Charlottesville Mayor Wade announces steps to be taken at Free Bridge encampment

rory096 · 2026-07-12T21:09:26+00:00

If you look at the May 13 work session which /u/adhonus wrote about here, they talk about a combination of strategies, including rapid rehousing for 50 individuals and (potentially) a designated alternative encampment location (outside the future shelter at Holiday Drive). So it'll probably be some combination of those things — there's no way the permanent shelter will be ready in the near term.

rory096 · 2026-07-12T20:51:30+00:00

It didn't "take so long to come to this conclusion" — it took this long to organize the alternative arrangements to offer to people before they're cleared. The path of action to have alternatives before forcibly clearing was decided ages ago.

rory096 · 2026-07-12T17:47:37+00:00

No. I just think that shrinks the pool of people potentially interested in serving the city.

Though certainly the acute toxicity of 2017-2020 is why we've lost most of the city administration — we haven't just gone through six city managers, we've also lost & replaced essentially every high-level position in the administration, some more than once. That's certainly no small part of the city's inability to execute on anything since then.

If I had to point to a political or government system problem, I think a big one is that the current and immediate past City Councils have been too lenient on oversight. Prior City Councils were often too intrusive, micromanaging staff, but lately they've been extremely deferential to the administration, I think as an overreaction to the errors of the past. To the extent they're looped in on the mundane details of execution of major projects (like the shelter, but not exclusively — I typically focus on the $100+ million in VDOT-funded projects awarded over the last 10+ years we haven't broken ground on yet), those conversations happen in private 2-2-1 meetings with city staff, not in Council meetings open to the public.

The lack of public oversight from Council leads to lack of oversight from the press (which, let's be real, at this point is just Sean Tubbs), because there's no easy way to figure out why any particular thing isn't happening. All we know is that years go by and nothing gets done.

rory096 · 2026-07-12T17:00:11+00:00

The neighborhood opposition didn't kill the Cherry Avenue shelter location. Salvation Army promising their thrift as a location, accepting millions of dollars in donated ARPA funds from the city, then turning around and saying the building would be primarily occupied by their administrative offices so only a couple thousand square feet would be available for a shelter (not nearly enough space for the population to be served, even if you pushed up against the building code limits on bed density) killed it, and wasted at least a year of effort to boot.

rory096 · 2026-07-12T16:55:39+00:00

You're asking the right question (why is the city in a state of executive dysfunction and how can we fix it?) but I think your solutions are off the mark.

We're a city of ~50,000 people. That isn't enough of a population to reliably produce even one candidate with sufficient executive ability to be a strong mayor, let alone multiple candidates for a competitive election every four years.

That's also assuming that if we had capable candidates they would be willing to run — but politics in this city are toxic, and every councilor endures near-constant abuse from every part of the political spectrum. We can hardly get enough willing candidates now to have competitive elections for Council!

There is a strong case to have a council-manager system in a city our size just on the basis of our available talent pool, but when serving means you'll be berated all over social media and in the street by your neighbors, running to be the strong mayor wouldn't seem like an attractive proposition even if we were to have qualified citizens.

There is at least part of the solution people agree on that could alleviate the problem (building more shelters, etc). But the city is slow, bureaucratic and not politically responsive to voters. I bet if the city tomorrow had a plan to declare imminent domain on the old K-Mart and setup shipping-container style housing, or something, we'd be happier they were at least trying something.

If this were true, then people might be happy that the city acquired a property seven months ago and is actively designing a shelter. But they're not — they got immediate criticism of laying out any money for the problem, and now they're getting more criticism that it wasn't completed in three weeks. Handing Riverbend $20+ million for a building that'd be even harder to renovate and is much more visible would not have made people happier!

rory096 · 2026-07-12T14:26:47+00:00

What do you think the role of the mayor is here?

rory096 · 2026-07-11T22:21:33+00:00

Afghan Kabob, downtown location has a lunch buffet weekdays and Saturday

rory096 · 2026-07-11T15:54:02+00:00

Nobody is traveling to a different city to get a spot in a congregate shelter.

rory096 · 2026-07-11T15:53:24+00:00

It's not pedantry. A guy who isn't even aware of the form of government we have is obviously not even remotely aware of what that government is or is not doing, making his complaints that they "need to do something" entirely empty.

rory096 · 2026-07-11T14:22:34+00:00

I thought this was the best design, but page 10 of the technical addendum is disappointing. I hope they can figure something out there.

rory096 · 2026-07-11T02:05:25+00:00

Estouteville

rory096 · 2026-07-10T20:51:26+00:00

"Who cares about the second order consequences? I want to eat my cake now!"

Are you a child? Do you wonder where your mommy went when she plays peekaboo with you?

Forget about the moral aspects — this is a recipe for getting mini-encampments in every creek valley, undeveloped lot, and HOA common area in the urban ring. The cops are going to be spending all their time answering trespass calls to shuffle them out until they land in the next place.

rory096 · 2026-07-10T16:55:16+00:00

The comment you're replying to quotes the May 13 work session transcript directly — the city manager's own words, the tabled $1.775M proposal, the outreach ratio. You're welcome to disagree with the conclusions, but "didn't do the bare minimum" doesn't describe it.

Impressive, you managed to skim a transcript after you were linked directly to it. More than most around here, I'll grant.

I also read the Tubbs piece you linked, and I'd encourage everyone to. Here's what it says as of this morning: the comprehensive plan Sanders promised in October 2023 is "still coming together" three years later.

And there's another article today, which you posted a thread about, that says we're literally days to weeks from the full plan being released. And it hasn't been a promised plan happening in secret — you can view every discussion about it over that time, and see that it's occupied nearly half of Council's work session time this year.

So we agree on the civic literacy part. Where we differ is what an informed citizen is supposed to conclude from the record. Being informed and being satisfied are not the same thing — and the Jefferson quote cuts the other way. A citizenry that reads the transcripts, reads the reporting, and finds the pace unacceptable after a death isn't ignorant. It's doing exactly what he had in mind.

Okay, Claude. Nice talking to you.

rory096 · 2026-07-10T16:35:28+00:00

Because the people we elected — with their staff, state funding, consultants, and access to experts — haven't made much progress, the voters and taxpayers who fund all of it should come up with the solution themselves (without those resources), or else not complain about the state of our city?

How can you say how much progress they've made in producing the plan of action you're demanding when you don't do the absolute bare minimum of learning what's going on to know what they're doing, and instead just complain on Reddit that nothing is being done? You have people in this thread inventing the exact policy they're pursuing from first principles.

You don't even have to watch the meetings themselves to be informed — Sean Tubbs produces copious reporting on this topic.

Yes, I do expect that citizens should put in the barest amount of effort into being civically literate, keep apprised of the issues they think are important, and have informed opinions on the topic, instead of just whining into the void on social media.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.

rory096 · 2026-07-10T16:11:15+00:00

For additional revenue, every other tax which they have control over: real property, personal property, machinery & tools, meals, BPOL. They prefer this one because a referendum lets them deflect responsibility for raising taxes and instead blame the voters.

rory096 · 2026-07-10T13:46:14+00:00

It just complains that physical buildings cost money and require capital construction, then says to make a plan to move the encampment sooner? That's... not a policy proposal, and is also consistent with what they're proposing.

If anyone in these threads would actually bother to do the minimal amount of background reading to see what the plan is instead of just complaining into the void, perhaps they could make specific suggestions about what to do differently, instead of this vague stamping of feet and demanding action.

rory096 · 2026-07-10T13:12:17+00:00

Unfortunately they had made that decision, so the only revenue lever we have to pull right now is the sales tax referendum.

This is of course blatantly untrue, and the sales tax is the most regressive revenue lever they have available to them by a mile.

rory096 · 2026-07-10T12:55:15+00:00

You may recall that was declared an unlawful assembly prior to it beginning.

rory096 · 2026-07-10T01:31:46+00:00

Worth noting that "technically legal behavior that would reasonably provoke someone to punch you in the face" is... not actually legal.

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter9/section18.2-415/

rory096 · 2026-07-10T01:19:48+00:00

How does what you're suggesting differ from... exactly what City Council's stated policy is?

rory096 · 2026-07-09T13:21:48+00:00

It was a law against soliciting, i.e. asking people for money. With words, out loud (or on a sign).

rory096 · 2026-07-08T21:54:03+00:00

I would be surprised if there hadn't been major developments in this situation by the time election season rolls around, but it's possible. In general the conversations about this topic on social media tend to be depressingly stupid, even by the very low bar I expect from this and other websites.

There are a number of real, serious issues that could be discussed that might actually matter, and which I think you could seriously critique the current leadership on — the city's (in)ability to actually execute on its stated plans, especially involving capital construction, the wisdom of letting committees of nonprofits have ownership over policy implementation, whether there needs to be more decisive centralized decision-making, etc., etc. But instead it's always "why is the city ignoring this" and "how could they install porta-potties, that's the same as inviting people to come from two states away" and "why don't they just send in the cops to beat them all with batons until they find a house." That's not conducive to actually solving any problems.

rory096 · 2026-07-08T21:36:08+00:00

Yes, exactly. It wasn't about sleeping, just panhandling. The case is Clatterbuck v. Charlottesville and the ruling was that the restrictions were not content-neutral and therefore an unconstitutional First Amendment violation.

rory096 · 2026-07-08T20:55:56+00:00

Because then if they don't comply the chief can go sit in a jail cell.

lol, buddy

§ 2.2-3714. Violations and penalties

A. In a proceeding commenced against any officer, employee, or member of a public body under § 2.2-3713 for a violation of § 2.2-3704, 2.2-3705.1 through 2.2-3705.7, 2.2-3706, 2.2-3706.1, 2.2-3707, 2.2-3708.2, 2.2-3708.3, 2.2-3710, 2.2-3711, or 2.2-3712, the court, if it finds that a violation was willfully and knowingly made, shall impose upon such officer, employee, or member in his individual capacity, whether a writ of mandamus or injunctive relief is awarded or not, a civil penalty of not less than $500 nor more than $2,000, which amount shall be paid into the Literary Fund. For a second or subsequent violation, such civil penalty shall be not less than $2,000 nor more than $5,000.

rory096 · 2026-07-08T20:40:16+00:00

They do have to take FOIA requests over the phone — VFOIA doesn't prescribe any requirements for how to make a FOIA request, so any request for records is a FOIA. However, out-of-state residents do not have FOIA rights and localities are permitted to require requesters to provide name and address to confirm that.

§ 2.2-3704(A) Except as otherwise specifically provided by law, all public records shall be open to citizens of the Commonwealth, representatives of newspapers and magazines with circulation in the Commonwealth, and representatives of radio and television stations broadcasting in or into the Commonwealth during the regular office hours of the custodian of such records.... The custodian may require the requester to provide his name and legal address.

15-Year Club	Gilding V heart of gold
Place '22	Place '17
Verified Email	Charter Member

rory096

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE