Last week local blogger and leadership consultant John Sarvay wrote a guest column about the ongoing charette (that’s a fancy word for workshop) regarding the city’s master plan for downtown. He’s been following up with reports from the field on his blog, Buttermilk & Molasses.
For a rather different take on the subject, check out Save Richmond.
Another skeptic: City lawyer Mike Sarahan, who writes in an e-mail that he would call the event “a ‘charade’ instead of a charette”:
I am so tired of going to planning and “visioning” meetings that are attended and run by white, relatively affluent people saying what’s good for the City. Yesterday about 3.5% of the overall attendance was Black. . . . About 200 people were there and I counted 7 Black people. I asked at one point whether anybody from the planning group or the audience noticed that there was no significant representation from the Black community. That was considered a rhetorical question, I guess, because I did not get a response from anybody.
The amazing thing about this meeting yesterday was that it had no context or constraints. In other words, it had no basis in reality. People dreamed up projects and just wrote them on the board, which in this case was a map of Downtown. By the end of the reports from each small group (you know the routine) you could sum it all in this way: “Build another Disney World; call it the ‘City of the 21st Century’; and send the bill to the City.”If this was all just a waste of time anyway, I wouldn’t worry about it. There are plenty of government meetings and public input process that are wastes of time. The thing that is so bad here, though, is that some points talked about might be considered or written up as “consensus” points from the public. How do you have a “consensus” point from the public when most of the affected public wasn’t there and never heard about it in the first place.
Three very different perspectives from three different sources—all of whom, obviously, care passionately about the city and want it to thrive. The fact that all of them mean well doesn’t make all of them right on all points. For that matter, meaning well doesn’t make any of them right on any point.* But by the same token, the fact that one or more of them might not be right on every detail doesn’t mean they don’t mean well, either.
___________
* Is meaning well entirely independent of being correct about something? Perhaps it depends on the issue. People who mean well can inflict terrible harm, sometimes intentionally (see “Cultural Revolution"), sometimes not (see “culture of dependency"). But is malice more likely to produce an inaccurate interpretation of events than false hope or utopian ambition? Beats me—just wondering aloud. . .
Reader Comments:
Larry wrote:
“I’m sorry—and I suppose Mark will challenge me to another duel at 50 paces—”
No, Larry. I don’t even want a dual of words.
All I’m asking is that you to call me up at 240-0354 and chat pleasently as we did a couple of weeks ago.
I LIKE your Mr. Phone Pal personality. Unlike your “Mr. Angry Blogger Guy Spewing Hyperbole and Silly Insults” personna, I find your alter-ego to be charming, enlightened and thoroughly enjoyable to converse with.
C’mon man. Quit “venting” (your characterization of your blog behavior, not mine) and start looking for points of consensus among the fractured opinions of your fellow bloggers.
That’s how problems get solved in the real world. Venting, on the other hand, always generates more heat than light during a closely-reasoned discussion, which is why I am opposed to it.
Let us reason together.
Yers,
Mark
PS - Just keep venting if you must, but don’t expect me to respond in kind.
The deal is, I have this whole “What would Jesus do?” ethic going on, so all you’ll get from me is a few zillion watts of Rapidly Aging Hippie Love.
That reasoned and loving response beats venting every time, and makes friends of persons whom would be otherwise lost to me.
And one can never have too many clever friends, no?
Yers,
Mark
Mark wrote to R. Smith, “ Let us ignore the Trolls and conduct our own enlightened debate on this, and other subjects.”
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....
I’m sorry—and I suppose Mark will challenge me to another duel at 50 paces—but that one was difficult to resist!
R. Smith wrote:
”...Trani, Wilder and Ukrop I can understand because they are successful and, therefore, evil in the eyes of the “new urbanists” (nubs?) but, what did Gene Cox ever do to these people?
Next year, have a pig roast and I’ll come.”
Sorry, Boss, you threw me some stuff I do not understand.
The only Gene Cox I know of is the News12 anchor, and around our modest Montrose Heights home, we generally roast a bit of tenderloin and let it go at that. A whole pig seems excessive, unless you’re on Maui and have dug a big pit in the sand, etc.
In other words, “Huh?”
Yer buddy,
Mark
Mr Dorroh said, “They’re too busy counting coup on their perceived enemies (which are legion) to spend a little time listening to what any other person has to say”...Trani, Wilder and Ukrop I can understand because they are successful and, therefore, evil in the eyes of the “new urbanists” (nubs?) but, what did Gene Cox ever do to these people?
Next year, have a pig roast and I’ll come.
“The term “charette” seemed silly to me.”
That is Mr. Smith’s mature and rational reason for not attending — and not approving of — the Downtown Master plan sessions.
And Mr. Smith’s is the “most thoughtful, honest and incisive post” that Mr. Dorroh has read in a long time.
Hoo-boy. Mega-Dittos to all.
We could’ve used this kind of inspired logic and rational thinking at those planning sessions. Truly visionary stuff.
Thanks, Bart, for going back and actually reading what I wrote, and for understanding the nature of satire. Thanks in advance for reading closer in the future and not misrepresenting me and lumping me in with people espousing views that are actually 180 degrees from mine.
Don Harrison wrote:
“Tell you what, Mr. Smith. I’ll write what I want and you can just deal with it. OK?”
R. Smith replied:
Well, obviously I did...and if this is how you react to a little criticism then there’s no wonder nobody is interested in attending the charcoal briquette or catillion or whatever we’re calling public forums these days.
Dear Mr. Smith:
Mr. Harris has sunk too far into his own negativity and anger to get your point, but as a veteran of approximately 10,000,000 public input hearings, I can assure you, you’re right on the money with your analysis.
There are persons with little to offer in the way of actual constructive thought, but who are in possession of an outraged sense of entitlement and a deep suspicion that everybody - except them - is out to screw up the world. Their coin and currency are statements such as, “Tell you what, Mr. Smith. I’ll write what I want and you can just deal with it. OK?”
Time and again, I’ve heard Mr. Harrison and his ilk derail public hearings with their anger, their vituperation, and their serial inability to see any argument or proposal which does not march in lockstep with their own. They are to be loved and pitied, but don’t expect anything vaguely positive to emerge from their mouths or their keyboards. They’re too busy counting coup on their perceived enemies (which are legion) to spend a little time listening to what any other person has to say ... unless he/she is also a True Believer in their preconceived notions of what constitutes reality.
You, on the other hand, seem perceptive and open-minded. Let us ignore the Trolls and conduct our own enlightened debate on this, and other subjects.
Yer buddy,
Mark Dorroh
More class warfare: “the portion that is young, active and smart as whips”? I guess that leaves the over 55 crowd as lazy, stupid and we should shutup. Hmmm.
I wonder why developers would “sit” on valuable property for 40 yrs? The Verizon bldg. is the last new bldg. on Main St--15 yrs. old? James Center 15yrs? Hmmm. Does that mean Richmond is a dynamic place with a constantly changing skyline?
How long has Grace St. been empty? How long have the “treasured” homeless been urinating in the street?
A revitalized downtown Broad St. is coming, will it be within the 21st Century? Other than State bldgs. can anyone name a new bldg. built on Broad St. in the past 20 yrs.
Yes John, the City of Richmond is a dynamic bustling place equal to any in the world.
“Tell you what, Mr. Smith. I’ll write what I want and you can just deal with it. OK?”
Well, obviously I did...and if this is how you react to a little criticism then there’s no wonder nobody is interested in attending the charcoal briquette or catillion or whatever we’re calling public forums these days.
As for taking Richmond back to the 50’s, I wouldn’t know what it was like then, not having been born for another decade. What I do know is that Richmond is sick and that sickness has nothing to do with bricks and mortar. I also know Richmond is a unique city that could really be something special but, it never will be unless people put down their sticks and rocks and start picking up the trash. Some things are just that simple.
We’re not ready for that. I read the article by the women in last weeks TD. I forget her name and don’t care enough to look it up. The one statement she made that stuck in my mind was about a plan that would protect Richmond’s traditionally black neighborhoods.
God forbid we allow white people to move back into Richmond. And this is what passes for progressive thinking. That one statement told me all I needed to know about this latest crusade and, I’m sure I’m not alone.
So forgive me if I put my money on the Sunni’s and Shi’ites getting together before Richmonds warring tribes ever do.
R.Smith wrote:
“I don’t think it’s really fair to blame “the media” for not getting the word out. I read about it in the RTD but the term “charette” seemed silly to me. I’ve since added it to my growing list of terms that are red flags signifying the approach of people who think far to highly of themselves...diversity, nurture, dynamic...I could go on.
“If you want to be taken seriously then speak plainly and remember that not everyone wants to live in Seattle.”
Dear Sir:
Yours is, without question, the most thoughtful, honest, incisive post I’ve read in months. Thanks, and keep on cogitatin’!
Yer buddy,
Mark
Don—My apologies for misrepresenting your view. I read the satirical quiz ("Did you even realize there was a Downtown Plan? Doesn’t it blow your mind that someone ‘planned’ to do all of that to Downtown Richmond?")as more sarcastic than you meant it, I guess. Fault the reader, not the writer: My reading of it was probably too rushed to give it the consideration it was due.
Cheers,
B.
Post Your Comments:
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.