School Board fails leadership test - need to get tutorial from Burnley Moran SCA/Leadership students

Eighteen students from the Burnley Moran Elementary School (the Bobcats) presented a series of projects their student council association have undertaken in this school year. One aspect of the presentation was to present what they have been learning about leadership. One student stated that leadership required clear information to be an effective leader. In my opinion, the School Board action to approve granting an easement of school land to build the Meadow Creek Parkway through school property demonstrated that perhaps they need a work session with the Burnley Moran students as much as they needed a work session with the city council to develop a set of clear information upon which to make this decision.

There was an interest among some board members to arrange a work session with council prior to voting, but it seemed the board got wrapped up in parlimentary procedure and felt obliged to vote on the easement resolution before even considering the option of arranging a work session and acquiring clear answers to questions the board felt they needed during the discussion. I was surprised at the lack of information clarity provided by both the city staff and VDOT in responding to direct questions. Here are three examples of particular concern to me:

• Board member Colette Blount inquired about the differences in environmental and historical property consideration between federally funded and state funded projects and asked if the Meadow Creek Parkway project was ever a federally funded project. City staff provided that federal projects would undergo a more stringent review of impacts, but claimed they were not aware of this ever being a federal project. In fact, a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for this project (federal project M-5104(108)) was signed by the Federal Highway Administration on April 13, 1995. Also, a Dec. 22, 1997 letter sent to then mayor Katherine Slaughter discussed the federal role in this project. It is troubling to me that either the city staff did not know details of the history of this project - or that they knew and chose not to answer the direct question from a member of the school board.
  

• Board chair Ned Michie also asked if it were true that the entire linear park including replacement parkland (not land replacing school land, but land in McIntire Park to be used on the McIntire Road Extended project) would be deeded to the city. The response from staff was that it would be deeded to the city. But, in a map posted on the city's website, a large portion of this land is indicated as not becoming public land - only a public easement will be acquired. As I understand it, the land deed will be held by private owners so that they do not lose development rights and the ability to construct more housing units on their property than would be allowed if portions of the land were deeded to the city.
  

• Board member Llezelle Dugger asked directly if in fact the McIntire Road Extended project has been approved for construction and could be build independent of the school board's decision. The answer to this from staff was an unconditional yes. As I understand it, the city council has several conditions yet unsatisfied to be met before council will consider granting right-of-way easement for the road. Council will have to pass a resolution acknowledging that the conditions have been met. City council passed the easment resolution with these conditions at their October 1, 2007 meeting. To my knowledge, no confirmation of these conditions being met or resolutions authorizing construction has yet been even proposed.

I have been following this project since the mid 1990's and have seen many of these documents in the city's files. Perhaps it is time to have our city staff involved in this issue reacquaint themselves with the history of this project and review their files. Then they can actually provide credible answers to direct questions from elected officials making critical decisions such as the one taken by the school board on May 1, 2008.

I believe the school board, the city staff and VDOT staff all jcould have done a much better job in considering this action. I hope the staff at Burnley Moran will consider this issue as a case example of what can happen when decision makers fail to demand that clear information be available before acting. Go Bobcats.

Graphic Source: Burnley Moran school website.

Charlottesville School Board to consider easement for Meadow Creek Parkway again on May 1, 2008

Yes, the Charlottesville School Board will again consider whether or not to approve the granting of a construction easement of about 9 acres of city property to VDOT for the Meadow Creek Parkway. I have been lobbying the school board against giving away use of this valuable school resource (including one softball field) with no positive compensation. The school will get traffic congestion, air pollution, noise pollution, loss of tree cover and screening, decreased student safety, and likely other negative results from this 'deal'.

The school board will consider a new resolution including some conditions discussed at the last meeting where the vote on the easement was tabled. I am unsure that any of these conditions will be enforceable and if I were a board member I would likely suggest that if VDOT wants to build the parkway it should acquire this land through eminent domain - and provide fair market value for the land used. The land to be eased is about one-third of the 27 acre parcel the city owns that is zoned R-15 (the county's highest residential density zoning) and assessed at about $7 Million. Fair market value would appear to be in excess of $2 Million. The school could then use these funds to mitigate the impacts to the school from loss of the land and impacts from the parkway construction and traffic load.

I am not convinced that a simple signalized intersection at Melbourne Road can handle the design year traffic (2000 vehicle in the peak hour on the parkway - and significant High School traffic in the morning peak hour on Melbourne Road) at an acceptable level of service. I suggested that the city provide an intersection analysis of delay at the signal, anticipated length of queues in the peak hour and related data for consideration by the school board and the public. I was surprised that the host of city, county, and VDOT staff present at the April 17 board meeting didn't have answers for many of the boards questions about the project.

You can participate in commenting on this at the school board meeting on May 1. It is at Charlottesville High School library and scheduled for 6:00 pm. The Meadow Creek Parkway item is early in the agenda so be there at 6:00 pm if you wish to comment.

Here is the text from the draft minutes of the April 17 meeting included in the School Board agenda packet. Check this out before you comment on May 1.

Draft Minutes from April 17, 2008 School Board Meeting

B. Meadowcreek Parkway Resolution: Prior to any discussion on this item, Mr. Wade said he was going to respectfully recuse himself from voting on or participating in any deliberation to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. Mr. Wade is employed by Albemarle County as a Transportation Planner. Mr. James Henderson introduced this action item to the Board for consideration. At the April 3, 2008 School Board Meeting, Mr. Spencer DeJarnette, representative from the Virginia Department of Transportation, presented an overview of the Meadowcreek Parkway project which included the exact location and design of the right-of-way. VDOT contacted the City of Charlottesville requesting a donation of the right of way and easements necessary for construction of the parkway. The property involved is approximately 9 acres which is titled to the City of Charlottesville, but is utilized by Charlottesville High School for junior varsity girls’ softball practice. Spencer DeJarnette from VDOT; Gary O’Connell, City Manager; Craig Brown, City Attorney; and Angela Tucker, City Engineer were present at the meeting to answer any questions the Board might have. Discussion by the Board centered on issues of speed, pedestrian and bicycle safety and, access to the linear park on the east side of the parkway. Specifically, the following requests were made by the Board:

• That the posted speed be 25 mph on the entire parkway and reduced (if possible) to 15 mph at the Melbourne/McIntire Road Extended intersection.
• Signalization at the Melbourne/McIntire Road Extended intersection for pedestrian safety.
• Flashing signals be appropriately placed on the Meadowcreek Parkway and McIntire Road Extended to alert motorists they are approaching a school zone.
  

In addition, Ms. Galvin asked that the Board consider amending the resolution to include:

• That provisions be made to ensure the future design and construction of an east/west bicycle-pedestrian connection between the CHS site on one side of the Parkway to the multi-use trail and linear park on the other side of the Parkway.
• In order to ensure the feasibility of funding the construction of the bicycle-pedestrian connection(s), it is understood that the City of Charlottesville and the County of Albemarle will earnestly commit to working together to secure funds as required either through VDOT contingencies, State “Enhancement Grants” and/or other local public (and private) sources as necessary.
• That ongoing School Board input into the design, location and funding of the intermediate bicycle-pedestrian connection(s) as well as the final design of the Parkway itself, especially at the intersections of Melbourne Road, Rio Road and the Parkway will be ensured by appointing a Charlottesville City School Board member to sit on a Parkway Design Review Committee or whatever established vehicle charted with that purpose.
• That a suitable replacement field space be created that meets the needs of Charlottesville High School.

Ms. Blount made a motion to table action on the resolution until the May 2, 2008 School Board meeting. Ms. Dugger seconded the motion. Mr. Michie stated the delay will allow time to discuss this matter with City Council and for Board Members to consider the suggested amendments to the resolution. Mr. Michie called for a vote. The motion passed with Ms. Blount, Ms. Galvin, Mr. Michie and Ms. Dugger voting aye; Dr. Edwards and Ms. Puryear voting nay.

Graphic: from the Charlottesville City School logo.

Charlottesville School Board Tables Easement Decision

The Charlottesville School Board met on April 17, 2008. After about 90 minutes of presentations, discussion, and questions to which only some answers were available from VDOT, Albemarle County, and the City staff the board voted 4-2 to table the issue until the next school board meeting. Apparently the school board only got involved in this issue - "A Resolution of the Charlottesville City School Board Consenting to the Conveyance of Certain Real Property Interests by the City of Charlottesville to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Construction of the Meadow Creek Parkway" - about three weeks ago. Although this property was purchased for school division use in 1982, and use of this property for a roadway has been considered in some form since well before that date, this is a new item on the school board's agenda. A work session included discussion of this issue occurred on April 3, 2008.

Kathleen Galvin lead the questioning of VDOT, county and city staff asking how this project will benefit the school, and about the safety issues associated with the parkway design and plans for the at-grade intersection where the proposed Meadow Creek Parkway and McIntire Road Extended projects meet at Melbourne Road. Galvin said she made a list of the 'pros' and 'cons' associated with this project, but the discussion clearly was dominated by exploring the 'cons'. I am curious what she had listed in the 'pro' column. My own personal listing of benefits to the school division from this project is void. Other board members also expressed concerns about safety issues and limitation on access to the natural area blocked from both Charlottesville High School and CATEC by the proposed roadway.

Kathleen Galvin lived up to her campaign slogan in the November 2007 election. She clearly did her homework on this issue. The issues she raised included troubling safety concerns and loss of needed athletic fields by the high school and appear to have convinced four of the six members who will be voting on a resolution (Juandiego Wade recused himself from this matter due to his being a transportation planning staff member employed by Albemarle County and involved in the parkway project in that capacity). The school board and city council have a luncheon meeting today (April 18 - 12:00 at city hall basement conference room) and I expect this resolution and its ramifications will be a topic of discussion. This meeting is open to the public. I plan to attend and see if any positive features of this proposal emerge.

This proposed resolution is what I consider to be a lose-lose situation - unfortunately if city councilors and school board members all don't do their homework it just might be approved. I will continue to encourage all of our elected officials to identify what benefits - if any - this project provides, and weigh the environmental, safety, athletic, educational and other costs against those benefits to make whatever decision is best for the school division and our community at large. These are the tough decisions we elect our local officials to make. I hope the board doesn't default to what appears to be the lose-lose decision as the material presented to the school board at yesterday's board meeting suggests to me.

Sean Tubbs at Charlottesville Tomorrow posted a summary and the audio podcast of the April 3, 2008 Charlottesville School Board work session discussion on granting an easement for construction of the controversial Meadow Creek Parkway. The proposed easement to VDOT would affect nine acres of school property. Check out this material and find a link to a color plan of the parkway location and design at the Charlottesville Tomorrow Blog item entitled City School Board to consider easement for Meadowcreek Parkway.

Graphic Source: Charlottesville Tomorrow website

Background Material on April 17, 2008 School Board Item

Here is the background information provided to the Charlottesville School Board regarding transfer of nine acres of land to VDOT for construction of the Meadow Creek Parkway. The meeting starts at 6:00 pm at the Booker T. Reaves Media Center in Charlottesville High School and this item is early in the agenda following comments from members of the community and board member comments. The background material below identifies the safety issue and loss of recreation/athletic fields but doesn't address any of the health, environmental, and natural resource impacts of reprogramming this land for highway use. I also find it interesting that there is no statement as to the value of loss to the school from this request, or any statement of what benefit to the community will be gained (if any) in return for the undefined loss of use this property transfer would cause.

As decision leaders for both the city school division and our community as a whole, I encourage the school board members to identify the costs and benefits to the school division and our community for the alternative choices they have relating to the 9-acre parcel of land. As elected officials, our school board members need to consider actively the concerns of the public in their actions. The agenda packet states "the Superintendent recommends the Board deliberate and take action on the resolution." I couldn't locate the text of the proposed resolution. But, I do hope you will contact the school board members and encourage them to indicate clearly why they believe their ultimate action - to approve or deny - is in the best interest of the schools and our community.

08-106: Information Items:
A. Meadowcreek Parkway Resolution - Mr. James Henderson presented this information item to the Board. The Virginia Department of Education contacted the City of Charlottesville requesting a donation of the right of way and easements necessary for construction of the Meadowcreek Parkway. The property involved is approximately 9 acres which is titled to the City of Charlottesville but utilized by Charlottesville High School for junior varsity girls’ softball practice. Mr. Spencer DeJarnette, representative from VDOT, was present to give an overview of the project which included the exact location and design of the right of way and easements needed for the parkway. The Board had received a packet from VDOT which contained a copy of the resolution, VDOT’s property owners manual, plan sheets and copy of the request to the city to convey the easements to VDOT, and accompanying legal documents. Mr. DeJarnette reviewed the easement information with the Board. The road project is slated for advertisement this summer. Relocation of the utilities at the CATEC end has started. VDOT expects if they obtain all the right of ways necessary by the summer, they will go to ad in August or September and construction of the roadway should begin in January or February of 2009. Mr. DeJarnette said he understood this was a working meeting and he and Mr. Rome would be glad to attend the Board meeting on April 17th to answer any additional questions Board Members might have prior to approving the resolution.

Mr. Michie asked Craig Brown, City Attorney, to explain the legal part of the ownership. Mr. Brown explained that the property was purchased in 1984 for the purpose of use by the schools. For a number of years after the school was built, the outdoor recreational facilities at the old Lane High School were still being used which necessitated the acquisition of the property across the street. The property is titled to the City of Charlottesville and was never deeded to the school division. Given that it was acquired for use by the school and historically been used for that purpose, from a public perception it is seen as a part of the Charlottesville High School campus. It was Mr. Brown’s opinion and in consultation with the School Board’s legal counsel, Patrick Lacy, that this was fairly characterized as school property. Under Virginia Law, they agreed this Board’s consent was necessary before the easement could be conveyed. Mr. Michie asked if the School Board had any identifiable interest in the property. Mr. Brown said none of record.

After Board discussion and questions, the consensus of the Board was there should be conditions on the resolution which would include making sure there is assured pedestrian access either over or under the new parkway, that the intersection is extremely safe for pedestrian crossing and the timing with the city end of the road is extremely critical. Mr. DeJarnette said he would gather information on all three of those points as quickly as possible and get the answers back to Mrs. Atkins and Mr. Henderson. He also told the Board he would have the planners and designers of the project come to the next meeting if that would be helpful.

Graphic Source: the Charlottesville City Schools logo from their website.