instrumental in the introduction of community policing to Roanoke, which has reduced crime and caused our police to become more connected with our neighborhoods to prevent crime as opposed to only reacting to it.

To me, the selection of Chief Perkins also shows wonderful judgement on behalf of City Manager Chris Morrill. This is the most significant appointment since he began his role, and is a great reflection on him.

Congratulations to Chief Perkins.

Work Ahead

2010-09-27T11:22:00.000-07:00

Now that summer is officially over, the pace will pick up on Council. We will begin in earnest, having already had our first budget work session, to put together a budget that is devised in a very different way than has been done before. It's a process known as Budgeting for Outcomes, which essentially requires public leaders to set a price for the city government and to figure out what citizen's most value and how to spend taypayer dollars. I'd encourage you to read about it at http://www.psg.us/resources/osborneletterbfoupdate.html.

We will also have to begin to grapple with a Capital Plan in the city that offers little wiggle room in terms of debt capacity and the stability of our bond rating. So it would seem to me that we'll stick again with more infrastructural and existing capital projects in the current five-year plan.

We'll also be dealing with putting together a Master Plan for the former Countryside Golf Club property. Any plan should have significant recreational components that include well-designed green spaces. Other ideas that I heard at the multiple public meetings for neighbors of the property and other stakeholders could include some nice and compatible housing, a village center, a conference center, playing fields and other ideas. All stakeholders will have the opportunity to provide more public input beyond the meetings already held, and I hope folks will take advantage of that opportunity.

We're already working and have just gone through a third draft of the city's annual legislative plan, and members of Council will likely go to Richmond to lobby the General Assembly on certain requested legislative changes. I'm sure there will also be a lot of talk about our need for the Commonwealth to stop the massive funding cuts to public education.

We've got a busy fall ahead and I'm sure more will arise as we head into winter. There's a lot to be done.

New Council seated

2010-07-07T10:25:00.000-07:00

Roanoke City Council met for the first time yesterday with two new members - Ray Ferris and Bill Bestpitch. I'm looking forward to working with both and am confident we'll have a cordial and collegial Council.

It's also important to thank Rupert Cutler and Gwen Mason for their service. They both worked hard to make the best decisions for Roanoke during these very challenging times. Dr. Cutler deserves the opportunity to have more free time and to pursue challenges important to him. And Ms. Mason has a challenging new role with the U.S. Attorney - one I know she'll be excellent filling.

As we begin a new fiscal year, we should work hard to find opportunities in this financially troubled time. There are opportunities out there and we need to find them and take advantage of our ability to more efficiently and effectively run city government.

Full Council dinner tonight to support meals tax/Roanoke City schools

2010-07-01T07:56:00.000-07:00

Tonight City Council will gather to go on a progressive dinner in support of the temporary increase in the city's meals tax for the sole benefit of Roanoke City Public Schools. The schools faced an enormous deficit this year, mainly caused by funding cuts to localities out of Richmond. Council made the tough decision that a lack of responsibility in Richmond didn't merit similar irresponsibility in our own policy making decisions. Given the significant progress made in our schools over the course of the past two years, Council supported the temporary increase in the tax to stave off major programmatic cuts in the schools.

The dinner will begin with appetizers at Table 50 downtown, then proceed to Thelma's Chicken & Waffles on Orange Avenue for dinner. To conclude the evening, Council will travel to Pop's in Grandin Village for dessert. This dinner shows a strong commitment on the part of Council to support our local businesses while also supporting necessary funding for our schools.

I'm hopeful that the media will cover this positive, community-oriented and important event that shows a united Council working together to better our city. It's an opportunity to highlight an improved working relationship amongst Council Members, and one that is definitely newsworthy.

Regardless, it's the right thing for Council to make efforts to support our local restaurants during a time when few options left us with little choice but to increase the tax over the next two years. I'm really looking forward to it.

Vice Mayor Sherman Lea and today's story

2010-06-22T13:14:00.000-07:00

I received a call this morning from Roanoke Vice Mayor Sherman Lea letting me know that news would be appearing sometime today regarding an inquiry his employer, the Department of Corrections, undertook based on a hotline phone call received earlier this year. My understanding is that Vice Mayor Lea and his employer have resolved the issue, and any differences were reconciled.

As someone who also has to balance my professional life with my work on City Council, it seems pretty easy to me that administrative mistakes could occur in recording time and distinguishing between professional work and council work. For instance, I'll be driving back from a meeting in the New River Valley for my own business when I get a call asking me to swing by the City Building, so I've confused the two. Or I'll get a phone call or email that takes up a half hour on an issue relating to the City and that gets thrown into the mix. For someone like the Vice Mayor, who serves in a senior capacity with the DoC, I can imagine that confusion occurs when trying to administratively account for time.

I've known Vice Mayor Lea in a working capacity for 2.5 years, and have worked especially closely with him for the past two years. He is an honest, decent, hardworking and good man. There's no doubt in my mind that any mistakes that were made in accounting for time between his work on City Council and for the Department of Corrections were entirely unintentional. Mr. Lea has provided leadership during times when we desperately need it, and I have immense respect for his genuine love and concern for Roanoke and his willingness to work tirelessly on behalf of its residents.

A tough year is ending

2010-06-02T08:19:00.001-07:00

I've not posted in a while on this blog, largely because it's a relatively slow time in terms of city council business. We adopted the FY 2010-2011 budget in May, and after lots and lots of meetings and work leading up to adoption, June is a slower time.

It was a difficult year, with major reductions or eliminations of services, reduced school funding and a generally difficult financial period. City staff worked dilligently, with an eye towards efficient delivery of services at reduced funding levels. Staff carried out this task with optimism, seeing opportunities during this time to create a more streamlined government focused on the core services that government should provide residents. There's more work to be done, but difficult times force us to think outside the box.

It's also important to recognize that, by and large, taxpayers have recognized that expectations for services and programs like they were only a few years ago is unrealistic. Having the community understand the difficult task of simply balancing the city's budget has made the process immeasurably smoother. Protecting the city's school system from debilitating cuts in funding, and largely supporting the temporary 2% increase in the city's prepared foods tax to help offset these reductions to our schools, was a real testament to the priorities Roanokers have set for our community.

The next fiscal year's budget will be as tough, if not tougher, than the one we just adopted. The practical effects of the national recession have caught up to Virginia and caused localities to endure the brunt of the revenue reductions that are passed on by the Commonwealth. We should continue to work as a community to maintain realistic expectations and to make sure that the priorities of residents are also the priorities of the city government. Let's find more opportunities to better serve residents with a disciplined, responsible government.

Exercise your right - vote

2010-04-30T07:25:00.000-07:00

THis Tuesday is the Roanoke City Council elections that will determine the make up of Council for at least the next two years. It's an important election and one that will significantly impact the way the city does business and how we'll weather the current financial challenges we face.

I won't encourage you to vote for any candidates in particular - though I have my preferences. Instead, I'll simply encourage you to vote. Participation in the electoral process is the most effective way to shape your government and the way it operates.

Exercise your right and please vote Tuesday.

Emergency Measure to Aid Schools Passes

2010-04-06T10:34:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, Roanoke City Council passed an emergency measure to help offset the massive funding cuts being leveled by the state to aid the Roanoke City Public Schools for the next two years. This occurred in the form of a temporary 2% increase in the city's prepared food tax, and will raise more than $4 million per year over the next two years to protect such critical urban educational programs as summer school, Spanish for elementary students, and most importantly the maintenance of reasonable class sizes, among others.

Nobody likes to raise taxes. And without question reduced spending and targeted cuts should be undertaken. But it's important that we remember that we have made massive cuts, reducing spending last year by nearly $10 million (the schools cut nearly $5 million last year). Additionally, the city will cut another $10 million this year and the schools will cut an additional $5 million. To say that the city has not cut and reduced spending and seeks only to "tax and spend" is simply not true.

The future of our city, I'm convinced, is directly linked to the success of our schools. Adding $1 to a $50 meal, with the resulting revenue this will generate, is a small price to pay when looking towards the economic and social prosperity of Roanoke.

Council deserves kudos for the courage and foresight to make a very tough decision (the state limits our ability to make these sorts of local decisions) to temporarily raise the meals tax to stave off the devastation of our schools. It's a tough decision in the short-term but I believe, if approached correctly and with our planned marketing campaign, that our restaurants will benefit from increased support from residents who recognize that without a solid school system the future holds less promise. And as a temporary measure, the city and schools will have the opportunity/necessity to restructure how we conduct our affairs and find more efficient ways to deliver better outcomes for cheaper.

I know that there are many who hear the word "tax" and automatically oppose it. I understand this philosophy, but I don't believe that it leads to good government. And when it comes to education, sometimes we have to make the tough decisions that make our long-term future that much more promising.

Public Hearing Scheduled on Meals Tax Proposal

2010-03-16T08:12:00.000-07:00

Last evening City Council took the important and urgent step of scheduling a public hearing for April 5 to consider a temporary 2% increase in the prepared foods tax (meals tax) for the benefit of the Roanoke City Public Schools. The unanimous vote to move forward and hold a public hearing enables us to get over the legal hurdle necessary to bring this matter to a final vote, which should be held following the April 5 public hearing.

None of us wants to raise taxes; in fact, I'll be the first to say that I wish I paid less taxes than I already do. But the reality is that lawmakers in Richmond are not fulfilling their Constitutional responsibility to adequately and appropriately fund our public schools and to provide a sound, quality education to children across Virginia. They have let us down, and have created massive budget deficits for localities that make the upcoming budget decisions exceptionally difficult.

I believe to my core that the long-term future of Roanoke is directly linked to the success of our schools and the quality of the students that benefit from those schools. A temporary, 2% increase in the meals tax would provide more than $4 million to our schools, helping to keep class sizes reasonable with the potential to help save 4 year-old pre-kindergarten and other programs that most benefit urban youth.

I'd love to believe that we have no need to raise revenue, or that something less than 2% on the meals tax would suffice. But the whole $4 million+ that a temporary 2% increase would create is needed. This is the reality that City Council faces. And last night was a bold move by each member of Council.

Meeting with Educators

2010-03-09T10:08:00.000-08:00

The Roanoke Education Association held a membership meeting yesterday to discuss the current state of education funding and to discuss any efforts to try to affect final decisions being made in Richmond.

They also invited City Council to attend the meeting and offer a few words. I'm happy to report that the sense I got was that the educators who were able to attend the meeting are fully aware and understand the consequences of the decisions being made in Richmond to cut massive amounts of funding to our public schools. For the last couple of years, and certainly for the next several years, teachers and educational staff have been and will be asked to do more work with less resources, teaching larger classes with less materials offered. We have some of the very best educators in the state, and I think we should all be confident that they will do their very best to help work through the current situation.

I also addressed the meals tax proposal that I made several weeks ago. I believe that the matter is urgent and that City Council should deal with the need for more revenue sooner rather than later. All my colleagues on Council are working exceptionally hard to navigate the current financial crunch, and I believe that in the end we'll make the right decisions.

Vote today

2010-03-02T09:36:00.000-08:00

Today is primary election day in the City of Roanoke. You have three votes and I'd encourage you to cast all three.

I certainly have my preferences, but it's up to each person to understand what the candidates stand for and the type of leadership and committment they'll bring to City Council and to make the most informed decision you can.

No matter who you support, please vote.

The Closing of Countryside

2010-02-22T06:52:00.000-08:00

As is widely known now, a majority of City Council decided last week that continuing the operation of Countryside as a golf course is not in the best interests of the taxpayers of the city. This was a tough decision but a necessary one.

Countryside was purchased in 2005 with the idea that higher end housing could be built, offering more diversity in housing and increasing property tax revenues to the city. There were few responses to Requests for Proposals seeking developer/builders that could create this new housing, and so the course has remained in operation for the last several years.

Recently, the existing operator of the course and the city were in negotiations to try to come to an arrangement to continue operation of the propoerty as a golf course. I did not agree with the idea of putting $1.5 million of capital improvements into the course and continuing to operate it at a significant annual loss to the city. This yearly loss, of course, did not include the more than $400,000 a year in debt service payments for the purchase of the course.

While I fully realize the short-term negative feelings that closure of the course brings to a group of residents that play the course, I truly believe that in the long-term the repurposing of portions of the property into actual park space will be of greater benefit to the community. As is, residents living near the course cannot use the property recreationally unless it is for playing golf. By repurposing portions of the course into a park, more residents will be able to take children or grandchildren to enjoy the green space.

To those who this long-simmering decision impacts, I am hopeful that the long-term use of portions of the property as a park will bring more enjoyment and use, and will be of significantly less cost to the taxpayers throughout the entire community. At the very least, a decision has finally been made and the community can continue on with the knowledge that Council made the responsible decision, particularly in light of the enormous budgetary pressures the city is facing.

Budget Meeting tomorrow

2010-02-18T08:15:00.000-08:00

Tomorrow, beginning at 9am, we will be meeting to begin the tough discussions necessary to prepare next fiscal year's budget. It should be an all day meeting, and anyone who is interested and can sneak away from work for a bit I would certainly recommend attend. If nothing else, it will provide insight into the way the budget is put together each year.

Please feel free to share any comments on specific programs or services that you feel should or should not be looked into for cost-savings.

Emergency Relief for Schools

2010-02-08T08:39:00.000-08:00

Rosen Proposes Two Year, Emergency Meals Tax Increase

Says School budget needs short-term, immediate fix

ROANOKE, VA- Roanoke Councilman Court Rosen today proposed an emergency, two-year increase in the city’s prepared meal tax of 2% as short term fiscal first aid to provide the Roanoke City Public Schools needed breathing room amid massive state cuts to public education. The measure would help fill an enormous funding deficit within our schools and also alleviate significant pressure on the city’s budget, preserving public safety and other essential city programs and services.

“As a small business owner, the last thing I like to see is increased taxes, particularly during difficult economic times,” said Rosen. “But within the next eight weeks our schools must adopt a budget for next fiscal year, and we must look at what's best for the education of kids by trying to keep class sizes lower and preserving programs that benefit our urban youth.”If enacted, a 2% increase in the “meals tax” would have the following impact on the cost of meals in the City of Roanoke:

· On a $10 meal, it would add 20 cents to the cost of the meal
· On a $25 meal, it would add 50 cents to the cost of the meal
· On a $100 meal, it would add $2 to the cost of the meal

“This is only one proposal that deserves a public, transparent and vigorous debate,” Rosen said. “It’s important that city residents also recognize that this measure, while directed to fill a funding gap within our schools, will relieve significant pressure from the city’s budget, preserving needed programs and services delivered by hardworking, qualified employees of the City of Roanoke.”

The next two fiscal years are projected to be exceptionally difficult in fulfilling needed educational, economic development and social programs. If enacted, City Council should revisit this tax increase at the end of the next fiscal year, and should the economy rebound sooner than expected, the Council should revert the meals tax back to its current level. If, as expected, the next two fiscal years are as tough as expected, the sunset clause written into the proposed ordinance would guarantee the tax would end following the next two fiscal years.

“Additionally, this proposal stresses that any tax increase should sunset and end on June 30, 2012 and should be enacted only as a temporary measure and not as a ‘new’ source of revenue that either our schools or the city become reliant on,” said Rosen. “It would be a short-term, emergency tax to fill an emergency need that has been forced upon us at the state level.”

Rosen stressed that this proposal should be debated in the upcoming budget sessions that City Council will soon begin, and that he looks forward to other discussions, proposals and solutions by others to what soon could be devastating funding cuts leveled by the Commonwealth at our public schools.

Snow

2010-02-06T07:55:00.001-08:00

I just travelled some of the city streets, as I did last night, and crews have been out working all night plowing the roads. The main roads look cleared by and large and I've noticed that most neighborhood streets appear to have been plowed at least once.

Given the intensity of the storm and the hard work of so many city employees, I think the city has done an exceptional job during this heavy snowfall.

I hope you agree.

Flood waters recede

2010-01-26T11:06:00.000-08:00

As many folks know already, there was significant worry that the Roanoke River would overflow and cause some flooding in the city with the heavy rains experienced over the last few days. The city's emergency management coordinator was prepared and on top of the situation and very adept at managing crises or potential crises of this nature. We're fortunate to have such a person who has the experience and skill to manage emergency situations of all kinds - natural or man-made.

The good news is that the river waters crested and receded without major damage or destruction. But this possibility reinforces more why the Roanoke River Flood Reduction project is so important to the city and its residents. We're committed to seeing it through and hope the last few days have evidenced why we need to fulfill this significantly completed work.

Stormwater Tax Tabled

2010-01-20T07:47:00.000-08:00

Last evening at Roanoke City Council the decision was made to table, as far as I am aware indefinitely, the adoption and implementation of a new stormwater utility fee that would affect residents and commercial property owners.

I believe this was the right policy decision to make. We have to maintain a competitive advantage with our neighbors and not put ourselves in a position where locations outside the city are more attractive for employers to locate than locations within the city. A new tax on properties would serve to do just this.

I was pleased that Council made this decision and hope that it will spur us to work closer with our neighbors to address this and other issues that require regional solutions.

Not the right time for Stormwater Utility

2010-01-18T09:19:00.000-08:00

As Roanoke City Council debates whether or not to impose a new stormwater utility tax on residents and commercial property owners in the City, Vice Mayor Sherman Lea and I co-authored an opinion editorial that appeared in today's newspaper arguing against this new utility at this time. To read the piece, please click on the link below or scroll down to read the text:

http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/commentary/wb/233397

TEXT:

Stormwater solution deserves reprioritization, not automatic new fees
by Sherman Lea and Court Rosen

The City of Roanoke has one of the highest real estate tax rates in the Commonwealth of Virginia ($1.19 per $100 of assessed value). This is fact – one can visit the Virginia Department of Taxation’s website to confirm it.

Roanoke also has a $60+ million and growing stormwater management problem - which is and should be addressed regionally, the magnitude of which can be seen following steady rains that flood roads, basements and yards. Compounding this water quantity problem, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has passed down strict new water quality standards that our locality must abide by to protect future water quality and to curtail chemical contamination of our waterways.

In response to the new EPA regulations, Roanoke must improve its stormwater infrastructure to ensure compliance. These improvements will cost money. The current proposal, which City Council will soon approve or defeat, charges every residential property a fee of $3 per month, or $36 per year, and businesses $3 per Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU). One ERU is equal to 1,920 square feet of surface. In reality this would be a new tax, but not called a “tax” because certain groups, such as churches, are exempted from taxes whereas everyone must pay a “fee.” This might not seem like a big burden, but coupled with our already high real estate tax rate, businesses/entities like the Airport, Valley View Mall, car dealerships and others will pay fees in the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the amount of commercial surface they own in the City.

Proponents of this new fee argue that a new source of revenue to address stormwater management is needed. The point of this piece is not to declare that some sort of fee won’t be, in the end, appropriate or needed. Rather, we wish to share two arguments for defeating the current proposal and using existing capital money to fund the improvements, while at the same time working with our neighboring jurisdictions to address this regional problem in a cooperative and mutually beneficial way.

First, the City of Roanoke, in Fiscal Year 2010, plans to spend more than $66 million on capital improvements projects. Keep in mind that a majority of this money is borrowed, and like any other loan accruing interest, the total repayment obligation will far exceed this principal amount.
Of the $66+ million slated for capital improvements in FY 2010, and this is not a typo, a mere $179,759 is budgeted for existing storm drain/stormwater problems in our City. That’s 0.27% -- just over one-quarter of one percent. The easy way to address our significant stormwater management problems is to add a new fee to residents and businesses, increasing the tax burden on the very same businesses we rely on to provide good paying, quality jobs. The right way to address those needs is to look in the mirror, recognize that there are some capital projects currently planned that are “nice to haves” and not “need to haves,” and to reprioritize our governmental responsibilities.

The second main point as to why the proposed stormwater utility fee is wrong for Roanoke at present is that we’re in the midst of the worst national recession since the Great Depression, and many would argue in the history of our country. The unemployment rate nationally is over 10%, the highest it’s been in more than two decades. And while the Roanoke region’s unemployment rate has fortunately fared better than the national average, further burdening residents, a large portion of whom are on fixed-incomes, and businesses, who employ those residents, is just plain poor timing. Now is the time to support those businesses, encourage them to create more and better jobs, and not add to the burden on property owners of an already high real estate tax rate.

There’s no question that the City of Roanoke has got to address our major stormwater management needs, both by choice and mandate. But the elected body, City Council, must reprioritize where we’re spending your money. Dedicating the necessary resources to make progress in fixing our storm drains throughout the City is about making tough choices, understanding the fundamental responsibilities of government to maintain its infrastructure for its citizens, and making tax/fee increases the very last resort, not the first and default option.

Bad Blogger

2010-01-11T09:01:00.000-08:00

As the new year begins, I am going to recommit to posting on this blog more often (hopefully a couple of times a week) about issues affecting the City of Roanoke. I have been a bad blogger, there's no question about it, and I am going to work very hard to do better about being more informative to those who read this blog.

Often it's difficult to convey to folks what's happening in the City since news outlets have limited space to cover City issues. I feel as though I have a respnsibility to make sure that I'm sharing as much as possible about current events so that residents are more aware of the decisions that are being made in the City with your money.

I will put up a new post soon and hope you'll visit my blog regularly to stay up to date on current happenings in Roanoke and to provide feedback on those issues.

Court

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays

2009-12-25T06:42:00.000-08:00

I hope during this holiday season that everyone has a very Merry Christmas, happy holidays and a safe, joyous new year.

Monday's Disorder

2009-12-09T09:05:00.001-08:00

This past Monday Roanoke City Council met to discuss a number of items affecting the city. Entering the meeting I felt like there was a lot of work to do and that we could be productive in moving towards budget preparation for the next fiscal year. Unfortunately, this didn't happen.

I have no other way of describing Monday's events but that it was a circus. As many of you know, the Market Building has become a hot political topic these days, largely as a matter of maneuvering and with a great showing of disrespect for city staff. The conversation (which was more one person talking than any actual conversation) took 2.5 hours, contained little in the way of substantive or pragmatic solutions to the coming difficulty that the market vendors will experience during renovation of the building, and was clearly an attempt to score political points.

I understand that we work in an environment on Council that does include politics. But Monday's meeting and particularly the conversation regarding the Market Building was a new low in my mind. All parliamentary procedure was ignored, one member of Council spoke nearly the entire time, and the disrespectful treatment of city staff was totally unacceptable.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with any position on the Market Building, creating chaos during a Council meeting to gain political favor, inappropriately treating staff (or anyone for that matter) and dominating most of the afternoon to fulfill a personal agenda is wrong. It should not have happened and I've already requested that Council discuss this at our very next meeting in order to try to prevent any one member of Council from acting in such an unprofessional way.

The citizens of Roanoke have a right to be upset at the conduct of the December 7th Council meeting and to expect more from their representatives.

Finally Over

2009-11-04T06:58:00.000-08:00

Finally. It's over.

When it comes to government in Virginia, it seems as though there is always an election going on and always negative ads back and forth. The reason is, of course, that there is an election held every single year in the state, and negative ads appear to be the answer for most all candidates.

It's a real shame that we have gotten to a point where it is rare to have the opportunity to actually discuss the issues and policy differences, but instead campaigns anymore are about soundbites and discrediting your opponent, both at the surface level in terms of policy ("such and such will raise your taxes") but more at a deeper level of personal attack.

A lot of people talk about running different kinds of races, about being positive and talking about the issues. But time and again it is shown that negative ads work, so no one is willing to change how they run their own campaigns. And I don't think this is likely to change if we only leave it to candidates to tackle.

What is needed is a consensus of sorts amongst voters who refuse to accept candidates who use personal attacks as a strategy to win an election but instead demand a real debate over the issues that confront us. And as nasty as things have gotten, I can only hope we will reach this point soon.

Finally, this election is over... but of course the Congressional races will start right up....

Choosing Priorities

2009-10-05T17:51:00.000-07:00

Today at City Council, the majority of members voted to allocate $1.5 million to Countryside Golf Course for improvements. This $1.5 million will come from the sale of municipal bonds, so once the million and a half dollars is repaid, with interest, it will have cost taxpayers more like $2.5 million. Given the financial circumstances in which residents and businesses, as well as City government, find themselves, and given the dire infrastructural needs in our City, I do not believe that putting money into a golf course is in our best interest.

Countryside is a nice golf course that could be much better had its maintenance not been neglected for so many years. It's layout is very good, and it is a beautiful piece of property. I understand the desire of residents around the course to want to keep green space near their houses. But having said all this, I fundamentally disagree with the idea that the City of Roanoke should be in the golf course business. We could turn some of the course into a 20- or 30 acre park so that residents living around the course who don't golf can also benefit from the green space, and then seek input from developers as to what would make sense for the remainder of the property.

A few hundred residents and taxpayers in Roanoke actually play golf at Countryside. So as we invest so much money into the course, we are forcing 93,000 other non-Countryside golfing residents to shoulder the financial burden that this debt brings us. And the worst part is that we are not actually investing money that will improve the course; rather, we are patching up some deficiencies in the course such as repaving cart paths and putting in a new irrigation system. These items won't make the course better, attract new or more players and improve the experience of golfers (of which I am one). These items will simply be better than they presently are, with less potholes and higher water pressure. But at the end of the day we are sinking millions of dollars into a city-run golf course that will add debt obligation and likely general fund subsidies to our already stressed City budget.

And within the next six months or so, City Council will be addressing whether or not to add a stormwater utility fee onto each property in the City, causing residential property owners to pay an additional fee each month and commercial properties to often pay enormous monthly fees. So in this instance, and knowing that we have over $60 million in needed stormwater facility improvements, we are choosing to invest capital money into a golf course to benefit those couple hundred folks that play golf at Countryside, and then will come back to talk about adding fees to cover what we know to be a desperately needed stormwater fixes. To me, that is a total mis-prioritization of where we are spending our limited capital resources.

The decision has been made and Countryside will remain a golf course for the time being. I just hope folks remember this choice when we come back to discuss adding additional fees onto our taxpaying residents and businesses to cover our very basic, and largely neglected, infrastructure needs.

Bond Issuance

2009-09-09T10:31:00.000-07:00

At the September 8, 2009 City Council meeting we voted on the issuance of nearly $14 million in bonds to pay for various capital projects within the City. This was an expected and scheduled vote and is the main instrument by which the City gets the resources necessary to take on construction/re-construction projects.

I voted "no" on the issuance of these bonds. Unfortunately, as often occurs in government, it was an all or nothing vote. 90% of the items that we would be taking on this debt to pay for I am supportive of - from bridge maintenance and repair to sidewalk, curb and gutter repairs to the much-needed renovations to the Market Building. These are infrastructural needs that our City has that affect the quality of life of our residents and downtown businesses, and the overall beauty and safety of our neighborhoods. Our neighborhoods are what make Roanoke what it is and infrastructural repairs and upgrades are essential.

The concern I had and have was that there are projects contained within the bond issuance that have had 1) no decision made on and 2) that I do not believe are in the best fiscal interest of the taxpayers. An example would be Countryside. We have yet to decide what will happen to Countryside, so I did not think it appropriate and responsible to issue bonds to the tune of $2 million with no decision yet made. Roanokers already pay high taxes, and increasing this burden during the worst economic period in our nation's history, to me, is not the right decision. On top of that, the governor shared the news yesterday of the more than $1.35 billion in cuts the state is having to make because of revenue shortfalls.

In short, when issuing debt I believe we have to look at what is in the overall best interests of the entire City. And I do not believe that pushing the City over it's self-imposed 10% debt ceiling is responsible (which we are already up against). Money is money, and by including debt issuance for projects that I do not believe we can afford now in our City puts more of a burden on folks who are already feeling the pinch in this tough economy.

Like everyone else, we should live within our means and, just because we have the capacity to borrow money, doesn't mean we should.

Countryside and the Future

2009-08-26T07:27:00.000-07:00

Today's Roanoke Times had an article today discussing the future of Countryside Golf Course and the likelihood that it will remain a golf course for at least the next five years. Having read the article (and not having been available yesterday to comment) I do have a few thoughts that I thought I would share.

These thoughts do not reflect anything discussed in City Council's closed meeting as contracts are being negotiatied and it was my understanding we should not discuss ongoing negotiations. So here are a few thoughts:

- I do not believe it is fundamentally fair in a city of 93,500 people, of whom maybe 500 residents actually play the course, to spend so much money for the benefit of relatively so few. So we will have nearly 93,000 city taxpayers paying millions of dollars for a very few to play golf - and we have a disproportionate number of golf courses in the area, many of whom, if not all, are struggling financially.

- We cannot assume that this piece of property would not be bought if put on the open market as is said in the article. Yes, the economy is bad, but to commit to spending millions of dollars to keep it a golf course simply because we think it won't sell is not in the best interest of taxpayers. Never hurts to try selling.

- I do not believe that because this topic has been debated for a few years that we should just put it to rest and start spending millions of dollars.

- I do not believe that we should commit to spending millions of taxpayer dollars simply so this does not become an issue dealt with year after year by City Council. To spend millions so that seven of us do not have "to pay the political price" is wrong. The price we should be concerned about is the overall costs to the taxpayer.

In the end, this course will cost us millions of dollars. Period. A solution would be to cut a large portion of acreage off the course and to turn it into a wonderful park for residents of the city and in particular in northwest Roanoke. This would accomplish the creation of open space and a park, the alleviation of millions of dollars of subsidies and capital expenses that will be put into the course, and better represent the interest of the taxpayers of this city.

We subsidize the Roanoke Civic Center, the Market Building, potentially an amphitheather, a golf course... millions and of dollars worth of operational subsidies a year...

Council and appropriate involvement

2009-08-18T12:24:00.000-07:00

Last evening, Council weighed in on the proposed merger of the city's recreation teams into four regions. There was much controversy over whether or not teams should be allowed to "stand-alone" or whether it is in the best interest of the children who participate to have the merger go forward.

The truth is that this matter should have never come to Council. I can say without a doubt that a majority of the Council would have liked to have seen this resolved in a way that could be favorable to both sides rather than brought to a political environment, that respected the Youth Athletic Council's decision while also respecting the history of the various other teams who have made huge contributions to the city.

The vote forced upon Council last evening was not on the agenda and was verbally created by a member of Council at the previous meeting. What this tells me is that in the future we need to be more direct in our expectations of Council as a governing body and matters that should rightly be handled at a staff level.

Lesson learned.

Capital Projects

2009-08-04T10:48:00.001-07:00

Yesterday at City Council the decision to delay a municipal amphitheater was reversed and the project (design phase) will proceed. There is a maximum $1.2 million price tag for this portion, and hopefully we'll learn well before spending that amount of money whether an amphitheater has any feasibility as a capital construction expenditure in the future.

While I did not support moving forward with this capital expenditure at this time, the decision has been made and a majority of council (now) wants to proceed. I believed and still do that there are other capital needs in the city that currently outweigh a wonderful, though not necessary, amphitheater project. We have major storm water, road, bridge and curb/gutter/sidewalk needs that must be addressed soon for the future prosperity of Roanoke. We also have a lot of residents struggling and pinching pennies every day and felt the city should lead by example and exercise fiscal restraint.

Having said all this, a majority of council has spoken, and though there were extremely aggressive lobbying efforts undertaken by the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce and DRI (which is certainly well within their rights to do), a majority makes the decisions for the policy matters that affect Roanoke and its residents. At this point, we should all hope for the very best outcome as it relates to the amphitheater and that any further information we receive from the management group will help us to best determine how to proceed in terms of the actual construction of an amphitheater.

In short, council never gets boring... and yesterday was a perfect example of just that! Now it's time to move forward and get on with the important work that lies ahead.

Amphitheater and Priorities

2009-07-11T03:45:00.000-07:00

As was stated today in the Roanoke Times, I have expressed serious concerns over the construction of a new, $14.2 million amohitheater in downtown Roanoke. While I would love to have another great concert and arts venue, I simply do not believe that Roanoke can afford such a luxury item at this time.

The article in today's newspaper was, at its very best, incomplete. A number of items stated as suggestions are are not suggestions at all, but factual. For instance, it is not a suggestion as to what the debt service and subsidy would be for a new amphitheater, it is fact. Because of the incomplete nature of the Roanoke Times article, I have decided to post the letter I wrote to my colleagues here.

- START LETTER -

All,

I wanted to write this email to you all regarding the inclusion of the amphitheater design in the CIP that we discussed Monday. As you recall, the design itself is projected to cost $1.2 million with construction not able to commence until 2013.

My purpose in writing this is because, after really looking closely at the numbers year over year debt and subsidy, I do not believe it is in the best interest of the taxpayers of the city to proceed with this project at this time. Below are my reasons for this conclusion.

First, we are all aware of the enormous infrastructural challenges we face in the city. We have more than $7 million in bridge maintenance and repair, more than $60 million in stormwater needs (this is in today's dollars and does not include additional needs and costs that will arise in five, ten and years beyond that), as well as two pools, the market building and other existing needs that must be addressed.

Second, between the time the design would take place ($1.2 million) and the time the amphitheater would be built ($13 million) is several years and two possible council changes. As we all know, when councils change then priorities change. I do not believe it is fiscally responsible to commit to $1.2 million now when the chances of priorities changing over the next four years is rather strong.

Third, I do not believe we have near the necessary financial information to make such a serious and costly decision. Please see the follow:

-At $14.2 million total cost for the amphitheater, our annual debt payments, given current market conditions and interest rates (which may be higher in four years) would be $1,178,600 (that's $83,000 per $1 million borrowed).

-On top of this, and something we have really hardly discussed, is that the projected numbers indicate that, beyond the nearly $1.2 million in annual debt service payments, there is a $500,000 per year subsidy that is called for - this subsidy assumes the projected numbers are correct - if they are not, the subsidy could be even more than $500k per year.

-So, if market conditions stay the same, and we have unusually low interest rates right now, and the cost of construction remains fairly constant, we as a city will have to pay nearly $1.7 million per year just to meet our debt and subsidy obligations. This does not include maintenance costs.

Fourth, we have had no discussion, and I don't believe that the City Manager or Finance Director have been asked, but have we done any projections as to what we believe the indirect revenue impact would be with an amphitheater?? By this I mean do we have any idea how much tax revenue would be generated or any projections of this from downtown food, shopping and the indirect benefits from an amphitheater? I cannot find anything that even begins to address this, which to me is vital and necessary information to have to know whether the costs of the amphitheater are outweighed by the benefits.

And lastly, the Civic Center in '08 required, debt payment and subsidy, $2.7 million from the city. If we are having to subsidize it to such an extent, it is difficult for me to understand how we would not be required a continued and large subsidy for an amphitheater. And will we be pulling attendance from the Civic Center and thus creating the need for an even larger subsidy. We are hopeful that Global Spectrum will be able to reduce the Civic Center subsidy, but we are no where near close yet.

In closing, I believe that an amphitheater should not be a priority for our city at this time. We have some real needs in our neighborhoods and in the community that I believe have a direct impact on the future prosperity of the city. I would love an amphitheater as one resident, but having spent so much time in the neighborhoods across the community, I believe that concerns over curb, gutter and sidewalk, stormwater, economic development and the need for new and better jobs, and other needs are a much higher prioirty for our residents. We must take care of the facilities we already have, such as our pools that do need significant renovations, before we begin to build new capital facilities.

I would only ask that before we finalize the CIP we address this again and do more homework. I do not believe we have a full understanding of the implications of committing our taxpayers to more than $14 million and believe it would not be a responsible course of action to proceed with so many unanswered questions. Given all this, I will not support moving forward with the $1.2 million design at this time.

Thanks for your consideration and I hope you will agree that we should discuss this more, ask Ann Shawver if she can figure out some projections for indirect tax implications, overall subsidy and debt service and the real numbers that we need, aside from consultant projections, to determine whether this is a wise project or not.

Sincerely

Court

City Council: Correcting the media record

2009-07-07T06:47:00.000-07:00

Yesterday was the first City Council meeting of the new fiscal year, and one of the main areas of discussion centered on the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which determines what we will build or repair in terms of capital expeditures. Most of the money for any capital improvements would be borrowed and payments, as with any loan, would be due plus interest.

It is important that I correct some errors that a couple of news outlets reported yesterday/last night/this morning. NO project (Market Building, Amphitheater, Washington Park Pool) was approved to move forward yesterday. Yesterday required no votes. It was City Council directing staff to include certain items in the CIP which has to be FINALLY approved in the next month or so.

This said, and knowing these mistakes in reporting by the media were based on a complicated system of legislating, I think it would do the community a service for those outlets to run corrective stories, and hopefully they will.

So, where do I stand on capital projects? I will support moving forward with an extensive renovation of the Market Building. It is sorely needed and badly overdue.

As of now, I will not support construction of an amphitheater ($13 million), municipal operation of a golf course (minimum $2 million known) or a regional waterpark ($3.6 million). I do not believe we can afford these items and that both will require subsidies in perpetuity once they are built. In a city with over $60 million in needed stormwater repairs, more than $7 million in bridge renovation and repair and millions in needed neighborhood improvements, I cannot support building luxury items that will cause increased taxpayer subsidies when we already are forced to subsidize other facilities we own (civic center, market building).

To clarify once again, there was no need for any vote on the CIP yesterday. For instance, I voted yes on putting the Amphitheater on the table for inclusion in the CIP. I could have as easily said 'no,' but again, these were not technical votes. The real debate will begin as the final CIP draft is provided to us.

Just wanted to set the record straight.

Brief Hiatus

2009-06-29T08:49:00.000-07:00

As you might be able to tell, I have been on a bit of a summer hiatus. We have three weeks between meetings this month (just how the calendar falls this year) but I will resume my posting shortly.

I hope everyone's summer is off to a good start.

Retirement of City Manager Darlene Burcham

2009-06-02T05:32:00.000-07:00

As has been widely reported, City Manager Darlene Burcham and Roanoke City Council agreed to a March 1, 2010 retirement date for Ms. Burcham. These decisions are never easy, and given the circumstances I believe that yesterday showed great professionalism on both the part of Ms. Burcham as well as the council.

Ms. Burcham has dedicated nine years to the management of the City. While we all will never agree on every decision that has or has not been made, Ms. Burcham has been a dedicated, committed and hardworking member of the Roanoke family. She has accomplished many good things in her time in the Manager's office.

I am confident that the next nine months will be a fruitful time for the City Council and Ms. Burcham to work together to accomplish great things, from hiring a new Director of Economic Development to lead our increasingly important efforts in that area to the much-needed renovation of the Market Building. Ms. Burcham is committed to working tirelessly until the day she retires, and as a council we have come to expect nothing less from her. We will work closely and collaboratively with her to make decisions that are in the best interest of the most residents of the community.

As Council moves forward in its search for Ms. Burcham's successor, my focus and work will be to help find a new city manager with a strong background in economic development and financial management, and someone that recognizes the many wonderful attributes of our diverse community. I think this is particularly important for Roanoke in this economic climate and want to make certain that Roanoke is poised to take advantage of opportunities to attract more and better jobs to the area and encourage business growth and expansion.

Increased and expanded opportunity is in the best interest of each member of our community and I look forward to working to accomplish these goals.

Statement on Personnel Matter

2009-05-29T13:47:00.000-07:00

I have received nearly two dozen calls or emails regarding the piece that ran in today's newspaper concerning the future of City Manager Darlene Burcham.

I am a true believer in an open and transparent government and believe that the citizens of Roanoke deserve and should expect that information be shared with them by their elected officials in a timely and succinct manner - our government is only as good as the citizens that support it and the faith that they have in their decision-makers.

Out of respect for the City Manager and the Office of the City Manager, however, I will not address current discussions surrounding a highly sensitive and important personnel matter. Ms. Burcham deserves the professional respect and courtesy to have public comments withheld until the appropriate time.

Thank you.

Court Rosen

Happy Memorial Day

2009-05-24T19:45:00.000-07:00

I haven't posted in a little while as I have been decompressing from the long, protracted city budget work period. It had been quite intense for several months so it's been nice to have some quieter time to spend with our son, family and friends.

I hope everyone has a nice Memorial Day. It's a good opportunity for a long weekend and a time to reflect on and think about the hundreds of thousands of soldiers stationed overseas, both in areas with peaceful relations and areas entrenched in war. While we relax for a deserved day off, there are American men and women abroad working seven days a week to keep America safe.

Memorialize them on this day.

Pools Will Open, Schools a Bit Less Fortunate

2009-05-07T13:43:00.000-07:00

Earlier today Roanoke City Council met for what is known as Budget Study. Essentially, Budget Study is where the Council finalizes the next fiscal year's budget before it goes to a formal vote to be adopted into law.

During this meeting, we discussed an item that I believe to be important to the youth of the City. We decided, after weeks of debate and searching for the resources, to open both the Fallon Park and Washington Park swimming pools for the upcoming summer. At one point there was talk of a public/private partnership that would have kept Fallon Park open and seemed to be the only financial way to do so. That fell through, however, and during the course of those negotiations the City projected a slight increase in revenue and other resources that could be available.

I would have had trouble supporting the opening of one pool and not the other. Though public/private partnerships can be a model for good government, in a City as divided as ours, opening one pool without the other would have sent the wrong signal to our residents. So I'm happy we were able to find the resources that will allow children from various parts of town to have recreational opportunities this summer that will hopefully keep kids busy and out of trouble.

On another note, we did not agree to provide the schools with additional resources to help boost enrichment in summer school offerings, stave off elimination of teachers' assistant positions or fill ten empty elementary teacher positions. I believe this is a mistake and, if you recall, made a proposal a few weeks back that would have provided $1.6 million of taxpayer money from the Budget Stabilization Fund (rainy day fund) to accomplish just this (http://courtrosen.blogspot.com/2009/04/proposal-for-additional-funds.html).

Our school division is ranked second worst in the Commonwealth of Virginia. We have suffered from declining achievement for years, and while efforts to attract new business and create new jobs have been many, until we make fundamental changes to the way we educate our children and prioritize our schools, I simply think these efforts will prove to be less than effective. We cannot make small, incremental changes in the way we educate this City - we must make a tidal wave of change to turn around a system that has not improved in many years.

I appreciate my colleagues willingness to increase City funding to the schools... I truly do. The state did not fulfill their financial obligation, and as much as we choose to blame the state for shirking its responsibility, these are still our schools whose success will affect the future of our City. Major policy changes and programs have been enacted over the last couple of years with the by a dedicated school board and superintendant. And it is my belief that until we dedicate ourselves to seeing through a major overhaul of our school division, a tidal wave of change, we will fail to see a major turnaround in our economic climate here and our ability to create new, highpaying jobs for our residents.

Education is the key to fighting poverty in our City and to improving the quality of life for everyone. I'm disappointed that we did not do more to avoid the programatic elimination that RCPS has been forced to undergo. But I know that they will do the best they can with the resources they do have. And we should be grateful for their dedication.

Proposal for Additional Funds

2009-04-21T08:55:00.001-07:00

Yesterday, during discussion of the upcoming FY 2009-2010 budget, I proposed that the City withdraw a little over $1.9 million out of the Budget Stabilization Fund (BSF), also known as the "Rainy Day Fund." I did not take my proposal to use this money lightly and spent significant time researching and determining the benefits vs. costs of doing so. In the end, I decided that, in my opinion, the needs of our schools and certain city services were too important to not attempt to address additional funding for the next fiscal year.

It is my belief that the future success, prosperity and long-term stability of the City of Roanoke is directly correlated to the success of our public schools and certain other programs that benefit, in an educational way, the youth in our community. There is no doubt that we are faced with a national economic recession that has sent ripples throughout state and local governments. Had we not faced such an unexpected and immediate emergency, I would have been loathe to even consider using any of the more than $19 million of unencumbered funds in the BSF, but feel as though we have little additional ability to raise resources. I am not in favor of raising taxes as I fundamentally believe that raising taxes during a recession, with folks losing jobs and discretionary income in decline as well as significantly reduced pension and retirement plans, is not the answer.

The BSF is comprised of taxpayer money paid in over the years. It is not the City's money, and I don't believe we should fear using taxpayer money when there is a real need for it. That said, I understand why some members of City administration do not want to use any of these funds. There are two main reasons that some are opposed - I completely understand these reasons and would agree with them 99% of the time. To me, however, this is that rare instance where we should go into the BSF. The two main reasons not to go into the BSF are:

1) Bond-rating agencies look at local government reserves when rating the locality. Ratings are important because they impact the interest rate that a locality can borrow money for and a downgrade in rating will increase that interest rate. I contend, however, that a slight downgrade is not the end of the world. IF we were to be downgraded, it would increase the interest rate by .25%. In other words, if the City were to borrow $20 million, this increased interest rate would cost the City between $50k and $60k per year. Is this ideal? No. But given the state of the City's budget, I believe worthwhile given the immediacy of the need. Additionally, in the scheme of a $257 million per year budget, this interest payment is rather minor.

2) This is one-time money for what could be recurring expenses. That is, if we find ourselves in the same, tough budgetary situation next year, we would have the same expenses and would then have to decide whether to go into the BSF again to pay for the services. This makes sense, though again would contend that any emergency or unexpected need can always be recurring. No one can ever predict what will and will not be a recurring event. For example, even a natural disaster can be recurring. Locations are hit by tornadoes two years in a row, floods two years in a row or other uncontrollable events. Likewise, we may or may not be out of the current recession next year, and though it appears we will be in a similar situation, nobody can predict that.

I believe to the core that now is an emergency that we could have never predicted but that we should not ignore when the effects on our schools and certain city services that are vital to the future of Roanoke are in danger. Major decisions and policies have been set that we all hope will be successful and will fundamentally change and improve our schools. Now is not the time to watch those recently implemented programs to be allowed to disappear.

Below is a breakdown of the proposed money and where it would go. Please feel free to leave your comments, both positive and negative, regarding my belief that we should withdraw money from the BSF for the FY 2009-2010 budget.

Total $1,907,867

$202,867 - Would keep both Washington Park and Fallon Park pools open.
$60,000 - Would keep the bookmobile operational.
$25,000 - Would keep libraries open 5 days a week.

$300,000 - Would maintain enriched, technology and life skills courses in RCPS summer school.
$600,000 - Would retain 20 teaching assistants, all accredited and the future teachers of RCPS.
$120,000 - Would retain 2 guidance counselors.
$600,000 - Would enable 10 empty elementary teaching positions to be filled.

Again, I want to remind any reader that I did not take this proposal lightly, believe that the above needs are vital to the community's educational attainment and economic future, outweigh the costs associated with going into the BSF, and are the right thing to do.

Court

Budget Update and Roanoke Regional Partnership

2009-04-05T08:40:00.001-07:00

City Council met Saturday morning, April 4th for a special meeting on the City and School budgets for the upcoming year. Overall it was a positive, collegial meeting at the end of which we voted to provide the schools an additional $1.5 million with a $500,000 contingency should some state revenue we expect to go to the schools not make it.

By working to provide this additional money, 31 teachers will not lose their jobs and three school nurses will remain in RCPS to provide health services to students, many of whom rely upon school nurses for their only source of healthcare. Given where we were financially only a month ago I'm proud that Council made this decision.

Truth be told I would have liked to have seen more resources go to our schools to avoid cuts in programs such as summer school, swimming classes for elementary students, pre-kindergarten and others. I believe we have a responsibility to make sure that kids in the City of Roanoke have access to an excellent educational system that prepares them for life. Our economic, social and cultural future as a city relies on it. And I do believe our current School Board and RCPS administration has made significant progress to this end.

The reality is that we have more than $19 million in a "rainy day" fund that we could use if the Council decides to. Using this money will certainly make it more expensive for us to borrow money (due to bond ratings, which are inherently flawed and likely to be changed at the national level), but if this is not a rainy day in the present economic recession then I'm not sure what we could consider an emergency. That fund is taxpayer money, so as we are forced to tell our citizens and employees that we have no money for X program or Y program, the fact is that we do have the money.

I totally understand why some in the city administration do not want to use this money, but again, I believe this is the rainy day that that fund is intended to offset. I do think this will be addressed again over the coming weeks. Taxpayers should expect it.

Finally, I do want to point out, and wish that it had been covered in the newspaper today, that the City Council restored 5% (half) of the previously decided reduction in funding to the Roanoke Regional Partnership. To me, this was very important because cutting economic development activities during times like these I believe to be an enormous mistake. Now is the time we should be ramping up activities. And I think this additional funding to the RRP signals Council's desire to focus on economic development, the efforts of which we must be successful at in order to create more and better jobs and to retain existing jobs.

More to come soon...

Baby Hiatus

2009-03-30T19:02:00.000-07:00

As many of you know, Brooke and I were blessed with a healthy baby boy last Monday about this time. This has been consuming and enjoyable, which is why I have failed to post in the last week. I never thought that looking at my own child would be such a moving and emotional experience, and I love it.

The current budgetary situation with our schools and any additional funding to them from the City is coming to a head in the next week or so, and I will be sure to post as that process moves forward. Thanks for understanding my absence.

Continued Budget Work

2009-03-18T07:54:00.001-07:00

This past Monday, City Council continued its work of finding ways to reduce expenditures in the required effort to balance the City's FY2010 budget. As everyone knows, we are experiencing a severe economic contraction that is affecting government, businesses and non-profits, as well as families trying to make ends meet. Tough decisions have to be made, ones that are not fun but required.

As one member of City Council, and as I look through the line items that as a whole make up the entirety of the budget, it is important to me that as we reduce services and eliminate programs, we make an effort to do as little harm to as few people as possible. But there is no doubt, and I fully recognize and understand this, that any reductions or eliminations will negatively impact some citizens. We all wish that the economy was robust and expanding, but as we face the reality of the seriousness of the situation, there is no escaping the fact that we are significantly short in our revenue. Additionally, I believe that it is imperative and responsible for the City to do anything and everything we can to provide the school system additional funds to continue progress that is being made to improve our schools and to avoid unnecessary teacher layoffs.

I hope that anyone with suggestions or other input will contact me via this blog, my email or cell phone. I welcome it. Tough decisions will be made, and there will be unpopular reductions or cuts. These are unavoidable.

But now is the time for City Council to step up, make the tough decisions that have to be made, and show that in times of crisis, leaders can and will step forward and work to carry the City forward. I will do my best to be a part of the team that must work to help continue much of the progress we have made.

The 17th House District

2009-03-04T10:40:00.000-08:00

This past Saturday, Del. William Fralin announced that he will not be a candidate for re-election to the Virginia House of Delegates this upcoming election. And as one might expect, jockeying for position began in earnest almost immediately. There are a lot of good folks out there who are considering runs for this seat, including many of my fellow Democratic colleagues.

I continue to be asked about my interest in running for Del. Fralin's seat, so I thought it appropriate to post on my blog to be clear in response to the inquiries: I will not be a candidate for the nomination of my party for the 17th House district.

I am flattered by the encouragement that I have received. It's humbling to have people suggest that I could do a good job representing the 17th in Richmond, but now is simply not the right time for me personally or professionally.

First, Brooke and I, within the next three weeks, are expecting our first child. I want to be around as much as possible to experience and get used to fatherhood and the many wonderful things it will bring to my life. And I want to continue to spend as much time with my wife as she will allow! Undertaking what will certainly be a challenging campaign is something I am not willing to take time to do right now.

The second reason I will not be a candidate is because I feel a responsibility to the citizens that elected me to Roanoke City Council to help as we work through what can be described as nothing less than a fiscal crisis. We are in the midst of trying to figure out how to balance the City's budget while avoiding harm to our schools and other major services. Personally, and I only apply this to me, I am not ready to turn from this task and believe that I have a responsibility to continue working hard on the many issues affecting our citizens. We have a bright future ahead of us, and again, the time necessary on the campaign trail is more than I am willing to commit at this time and in the midst of preparing the City's FY2010 budget.

I certainly wish whomever decides to enter the race the very best of luck and will look forward to hearing issues that affect our City and region discussed during this campaign season.

Support Local Businesses and Jobs

2009-03-02T12:04:00.000-08:00

Today, Vice-Mayor Sherman Lea and I introduced the resolution that follows. The purpose of this resolution isto encourage residents and employees of the City of Roanoke and Roanoke Valley, during these troubled economic times, to support local businesses as much as possible. By supporting local businesses, we not only have the opportunity to create new jobs but, particularly in our current recession, we can retain existing jobs.

IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA

The 2nd day of March, 2009.

A RESOLUTION encouraging the residents and employees of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, when purchasing goods or services, to take into account the importance of using city or regional businesses whenever possible.

WHEREAS, the residents and employees of the City of Roanoke, in the course of daily life, purchase necessary and essential goods and services from outside businesses and vendors.
WHEREAS, contracting with local businesses will demonstrate confidence in the strengths and capabilities of the region’s business infrastructure and send a positive message to companies that will locate and grow here.

WHEREAS, many existing businesses located in the City of Roanoke and Roanoke Valley have unique capabilities, are award-winning and recognized leaders in their fields.

WHEREAS, the local purchase of goods and services is a great investment for the community because more money stays with local businesses and in the local economy.

WHEREAS, using local businesses and vendors to provide for the needs of the residents and employees of the City of Roanoke will help to create new jobs, retain existing jobs, and strengthen the local economy.

WHEREAS, people are more likely to invest in or move to the community if we preserve the culture embodied in our unique local businesses.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:

Council adopts this resolution as a means to encourage residents and employees of the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Valley to seek goods and services from local businesses that provide jobs to city and regional residents, whenever possible.

The City Clerk is directed to forward an attested copy of this resolution in electronic form to all City employees.

ATTEST:

City Clerk

Commentary from Roanoke Times

2009-02-15T13:19:00.000-08:00

The following is Commentary that appeared in today's Roanoke Times:

Roanoke City Public Schools are a reflection on our city and a fair measure of our priorities. I consider the perceived lack of quality in our schools to be one of the greatest hindrances to economic development in the city. I use the word "perceived" because I am convinced that we have good schools and teachers and they are getting better. Progress is being made to improve the quality of Roanoke's schools (Community College Access Program, New Honors Program in middle schools, and many others), but we can't ignore that our schools are ranked near the bottom among our peers in the commonwealth. To make matters worse, this year we face an unprecedented financial shortfall that could seriously impact our progress in the school system.

As elected officials, government administrators, business leaders and community residents, our priorities for the city should include creating an environment that encourages entrepreneurship and produces good jobs. Obtaining these goals requires a high-quality education system. While we can provide the very best services to our adult residents, enjoy wonderful capital amenities and a high quality of recreational life, there will always be a ceiling on how strong we can be as a community if we find it acceptable to have barely 51 percent of our students graduate from high school on time. This will be what we are known for and will have a direct and negative financial impact on the city for generations to come.

This is going to be a tough year financially for everyone and, with an expected $15 million budget shortfall, our schools will not be exempt. As with any enterprise that runs on a budget, the Roanoke school board and city council have tough decisions to make. These decisions pale in comparison, however, to the thought of having to halt, and maybe reverse, the progress we have made in improving the quality of our city schools. The troubled economy and loss of 10 percent of the resources that go to our schools could result in school closures and classroom size expansion, which means children may find themselves getting less attention and instruction than needed. I worry about the devastating effect this may have on our most vulnerable students and their families.

During times of shrinking budgets, we are forced to take a hard look at our expenditures. A byproduct of this examination is that we will have an opportunity to identify areas of unnecessary spending, such as programs that are underused or outdated, and generally make government function more efficiently for citizens. And certainly, like other areas of government, our schools will and must find some areas to reduce expenses. But a $15 million budget shortfall cannot be recovered by cuts to superfluous spending; rather, this shortage will require tremendous gouges to our system -- cuts that are far deeper than our students should have to endure.

A top-quality education is the one, common way for people to improve their lives, positively change their circumstances and continue to push forward the limits of innovation and accomplishment. With the many challenges we face throughout our community, this is the gift we can give to Roanoke's children, all of whom deserve a chance and all of whom need an education for the success of their individual and our collective futures.

Unfortunately, perception and politics are a part of the reality we face. But the future of our schools, the quality of education afforded our children and our priorities must transcend perception and politics. These are our schools. Their success will determine the long-term economic future of our city, which includes the jobs that we have for our residents. These issues affect children from all socio-economic households, regardless of whether these effects are immediate or arise in the future. If we are not willing to stand up for our schools, then it is my belief that we are misguided in where our priorities should be.

This is about leadership and whether Roanoke City Council is willing to do whatever necessary to support the city schools and the tough decisions they face. We should be ready to roll up our sleeves, get down in the trenches and work alongside the school board to try to figure out a way, as hard and painful as it will be, to protect our schools as much as possible. It is not any student's fault that we are in troubled economic times and financial hardship. It is not their fault that state revenues are down. It would sadden me deeply if we are not willing to try our best to make the coming school years as stable and smooth as possible.

Community Input Budget Meetings

2009-02-13T20:08:00.000-08:00

Many thanks to City staff for their hard work in scheduling two community input budget meetings to be held at the beginning of March. These meetings will offer residents the chance to learn how the budget process works, where scarce resources may or may not be allocated and other information that contributes to the very tough decisions that will have to be made during the current budgetary crisis.

The second purpose of these two community meetings, and the main reason I think these meetings are so important, is that while each department within city government is being asked to label programs high priority, medium priority and low priority, taxpaying citizens ought to have the opportunity to tell City staff their priorities in this tough fiscal time. We need to make sure that we acknowledge that sometimes staff might consider something low priority while citizens consider that very same thing a high priority. Open communication and a transparent process are vital .

The two community meetings will be held on:

Tuesday, March 3
Virginia Western Community College
6:30PM

Thursday, March 12
Roanoke Civic Center
6:30PM

I strongly encourage all those interested in providing input and understanding budgetary requirements, and those leaders throughout our neighborhoods, to come to one or both of the community meetings.

Hope to see you there!

Who should City Council Appoint?

2009-02-10T11:12:00.000-08:00

City Council must appoint someone to fill out the remainder of the term for the seat being vacated by Alvin Nash. I would love to hear your thoughts and suggestions... any feedback, positive or negative, is welcome and appreciated.

Who should serve until July 2010??

Resignation of Alvin Nash

2009-02-09T10:24:00.000-08:00

As has been widely reported, Alvin Nash has announced his resignation from Roanoke City Council. In my mind, Mr. Nash made the right decision for himself and for the City. We face an unprecedented fiscal crisis in Roanoke (as at every level of government) and need to have all members focused on the budget, the impact it will have on our schools and City services, and fully prepared for the difficult decisions ahead.

Fifteen years ago, Mr. Nash founded Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation, and it holds a special place in his heart. As Blue Ridge struggles, Mr. Nash made the decision to return to his employment there and to work to try to save the troubled organization. Additionally, there has been lots of attention focused on the HUD repayment matter, and it had become a distraction to Alvin and his ability to focus on City Council decisions.

I wish Alvin the very best in his return to Blue Ridge and respect his decision.

Roanoke Times Editorial

2009-01-26T10:24:00.000-08:00

The Roanoke Times had an editorial in today's paper that deals with the recent Council vote to hire a consulting firm to come up with conceptual plans for the Market Building. If you missed it, please visit:

http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/wb/192408

I think it does a good job of addressing the need for vision in directing the renovation of the building. I encourage you to read it.

Market Building vote... again (and open government)

2009-01-22T17:19:00.000-08:00

Market Building
Earlier this evening, Roanoke City Council voted to hire a consulting firm based in Washington, D.C. to perform work surrounding the Market Building. The Market Building is an icon in Roanoke, the center of the downtown market area, and vital to the economic future of our city center.

I voted against hiring this firm (it was a 6-1 vote). My reasons are fairly simple, and I will try to succinctly explain below.

First, I still feel, as I did several weeks ago, that City Council has not yet provided a clear vision for what we want the building to be for the next 20, 30 and 40 years. For example, "we are committed to maintaining the building as a public market, with food vendors, retail and entertainment opportunities." Following this we can consult the numerous past studies conducted for ideas and concepts and work to pull together this vision. Maybe outdoor seating on the mezzanine level, a community room for rent on the top floor, food vendors with service both inside and outside of the building... etc.

Second, I believe that we need to decide on a budget. What can we afford presently, could we phase the project into two steps, etc. This is an obvious point but vital to moving forward and committing money to conceptual ideas.

At this point is when I believe that we should hire an Architecture & Engineering firm, and if appropriate, would like the firm to be a local business. As a City Council we should certainly try to do our part to help the economy in Roanoke.

We do need to assess the facilities, such as HVAC, plumbing, electrical and structural soundness. In all fairness, this is the piece of the contract that I believe is the most useful. But I believe that the A & E should be part of an overall design/construction document contract.

My fear is that we spend $120,000 (amended amount of contract) with this consulting firm, don't think about it until the report comes back in May (out of sight, out of mind), and realize that Council has "lost taste" to move on with the renovation. Then, we have a $120,000 conceptual report sitting on a bookshelf. No construction documents. If the overall A & E were part of the actual contract where Council has decided to move to contruction, we can guarantee the usefulness of the information gained.

I simply did not feel comfortable committing $120,000 to a hopefully useful report at the same time that our schools are slated to lose between $10 million and $15 million in funding this year, with no certainty that we would actually get to the renovation itself.

I'm hopeful I've been clear.

Open Government
As you all are aware, an issue has come up surrounding Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation and Councilman Alvin Nash. I have enjoyed getting to know Alvin over the last six months and enjoyed working with him.

I do not have all of the information surrounding this yet, but do feel that Council should have been informed immediately once this issue arose. When it involves a sitting member of City Council, I believe it is appropriate that each member be told of any matter involving official business.

I am committed, however, to getting all the information and will comment further at that point.

The Market Building (again)

2009-01-06T17:27:00.001-08:00

As most folks know, at its last meeting, City Council brought to a vote the allocation of $160,000 to a consulting firm from Washington, D.C. to provide us with three conceptual plans for the renovation of the City Market Building. Due to technicalities, we have to re-vote on the matter at our next council meeting, even though the vote yesterday was 4 to 3 in favor of hiring the consulting firm.

Let me say right off that I respect the opinions and decisions of each Member of Council, whether I agree with them on this particular matter or not. Any thoughts I share are mine and mine alone and guide my reasons for voting against hiring this firm. Below are my reasons.

The City Market Building is an historic landmark in the center of our downtown, next to many restaurants, retail stores and offices. In fact, it houses small businesses. Because of this, I do believe that we need to move forward and renovate it with an eye towards the next five, ten and twenty years. The Market Building has been neglected for far too long, which is one of the reasons it is now in such disrepair and requires such a major renovation. So let's renovate, right?

Not quite yet.

Over the past several years, there have been public sessions with input from interested residents and parties as to what the Market Building and market area should look like. We paid for a received a report in 2006, and a coalition of downtown businesses commissioned a study with suggestions that was authored by the Partnership for Public Spaces, the leading national experts on market areas.

So now the idea is to hire this consulting firm out of D.C. to provide us information on the utilities of the building, hold three public hearings, and then provide three concepts. It is important to note that the concepts are not architectural renderings sufficient for construction, but rather general conceptual ideas. We will then have to come up with the money to pay for the actual construction design documents.

I voted against hiring this consulting firm for a few major reasons. First, given the past few years and the studies we have regarding the market building, I am not convinced that we need to hire another firm to tell us what they think the building should look like. Second, City Councils past and present have yet to provide a clear vision as to what we want the Market Building to function as for the next several decades. Without a vision for the future use of the building, why bother paying a huge amount of money to consultants to conceptualize for us.

Yet another reason (the most important) I voted against hiring this firm is that we learned less than three weeks ago that our schools could be losing more than $5 million in state funding this year. And yes, you read the number correctly. I believe that it is the responsibility of the City and its governing body to do everything within our power to help the schools offset this enormous gap in funding. $160,000 clearly won't solve the entire budgetary problem, but it sure is a good start.

And last but not least, I simply do not believe that we need to hire a consulting firm from Washington to tell us what the electrical, plumbing, structural and HVAC systems look like and need - we can certainly hire local businesses to tell us that once we begin actual architectural design. We can also handle holding our own public hearings. So what are we really getting for the huge sum of money we will pay? In my opinion, it is not the best value for taxpayer money.

I intend to vote again in two weeks against this hiring. We can move forward renovating the Market Building right now if only we would provide a vision to a local architectural firm, express to them the budgetary constraints in which we find ourselves, and are willing to be decisive in our action.

Slow Time

2008-12-29T17:36:00.000-08:00

My apologies for having failed to post anything over the past three weeks. Like many folks, I've been caught up with the holidays, visiting family out of town and having family visit here, as well as the general end-of-year rush.

The upcoming year promises many challenges: a sluggish economy, budget deficits, job layoffs and other difficulties that we will likely all face. But I also believe that with great challenges come great opportunities.

During difficult economic times we have opportunities for continuing education, career re-training that leads to career changes, government working to minimize waste and maximize the utility of hard-earned taxpayer money, among others. Times are no doubt tough, but if we work together and weather this recession we can all come out better on the other side, with greater opportunity for everyone.

These are just a few thoughts...

The real purpose of this post is to wish everyone a Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah or whatever holiday one observes. Have a safe and happy new year.

Court

Holding Public Servants Accountable

2008-12-05T11:23:00.000-08:00

This week, it was determined that enough evidence existed supporting improper procurement procedures and forgery of quotes from vendors to suspend two employees from The Greater Roanoke Transit Company. The wife of one of the employees has been implicated and warrants have been issued for a search of GRTC offices and the home of one of the employees.

It must be noted that no one has been convicted of any crimes, so the presumption of innocence must be afforded to those involved. Regardless of criminal convictions, however, it is clear that an improper procurement process occurred and that employees of GRTC were irresponsible and showed extraordinarily poor judgement at a minimum.

Beyond the potential illegalities and misuse of public money, this incident brings to the forefront an even more important, yet often unstated, belief that I share with so many others. We often hear that "public officials/public employees should be held to the same standards as everyone else."

I disagree with this statement. I believe that public officials and those who work in government should be held to higher standards than everyone else. For public officials, elected by citizens, we have chosen to put our names forward for office. We understand when we do this that the public eye, and the many probing eyes of the media that hold us accountable, are on us as we do our jobs. And for those that have chosen to work in government, and who are in particularly responsible roles in charge of the expenditure of public, taxpayer money, responsibility for only the highest ethical standards should be a job requirement.

The public has the right, in my opinion, to demand that those of us charged with making the decisions as to how to spend their money, elected or otherwise, be held to the highest possible standards. There is no doubt in my mind that this is exactly what the residents of Roanoke expect, and I couldn't agree more.

Real Estate Tax Relief

2008-11-13T15:20:00.000-08:00

Over the past two months, our economy has faced serious challenges (understatement). The financial markets have taken serious hits, the housing market nationally has been laden with foreclosures caused in large part by subprime lending, and the pension and retirement accounts of a vast number of people have suffered significant losses. While we can do little to control the financial or housing markets, there is something we can do to help many folks who have seen a lifetime of hardwork and retirement savings diminish.

Many seniors and disabled citizens of Roanoke are on fixed incomes. Often, these two groups subsidize their Social Security (SSI or SSDI) with money they saved during their working lives through pensions or other accounts. Suddenly, with these accounts significantly reduced, it is becoming increasingly difficult for these folks to continue to meet their financial obligations, such as mortgages, health care costs, utility costs etc.

Roanoke City offers real estate tax relief for the elderly and disabled who qualify - currently those who earn less than $34,000 per year gross income or have a net worth of less than $125,000. Those who meet these income or net worth requirements may apply to the City to have their real estate taxes "frozen," meaning that the amount the household pays in real estate taxes remains the same as long as the requirements are met each year. This is hugely important for those on fixed incomes, primarily seniors and the disabled, who can little afford increasing property taxes each year.

Due to the declining retirement and pension account values, I believe it more important than ever to increase the limit at which seniors and the disabled qualify, as many who subsidized their fixed incomes to pay their taxes or the other previously mentioned living expenses simply cannot continue this way. Fortunately, we are able to increase these limits to $42,000 per year gross income and $160,000 per year net worth. This should, and I believe it will, offer additional tax relief to many of the most vulnerable in our City.

Vice Mayor Sherman Lea, who has, from the outset been supportive of this change in City policy, and I, with the support of the rest of City Council, worked to increase these limits so that many of our residents can afford to stay in their homes and pay for those items necessary for their continued quality of life. I want to thank Vice Mayor Lea - without his support I am not sure this would be occurring.

The City will lose some revenue, most likely in the lower hundreds of thousands (maybe $200,000), though it is hard to forecast exactly how much because the City does not keep income or net worth statistics of our residents. But I believe this is the right thing to do - to help our senior citizens and disabled citizens remain in their homes with the ability to afford life's essentials. Cutting a few hundred thousand dollars of spending elsewhere, in my opinion, is minor compared to the relief many in our community desperately need. This is the good that government can do for its residents.

The following is the motion offered at City Council's regular session:

Real Estate Tax Relief for Elderly & Disabled Residents

of the City of Roanoke

That the City Manager and City Attorney prepare an Ordinance to be adoptedat the December 1, 2008 City Council meeting that increases the limits atwhich Senior citizens and Disabled citizens in Roanoke City qualify forreal estate tax relief from the current limits of $34,000 per year grossincome and $125,000 net worth, to $42,000 per year gross income and$160,000 net worth.

This increase in gross income and net worth limits should provide relief to additional residents, many of whom have fixed incomes, and expresses thesense of the City Council that, given current economic conditions and thesignificant decline in pension and retirement accounts, Senior citizens andDisabled citizens, who have little opportunity or ability to return to theworkforce, face increasingly difficult financial times. Raising limits forreal estate tax relief is the City's effort to acknowledge and address thesignificant hardships these two groups of citizens are experiencing.

Yesterday

2008-11-05T12:00:00.000-08:00

While I committed a while back to not discussing national political issues but instead to keep this blog focused locally and on Roanoke City, I do feel the need to comment on the election results of yesterday in a broader context.

There's been a lot of talk about the history-making nature of Barack Obama's victory to become our 44th President, and I'm sure this talk will continue. It was only 45 years ago that Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his "I have a dream speech." And it was only a year before that that LBJ pushed the Civil Rights Act through Congress.

Yesterday showed just how far our country has come in the last 50 years. As many of us have discussed this election for some time now, it has impressed me a great deal that even friends of mine who did not support Obama and do not like many of his policies recognize and appreciate the historic nature of an African-American being elected president.

Hopefully the Obama message of bipartisanship and progress will help to unite Washington, and that the 2008 Democratic sweep of Congress does not in the end prove problematic as it did for the 1994 Republican takeover. Both parties need to work together, avoid becoming greedy with power, and try to accomplish positive policies that help the most people.

Parks and Recreation Receives Accreditation!

2008-10-23T08:57:00.000-07:00

The Roanoke City Department of Parks and Recreation last week became only 1 of 76 Parks and Rec. departments nationwide to receive accreditation from the Commission for Accreditation for Park and Recreation Agencies.

This is an enormous honor for Director Steve Buschor and his talented staff in Parks and Rec. -- only six departments statewide and only 76 of more than 5,500 departments nationwide have received this honor.

Please take the time to congratulate staff members with Parks and Rec. -- it took teamwork, a sense of ownership over the city's many wonderful facilities and dedication to receive this national honor. We are proud of this wonderful accomplishment.

More Reason to Prioritize

2008-10-08T11:18:00.000-07:00

We have now been delivered news that gives us even more reason to prioritize in the City and to remain focused on those things that are vital to a community's well-being, present strength and future prosperity: our schools.

The Virginia Department of Education informed us today that using their new cohort method for calculating graduation rates, our City's schools have only graduated 51.6% of our seniors in four years. This new number to what has been an ongoing problem should provide us even more of an impetus to refocus our energies as a City on the things that can bring our community together, united behind the common goal of working to transform our schools into not just good schools, but rather great schools.

We often spend time focusing on such matters as spending millions of dollars on a golf course or other capital projects. We are in an economy that is contracting and has cost a couple of trillion dollars in wealth to pension funds during the last couple of months alone. Now is the time to step back, look in the mirror as a community and decide whether we like what we see and whether we must have these capital items right now.

Our schools can be our greatest asset or our biggest boon. Now is the time to commit to doing what it takes to making our schools first-rate, to put aside capital projects that would be great for the community, but that are discretionary and require sound finances and a strong economy with increasing revenues. We must work to bring more and better jobs to the City, which requires a firm committment to improving our schools and to providing them with the resources needed to turn out well-educated, well-rounded students qualified for the 21st century workforce.

Now is the time when we must tighten our purse strings and realize that we can't always have everything, but that a community's core committment is to its children. Without great schools, the future of those children will be tougher and tougher. And our City's future is tied to that future.

The Market (Building)

2008-10-03T08:08:00.000-07:00

The Market Building re-opens this morning at 8AM. The small business owners in the building, employees of the city and many others have worked tirelessly, weekdays and weekends, from morning until late at night, to remediate the problems that caused the building to be closed in the first place. Although the grills will be fired up this morning, there are still decisions to be made.

The next step City Council faces is when and how to begin renovating the building. There is no question in my mind that a major renovation needs to take place. The Market Building is a historic, central part of our downtown, and I believe that Council must soon define a vision for the next twenty-five years of its life. But we cannot only continue to talk about these changes, rather should seek public opinion, direct the design/re-design, and move forward to have the work done that needs to be done.

It makes a great deal of sense to me personally to have the city serve as the general contractor for this process and to direct the architecture and engineering process, the subcontractor bid process, and to oversee the actual construction. I believe this for a couple of reasons:

1) If the city is going to front the costs of the Market Building renovation, it may as well direct the process, which would save the time necessary to issue an receive responses to an RFP. Costs in construction are increasing every day, so the more decisive we are and the sooner we move, the less it will hopefully cost.

2) The city serving as general contractor should allow the work to be done more quickly at better prices as we can hire local small businesses (electricians, carpenters, masons, plumblers, etc.) that might not otherwise be hired by a larger, potentially out of town, construction management firm.

I hear from a lot of folks who are excited about the potential the Market Building has and the history it has provided residents for more than eighty years. And some express concerns about whether or not Council can act decisively to take care of this facility that serves as an anchor in the entire market area.

I believe we can, should and have got to- while times are tight budgetarily, to allow the Market Building, its small businesses and its physical facilities, to continue to deteriorate beyond the point of repair should simply not be a choice. This is one of the situations we face as a city and as a City Council that will show whether our priorities for our city mirror the needs we have as a community.

The Market (not the building)

2008-09-29T07:16:00.000-07:00

Today, news hit that Citigroup will buy the banking operations of Wachovia, which has a large local presence among the many banks that operate in the Roanoke Valley and western Virginia generally. This follows several weeks of tumult that have rocked the fundamentals of the U.S. economy.

For several years, mortgages as investments seemed like a good deal, where easy money was made and it appeared that there was little risk involved. We now know this to be entirely untrue, and many economists had previously predicted the situation we now find ourselves in. In hindsight, it makes perfect sense that buying securities backed by mortgages were only good investments if 1) home values continued to increase at high rates, 2) the economy generally continued to grow as rapidly as it had been, and 3) there was not a significant increase in defaults on home mortgages. It appears that all three of these factors have gone against investors -- the perfect storm.

The good news to be found amongst all the bad news is that home values in the Roanoke Valley as well as the New River Valley continue to remain stable if not continuing to increase at a sound rate. We should remain confident that this trend will continue and that we experience an isolated market due to the presences of Virginia Tech, the CRC and within our own valley, the coming of the new VTC Medical College.

The main area of concern for me lays primarily with seniors and the disabled, most of whom live on fixed incomes. This is not to say that the rest of us will not face hardships, but a great deal of these folks receive Social Security, though this income alone does not fully subsidize the many expenses, including healthcare, utilities, home payments etc faced on a monthly basis. Often seniors and the disabled must dip into pension plans to make up for monthly shortfalls in income to pay for the entirety of expenses.

My concern is that, not today or tomorrow, but in six months to a year, many of these folks will wake up and see that their 401(k) or other pension plans have suffered from what used to be safe investments, namely, financial institutions. I believe that it is worthwhile for us to look at ways to help seniors and the disabled who may begin to see this happening and to work to try to find ways to help them should this scenario occur.

We should try to think outside the box and find any ways that we might be able to accomplish this within the budgetary constraints that we face nationally, statewide and locally.

This is a moral and fundamental need faced by those most financially fragile, and it will take all of us working together to help alleviate the difficulties that might soon become reality.

Community Summit: The Greening of Roanoke

2008-09-24T05:34:00.000-07:00

Last evening, the City of Roanoke held a community summit to discuss ways to reduce the carbon footprint of our community. The goal to reduce our footprint, which is the total amount of carbon pollution we put into the environment, is 10% for the community over the next five years and 12.5% for our municipal government.

After hearing from Sean McGinnis, Director of Green Engineering for Virginia Tech, about the various sorts of pollutants that contribute to our carbon footprint, we broke into roundtable groups to discuss ways to encourage our community to help achieve this 10% reduction goal.

Some of the ways our group came up with were: the use of public transportation as an alternative to single-car commutes, more recycling across the city amongst residents, the use of compact fluorescent lightbulbs, and the planting of more trees to increase our tree canopy, which is thought to help reduce pollution.

We had students from Patrick Henry, William Fleming as well as Virginia Western CC in attendance. It was really exciting to see the energy in the room and the willingness of folks to volunteer to help improve our environment by taking small steps locally to encourage better living that will reduce our carbon footprint.

Virginia State Neighborhood Conference

2008-09-21T17:04:00.000-07:00

This past Thursday through Saturday I was in Fairfax, Virginia for the 9th Annual Virginia State Neighborhood Conference. A rather large contingent from Roanoke attended this years' conference, including members of the Melrose Rugby, Melrose Loudon and Old Southwest neighborhoods as well as folks associated with the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority.

Also attending was Ms. Estelle McCadden, President of the Melrose Rugby Neighborhood Forum and Chairperson/Founder of the VSNC. It was obvious to all of us in attendence the level of respect that Ms. McCadden has of other neighborhood leaders around the state for her dedication to the conference and her dedication to making sure that neighborhoods have the leadership, programs and knowledge necessary to help build strong communities.

I participated in a number of workshops and learned a great deal from regional and national experts in community development and also from people from other parts of the state who are community activists and committed to their own neighborhood's development.

I hope to use what I learned to help improve relations between our government and neighborhoods. Strong neighborhoods help to make a strong community.

A long night

2008-09-16T14:54:00.000-07:00

As many folks already know, last night's City Council meeting was a long one. There was a lot of debate over two issues that have been at the forefront of City Council for a few years: the future of Countryside Golf Course and whether and where the city should build an amphitheater.

If you watched or read the news, you may also know that at times things became a little heated. Suffice to say that I stand by my words and look forward to a more inclusive, respectful process in the future. I hope that we can work to make certain that every member of Council is aware of what is happening before it is set in stone.

Out of respect for my fellow members of Council, I don't want to focus on this debate and will leave it at that.

What I do want to focus on is the future of Countryside. I voted "yes" for the motion offered by Vice-mayor Lea -- a vote which may seem contradictory to my words last evening.

The motion is what the city attorney called "a statement of policy." It is a non-binding vote that essentially formalizes a process that was already beginning -- to delve into the numbers, issue an RFP for a management company to run the course and determine capital needs. This is the information that I believe is necessary to have to make an informed decision about the future of Countryside.

I fully recognize how difficult the last several years have probably been for residents who live on or near the golf course. There has been a level of uncertainty that would naturally concern someone who has made a large investment in a home and who wonders what the future holds for their neighborhood.

I truly believe that we are finally nearing a decision on Countryside, and I believe that the non-binding motion will speed the process along, allow us to gather the necessary and relevant information, and once and for all make a decision that provides certainty to the residents at Countryside but also is the fiscally responsible course of action for the entire City of Roanoke and its taxpayers.

Oh, and I'll leave the amphitheater for another time...

Self-imposed Policy

2008-09-12T19:20:00.001-07:00

New policy: only city matters and local issues will be discussed on my blog. Though I am Democrat and obviously have opinions about the current presidential race, I am going to stick to my goal of being focused on diong what's right for our city rather than discussing current national politics.

When it comes to making Roanoke a better, more progressive city, it doesn't matter what political party one is affiliated with.

What do you think should happen to the Market Building?

2008-09-10T11:15:00.001-07:00

A lot of debate lately has been centered on what the Market Building should look like once the city renovates it. I would love to hear from folks as to what you believe the city should do to improve this deterioriating building that is an anchor for our downtown.

As a city, I believe we need a vision and goal and should accordingly work to accomplish our vision for the future of the Market Building.

What do you think?

The Market Building

2008-09-05T15:31:00.000-07:00

As you probably know, this past Tuesday City Council got into a lively discussion regarding the DRI/Coalition proposal to overhaul the Market Building. This was the only proposal received in response to an RFP issued seeking a public/private partnership for the future operation of the building. See the RFP here http://www.roanokeva.gov/DeptApps/PurchasingBids.nsf/4932692bdcc8a5d885256fc00069a3f5/cecc8411a230eac0852573fc006400f7?OpenDocument.

There were a number of good aspects of the proposal, but one significant problem: it did not conform to the guidelines as set out in the RFP. Some folks within the Coalition dispute this, but a unanimous vote by a board of city officials all agreed on this point, as did a number of area business folks who were a part of the coalition. But this is beside the point. The point is that Council decided that the city should issue another, broader RFP that allows for flexibility and hopefully creativity in responses. And DRI/the Coalition will be able to re-submit their proposal, with improvements based on our discussions. To me, this is a good thing.

Additionally, there are legal requirements when a response to an RFP does not conform to guidelines. Though many of us would have liked to have discussed/negotiated/worked on the one proposal we received, the law requires that we issue another RFP that affords others the opportunity to submit broader proposals. I wish this point had been shared in media accounts more clearly.

But the main point of all this is that members of City Council were not allowed to read the proposal before we had to make a decision on whether to accept or reject it. This is a big problem.

In a City Manager form of government, the city manager should be the person responsible for working on the details of everyday business within the city. But when there are proposals, particularly ones of this importance, Council members should absolutely have the ability to ask for and receive a copy to read. Unless it violates a law, harms the civil rights of an individual or otherwise directly hurts the city's ability to negotiate with an entity, we as members of Roanoke City Council have a responsibility to know, question and understand what it is we are voting on and how we are spending taxpayer money.

It is true that I asked for a copy of the proposal the week before we were first briefed on the DRI/Coalition plan. And it is equally true that I was told it was against administration policy to receive one. Instead of arguing, I called a local business person and asked if they could get me a copy which was done and in my hands within the hour.

The administration works hard and we should all, whether we agree with or do not agree with decisions made, respect their efforts and know that they are doing what they believe to be in the best interests of the city. But as members of City Council, we are answerable to the citizens. We are the ones who must explain why we decided to spend taxpayer money in certain ways. We should always keep this in mind.

I will work to make sure that in the future members of City Council have access to any information deemed fit or necessary to make the important decisions that affect our everyday lives as residents of Roanoke.

Council and Countryside

2008-08-18T19:05:00.001-07:00

Today, during City Council's 2PM session, I made the request of the City's Director of Finance that she put together a projection of what the debt service, capital needs and other necessary expenditures will be over the next five and ten years if the City retains ownership of Countryside. During my request, I made mention of wanting to have as much information as possible, and as a businessperson, the most effective way for me to look at the future of the course is to, as part of that outlook, know what the numbers will look like.

I made the mistake, admittedly, of mentioning that as we rush to put out a Request for Proposal with five and ten year terms for management of the course, we should not eliminate the option of selling Countryside if it makes the most sense. As you might imagine, this set off a firestorm amongst the mayor and a few members of the audience who are strong advocates of permanently keeping Countryside as a golf course. I was not intending to debate the highest and best use of the property itself, though it provided a political opening that was taken advantage of.

I have learned my lesson in terms of being more direct and clearer in what I am requesting.

I believe one can never have too much information. As our national, state, and to a lesser degree, local economies contract, we as a City government must also contract budgetarily. To me, this isn't a matter of politics, it's a matter of fiscal responsibility and the ability to be disciplined when times are tough and the budget is tight.

After forty-five minutes of banter about the merits of selling Countryside or seeking private management or the City itself managing the course, we finally came to a vote on my request (for the record, I really was only requesting information so no vote was actually needed).

The mayor stated that the voters had spoken and that they clearly wanted Countryside to remain a golf course. First, I am not sure who "the voters" are and when they made a decision on this particular issue, and second, the request was for information, not a determination on the future of the course (again, the request was not a vote on the highest and best use of the property). It was simply a request to have all the information available when deciding whether to contractually obligate the City to a five or ten year lease. If we don't take a look at the numbers now, it may be ten years before we can revisit this decision.

Council Members Price, Mason, Trinkle and I voted to request the information. Councilman Nash wants the information but did not like the process and how we arrived at needing a vote for information, and the mayor voted "no." I simply don't understand how one could not want more information to make a decision that could have such significant and long-term implications for the financial stability of our community.

Sometimes, you've got to put being good stewards of the taxpayers' money and a willingness to learn as much as possible ahead of politics. Let's take one step at a time, know what our options are, and understand the impact the decision we may make today will have on our community ten years from now.

This Past Week

2008-08-10T06:33:00.000-07:00

This past week, I heard from many constituents about some of the issues in front of Council. As you might imagine, the future of Countryside is on the minds of many, particularly those who have enjoyed the golf course as an amenity, beautiful backyard or green space for the community.

But the golf course should also be on the minds of all taxpayers in Roanoke City. It was a large purchase paid for with taxpayer money, with debt service payments of more than $460,000 per year. The course has some major infrastructural needs including the replacement of the irrigation system as well as golf cart paths.

I am a golfer, so I would be perfectly fine with the golf course remaining just that. But I am also involved in the business of real estate development, and from this perspective, the real property that is Countryside presents a number of issues that, in my mind, will prevent it from being developed into a residential community. Now is not the time for me to go into these, but suffice to say, I am convinced that the course, given market conditions and other factors, will likely remain a golf course. And again, I have no problem with this at all.

I do not, however, think that the City should be in the golf course business, and would like to begin a dialogue as a Council, community and taxpayer about the possibility of putting the golf course on the market and working to find a buyer who would put the necessary resources into making Countryside a long term success.

I will continue to learn as much as possible and hope residents of the Countryside neighborhoods as well as other taxpayers will share their thoughts with me.

An Exciting Start

2008-08-01T12:02:00.001-07:00

This is my first offical post since taking office on July 1. I wanted to get grounded in my responsibilities and learn as much as possible about our city government, the finances, operations, etc. I still have much to learn, but am confident that I have gotten off to a solid start.

So far, we have not as a Council dealt with too many substantive items, and have spent a lot of time talking about procedural changes and the like. I am hopeful that we can put these items behind as I believe that our citizens deserve to have our full attention on matters that directly impact their lives, such as infrastructure, parks, economic development and the continued revitilization of our downtown. And I think we are getting to this point.

Monday we'll have a joint meeting with the School Board at Addison Middle School, which I am looking forward to. We have a wonderful new Superintendent, a committed and hardworking Board that is willing to make some tough decisions, even if we don't all agree with each and every one, and a committment from the Council to appropriately fund our educational system.

We will then return to the city building where we will deal with a number of items, including the upcoming appointments to the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority. This board is vital to the many folks who live in housing that the RRHA controls. And it's important that we appoint the best and brightest based on qualifications. I'm excited about this opportunity, and look forward to Monday.

I will continue to blog during the course of my tenure on Council. I hope citizens will share their thoughts, ideas, opinions and concerns with me here, or you can call me anytime on my cell phone at 597-3193. Thank you and I look forward to hearing from you.

My New Blog

2008-06-08T12:59:00.000-07:00

Thank you for visiting my new blog! During the four month campaign for City Council, I had a blog that was intended to help me share my thoughts and experiences on the trail from week to week. I met so many great people, attended so many great events and celebrations, and received so much feedback as to things our City can do to make it a better place for EVERYONE.

While I have retired my campaign blog, I now invite you to my new blog, http://courtrosen.blogspot.com/.

On this new blog, I hope to share the current happenings of Roanoke City and the debates and policies before City Council at any given time. My hope, too, is that residents of Roanoke City will share your thoughts, ideas and feelings about what we can do better as a city, how we can better serve the residents and neighborhoods that make up this wonderful place.

Join me in a dialogue to help move Roanoke forward into a positive and progressive future. It is only through your regular input that I can best serve your needs.