commenter-thanks for clarifying… I was confused, missed your sarcasm.

Lets keep this apartment thing in the public’s thoughts.  Most of those I speak with oppose them.

sorry bw, I didn’t explain myself very well. what i was referring to with the bush voters are dumb comment (which i disagree with) is that after the 2004 election when Kerry lost, some liberals tried to start a claim that bush voters were dumb and that fox news convinced all the dumb voters to vote for bush…. therefore, if people were smart, they voted for Kerry and dont’ watch fox news. I don’t subscribe to any of it, I was asking if incumbents who lose the election might offer the same explanatino of their loss…. the voters were dumb/did not know what was good for them.

here’s a long break down of the idea with some links to articles from back then making the claim:

http://zombietime.com/iq_of_2004_voters_by_state/

as far as the conspiracy theory on secret apartment discussions/meetings etc… true, it’s only a conspiracy theory when there is no proof. That’s pretty much how it played out with Walmart until the FOIA request uncovered the plans for a non-public meeting…. that’s where it moved from conspiracy theory to actual fact. I’m sure the same mistake will not be made again with the apartments, so… i suppose it will remain in the conspiracy theory realm.

jj-they will care when it hits them in the pocketbook to pay for educating a bunch of apartment dwellers not paying their way.  Read the 9/21 editorial letter to see the numbers.

commenter - “On Nov 9th will the ex-re-election candidates look at the voters like 2004 Bush voters or Fox News viewers… too dumb to know what’s good for them?”

Not sure where you get this idea.  It is the 2008 election that those voting did not listen to what obama was saying.  Look what that has gotten us.  I think the 2010 elections proved some of that.  It is well known Republicans are outnumbered in the U.S. so when we win a elections it is our informed voters and the other who agreed.  On the other hand, most local BOS members may be party affiliated but their local decisions are not in most cases, though it is probably getting that way more these days.  I am a little leary of some of the conspiracy theories on meetings, etc. but pretty much agree on the decsion making.  They pay lip service to the votes with a few public hearings, etc. when their votes are pretty much decided.  Have you even seen one say the public changed his mind?  The system is flawed but voting is our only chance at change.  At least a couple of the long term members are “voluntarily” bowing out this year.  We got rid of several a few years back but was not a great improvement.

BTW, check back on analysis of Fox election coverage and Fox view voting and you may be surprised at their higher ratings, integrity, etc.  (or if I am missreading your comments, sorry?)

Moore has definitely spoken on the issue: PowhatanRadio, Rosa’s, his website.

I think the other Supervisors (other than the two coasting through their final term) believe that is “outside their purview” until the planning commission sends them a final plan and recommendation which they can then hide behind, ignore, alter, and/or characterize to their liking.

“Waiting for the report” and/or “not my responsibility” (they think) provides cover for them to stay out of touch with controversial issues the citizens want to deal with.

The question is, do they also refuse to talk to Balzer or any other pro-apartments parties?

The secret “tall grass” Walmart meeting(s?) have been mentioned many times in these comments…. is that how things are being handled in this case?

Was the lesson learned in the “tall grass” FOIA incident that it was unacceptable/illegal, or was it simply instructive in how to better hide secret meetings via non-FOIA accessible Google or Yahoo email accounts…... or possibly avoiding phone and email all together.

Recusing yourself from all but the last 1% of debate and voting is not necessarily better. Providing a public comment period after the vote or 5 minutes before the vote is not sufficient. Checking your watch and reading emails during public comment is not being responsive to the people. I have a feeling the people will explain that in no uncertain terms on Nov 8.

On Nov 9th will the ex-re-election candidates look at the voters like 2004 Bush voters or Fox News viewers… too dumb to know what’s good for them? Perhaps the out of touch feeling the re-election candidates give off is because they already look at the voters like that?

The reason this is not getting more coverage is because nobody really cares except the few of you who apparently have no life.  The rest of us are busy making a living and trying to better our community, not exclude others from it.

To “bw”:

Moore has said he is opposed to the apartments, and he has held a couple of seances at Rosa’s Pizza in order to drum up opposition.  As far as I know the other supervisors have not said anything publicly.

In my opinion letter a few weeks back really laid out the financial reasons for not approving the apartments, dollars and “sense”.  Seems a no brainer to me.  Some noted with Walmart coming we needed affordable housing for potential Walmart employees to move here.  I was thinking it better that those jobs go to people already here?  I know its not quite that simple but that is part of it.  The school expenses, traffic and other issues with apartments far outweigh any benefits to the county and its residents.

This should be getting more coverage than the Walmart deal.  And coverage of that was very lacking.  Does anyone know any BOS members positions on the apartments.  I believe Mr. Moore has expressed his disapproval?  I was very put back by last week’s editorial page comments and was going to comment here but the paper has not updated the website to the most recent paper.  Current content is two weeks old? Nothing in RTD either.

Doc and bw,

This is unfortunately nothing new. The amount of things that are NOT covered dwarfs what is. We get tons of editorials about getting along and civility, but no reports of substance, facts or motive.

The paper published an editorial and looked for a template that oppostion to these apartments was motivated by race or economic status. The story didn’t fit the preconceived ideas. So at best, it’s business as usual.

Nothing is ever printed or reported that “would make the board or administration look bad.” As a result, generally those who follow closely through attending meetings, reading documentation and listening to tapes really have a grasp on just how bad it is. Case and point: School Board, BoS relations.

Of course there are always exceptions to that, but this paper does not contribute to citizens being more informed, it’s silence contributes to business as usual and their approval of it.

To “bw”:

The lack of coverage of the planning commission meeting bothers me too.