March 2006 Archives
March 28, 2006
2006 Town Elections: Choose or Lose Comments (1)
This May Vienna will hold annual elections and there are, for the first time in a real long time, choices. Who is running? The following 5 candidates are running for 3 seats:
1. Edythe Kelleher
2. Susan Stich
3. Blair Jenkins
4. Michael Polychrones
5. Laurie Cole
We pull no punches about the pros and cons of these five candidates. Four of these candidates are reasonable people. Four of these candidates, Edythe Kelleher, Susan Stich, Blair Jenkins, and Michael Polychrones, are fair, honest and progressive.
Laurie Cole on the other hand is not fair, nor is she honest in her politics. Cole regularly acts with extreme arrogance toward citizens and has no problem settling scores. What do we mean? Consider the way Cole recently treated this property owner. A vote for Laurie Cole is a vote to decrease the value of your home. Amazingly, while Cole has no problem lowering the values on other people's homes, she made sure she got the biggest new house on her block.
Additionally, Cole is against any improvement on Maple Avenue, while the other four candidates are open to improvements. Vienna has clear choices this year!
March 27, 2006
The Mulch Pile Lawyers Up Comments (1)
We posted a comment recently about the video taping of the Vienna mulch pile. We then asked the Town for copies of the mulch videos. Simple Freedom of Information request right? By law the Town must hand over copies of the tapes. Not so fast! The Town Information Officer just informed us, in person, that the Town Attorney needs to be consulted first. Say what? Why not just hand the tapes over? Why does the mulch pile need legal counsel?
The Mulch Deserves Better Representation than Steve Briglia
March 26, 2006
Lacking Competence: George Creed Comments (0)
George Creed sits on the Town of Vienna Planning Commission. In 2003 he voted to not allow 5 properties to be removed from the historic district. In 2006 he voted against allowing 1 property out of the historic district. All Vienna citizens assume he has some basic competence to sit on that board and make those decisions. Right?
Seemingly unrelated to the historic district, Creed voted in March 2006 to allow a single property in Vienna to be subdivided into three parcels. Nothing unusual there, the majority voted for it. There was no opposition. Where is this property? It is three blocks outside the historic district near Louise Archer School. However, right when it seems something should be simple in Vienna, it gets stupid. Watch Creed's question at the end of this property sudivision meeting:
Why is Creed ruling on people's lives and their property rights when it comes to the historic district when it is clear he is not cognizant of the basics? He doesn't know the boundaries of the historic district, but regularly rules on boundary changes?! Some people have complained that this site is too hard on some people personally. That is nonsense. George Creed wants power over people's lives and loves sitting on the Planning Commission to exert that power. Pointing out that Creed may be incompetent or that he is a political crony is not personal. It is a political reality that needs to be rectified. And if you watched the faces of other members on the Planning Commission that night, it is clear many would agree with our sentiments.
March 25, 2006
Freeman Store Clubhouse & Den Mother Laine Hyde Comments (0)
Moorefield Demolition: Laine Hyde's Leadership in Action
The following comment regarding the Windover Heights Historic District was recently posted to the site. We repeat it here to make sure it is well read:
"This whole Historic Vienna, Inc. business seems to be a farce... an exclusive garden club hobby operating out of its Freeman Store clubhouse at Town expense. Who owns the Freeman Store property? Is this Town property? If so, how come only club members can meet there? And what does this club do besides sell crafts, display old stuff, and walk around their backyard "historic district"? What historic properties has this club identified and preserved since 1975... the Moorefield home that consumed countless manhours and tax payer dollars before being demolished? Nice work, Historic Vienna, Inc.! Do Town employees maintain the exclusive Freeman Store clubhouse? What does Historic Vienna, Inc. do with the non-profit funds they raise while operating off the good grace of Town tax payers? Where are their financial statements? How come their is no substantive content about Vienna history on their website... it's been 30 years... where's the preservation?... where's the history?... a death notice?... anything at all? Why are they using Town of Vienna e-mail addresses? Why are my tax dollars paying to support their IT overhead if they are an exclusive paying-members-only club? A historic district that has virtually no identified history, an exclusive club operating at Town expense... it's all as if someone is trying to fabricate a historic Vienna that never really existed. This all smells like someone's crafts project and small-town cronyism and and it's time to clean it up. Town government should get back to the basic functions of government and leave the garden club historical societies to the private sector."
The Freeman Store is owned by the Town. It is not located in a historic district. Who are all the players in the clubhouse?
President - Laine Hyde
Vice President - Shirley McCoy
Treasurer - D. H. Scarborough
Secretary - Anne Stuntz
Board Members of Historic Vienna, Inc.:
Sarah Jane Brady
Michael Cheselka
Daniel Dellinger
Mildred Monahan
Rose Mulville
Maud Robinson
Daphne Sloan
Paul Snodgrass
Katherine Tugendhat
Christopher Vereide
March 24, 2006
Operation Mulch Surveillance Comments (0)
Why has the Town of Vienna installed a TV surveillance system to monitor and record their infamous mulch pile? Here is a picture of the warning sign posted to the mulch pile entrance in Vienna:
The Town Council refuses to broadcast their meetings on cable like all other jurisdictions in Fairfax County, but they broadcast "compost" instead? Amazingly, the Vienna Town Council was actually naive enough to propose a banning of the videotaping of public meetings by citizens. Well, at least we can all watch the Vienna Town Council compost pile on cable!
March 22, 2006
Can You Spell "Favorites"? Water & Politics Comments (0)
The Lillis family had a storm water management report prepared especially for them after their neighbor built a new house. George Lovelace and Maud Robinson made sure that the Town spent $10,000+ on this report under the guise that they were protecting themselves from a Lillis lawsuit. That's baloney. This very expensive report was prepared as a "political get back" against this homeowner who happened to be Lillis' neighbor. Why do this? It was a nasty tactic employed by George Lovelace, Maud Robinson and Laurie Cole after losing a big 4-3 vote. These three losing Council members wanted to mete out punitive financial sanctions against Lillis' neighbor in the form of a "delay". Nice people eh? What does the report say? Read it here (PDF). When was the last time the Town of Vienna commissioned an engineering firm such as Whitman, Requardt and Associates to study your property? When you have the "power" we guess you can spend taxpayers' dollars any ole way you want.
March 20, 2006
Historic Tract Homes - Wall Street Journal Article Comments (2)
At tonight's Vienna Town Council meeting Council Member Edythe F. Kelleher pointed out a recent article (PDF) about historic districts. Kelleher seemed to genuinely be offering information. An excerpt from the article:
"As the real-estate market begins to cool, a growing number of homeowners are seeking to boost their property values by getting their neighborhoods designated as historic districts. Local historic districts, which can trigger regulations on everything from window repair to demolitions, are proliferating across the United States. But the desire for historic designation has some communities touting characteristics with questionable preservation value. Homeowners in Denver say their neighborhood deserves historic designation because it is an early example of large front lawns. A Phoenix subdivision is seeking historic status because it says its ranch homes were the first in the city with central air conditioning."
After Kelleher noted the article (PDF) Maud Robinson chimed in for emphasis to say that historic districts are being created to make properties "more valuable". That's the reason du jour now for having a District? Let us get this straight. It's no longer about "Vienna's history", it's now about Maud Robinson helping members of Vienna's historic district to become millionaires? We should all just sit back and let Robinson continue to push a District with no rules and nothing historic in it all so we can become rich?
Mrs. Robinson, the jig is up. The citizens of Vienna all know you voted against one of the nicest and most expensive homes ever built in Vienna.
March 19, 2006
Vienna Faces A Choice: Maud or the Real World Comments (2)
Maud Robinson Prefers 1960s Style Strip Malls. Why?
Monday night at a Vienna Town Council work session, the Vienna Town Council discussed the Maple Avenue Vision with an engineering firm proposing a feasibility study for the revitalization of Maple Avenue. During the meeting Vienna's abundance of one-story strip malls was broached and the comparison was made to Clarendon's new low-rise Market Common development. Watch carefully (video) what Maud Robinson has to say about this jewel of Clarendon:
Robinson states on the video:
"...it was very hard to find anyone there on a beautiful sunny day, there were a lot of glitzy shops that didn't seem to have any customers."
This can only be characterized as propaganda. Why would she say something so patently false? It would not be over the top to characterize Robinson's statements as lies. Not only is this development packed with people, restaurants and shops, it has won substantial awards. Does this mean we accept it all for Vienna blindly? No. But why does Robinson have the need to make things up to defend her position? Is her only political skill "fear mongering"?
For example, in defending Vienna's older strip malls, Robinson says they are good for "mom and pop" shops. Last we checked Vienna strip malls housed the likes of Giant, Safeway, Popeyes, Radio Shack, 7-Eleven, Subway and the list goes on and on. Strip malls are ugly, pedestrian unfriendly, parking lot choked eyesores. However, Vienna does not have to be stuck. There are options.
For those not familiar with Market Commons, here are some pictures:
Market Commons in Clarendon, VA
Market Commons in Clarendon, VA
Market Commons in Clarendon, VA
We are assuming Robinson, who is now on the record as favoring 1960s strip malls, would much rather keep this Vienna eyesore of a landmark:
Vienna Strip Mall: An Example of Maud Robinson Preferred Devleopment
Is anyone paying attention to what Maud Robinson is actually saying and doing? The people of Vienna have a clear choice: follow Maud Robinson and likes of Laurie Cole down dead ends OR accept the real world and make Vienna a better place.
Vienna Strip Mall: An Example of Maud Robinson Preferred Devleopment
March 18, 2006
Old Makes Way for the New Comments (2)
A recent email came in from a Vienna citizen who thought we were criticizing the Vienna Presbyterian Church (VPC). While we have absolutely no gripe with the church, he was offended that we would even question "historical" aspects of VPC's new church. He wrote us to say how the church had:
"...painstakingly preserved [their chapel]."
It should be noted that in order for VPC to expand to its current size, the "historic" structure in the yellow circle in the picture below was bought by VPC then demolished. This picture shows the Freeman Store in the foreground and to the left of the yellow circle is the original VPC Chapel out of the picture:
Click to Increase Size
(Inside Yellow Circle is "Historic" Building Torn Down)
So while VPC did work to maintain their original chapel without the help of the government, they did also demolish another old time Vienna building to make way for their new church. Plainly, history in Vienna comes and goes. The consistency of how so-called "historic preservation" in Vienna takes place is a joke.
March 17, 2006
Vienna Citizen Sounds Off Comments (1)
Random and unsolicited feedback arrived yesterday in email from a Vienna citizen named "Rob". Below you can see the contents of his email and our responses:
"I was directed to your website and have enjoyed some of the content. Some is, quite frankly, ridiculous. For example, the original VPC [Vienna Presbyterian Church] building, now the chapel has stood on that corner since 1879. Anyhow, there is no reference to who “historicvienna.com” is. Don’t you think it would make you more credible if you disclosed your identities?"
We responded back in email: The fact that you can read, listen and view the content on historicvienna.com and come back with the statement that the content is "ridiculous" makes us wonder what exactly you refer to. Now, we can tell from your web site that you are details guy in a details business. If you wanted to drop off a quick rant offering no specifics, other than the VPC mention, that's fine. If you want to be taken serious or if you are looking for a serious debate, say something that actually counters the overall statements that are presented on historicvienna.com.
Rob responded back in email to our above email (we have interjected responses into his email response):
"Dear HV: It is obvious that your statement that there is 'nothing historic about Church St.' is incorrect. Pointing to a much needed expansion of a church, attached to a structure that has been painstakingly preserved by the members of VPC is at best a cheap shot and, yes, ridiculous."
It seems that you are responding to this post about "historic" signs on Church Street, but why don't you address the specifics of what we actually say? Why don't you have the church put on a national register then? Why not ask to have it put into a restrictive historic district that regulates what "painstakingly preserved" actually means? Or do you only want the ability to preserve things as you see fit with no governmental intrusion?
Rob continued in his email:
"I did not want to shoot off a 'quick rant', in fact, unlike you, I don't want to 'rant' at all. I happen, for the record, to agree with the overall point you are trying to make about the 'historic' district, its 'rules' and, quite frankly, the completely random way in which the Town's building ordinances are 'enforced.' There are numerous projects going on around town now and in the six years we have lived in Vienna that are clearly in violation of lot coverage restrictions, etc. If you are certain builders and grease the right skids, apparently you can do whatever the heck you want. As an American and property owner, I am deeply concerned about the continued erosion of our property rights in this country. If, in fact, there is no legal standing for the 'historic' district, its review board, etc. to exist, then clearly it should be eliminated."
It seems we have some common ground here. That is positive.
Rob continued in his email:
"I am in violent agreement with much of your content, however, the tone is one of something well beyond your garden variety anger and more like pure unadulterated open hostility. In fact, it is that hostility that led me to ask the obvious question, who are you guys at HistoricVienna.com? Apparently, you don't want to reveal your identity. The fact that you don't, I think, makes your site less credible."
Looks like the common ground may be crumbling! By hostility, for example, do you mean the verbal tirade launched by the former Chairman of the Historic Review Board? Is that what you mean? The intent of this website is not to punish the citizens who have recorded and posted the phony historic politics played out in Vienna. In the real world, political leaders exposed as corrupt typically seek retribution. And that is the real issue: Why are you not more concerned about the corrupt actions of numerous Vienna leaders? If you were actually in the firing line of having YOUR property rights abused by Maud Robinson, and this was more than just an intellectual exercise for you, would you be perhaps "hostile"?
Rob continued in his email:
"What axe do you have to grind with these people?
Let us get this straight. After reading this entire web site, after watching all of the videos, after telling us you are an advocate for property rights, you ask the question about what axe we have to grind? Are you not the least bit worried it's the other way around? The question is, 'what axe does the Town have to grind?'
Rob continued in his email:
What financial interest(s) are you trying to advance or protect?
Did it ever occur to you in your life that there is right and wrong? We fully understand some people can't comprehend standing on principle. For example, it's difficult to point out, in the face of seemingly wide-spread support, that a leader such as Maud Robinson is dishonest. However, the evidence is clear. Perhaps, Robinson runs her life in such a way that the historic district is her only contradiction. Perhaps, it is the only area of government where she abuses citizens and their rights. If that is true, it is even worse. That means she is using her "good name" to take actions (and give her cover) against a few.
Rob continued in his email:
"Knowing these things would allow a more thoughtful consideration of what you have to say. As it stands right now, it is obvious you are angry, perhaps with good reason, but without this information, you are just an angry coward. After all, I could have not used my firm email with my signature and url but I am not trying to hide my identity like you all apparently are. Too bad, because I think beneath all the invective, you make some good points. Kindest regards, Rob M."
The facts are not enough for you? You need "more" than just the facts?
Rob is a middle of the road guy. He is for property rights he says, but if you attempt to protect your property rights, if you attempt to point out corruption and cheating in governmental leaders, than by Rob's logic you are a coward. Amazingly, Rob is perfectly "hedged". He can go left, he can go right, but he has no true principle upon which he stands.
March 12, 2006
"Historic Church Street" Signs: A Farce Comments (2)
New signs have been appearing around Church Street in Vienna. The signs seem to be everywhere and all point in the general direction of "Historic Church Street". What does that mean exactly? Does that mean the new building that just replaced Vienna's first fire department is "historic"? Or maybe the new brick sidewalks are "historic"? Perhaps the caboose brought in during the 1980s, that is "historic"? Is the brand new Vienna Presbyterian Church "historic"? Is the new building that houses Nielsen’s Frozen Custard "historic"? The auto-parts store, that is "historic"? Maybe, the building on the corner of Church and Center Street set for demolition at any moment, that must be "historic"?
Of course, Church Street is not historic. Nothing on the Street, except maybe the Freeman Store, is even remotely "historic". And the Freeman Store is not on any historical registers, nor is it in a historic district. Why all the wordsmithing with the word "historic"? That ladies and gentleman is how Vienna Town Council Member Maud Robinson operates. The truth doesn't matter to her. She wants to pretend Church Street is historic, so she will do and say everything that makes the ruse stick. Why does Robinson spend so much time creating "fake" historicity in Vienna?
March 04, 2006
Mayor Charlie Robinson Says Put Me In Comments (0)
Back in 1985 former Vienna Mayor Charlie Robinson (Maud Robinson's husband) spoke against letting a property out of the District. Listen to his argument:
Does anyone in Vienna beyond Maud Robinson believe this today in 2006? Does anyone believe after the 20 years of cronyism that unfolded following those words from Mayor Robinson that the District places no hardships on property owners? Is Maud Robinson willing to put her house in the Windover Heights Historic District and back up her husband's words?
March 03, 2006
George Lovelace v. Logic Comments (0)
In 1998 the Vienna Town Council voted to add a property to the Windover Heights Historic District. Then citizen George Lovelace stood up at the microphone to voice his support of adding a new house to the District without any review board approval. From the verbatim minutes of that meeting comes this Lovelace comment:
"What kind of a symbol would we set if we chose not to allow someone who WANTED to be in the District, to leave them out? I think we want to send a message that says we still are for historic preservation..."
Follow that logic? George Lovelace's logic to support adding a property to the Windover Heights Historic District was asinine. From that same Town Council meeting, then Town Council member Steve Briglia added more "logic":
"I also feel that once you are in [in the Windover Heights Historic District] you are going to have to come up with pretty compelling reasons to be let out. So if you are willing to be let in, I think that speaks highly. I think getting out may be a little harder the next time."
It is no longer 1950, it is 2006 and garden club style politics need to be retired once and for all. Vienna cannot afford to jeopardize its recent ranking as a great place to live.
March 02, 2006
Green Hedges School and George Lovelace Comments (0)
While the ultra-private Green Hedges School (415 Windover Avenue, NW, Vienna, VA 22180) is seeking a 2006 expansion that requires Town Council approval, it is not the first time the school has expanded. Green Hedges School expanded in 1997 too. Guess who the big supporters of the 1997 expansion were? Then Delegate George Lovelace was right there backing expansion into a residential neighborhood that borders the Windover Heights Historic District. If a ritzy private school wants to expand, with an assortment of Town granted waivers, that is fine? But when the Lillis' neighbor wants a new house, legally, the political machine goes into action to dole out "payback" to Lillis? Why can't we have honest government? Why are we stuck with cronyism? Why can't there be fair treatment across the board for all citizens? The day is coming when the fog of the Vienna historic district corruption will be lifted. There will be some severely tattered reputations and this web site will be there to document it all.
