So the energy plan abomination is rushed through on a 5-4 vote. The whole 182 page thing, complete with commercial advertisements (can someone sue to get them out?). Just like with the Journey Through Hallowed Ground abomination, the full process isn’t needed when it’s for the right people. And obvious conflicts of interest are simply overlooked because they’re all on the same side.
I am most disappointed in Jim Burton, always a stickler for process, fiscal sanity, and eliminating conflicts, unless of course it’s requested by the movers and shakers in his district. Is he really this hypocritical or do they have some kind of dirt on him to keep him in the fold when they need him? He was telling people last night that this plan was going nowhere because there were simply too many unanswered questions. Then today he’s flipped like a pancake, casting the decisive vote.
And Dingbat-in-Chief McGimsey must be so proud that she got her resume builder, even though it left a shitty taste in everyone’s mouth. Just like with JTHG, she took an issue that should have ended up with nearly unanimous support and bastardized it to such an extent that it squeaked by 5-4, leaving lots of stench in its wake. An amazing display of ego-centric myopia.
And people wonder why we see-saw from one extreme to the next in this county. I am as disgusted by this county’s government today as I have ever been.
UPDATE: In other less important news, the county budget deficit was today revised upwards to $192 million. But who cares! We’ve got local cap and trade coming, along with air conditioner inspectors! Get ready to receive your Energy Performance Label on your house!
![[Post to Twitter]](http://www.tooconservative.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-twitter.png){kind=icon}
Dec 15th by Loudoun Insider
Can you put Burton’s face on a pancake?
*
Nothing shocks me anymore, I just read how Lieberman flipped like a latke on the health care vote.
*
If it’s any consolation, I am thankful for all the hard work LI and several other key people put into this effort. This proves that all sides can work together for fiscal sanity. Too bad the Board is not listening.
LI, can you post the yeas and nays?
It gets worse.
Yesterday our LOCO budget deficit was 157 million. As of this AM based on a report to the board by county staff it is now 190 MILLION. Those voting for this plan did so knowing the deficit increased by 33 million over night. Those who voted for this in the light of this new deficit number are both Economically illiterate and politically tone deaf.
Mr. Burton must have gotten a call in the night. Maybe the Ghost of Nitwits past manifested itself forcing Mr Burton to reach deep for a handful of stupidity. He was the deciding vote and shrank to the occasion, as is his habit on important issues.
Amazing. Within the same afternoon that the BOS is told of a $190 million budget shortfall (a tax increase coming to a property tax bill with your name on it), they sign up Loudoun taxpayers for cap and trade, energy performance labeling, and who knows what else. Rubber stamped. 3 weeks for a 30 yr plan. So much for the public process. No need to vet it if PEC says its okay. Next time PEC talks about needing more time for the public process, someone should remind them of this day.
Yeas- McGimsey, Burton, Kurtz, Burk, Miller
Nays- Waters, York, Delgaudio, Buckley
Let me echo LL’s comment.
Hats off to LI, Joe B. at NVTH, and Ric James for doing the hard work.
Smart people doing the hard work for Loudoun County.
Thank you to Supervisor Waters for drafting an alternate plane in hopes of proving something other than this cluster fox trot. She worked very hard on this and should be commended for her efforts.
Thank you to Supervisor Delgaudio, Chairman York and Supervisor Buckley for their correct votes. To the others thanks for nothing.
I’ll never agree with Susan Buckley on school funding and taxes, but she does have a solid moral center. She knows right from wrong and is never afraid to take a stance apart from her fellow Dem herd.
.
Burton may as well join the LCDC with this vote.
I suppose I can insert the line I purposely eliminated from my address to these Supervisors.
“Prepare for the litany of lawsuits challenging your authority, as well as the authority of the NoVa Commission that foisted this onto us. There has been successful litigation against this very kind of unelected commissions, and as Dillon proved to us all, this County can only go as far as the end of the State rope.
I tivoed the meeting today. There was a rather interesting moment towards the end when the BOS was discussing the grant project specifics. Supervisor Waters made a motion to insert language in the labeling program that basically said that the money couldn’t be used to develop a mandated energy performance labeling program. It has to stay voluntary. Okay, should have been non-controversial, since the claim is that this whole thing is voluntary, right? Well, the Waters motion narrowly passed!!! McGimsey spoke AGAINST it basically saying she wants to keep flexibility. Please tell me that the LCRC has started candidate recruitment . . .
With this numb-brained idiot at the helm, I’m pretty sure that much is a forgone conclusion, Professor.
Like LI, I appreciate Buckley for her sense of right and wrong in this instance.
The whole lot of the rest of them need to go, and I only regret that Kurtz and Burton may slip out in 2011 without feeling the sting of the voters outrage on this.Miller cooked his own goose sometime ago, and I’m sure he knows he’s a lameduck at this point.
As for Burk and McGypsy, they might want to take up residence elsewhere. I hope to make their names household references…and not in the good way. Come election time, I think we can muster a bad enough image of her double-dealing with county finances, Bernie Madoff will look like a saint compared to her.
I doubt they have “dirt” on Burton, unless it has to do with his phony easement. He only has 10 acres, smallest parcel VOF has ever taken by a mile–they usually only consider parcels 100 acres or larger. Or his phony open space tax break. Because he has a VOF easement on his ten acres of flood plain, it is taxed at a much lower rate. (And you wonder why the effort to make the tax break only for parcels at least 20 acres failed.)
I just think he will not stand up to the PEC, or they will painfully shun him and his wife socially. She does not want him to run again, it is rumored, and no wonder. He should retire and enjoy his wife and time with his children and grandchildren. Does he really need things like this vote on his conscience?
For the next election, we need someone who is going to make the hard choices for our County, not cow tow to anyone, not even the oh so wonderful PEC and their agenda, which includes funneling a lot of our money to themselves and their own.
Why didn’t PEC pay for its own mailer? On the Novatownhall thread, Barbara said there was a motion by Scott York to raise the amount from $20,000 to $30,000 for PEC to send out an energy mailer? PEC has a lot more money than the County has for things like this…
I didn’t catch all the project totals but the list goes something like this:
Loudoun County Home Improvement Program – Waters had this, which was described in her prosposal. Already established program helping low and moderate income people ($140,000, I think)
1) hiring a “temporary” 3 yr employee to manage the mess approved today
2) Loudoun County Youth Shelter project
3) Solar Lights and Electric Vehicle recharging station at Scott Jenkins Park
4) education and outreach to businesses – $100,000, which was lowered from $240,000 by Waters trying to come up with money for a different project
5) education and outreach to residents – $240,000, which includes the PEC mailer and working with HOAs and citizens on covenant that prevent things like solar panels
6) energy plan with Moorefield station and data center
7) energy performance labeling program
Lots $ for more (Garforth?) plans and education. So little money to action.
I thought the outrage was directed at the rush and the possible COI of McGimsey.
.
I’ve seen very little actual discussion here about the County Energy Strategy (CES) and it merits or demerits.
.
I’ve read the document and it seems relatively benign. But perhaps I’m missing something. Sally? Barbara? Can you direct me to the sections that cause you the most concern?
Professor, thanks for that list. Is it your view that these monies come from EECBGs?
All that’s green does not glitter. I have not read the CES plan but would like to know more about the energy performance labeling program. Where do I get these labels? How are they to be affixed? Do they go on everything that is a user of energy? I have many many questions about this program.
While Buckley voted the right way today, I am wondering if she is sly like a fox and using this vote as “cover” for her certain vote on raising taxes and cow-towing to Hatrick.
The most fascinating thing that this thing passed was the fact that many of the Supervisors did not even have the right draft including Burton so they were voting on something that was not the correct document thus not knowing what they really were voting for. If this does not tell you that those voting for it were listening to their PEC handlers then I do not know what does. They did not even put it off for a couple of weeks in order to ascertain what was right and wrong. Fascinating TV.
One other fascinating thing that occurred was that Kelly Burk and Susan Buckley wanted to have the “flexibility” during the budget so they wanted to have the advertised tax rate at 1.50 which was even more than the original designated board direction of no more than a 5% increase or 1.44. Guess that’s not high enough for their champagne tastes. Best hold your applause for Buckley until you see what she has to say during the budget.
Have fun reading the 182 pages and trying to figure out what’s in it. But according to McGim, no one is confused about what it says.
Substance issues that didn’t get discussed:
1) pushes for “smaller” vehicles and reducing parking spaces and size: ie, families who have children whot need car seats are not welcome here
2) energy performance labeling program has no details on criteria, who will be the judge, administer, costs beyond the grant, etc. Some the “results” assume every building and house participates – uh, that can only be achieved through a mandatory program.
3) cap and trade sections: last I checked Obama hasn’t signed anything into law. Why put staff resources into something that doesn’t exist
4) “encourage” buildings to be more efficient than building code. Not a bad thing necessarily, but staff admitted they haven’t met with either commerical or residential building groups to discuss the ideas. Without buy-in from the building community, you’ll get nowhere. Is “encourage” going to be arm twisting on development applications?
5) Lots of EU references as the level to strive for: do we really want to be like them? This could be very damaging to our economy and businesses.
This plan is an economic disaster.
There are more problems but alas, the BOS evidently doesn’t care about details. Details – who needs them.
I have never applauded Buckley. She did what she did this AM for one reason or the other. I personally think it was to appease Tony Howard and the business community so they’ll endorse her next year.
At the same time, you’re exactly right about her inability to feel the taxpayers’s pain in paying the highest real property taxes in the Country.
What’s worse is every one of the five offering a “shut up and pay it already” mentality.
Time to chop some platforms out from under these dipshits.
Edmund, the conflict is a given with McGimsey for me.
Between pretending she wasn’t paid to lobby, and the fake petition, very little she does surprises me.
But she IS an elected public servant now, so there should be a bit more accountability than when she was a lobbyist.
The “strategy”?
I have a problem with the fact that it is now on record with the not only the county but the federal government that Loudoun plans these policies.
Mrs. Kurtz was quite right today when she said their implementation would depend on future boards.
It is a step by step process, and now the door is open.
Miller was quite disingenuous when he said “this is just a POLICY (uhhh, no, its a strategy–you call it a STRATEGY if you don’t want people to think you’re adopting a POLICY). It doesn’t become law until it gets into the zoning ordinance.”
Quite true.
And once you adopt a policy, guess what? You have just announced that you will be revising the ordinance to be in conformance with the policy.
That is why it was so crucial to adopt something narrowly focused and specific, devoted to “shovel ready” energy projects.
By adopting a broad brush conglomeration of squish, we now have it on record that any set of moonbats in the nine chairs can move on any of them any time.
Because now we have a 30 year STRATEGY.
Of green goo.
Each glob of which is its own program, with staff and expenditures.
I would have preferred a grant application saying what specific projects would have had enhanced energy efficiency (saving the taxpayers X dollars).
Funny, both Miller and McGimsey made their political careers on the CboogeymanPAM.
They just passed the equivalent of a much greater change than those proposed zoning in two subareas of one planning area.
I don’t know what amendments were added to this thing, if any, but last night Mr. Burton told me to my face “There are a lot of good things in this plan but now I am a NO tomorrow.” Sounds like the NO doesn’t mean much or enough changes were made to get him on board. I suspect the connected supporters made a call.
Ed – the grant funds will be used to cover those specific projects, but once the money is gone, the county either shuts down the program or uses local money, such as for the labeling program. Also staff admitted on the record during the project discussion that some administrative costs would not be recovered and local tax dollars funding current county positions would be used to fulfill grant requirements. I remind you that 37 staff put in nearly 1300 hours already, paid for courtesy of you and me.
For those of you who watched the meeting, did you see the segment where the interim County Administrator and folks from the budget office stated that due to the decrease in sales tax revenues, next year’s residential real property tax rate will need to be $1.509 per $100 for an equalized budget? That’s 20% higher than this year, and only if the budget doesn’t increase at all.
Well John, I guess that means you’re just a citizen and a business owner.
Not worth much these days, it seems.
John, the tip off with Burton was that he thought there were a lot of good things in this plan – it is crap!
See L2day article here:
http://leesburg2day.com/articles/2009/12/15/news/9951eenergyvote121509.txt
Apparently it was too squishy for Mr. Burton too:
“As an addendum to the strategy, Supervisor Jim Burton (I-Blue Ridge) put forward three points in the executive summary that state the strategy represents the “county’s goals for the next 30 years. The recommendations found within the report are possible approaches for the county to achieve these goals, given current technology, laws, etc. However the approaches outlined within may change over time as technology, law, etc, change. These are a set of projects with which to get started.”
Those additions allowed Burton to vote in favor of the long-range strategy, casting the tie-breaking vote on the matter.”
Now they are our GOALS, which may CHANGE WITH TIME, but we’re JUST getting STARTED.
That’s what I was afraid of!
lololol
How will Sally Kurtz fit her giant Suburban into one of those new smaller parking spaces? DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO.
No more travel expenses for Andrea McGimsey. Use of any mode of transportation other than a bike creates too many carbon emissions.
Then again, can anyone imagine Andrea McGimsey riding a bike to work, to DC, to Delaware or anywhere?
I’ve read the document and it seems relatively benign. But perhaps I’m missing something. Sally? Barbara? Can you direct me to the sections that cause you the most concern?
Edmundburkenator
How about the LC Gov’t man hours to administer the plan. It took 1290 man hours to do the Counties portion of the application for the grant. Now imagine if you will the costs from the 11 LC agencies involved in the administration of the plan. Please also remember this was crafted by the same LC gov’t that last week told us the current deficit was 157 million and this morning revised the estimate to 190 million. This NEW gov’t program is being created at the exact time when we should be reducing the cost of government not expanding it.
I didn’t read the plan. I don’t really care, but this has all been highly amusing.
And I second edmondburkenator’s request for specifics on what Stone/Sally/Barbara/LI don’t like in the plan. Give some specifics. All I see is complaints about the cost to put it together (already said and done), the inclusion of “advertising,” and disagreement if it’s to be considered policy.
Can someone give me page numbers and specific grievances with what the supervisors passed? If it’s benign, what’s with all the fuss?
I attended Millers budget meeting this evening over in the Broadlands.
Robert Dupree was also there. He seems like a big mouth anyway he kind of bugs me and I can’t put my finger on it. And about 6 or 8 other people. Including Cliff Kierce.
Anyway the group talked endlessly about nothing substantial like the cost of the kids parking at schools to charging for sports, even teachers possibly paying for parking which Dupree said they might look into that, which is silly and I hope he was kidding. And on and on and on. I mostly listened, as I don’t don’t think Miller was exactly excited to see me there. After it seemed endless talk about things that would not have much of a impact on reducing the 190 million dollar gap . I finally said where are the big ideas to substantially cut the budget. The answer really boiled down to from Miller taxes are going up and services are going to be cut. Nothing substanial from Miller on how to cut reduce the school budget or anything else. Dupree said they expect another 3,000 kids this next fall. If I heard this right from Dupree and I have heard this before, kids per family are 50% higher higher then most other similar counties in this Country. And there does not seem to be any logical reason for this except Loudoun school system is highly desirable for young families. But this still does not explain the unusually high percentage here of much larger families then average. Anyway what I gathered expect taxes to go way up less services and the schools will still rule the budget with no substantial cuts in sight. Miller said a large part of his mail or phone calls are parents not wanting to cut the school budget. Cliff was the only one that actually had some good ideas like raise class sizes slightly. I don’t believe Miller thought that was a good idea. Cliff had some other good ideas which I don’t remember.
The evening was mostly small talk about the budget NOT big talk. Miller did talk about increasing the commercial base and mentioned Raytheon. Well I chimed in and said it was a fluke because we happened to have the buildings. Now that those are gone where are the other buildings for another raytheon, well there are non. That is why we must redevelop rt 28 to make it more desirable and approve the Kincoras. Too much emphasis is being put on our way in the future metro. Kincora is NOW rt 28 redo is NOW that is where we could increase the the commercial tax base if 28 was more desirable and Kincora not to mention the roads.
Bottom line the commercial assessments are going to be lower and residential has stabilized nothing much will be done with the schools or at the very least nothing substantial. So with residential stable a higher tax rate will mean higher taxes for all of us next year. And I don’t think Miller cares for me much. ha ha
Barbara, Miller will be your way tomorrow night you ought to go if you haven’t already.
Wednesday, December 16th at 7:00 pm, Mercer Middle School in Dulles South
Tell me if Cliff and Miller are sitting in front of the group in rocking chairs, ok that is unfair I am sure those chairs where the room already.
And Cliff is the president of the broadlands HOA.
Oh Miller mentioned he heard nothing about Van Metre donating the land in the broadlands to George Mason, until the day it was announced. Odd that a big deal like that would be kept from our county supervisor.
Lee, you have to remember that when Miller decided to go run in the 86th, he left the district in his commissioner’s hands and a few little buddies.
Chaloux has been busy trying to get all the roads taken off the map and kill the schools, and part of that involves beating up Van Metre, because they not only were in negotiation with LCPS for school property (taking houses off the map, which is usually a GOOD thing, unless something good will come of it, like a school, in which case it is a BAD thing), they have a lot of the proffers to build the roads she wants to kill.
After some of the stunts she’s pulled down in this end of the district (the small group of “this is my private county” transition zone zealots cheering wildly notwithstanding), I wouldn’t blame Van Metre a bit if they just talked to George Mason and gave them the land.
Why deal with trouble you don’t have to? It isn’t the county’s business who they decide to give/sell land to (yet).
Something Miller might want to cotton on to: his commish is taking some positions opposite to very public statements he’s made on some district issues, and it’s causing some confusion in this neck of the woods.
My own take is that when he delegated the district to a few of Andrea’s email-group mavens (two of whom are listed on VPAP as self-employed in direct mail marketing and PR–really makes me wonder if they are sub-sub-sub-contracted to send out the emails–lol), they got in the habit of running things, and now that he lost in the 86th, I don’t think the girls want to give the district back.
We’ll see. I’m going to try to get to Mercer tonight, and there’s another meeting I’m going to tomorrow.
Not to mention that little thing called Christmas, but hey…
Is this where we are headed with energy efficiency in Loudoun:
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20091215/US.Snow.Covered.Stoplights/
G, the man hours do trouble me. But they don’t get paid by the hour. The man hours/monies used to date by county staff are not above what they would be getting compensated for doing other work. There is an argument to be made that your 1290 man hours could have been spent more wisely — but if the upside to the plan is lower costs, that argument falls short. The Professor states that the costs for specific programs are funded through grants (yes, Federal grants are coming out of your pocket and my pocket), but not local revenues. I share his concern about holdover staff positions once the grant monies run out.
.
Barbara, additions by Burton do seem to provide the future boards with a lot of leeway here.
.
Professor, could you direct me to the section that focuses on car size? I than you.
The comment from “specifics” a few back just got released from moderation. There will be plenty later on specifics – this thing will be dissected and discussed for a long time. But I guess you’re another one saying – damn the process and public input if it’s for the right cause and the right people, right? Process matters, unless you’re McGimsey, Burk, Miller, Kurtz, and Burton.
Loudoun Lady, I particularly like the quote in your link about “It’s the same as if the power were out”. THAT’S reassuring! lol
Edmund, thank you for the response. My major concern is that they just voted to open Pandora’s box on policy, and thus spending. It only takes five.
specifics, it is the lack of specifics, with sweeping potential, that has me concerned. “Interpret” is the most dangerous verb in the bureacratic lexicon.
LI, I don’t know if specifics is saying it’s okay for the right people; it appears to me they’re doing the “hey…what’s the fuss…be cool…it’s all good…nothing here to see…” if so that’s a funny choice of moniker. lol
p.s. to Loudoun Lady:
Check Out “Minnesotans For Global Warming” and their “Climategate Christmas” album. Here is the link from the green McG thread: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpQXY4tWaoI
Brought to you by some of the folks who have been dealing with the LEDs for a few years–although the lifespan of the bulbs is great! Death to softserve swirlybulbs!, long live LEDs (where they won’t cause death from ice buildup).
Edmund, if you had really read the thing, you would know where the section is that directs the Board to change all of our ordinances, and our comp plan to do things such as encourage smaller cars and smaller parking spaces, and meet carbon goals to make Loudoun the greenest of the green.
Barbara is right, several hundred pages of probably unrealistic goals, and a commitment to a very broad policy to change our zoning ordinance, our comp plan, the building code (which is a state code, not even ours) and to support legislation that does not even exist yet. Carbon goals that cannot be met without radical change…
The public was duped into thinking this was just something to secure a grant for existing County projects, a pretty good cause. Instead it is broad and radical policy change, putting into place programs that will be expensive to maintain. If it had been the case that all we were trying to do was to secure the federal grant, then the document Ms. Waters wanted would have been plenty sufficient. The process to rush to adopt this big policy document and change was not proper process according to our laws, and the whole thing deprived the public of adequate input and therefore the vetting required by law. Yes, I have a problem with that.
If they had one ounce of moral fiber, the process would never have happened the way it did, but they are all bought and sold, and do not have the mindset or courage to do what is right. They had to rush it through and call it something other than what it is, or it would never have passed… this is apparently the Democratic way, don’t read it, no need to understand it, or the costs associated with it, just do it…have it done before the public figures out what you have done.
I am happy though that some of the money was taken out of “studies” and put into the fund to renovate low income housing. I think there is an incredible need for this. Thank you, Ms. Waters and the other Board members for doing this.
“I don’t have a comfort level in saying this is the public position of the board,” said Supervisor Susan Klimek Buckley (D-Sugarland Run).
The public has no idea what was done, with this plan rushed through in 3 weeks, amended at the last minute, expanded significantly from its initial purpose–it was not properly advertised, not properly presented, and not proper to adopt for those reasons. It calls for amending laws that are not even Loudoun’s laws, and a whole host of things that Loudoun has no authority over. Apparently it was designed so it could be waived around at the federal and state level as representative of Loudoun’s citizenry’s views, and as such it is completely inappropriate.
Ms. Buckley, an accomplished municipal attorney, was correct in her “comfort level.”
I would love to have a serious policy discussion with some of you folks and then you link to tangents like street lights with snow on them (do you really think this helps your point?) or some YouTube thing from Minnesotan’s for Global Warming. I’ll go read the doc again since Sally won’t cite the place to which she keeps referring (it would seem like an easy thing to send me to the section instead of tossing an attitude at me).
.
It makes it difficult to consider you someone that really has issues with the strategy rather than someone that just wants to change the D seats to R seats. If that’s what you want, just say so. Stop with all the obfuscation.
Edmund, I’m sorry if people discuss other things than your personal interest; I read Loudoun Lady’s remark, and replied to her with the humor post–personally, I HAVE to be able to still laugh or else some of this manipulative crap is just too horrifying.
You write like a big boy, so I’m sure you can read the document with a discerning eye. How funny for people to demand citation of specific non-specific “specifics” in order to parse a suspiciously NON specific document.
You claim to have read it. Are you comfortable with the ramifications of stating 30 year goals (and the unspecified costs of implementing them) and therefore falling back on the one thing it doesn’t contain (specifics that COULD be discussed, in terms of energy saved, and thus money) in order to criticize those with whom you apparently disagree?
Or gee, maybe its all just one big hypothetical and you’re fine with that, unlike lunkheads like me? Hypothetical in blog rhetoric is one thing–this is now government policy that we will pay for.
That’s the point.
Edmund, go here:
http://www.loudoun.gov/Portals/0/docs/Energy/Draft%20Proposed%20ES.pdf
and start with chapters 10 and 11.
That was the draft advertized before the final input.
Soem fun stuff in 10 about people using extra appliances and how that could be fixed through application of something that was ALOMST lawe in CA, and COULD become a national norm, along with the inability of the team to get good data on nonresidential properties–but that didn’t stop them from recommending out of their arse anyway.
There’s a little example.
Shall we start with 10 and 11?
Bearing in mind of course that this is a moot point now that it has been adopted, and all we’ll be arguing about is what already happened, in the shadow of what we now have to watch out for DEFINITELY happening if some moonbat decides to implement a little further than this political tripe and credentialing exercise?
I didn’t watch the whole public hearing, but I didn’t see anyone get up to the mike and raise McGreensy’s involvement with an enviro group and how this so-called “plan” for Loudoun is resume-building for her. None of you critics had the gumption to raise that in your 2 minutes, which would assuredly had helped get it into the newspapers. Again, you all are great at bitching on this blog, but you’re all words, no action. I would suggest LCRC next month adopt a resolution calling on McGreensey to fess up. Or, file a complaint with Jim Plowman and get that into the papers.
p.s.–re your R & D remarks–this has really nothing to do with either political party as much as it does with whatever lables candidates think they can best market themselves under.
Those who believe in using policy as social control for personal benefit don’t really HAVE a named political party that I’m aware of, but that’s just me.
Politics IS pertinent, as LI noted, in that the board swings back and forth, and the board is who shoves this stuff into adoption, and who chooses whether or not to fund and implement.
As such, it is a bit politically pertinent if we don’t want to pay for this.
But I firmly believe it has very little to do with R and D, other than marketing (which McG’s real expertise was in, before she became retroactive senior management at AOL on her ever-growing resume).
Kind of like “Green is the new Black”.
Although I believe York said every item in that document would have to become before the board before acted on. Now that sounds all warm and fuzzy, but the greeny weenies on the board have the votes to make happen what ever they see fit. I can’t wait for the next election.
rabble, that’s a tough call to make in two minutes, and no guarantee it will get coverage.
One can make no more than one point in that time–Jonathan Weintraub used most of his time talking about his shirt.
They started early, so many people walked in the door and found their number had already been called, or walked in to find themselves on deck.
Doesn’t do much for focus.
Funny, they advertised for 7:30, and then when only one person came to the regular public input at 6:30, they just decided to start the 7:30 meeting early.
Another example of what McG would have cried and cried over if it had happened to her (email McActivist) peeps.
“Those who believe in using policy as social control for personal benefit don’t really HAVE a named political party that I’m aware of, but that’s just me.”
Exsqueeze me BM. Do you think it could be argued that the 2003 Republican BoS used a policy that favored sprawl development (social control as dependency on a consumptive carbon-fueled lifestyle) for personal benefit?
RR, you didn’t listen to it all.
Secondly, the gathering cloud actually galvanized the dems around the bitch.
Enough Mr. high brow Edmund, it’s a blog and people share links and videos because we want to. And no, it’s not too far fetched to think that a plan that is so large in scope that no one really knows where it will lead, might actually lead to changing bulbs in stops lights that kill people.
*
McGimsey already is bulb-changin happy, to the tune of (what was it?) – 1 million dollars last year?? Something insane.
The posse created a monster with this board – they may be further left than Obama and we need to wait 2 more years B4 we can get rid of them…
Barabara, You may have left already but there was also a speaker that sounded like he was admitting to siphoning gas out of other people’s gas tanks in the 70’s – he talked about “the taste of gas in his throat 30 years ago” – it was bizarre.
Ok, policy discussion is a bridge too far here. Thank you Barbara for the links, I’ll review again.
.
I’m not going to get into the discussion about a 30 year strategy without specifics being a bad or good thing. I think you need to set a direction and let facts on the ground dictate your specifics from week, to month, to year, to decade. This is the way many types of organizations work, from large to family size.
.
Sally brings up an interesting point regarding the process. Sally, do you know if there was adequate advertisement and public input regarding this vote? Does this strategy document rise to the level of some other BOS business that requires a prescribed advertising period?
.
LL, you’re right, link away. It’s a blog.
“Does this strategy document rise to the level of some other BOS business that requires a prescribed advertising period?”
It does indeed rise to that bar. Look at the sheer amount of money it spends. THAT ALONE is merit for it to be put before all of the citizens. This was a rush job meant to keep it from in front of the voters.
Michael, shut up. The previous bunch of turds were equally this bad. When will we get a Board that is wrapped up in public office FOR the people, and not treat it like a bank account for their personal endeavors?
Edmund,
The complaint with the plan seem to be short on specifics and long on innuendo. Looks to me that the biggest valid complaint may be in a perceived COI on the part of one of the BOS. Otherwise, it looks less like a smoking gun and more like a smoke bomb…
“It does indeed rise to that bar. Look at the sheer amount of money it spends. THAT ALONE is merit for it to be put before all of the citizens.”
Monk, that is not the same thing. There are certain things that by law must be advertised. Edmund is not talking about merit but requirement. Also, do we know if the advertisement requirements (if there are any) were NOT met? That is a pretty routine process and I doubt legal would let it go forward with meeting the letter of the law.
BPM – I guess power does corrupt. I thought some of thee people were ok on the way in, but they have turned to their special interest buddies. I am sure some honorable candidates will emerge next election cycle, whether they can resist special interests is another story.
Trickster, where oh where are those FBI indictments anyway?
You know, the ones McGimsey and her VLF buddies said were the reason to vote for them, because they weren’t “corrupt”, and would respect the Comp Plan?
You know, that Comp Plan that just had a “strategy” amended to it, just a little 30-year-plan to get a grant, that are now the County’s STATED GOALS as of a “friendly amendment” yesterday by someone who lied to a longtime resident with a business across the street from his historic home with a tax writeoff, tiny little sewer district, and VOF easement?
Eric, yes, there is conflict of interest. The sweeping policy goals now adopted are basically a backdoor CPAM. (If you can find a small specific to play ping pong with among the broad expensive programs, feel free to bounce them off a wall.)
You know, CPAMs, those things that are eeeeeeevil?
So eeeeeeevil, that if you get elected bleating about them, you don’t even use them when you probably should?
Guys on the “it’s all okay, nothing to see here” side, if it was JUST a little grant application, why the angst, the attacks, the emails alerts amongst the true believers?
And if it isn’t political (unless people who disagree with it are saying they should be voted out for approving it, in which case it PROVES it is ONLY political), why was Loudoun for Obama networking from the get-go, with McGimsey CLF-group heads leading the working groups?
Oh, and Eric, re advertisements and legal: that’s how the downzoning got thrown out, remember?
The advertising was so bad the judge didn’t even get to the meat of the case.
The board actually gave McG her retirement. She can now go and charge exorbitant consulting fees because of this basically new department in Loudoun. Now they are going to stick it to us with much higher taxes because they can’t get economic development going. But first you must make Loudoun more attractive then to just industrial and data. Again Raytheon was a fluke because we had a beautiful class A buildings in a beautiful setting. Like I asked Miller last night after an hour or so about nothing substanial about the budget and him bragging about Raytheon. I said so where are the existing class a buildings in a beautiful setting for the next Raytheon. He couldn’t answer, because Raytheon could of been put together by anyone it was a no brainer. The real job will be to attract class a business to build here, and without the kincoras it will not happen. They don’t want to be next to the next data centers and industrial and certainly looking out the window at them.
Well I hope McG took all the supervisors out to dinner that voted on her energy plan and gave her, her retirement and now huge consulting fees
In Hollywood they have a similar plan it is called the hollywood retirement plan. Ever wonder why you see these really old actors in the movies at times. Well the younger hollywood generation gives them work, so when they get old they will get the same treatment. This is actually true and now our BOS is latched on to something similar starting with McG. I wonder who will be next perhaps Miller??????? 
Michael, whether they can resist special interests is INDEED another story.
I’m once bitten, and I’ll be twice shy in anyone I endorse from here on in.
I. like you, thought these cats were operating on the people’s wavelength…not their special interests. We can and WILL find conservatives who will do the people’s business, and will not line their own pockets while they’re at it.
I’ve stayed out of this argument mainly because of the lack of policy substance. I also get skeptical when I see another coordinated Waters/Loudoun Insider campaign. Add to that I really don’t mind the heat thrown on McG as I don’t agree with much of anything she is doing. In the end, I am with Sir Edmund, this really doesn’t have much affect in the long run, I don’t see it raising to the level of a CPAM. Heck CPAMs aren’t even followed these days. So it does seem much-a-do about nothin.
Now with that said, I do worry about the meat that is showing about with this stupid thing. I am talking were actual money, grant money, is going to be spent, and I get real leery about this one, “$200,000 to create standards for labeling energy efficient commercial and residential buildings”. What the hell does that mean? I am not comfortable with any dynamic entering the market place that may or may not effect re-sale values of homes in this County. Especially one being pushed by McG. Too bad this didn’t get discussed/vetted before the personal shit started. Now that would have been productive.
BlakOut, CPAMs ARE allowed, but only by Board initiation.
They chose to treat it as a “strategy”.
Blackout,
My son has been very ill for the last few weeks, and I do want to say one thing to you. I love Reston Hospital. They have a special pulmonary/cardio wing, and simply exceptional doctors, and the nursing staff is unbelievably professional. He started at Loudoun Inova, and I honestly cannot say the same about that hospital. I am incredibly grateful to Reston Hospital, who may have saved his life. Puts all the arguing about hospital locations into perspective, since we took him to Loudoun, being closer….
As for the process, I think this was a backdoor CPAM, and should have been reviewed by the planning commission, and gone through the whole process. It is not just a grant application, but it is a long range plan, to amend our comp plan, zoning ordinance, and other laws.
Some things about it got me scratching my head, like how the heck will we increase the energy efficiencies of new construction by 25% by 2011, when Loudoun has NO authority to require anything other than the Uniform Statewide Building Code? And if you want to put a deck on your house, will they say, oh, you can’t do that without renovating your home for energy efficiency? already if you do more than a certain percentage of work on your home, you need to rewire/redo the whole thing–so now are they going to say you cannot put in a new kitchen without new windows, new roof, whatever?
The goals are pretty scary in that there is no way they can be accomplished without dramatic and drastic changes to all of our laws.
BPM, If I may ask, did you think Burton and McGimsey were conservatives?
Specifics :
$$$$$$$$ This is my specifics. I don’t know how much clearer I can be. Loudoun County is broke ! The shortfall of lust two weeks ago was 157 m. it is now 190 m and some say still climbing. The FY 2010 deficit was 200m. the resulting budget with a 9% increase in PP tax and marginal spending cuts has resulted in as of today deficit reductions of 10m. Given staffs inability to sight in the exact number we could be back at 200 m by the end of the year.
I oppose the program because if it costs us $1.35 that is $1.35 too much when we don’t have a pot to piss in. Save me the Horseshit about savings. The savings are guesses stretched out over many years projected by the same people who just missed the deficit number by 33 million ! I can not be any be any clearer.
It is amusing to watch McGimsey propose legislation that expands the county government by millions, while the County puts out a report indicating we are 192M in the hole for next year. Then they roll-out this Potomac green crap. The only thing this Board should be talking about now is how they are going to cut spending and close the 192M shortfall…is there a way for a recall – that might get their attention. Poisson’s drubbing obviously was not a big enough message for the McGimsey/Burton type. I have dubbed McGimsey, Burton, Burk, Kurtz and Miller the “Fascist 5″ – cuz thats what they are….
Sally, wouldn’t the short answer be: they can’t. They can require this of buildings constructed for the county (like Arlington does), but all they can do is “encourage”.
Haha…
.
You know, I was going to post something about when the first post or link would go up calling the BOS socialists/communists/or Marxist.
.
Michael wins.
.
I guess you can’t pick who posts on the blog… Michael, get out your Sharpe and start putting swastikas on photos of people! It’s all the rage!
This vote is going to look like the dumbest move ever when the FY2011 budget vote is taken first of the year. The current rate being discussed in the halls of LC Gov’t is a 20% increase, that means 1.50 per 100 folks. After having just raised the rate by 9% against the backdrop of a 200m deficit in the middle of a recession, they are going to raise it yet again by 20% against the backdrop of a 190m deficit. See the trend ? I am not just talking about the rate increase. The reduction ( using todays numbers ) in the deficit would be a paltry 10 million after factoring in the spending cuts and tax increase, yet will be required to double the amount of the increase from last year. So, increasing the cost of LC gov’t at this juncture is just foolish.
I thought it was $192, but what’s $2M among friends?
.
G, I think this thing doesn’t go anywhere just for this reason. You’ll get some grant monies to put some fliers together, but the state is the one that will be mandating energy efficiency codes.
.
I’ve gone through the doc again and just don’t see the red flags Barbara, section 10 and 11 are pretty fluffy. In fact, paying for this level of work is now bugging me the most — and the ethics issue. It’s a pretty lame document.
Edmund,
Why would they include goals that they cannot achieve legally, and resist removing those goals from their plan? because they will bully people to “volunteer” to do this, and basically discourage anyone from trying to do anything in the county.
Will they be treating this like the comp plan –which is only supposed to be a guide, but treated like the bible– and strong arm special exception applications to “volunteer” to be more energy efficient? most commercial uses and rural economy uses, especially in the western part of the county, are special exceptions… the energy plan specifically mentions the opportunity in special exceptions to ask applicants to “volunteer” to build more energy efficiency into their business… is this volunteering or is this blackmail?
is this just a round about barrier to make any new use way too expensive to develop in the west, or anywhere in the county, and to not allow any new businesses in the west unless they “volunteer” to be 25% more energy efficient– or 50% more efficient, since the 25% is a county overall average?
And will any rezonings, if we ever recover from this down turn, be held up because the Board wants massive expenditures on any new homes built, that will make the cost of housing in Loudoun even more expensive and less competitive? just another “option” to make builders think twice about building in Loudoun and encouragement to build somewhere else? new commercial uses? what will they do to “encourage” them to be more green? What strong arm tactic/threats will they use?
And will they then take this plan to Richmond, as if it represents a well advertised, majority agreement of the citizenry of Loudoun, and try to get changes to the Statewide Building Code?
And why are we endorsing, in this plan, cap and trade legislation that does not even exist yet? Do we in Loudoun really endorse cap and trade?
And was it appropriate to slip all of this into a simple grant application? I don’t think so, I think the citizens of Loudoun have been duped into this, and it was shoved through as fast as possible, so there would be no time for most people to figure out what they did…
The previous Board created this Board. And this one will create the next one. And that’s what’s wrong. We keep swinging from one extreme to another. I’d like to elect some nice intelligent, objective, not right or left, ethical, representatives.
BlackOut and his one track mind on display again! No coordination here, BO, just one ticked off blogger that is sick to death of hypocrites. That whole plan is full of a bunch of ill-defined energy consultant’s dreams. With Garforth’s abysmal performance on this, and his insertion of commercial advertisements for his strategic partners, he should be banned from competing for any of this work. This is what it says it is – a 30 year strategy. Sorry there wasn’t much time for substantive debate on the document itself, BO, but there were only three weeks from final report to public hearing, right before Christmas. And the entire BOS was confuced about what draft they were supposed to be voting on. And yet they voted to approve it anyway. Quit whining about me and show some outrage at those who really deserve it. The parallels between this bastardization of process and the last board’s ways is eery. Yet nothing at all from many of the last board’s big critics.
Edmund, I agree its pretty fluffy, which is why it wasn’t necessary to adopt it willy nilly.
Recall what I said: “Interpret” is the most dangerous verb in the government lexicon.
If the grant was the point (another expenditure by a bankrupt government), why not focus it onto specific energy savings on approved projects?
Ohhhh, so we can have GOALS that are the position of THE COUNTY.
Yeesh.
Breaking news!!!!!!
The BoS is going to enact a building death panel. If your residence or business doesn’t pass energy standards, here come the dozers! This is all being planned in a dark back room – sniff around for cigar smoke and whiskey – and we will have little time or opportunity to raise concerns. This is fascism, plain and simple, and Owens Corning is going to make a bundle. Where’s Jesus when you need him.
Nice try at deflection, trickster, and a trick is indeed all that is. This will get worse for McG, trust me. Can she get her former aide and Miller’s former aide to start another pro-McG blog?
I thought it was $192, but what’s $2M among friends?
You are correct. It is 192M
Be sure to write that number in pencil it will change yet again.
Trickster…not really. But they will deny your building permit until you’ve spent out to bring your residence or business into their version of compliance.
You know, under the laws of the commonwealth, and to avoid the lawsuits….they have to grandfather.
“…..but the state is the one that will be mandating energy efficiency codes.”
You are correct. And given the Dillon rule, not a mystery to anyone in local Gov’t then much of what is in the plan is unenforceable. All the more reason why much of this is a waste. A waste to create. A waste in that it may entice future Boards to proceed even though they will ultimately get slapped down by the state, after spending money to defend their position.
The courts are full of cases in which local jurisdictions have pissed away tax dollars defending themselves against the state. This whole thing was ill conceived from the get go. In my remarks before the board, I told them the process surrounding this proposal was out of control. I was right.
GStone, kind of like the version of the Comp Plan passed in 01.
trickster, for a non-carbon-based life form, you sure do spew some CO2!
lol
Our newly elected AG says he will defy any Federal legislation that he doesn’t like. In kind, the BoS can defy the Dillon rule and impose building death panels. Rumor has it that they will do the same for vehicles. Have you seen that ugly yellow and bondo Chevy monster-truck wanna be? BoS says KABOOM!
Oh, and btw BM, if you are concerned about the government imposing “social control” see who is on the new Governor’s transition team from the VFF, and close your eyes to those Wall street lobbyists and industry consultants.
http://mcdonnelltransition.com/press-release/governor-elect_bob_mcdonnell_announces_senior_advisors_to_transition-1/
But don’t forget folks, McG said, the day after this passed at the next board meeting all these developers called to congratulate her. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha wait till she is out of office she will be dropped like a hot potato.
Trickster,
Our federal constitution is kind of like the Dillon Rule–the federal government only has powers specifically delegated to it, and according to the 10th amendment–power lies in the States.
Maybe Mr. Cuccinelli will challenge Loudoun’s attempts to usurp power in violation of the Dillon Rule, too. The plan just adopted should be void ab initio, for no authority, or at least major parts of it.
Stoner, there you go again making numbers up. You must stop this as people are rolling their eyes when you begin trying to do math. You CANNOT look at the per hundred rate as the only indicator of whether taxes went up. Overall a majority of the county got a tax reduction last year as a result of lower assessments. You cannot look at the orange without looking at the apple.
.
BTW, why don’t you go ahead and tell people how much your taxes went DOWN last year. A substantial amount if you ask me, I was impressed. Tell us what was the real money, money out of your pocket was as compared to the previous year. Or would like to say you saw an increase in money out of your pocket. Don’t fib now.
Wow, I see a big similarity here. An inconvenient question, and fuzzy math. How ironic. Check this out, Gore is such a dweeb:
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fooYtalS9Gc
You elect a bunch of democrats and you expect something other than corruption, more spending (more wasting), and tax increases?
BlackOut, my taxes went up, as did many of my neighbors.
Our averages are skewed in this county, because of not only the great disparity in values, acreages and tax deferrals, but in the value rise and loss of all the differing holdings.
The “average” declined last year for tax bills, but like the difference between the “average” and the median on a per capita school seat, more people rose than fell, IMO.
The county has a history of confusing average with median.
It’s how we keep two of them in so many areas.
Barbara, I knew you would get the “you gotta look at the apple and the orange” to understand this. Mine went down last year and almost all of my neighbors went down as well.
BO mine more than doubled!
BlackOut, I know the results were very different in differing areas of the county.
We’re poised for that again.
I have a hard time with any BoS member who voted for the green moonbeams having any credibility when it comes time to grandstand on how we need to cut cut cut to be fiscally responsible to the poor taxpayers.
We have basic services we need to provide before we ever get into ambience or religious comfort zones.
BM,
I believe you missed the point that Mr. Weintraub was making with his shirt. The people who oppose sustainability are like that woman in the grocery store who opposes the tax on soda. Rather than examining her soda guzzling religious conviction, she attacks the tax. The fact of the matter is that society subsidizes her unhealthy lifestyle. The same thing goes for the belief that carbon fuel consumption is a natural “right” when in reality it represents a satanic religious comfort zone. Jesus didn’t ride into Jerusalem in a chariot did he? Since when did the righteous Jesus of the gospel become the NASCAR Jesus of modern America?
Trickster, Everyone “got” the soda/t-shirt analysis but that doesn’t mean it was based in reality.
trickster, so you are admitting that strong environmental beliefs are primarily a religious conviction? Thank you.
My point about Jonathan is that I was in the lobby when he was called to the podium, and after spending about half a minute saying why he wasn’t prepared (he too was startled by the early start), he then proceeded to discuss the holidays and the color of his shirt for nearly half of his time.
I realized that he wasn’t saying anything, and so I left.
The problem I have with “sustainability” is that “sustainable development” often is propounded in a manner that reverses the modifier and that which is its object.
An artificial mean is determined by consensus, and then “sustained”, no matter how expensive, foolish, or crippling.
Kind of like the mishmosh of data sets cherry-picked and graphed together to produce the demand for hundreds of billions in affirmative climate action by the IPCC.
So, are you serious, or a cartoon? Cartoon might make sense, since you consider a “carbon based lifestyle” evil–are you or are you not a carbon based life FORM, like everything else on the planet?
Well BM, Loudoun Lady got a teensy weensy bit of it and you didn’t get any, probably because it pierced the armor of your petro-deity and you chose to refrain from self examination. The point is that strong anti-environmental beliefs are an unrighteous religious conviction. That’s why we need a savior, not to help us justify our sin but to free us from it.
Ed da Bunker – its not the people, but their idealogue that is in question – so no fancy pics for you. But please explain to me, how does it make any sense to spend more money when your 192M down? Using Obama logic on HealthCare, if we don’t spend trillions on helathcare we’ll go bankrupt – O actually said this yesterday. This line of thinking by democrats makes no sense to me, can you explain how a government spends its way out of bankruptcy?
that’s right trickster–when I have a 22 mile drive home on bad roads in deer season in my religious conveyance, I don’t stand around waiting for someone to say something other than “look, I’m here, there’s a show of support so vote how we all already know you’re going to, thank you”, and see if there is an actual supposed point there.
Are you sure you’re doing your argument any good framing it in religious fundamentalist terms?
I know the wheels seem to be coming off the bus of “Let’s make a few people carbon billionaires by creating an alternate-universe economy and funding it through a UN treaty!”, but in light of some of what is transpiring at the DOE and in PA, it might look a bit more projectional than accurate.
p.s.–you havenb’t answered my question: ARE you in fact a carbon based life form, like every other living thing on this planet?
And are you sitting at a bicycle pedaling the electricity for your computer (made sustainably with green components from first to last, of course)?
John, as Barbara points out there is a huge disparage throughout the county on tax rates. You’re in a different boat and have a right to complain about a tax increase. Those of us who didn’t get an increase shouldn’t bitch about how high taxes are going when in fact they went down. Substantially.
.
Maybe the debate would be better suited for a discussion on equity in the tax code. I could easily get behind that.
Leesburg Today article on board action:
http://www.leesburg2day.com/articles/2009/12/17/news/9951eenergyvote121509.txt
Loudoun Independent story:
http://www.loudouni.com/news/2009-12-16/county-adopts-long-range-plan-going-green
LTM story:
http://www.loudountimes.com/news/2009/dec/15/supervisors-adopt-county-energy-strategy/
Does anyone doubt why newspapers are dying after reading those stories? Nothing in-depth at all. Sad.
Anyone feel like complaining? Here’s the contact page for the Inspector General of the US Department of Energy. Not sure it will do any good when complaining about a climate change initiative with the Obama administration, but there are enough irregularities in this process that they should look into it.
http://www.ig.energy.gov/contact.htm
And even though I have yet to see any action from them, there is also the FBI Northern Virginia Public Corruption Task Force:
http://washingtondc.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel08/wf052808a.htm
BlackOut, I’d be interested in such a discussion.
As Sally pointed out, the swing vote on this gets some pretty amazing perks not usually extended to lots so small.
Given the jettisoning of cred with this vote, I’d say just about any topic is fair game!
LI, the press isn’t going to approach ANY issue with the passion displayed by either side of any given topic.
They’re supposed to be objective, and all they’re really doing is noting that it happened. There is some good info in the articles, particularly the notation that it was a split board, and that there was controversy attendant on it.
I like that, particularly after Miller’s extensive remarks about “all it takes is five and that’s our position, so I don’t want to hear anything about a divided board on this.”
NICE!
Very nice.
Barbara, I’m surprised that you are swallowing Trickster’s hook. He’s holding a mirror up to faith-based arguments of the other side. He might even get a social con on board to fight the evil petro-deity. Who knows?
Who here is making a faith-based argument other than the alien noncarbonbot?
I’m sorry Edmund, but I guess that at this holiday season part of me rationalizes that even trolls need to eat.
Here? I haven’t seen one, unless one infers that those against green are FOR coal/oil and believe consumption is a “right”. I don’t make that leap, but others do — just like many who think every environmentalist or conservationist is a vegan/Dead head/fascist.
People in the environmental community are already telling people never to speak to me again. Susan Buckley is being pilloried for not being a real Democrat. This is so ridiculous.
Once again – I am all for energy conservation, and a county energy plan makes lots of sense. But this process was an abomination. If the last board did this with any issue you all would be bitching up a storm. The ends do not justify the means. I am a stickler for proper process in the public arena. If that makes me a pariah, so be it.
I’m not going to weigh in on the county environmental plan, I think thats been discussed enough. I feel compelled to say something about the “tax deferrals” and “inequitable taxing” that has been mentioned. I’m guessing this is in reference to Agricultural and Open Space Land Use taxation.
The fact is that residential property is taxed equally throughout the county. The acre of land that a farmhouse sits on is taxed exactly the same as the acre or quarter acre of land that a subdivision house in Ashburn sits on. That property is being used as residential and therefore requires the county services associated with a residence (fire, police, schools, etc.)
The farmland, (whether its in Arcola or Neersville) is taxed at a rate commensurate with use as farmland, which does not require any of the county services that residential land does. Someone who owns 50 acres will pay the same taxes on the the residential portion of their land as someone with a quarter acre lot, and they will also pay taxes on their farmland too, but not at the same rate as if those other 49 acres were all sudivided into 3 acre or 1/4 acre lots with services for each of the residences on those properties demanding county services. Even at its greatly reduced rate, farmland is revenue positive with regards to taxes, while residential property actually still costs the county more in services than it actually brings in.
Is there abuse in this system, sure, but there will be with any system. If agricultural land use taxation was abolished, the result would not be a flood of new revenue, but a flood of property on the market, which would drive everyone’s property values down (not a big deal for those of us not planning to go anywhere or who want to continue farming) but I imagine that would fire up a lot of more transient suburbanites. Of course, a lot of people couldn’t afford to farm if their land was taxed as if it had 30 houses demanding services on them, instead of just one.
I really get bummed out when the old east. vs. west arguments start to bubble up because each side of the county is advantaged by having the other around. We in the west rely on the the consumers from the east coming to buy our products and yes, enjoy the landscape, while many people in the west enjoy the proximity to shopping found in the east. Be cool everyone, be cool, its the holidays after all!
Welcome to the real world, LI.
As I said to Sally when she was threatened with deletion from the mailing list of the First, Middle, Last, Perennial and Eternal Choir, I wouldn’t lose a lot of sleep over it.
(Did you know that for only one dollar, one can get one of those oval regional/town stickers that say “LoCo” from the county offices?
Ahhh, it’s TWUE!! IT’S TWUUUUE!!!! lol)
LI, I hope whoever the environmental community is, they take a step back and take a dispassionate look at this. You are to be commended in my view for doing what local media has no capacity to do: ask tough, uncomfortable questions.
.
Process matters.
.
No matter what the proposal.
.
Ethics, or even the whiff of unethical behavior can, whether fairly or not, derail good works just like they derail bad ones.
Hillsboro, I don’t think anyone is arguing for abolishment of agricultural deferrals.
can’t be done at the local level, for one thing.
I do think the state threshhold could use some tweaking–$1K of product as opposed to profit + “value add marketing” = potential for abuse.
In addition, further abuse occurs when someone who is paying greatly reduced value on a lot of assets that they are barely meeting the production bar on for tax shelter purposes consumes services more expensive on a per capita basis through school seats that raise the MEDIAN–not the AVERAGE–to 13K per seat in the county.
Then they are NOT providing more positive, they’re just getting away with it and a pat on the back to boot.
At the very least, parcels too small to subdivide under our zoning should not get an open space deferral because they aren’t CHOOSING to not develop and thereby “protecting” us.
They CAN’T.
In addition, the small schools that are so expensive might do more equitable service in dispersing some special needs closer to more of the younger kids who need them and are spread around the county, instead of being a perk that comes with living in a very few neighborhoods.
I agree, Peace and Merry Christmas.
But the budget will be brutal, and a lot of things have changed in the past 20 years.
Everyone should have to bite a bit of the bullet, but that doesn’t mean taxing people who farm for the bulk or ALL of their living off their land.
I think we need to take a look at how we implement some things in the county.
A thorough one.
So these five supervisors would rather have energy inspectors than deputies and firemen?
That’s called a false choice PSF.
“Stoner, there you go again making numbers up.”
The numbers came from the LC budget presentation, dipshit. The hand out is on my desk. Here are some other numbers although outdated by a week. I will use them to make a point that simply escapes you. These direct from LC.
Adopted FY2010 budget summary.
Average House Value= $395,480 down from $465,550 in 2009. A 17% decrease (loss)
Average Tax Bill = $ 4,924 down from $5,307 in 2009 . A savings of $383
Dear Mr and Mrs Taxpayer you just took it in the shorts for $ 70,070. but cheer up we are going to reduce your tax by $ 383.
FY 2009 rate 1.14, FY 2010 1.245 ( 9% increase ) project rate for fy2011 1.50
Do the math projected out 3 , 4 and 5 years at the 1.50 rate as a static number. You get screwed ! to make things worse it will not remain static. It was increased once by 9% and now we are confronted with an increase between 8- 16 % Some are advocating a 20% increase on top of the 1.245 rate. That is where the 1.50 rate come from. That is staffs number. That is where they want to be. This is double ugly.
Loudoun Lady please explain. From the little I have seen she was one of the first with York to try to rezone rt 28 and she is for Kincora etc. Although her stand on taxes, at least last year was poor. But then again she was trying to help the school system, which is run poorly. We have a saying in the building business at least I do
Anyone can build a million dollar house and make it cost a million. The secret is build a home that looks like a million but cost far less. School system are you listening!!!!!!!
A bunch of posts disappeared????????
Amazing, Stoner, just like Al Gore, avoids the inconvenient question. Who would have ever thought those two would share traits.
.
I will admit you’re getting closer to the apple by referencing the tax reduction a majority received last year. BTW, the County had nothing to do with your house value reduction.
BO – a 1.50 tax rate will not help any of our property values, and yes the County has everything to do with this. The lack of economic development and lack of regard for the taxpayer hurts all home owners and their property value.
Property values depend on a lot of things, both from the buyer and the seller side. What you think hurts, some may actually think helps, Michael.
Commentated on was my concern of having the McG grant money used to implement a energy ratings applied to residential and commercial buildings. That is a dynamic I do not wanted entering into this volatile market.
BTW, the County had nothing to do with your house value reduction.
BlackOut
on December 18th, 2009
No shit, dipshit, I am beginning to wonder if you don’t have a learning disability. Maybe my remarks before BOS regarding the budget will help you understand. I said in part:
“Raising taxes yet again for a second year in a row is unacceptable.
Using the declining value of property as a rational for raising real estate taxes, is both poor economics and immoral. Attempting to balance the budget on the backs of hard working, recession wary citizens via their own loss of assets, gives the term Misery Index a whole new meaning.”