Care4Suffolk is a nonpartisan organization and does not endorse any candidate for any public office. We encourage voters to research the candidates for the upcoming local Mayoral and City Council Member elections. We have asked all candidates the same questions regarding land use and rezoning. These questions are based on the topics and issues from participating members. Below are the answers provided by the Whaleyville Borough City Council candidatesalong with their image and website contactif they chose to provide it.
Early voting is currently underway in Virginia and election day is TuesdayNovember 5th. Please go to the Virginia Department of Elections for any questions.
Note: Questionnaires were emailed to all candidates. Current Whaleyville Council MemberLeOtis Williamsdid not provide a response.
Whaleyville Borough City Council Candidates
Jason Wooldridge
Website: https://jw4va.com
ROADS
Many narrow country roads have design challenges and water issuesyet are seeing increased traffic due to new development. Should rezoning approval be contingent on either the City or the rezoning applicant being able to improve these roads to meet VDOT and City standards for their classifications?
I will start by saying that this sounds like an appropriate question to be asked using a formal referendum verse just having city council write up an ordinance to combat this issue. That saidI would be in favor of exploring developing an ordinance that would place contingencies upon the rezoning applicant to require the improvement of our roads such that before approval of the rezoning request the existing roads are brought up to meet VDOT standards for their classification. NOTE: This is a complex problem and cannot be solved properly using a sole source requirement.
Using a sole source requirement would create more problems. We cannot expect a single development to be solely responsible for ensuring the entire right of way (ROW) along the property frontage is brought to VDOT standard as there are two sides to a road. If we created a situation where the first development on a given length of road was required to extend the width of the ROW to meet VDOT standard we would unfairly burden this first development. Meaningif the first development was required to widen the ROW to VDOT standards any property on the opposite side of that ROW would not be held accountable later for ensuring the road was to VDOT standards because it would already meet the VDOT standard as proffered by the first development. This is unfair and thus not an equitable solution. Alsoa sole source solution to improve the ROW to VDOT standards would potentially create another concern. Let’s examine a length of road which has multiple parcels on each side of the ROW. Considering a sole source solution to widen the ROW to meet VDOT standards would shift the centerline of the ROW towards the first parcel developed. Now consider the next parcel to be developed along the ROW is on the opposite side of the ROW from the first parcel butalso is on the next section of roadway which doesn’t meet VDOT standards. This would mean the next development would have to provide proffers to widen the ROW to meet the VDOT standards thusshifting the centerline of the ROW toward that developing parcel and away from the previous development. This now takes a straight road and places an S-curve into itor potentially exaggerates an existing S-curve in the roadway. This is not an ideal solution to the problem of bringing our rural roads up the VDOT standards as our city grows either.
All of this saidany equitable solution would need to be limited to improving the ROW from the centerline and over to a newly developing parcel and this is not an ideal solution to ensuring our roadways are brought up to VDOT standards as there is no way to know when a parcel will be developed and thus bringing both sides of the ROW up to VDOT standards. Understanding this as a legitimate issue a fair and equitable solution would potentially be one in which the rezoning applicant is responsible for improving the ROW from the centerline over to the developing property and the city would need to potentially consider the use of eminent domain to improve the ROW on the opposite side of the roadway from the development. I would not be in favor of the city council arriving at this as a decision on their own.I would personally not be in favor of this as a solution and I would assume that such a solution would be unpopular with the citizens of Suffolk as well. ThusI believe this is a question best answered by public polling and a referendum placed on an official ballot.
ZONING
1. Residents often buy homes based on existing zoning. Rezoning land can impact residents and their quality of life. What criteria will you use when considering rezoning applications?
2. CurrentlyNO residential or student pipeline data is included in rezoning Staff Report packets to show already approved developments in the surrounding area. If you are re-elected or electedwhat would you do to ensure that Planning Commission and City Council have all pertinent information needed to make fully informed decisions?
1. Rezoning is a huge concern. If we are rezoning the use of landit means we are changing the design from what it currently is used forand this is not something to take lightly. I’m an engineer and changes to a plan or design are always something that are and should be overly scrutinized. Questions need to be asked like; Why is this change necessary? What are the risks and benefits of applying the change? What are the intended consequences of the change? What are the potential unintended consequences of the change? I believe that if we remember that just because you can do something doesn’t always mean you should do it then we would approach changes more skeptically and avoid potential negative outcomes.
A prime example of an unintended negative outcome occurred last year in the city of Chesapeake. The issue was created when the city council incorrectly granted the rezoning of a parcel of land to industrial use. The parcel of land happened to be adjacent to a residential area with approximately 200 homes and only a single road for ingress and egress. Normally you would not zone residential land immediately adjacent to industrial use because of nuisance issues to nearby residents such as the operation of heavy machinery and large trucksetc. This city of Chesapeake allowed this rezoning because the site had a history of being used for commercial container repair the site was to be developed into a manufacturing facility. Howeverafter the rezoning site was later bought by Dominion Energy and is now set to be the first battery storage facility in the cityhousing 114 lithium-ion battery Megapacks. This presents a completely new and far more risky problemlithium- ion batteries can catch fire but cannot be put out once on fire. They also emit a very toxic smoke when burning. Sothis means that should this facility catch fire there are now 200 homes trapped with a single ingress and egress path to escape which happens to run immediately adjacent to this facility. NowI don’t believe this was maliciously done by the Chesapeake City council butonce rezoned there was nothingthey could do to stop it from happening.
This is perfect example of why we should always consider the worst-case scenario when considering rezoning approvals. Being risk averse might slow things down from a growth standpoint butit will keep the impact to our citizens as the most important factor in making the decisions. Thusrezoning should be looked at using a complete impact assessment and it should follow the vision of the city’s growth planthat is the comprehensive plan. Also noting that just because the comprehensive plan shows it is within the growth vision of the city doesn’t mean it is always the correct answer.
2. This is simplerequest the data be provided. As an engineer I know that all data can be relevanteven the data that sometimes seems to not have an impact. If our leadership is currently making decisions about the growth and development of our city without looking at all the potential impactsthey are not doing citizens any service. I know that if there are variables that are changingdeciding about additional changes without considering the impacts of the previous changes will result in disaster. This is exactly how our city has gotten into the situation we are in now. Our schools are overcrowdedour roads are overcrowdedour taxes are risingour infrastructure is strained at best (we have among the highest water bills in tidewater)our community is witnessing a rise in crimeand our businesses (manufacturing and technology) are leaving.
All data that potentially can show impact to a decision needs to be at least considered and thusshould be a standard part of the reports provided to inform our council about the decision. Alsomaking this data a part of the Staff Report packets would show our schoolboard that city council is concerned about our students as a part of the future of the city which would be a step toward breaking down the barriers of animosity and distrust which currently exist between the schoolboard and city council. This would help to make“Suffolk Better Not Bigger.”
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
The City has decided against conducting a Fiscal Impact Analysis for the 2045 Comprehensive Plan. Insteadit will rely on fiscal impact studies that are paid for by developers as part of rezoning applications and are not required to include the key component of Cost of Services (such as long-term road maintenancerepairand replacement). If elected or re-electedhow would you ensure that the City is getting a complete financial picture of what development projects will both bring in revenue and cost the taxpayers in services?
You cannot answer this question without requiring an independent fiscal impact analysis. Relying on the applicant to tell you about the potential pitfalls of approving their project is like asking the blackjack dealer when to double down. If no independent fiscal impact analysis is performedI would have to rely on my own understanding and research of the matter. Carefully comparing the performance claims of the applicant’s project to as many similar projects as possible to identify where the claims are inflated and then asking the applicant difficult questions about what happens when those claims are not met. The answers should be very revealing.
TRANSPARENCY
1. Do you think council members should recuse themselves from rezoning requests if the developer requesting the rezoning has contributed to their election campaign?
2. Would you be willing to disclose all property and land that you own in the city of Suffolkwhether it is owned in your own namea partnershipor an LLC?
1. This question presents a double-edged sword. On the one hand I would like to say that I will not take money from individuals who will likely have business before the city. On the other handif we remove the possibility of receiving political donations from citizenswe create a scenario where only the independently wealthy can afford to run for public officethus establishing an elite ruling class. I do not believe that our government should be made up of an elite class. I believe “We the People” are just thatthe average people. I am not independently wealthy and thereforeI am accepting donations from all citizens who want to support me as a candidate. Nowthe question becomes do political donations compromise a candidate’s integrity? I can honestly tell you that if I am elected my commitment to you as a public servant is to dutifully represent you in good faith to improve the quality of our community. I will not trade freedom for favornor my dignity for benefitand I refuse to lose my integrity to persuasion.
Furthermoreas a personal noteif I am elected and I feel that my vote would be appear compromised because someone with business before the city has previously donated to my campaignI would recuse myself and abstain my vote on that matter.
2. This is already a requirement when you file for candidacy as I understand the law. SoI have no problem. State and local officers and employees required to file pursuant to §§ 2.2-31142.2-3115or 2.2- 3116 or as designated by their local governing body are REQUIRED to complete and file the Statement of Economic Interests as a condition to assuming officeand then annually while serving as an officer or employee. This statement includes all real estate you or your immediate familyseparated or togetherhold an interest valued at >$5000 in which is not your principal residence. It also includes any real estate you or your immediate familyseparated or togetherhold an interest >$5000 that is the subject of a contractpending or which has been completed within the prior calendar yearwith a government agency.