George Allen to be at Omni: Pro-gay marriage rally with NAACP at Newcomb Hall

Senator George Allen will speak Tuesday morning at 10:30 at the Omni Hotel, Charlottesville's crown jewel of eminent domain abuse and the black community's primary grievance for decades.

In order to retain credibility of his position, Allen will have to explain how he supports legislation that would make the process whereby the Omni came into existence a crime. Otherwise, his attendance is implicit endorsement of the forced redevelopment of Vinegar Hill.

Allen will also appear on WINA's Morning Show.

Friends of George Allen

Jim Webb campaign website

"Webb Visits UVa" October 30 Charlottesville Newsplex

The rally to oppose the marriage amendment will be at 7:00 pm in the ballroom of UVa's Newcomb Hall. Julian Bond of the NAACP will be there. I heard about it on WINA's Charlottesville Right Now with Jay James.

Text of the Marshall-Newman Amendment

BALLOT QUESTION NUMBER 1

Question: Shall Article I (the Bill of Rights) of the Constitution of Virginia be amended to state:

"That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.

This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage." (Pasted from GayCville)

BALLOT QUESTION NUMBER 2

My google search doesn't return much for the 2 other amendments. Amendment 2 would allow churches to form corporations. Previously churches were specifically restricted. On Charlottesville Right Now, the voter registrar read the text of all 3 amendments.

BALLOT QUESTION NUMBER 3

This amendment would allow localities to tax different properties at different rates. Another way to look at it is tax incentives for property owners who invest money to improve their property. This form of discrimination, initially, would be targeted at 'blighted' properties. Government officials have no concept of a law actually applying to everyone. Why should only vacant or rundown properties get a tax break for increasing the tax base?

On the basis of equal rights, I'll vote No-Yes-No. Amendments 1 and 3 write dicrimination into the state Constitution while Amendment 2 removes discrimination againt churches.

"Ballot Questions 2 and 3 should pass, however. Question No. 2 would strike language from the state constitution banning the incorporation of churches. A federal judge ruled in 2002 that the language violated the U.S. Constitution, making this measure a case of overdue typographical cleanup.

Question No. 3 involves whether to allow local jurisdictions to offer partial property tax exemptions for both new construction and improvements to existing structures in areas of economic blight. Currently, they can give such exemptions only for improvements." (A Dangerous Amendment: Virginia's constitutional proposal to ban same-sex unions is a loser, but other ballot questions make sense. Washington Post editorial, Friday, October 27, 2006; Page A22)

Voters may decide fate of historic, vacant sites

By Blair Goldstein, bgoldstein@newsadvance.com , October 29, 2006, Lynchburg News and Advance

Ed McCann, executive director of the Lynchburg Housing and Redevelopment Authority, said it is often difficult to develop these lots since their accompanying legal documents are often as disorderly as the property itself.

As a result, the city often acquires the property and sorts out title discrepancies before selling it, often at reduced prices. McCann said property tax abatements could replace the reduced selling prices as the city’s incentive.

Lynchburg city officials say a proposed constitutional amendment could help attract private developers to blighted and historic areas of town.

On Nov. 7, voters will decide if local governments can offer temporary property tax relief to people who build new structures or improve existing ones in conservation, redevelopment or rehabilitation areas.

Lynchburg City Manager Kimball Payne said the city supports the amendment and hopes it will provide an incentive to development of vacant and rundown lots.

“Vacant lots kind of look like gap teeth, particularly in a downtown where you’ve got façades pretty much against the street,” said Payne. “…Vacant lots really look like something’s missing.”
There are eight designated conservation, redevelopment and rehabilitation areas in the city where the tax relief could currently be offered, including the Diamond Hill Rehabilitation District and Tinbridge Hill Conservation District.

Ed McCann, executive director of the Lynchburg Housing and Redevelopment Authority, said it is often difficult to develop these lots since their accompanying legal documents are often as disorderly as the property itself.

As a result, the city often acquires the property and sorts out title discrepancies before selling it, often at reduced prices. McCann said property tax abatements could replace the reduced selling prices as the city’s incentive.

The property tax exemption would be a percentage of the increased assessed value as a result of the new structure or building improvement. According to the accompanying legislation, local governments can allow for the tax exemptions for up to 15 years.

Currently, Lynchburg offers similar property tax exemptions under the Real Estate Rehabilitation Program. That program extends to renovations of any qualifying building in the city.

According to Greg Daniels, Lynchburg city assessor, 260 parcels are currently receiving that tax relief, with about $290,000 total revenue exempted.

Laura Dupuy, executive director of the Lynchburg Neighborhood Development Foundation, said the tax exemptions would be another tool to encourage people to invest in difficult projects.

She said her organization is currently working to redevelop the Tinbridge Hill neighborhood, where many small lots are vacant. She said some streets are completely empty except for one or two houses.

“It’s just one more way to make it attractive to deal with properties that, as they are, may be costly to develop on and urge (developers) to put the right investment in,” said Dupuy.

“(The city) will cut some of your cost, if you invest the right amount of dollars.”The incentive will cost localities potential tax dollars, since all property taxes are levied at the local level in Virginia. Those taxes are primarily used to fund public schools.

Kelly Harris-Braxton, executive director of Virginia First Cities, said vacant lots are not generating much tax revenue. She said that over time, the developed properties would do more to increase value in localities.

Virginia First Cities, a coalition of Virginia cities that includes Lynchburg, supports the proposed amendment.

“Right now you’re not getting much tax money out of it (vacant lots),” Harris-Braxton said.

“It’s better to get a little more than just taxes on a vacant land.”

Sen. Charles Hawkins, R-Chatham, was a sponsor of the accompanying legislation. He said the amendment is needed to give cities the flexibility they need to revitalize urban areas.

“We’re basically trying to bring back our core cities,” said Hawkins, “and give some initiative to people to reinvest in downtown areas.”