To the Editor:
Frankly I am tired of reading the letters to the editors in the local newspapers each week dragging myself through all the “City Council does nothing right” screeds. The point is, City Council has been very responsive to the citizens’ needs. Council regularly faces hostile crowds seeking specific outcomes favorable to them, but do not recognize the overall needs of Alexandria’s citizens and the urban center we have become. Recently Alexandria downtown was recognized as one of the top 10 downtowns in the country, quite an urban statement.
Let me be specific. Recently several letters to the editors about council’s decision regarding the memory care facility on King Street were very negative. I live just off of King Street, just east of this facility and testified at both the Planning Commission and City Council in favor of the facility. Both made the right decision (except for one councilperson). Zoning codes, like laws, are purposely written to create a framework, but must be somewhat flexible to meet unforeseen future changes in the community. In this case the underlying zoning was “industrial.” The 1992 Master Plan covering this area could not know exactly what the needs of the community would be in 2015 and beyond.
Therefore, council and planning wisely agreed to change the zoning to accommodate this important facility. All Alexandrians are better for it.
The impact on the neighborhood was judged not to be as extravagant as witnesses testified. This also is correct. The argument I have read lately was that it was a zoning issue not a memory care facility issue,
that the vote “was being spun to appear as if it were to help seniors.”
The facility is intended to and will benefit seniors. The zoning was altered to accommodate the memory care facility, not the opposite.
On occasion council is faced with a decision between what is good for a neighborhood, and what is good for the city as a whole. These decisions are not trivial or easy. My opinion is that council has done a good job
in making those decisions, and has extended every effort to hear and digest all of the citizens arguments related to those issues. Council always listens to the negatives presented often by the Not in my Back
Yard crowd, or NIMBYs. Traditionally those in favor of an issue do not come to testify on the other side of an argument because they feel city staff and the proponent do this. I am not saying that NIMBYs don’t
have valid points, they do. But those arguments need to be considered as part of a discussion on the larger issues facing the entire city. There were significant changes to the design of the facility to accommodate the neighbors before the vote. City Council members looked at all the issues and came to the best decision. In my judgment our council does this well.
Another issue raised in the letters was a suggestion that that we need to alter the current “at large” representation to a “ward system.” Alexandria is 15 square miles with a population of 150,000. There are six council members (one being the vice-mayor) and the mayor. As Mayor Euille says: “One Alexandria.” The “at large” system works best for this community to foster “One Alexandria.” If you want “NIMBY on steroids”, install a ward system. Our councilmembers must represent all Alexandria and make decisions for the whole of the city.
Also mentioned was that council has “put us a half billion dollars in debt and mortgaged our future.” Of course. The city uses the proceeds from debt to build infrastructure for current citizen’s needs and for the future. Municipal debt is issued to build schools, public safety buildings, parks, infrastructures that last for generations. We pay some of that in cash today, and let future citizens pay for their share. So this “mortgage” is an investment. Should we be concerned about the city’s debt? Yes. But our debt load is not out of bounds. The credit rating agencies still feel we are within our means, and rate us AAA accordingly. Also, the city has taken advantage of a very low interest rate environment where the amortized debt payments are significantly lower that when debt was issued 20 years ago.
This brings up my final point. The largest source for city revenues is residential and commercial property taxes. Alexandria is out of balance. A 50/50 balance has been a city goal since 1994. The current split is approximately 60/40. Proponents of commercial growth in Alexandria do not say “yes” to anything developers propose. The development must be needed and fit in with the “personality” of Alexandria. The point is, Alexandria is no longer a bedroom community.
We are faced with urbanization pressures. To reject the idea that we are an urban community is a disservice to those that live here now. We need commercial growth to help alleviate increases in residential taxes.
Smart growth is the necessary vision for our city’s leaders to affect what Alexandria citizen’s need. Opponents of commercial growth love to reference history. I guess they forgot that Alexandria was founded as a commercial hub.
Dennis Auld
Alexandria