RECENT COMMENTS
Gustavo S. on Missing this fella? Updated!
Eric S. Huffstutler on New sidewalk at Clay and 26th Streets
Eric S. Huffstutler on Missing this fella? Updated!
Eric S. Huffstutler on Old water tower is coming down
Michael Paul Williams on “political gamesmanship” in the East End
02/21/2009 8:02 AM by John M
THe RTD’s Michael Paul Williams delves into some of the recent shenanigans around here:
Church Hill mysteries. First there were handouts to vote on the ballpark in the bottom. Then neighbors were uninvited to a meeting on development near Chimborazo. […] Democracy is a wonderful thing. But ideally, the engagement of the masses should stem from genuine concerns rather than string-pulling. Based on the events of last week, you have to wonder: Are the East End masses being mobilized as participants, or pawns?
The article that accompanies Michael Paul William’s video notes that the 50 pages of petitions (which were submitted by J.J. McQuinn, who I think is Delores McQuinn’s son) are mostly from the Nine Mile Rd. Creighton public housing projects. J.J. McQuinn has been actively campaigning on the developer’s behalf. He and his associate spoke in favor of the development at the Land Use subcommittee meeting and tried to paint historic district residents as a small minority.
The language of the petition is below. Note that the petition seems to be in support of a single family residential housing (R7?) project (did people who sign think this was going to be a public housing project rather than high end condos????).
Petition for support of the development of the oakwood heights project
Proposed location: 3618-3628 E. Broad and 3609 E. Marshall St.
City of Richmond
We, the undersigned homeowners and residents of the Seventh District Richmond Community are supportive of the proposed residential housing development known as the Oakwood Heights Project development that will be located at 3618 -3628 W. Broad St. and 3609-3611 E. Marshall St. in the City of Richmond. The proposed development will provide Single Residential Family Housing and Oakwood Heights Project Development is subject to zoning review by the City of Richmond. We clearly understand and agree that it is the responsibility of the City of Richmond to change any traffic flow pattern as it deems necessary to ensure the safety of its residents i.e., road improvements, intersections, traffic lights etc.
We strongly believe and affirm that the Oakwood Heights Project development will enhance the positive growth and changes that our city needs as it makes reforms for Richmond, Our City, One City.
Why does McQuinn support the Oakwood Heights Project? What is in it for her? She is no longer our city council rep and she is not even the district’s delegate.
I’m one of the many neighbors working to Uphold the historic guidelines in the Chimborazo Historic District and oppose the proposed Oakwood Heights project. Our neighborhood is diverse in terms of age, gender, race and income. And we are united on our opposition to the current rendering of the Oakwood Hts. project. Some interesting developments have come to light in the most recent week as highlighted in Michael Paul William article in Sat. RTD.
It appears that Dolores McQuinn has officially placed her support behind Fulton Hill Properties and the owner Margaret Freund. We would ask if Delores McQuinn should be Lobbying on Behalf of the Oakwood Heights Developers? The immediate Neighbors of the proposed project in Church Hill are concerned about a potential conflict of interest. Margaret Freund and Fulton Hill Properties constitute some of Delores McQuinn’s strongest campaign financial backers. Margaret as an individual and Fulton Hill appear in her top 10 contributors of 2008-2009. Please check the following link: http://www.vpap.org/candidates/profile/money_in_donors/33585?end_year=2009&start_year=2008
Del. McQuinn is now actively lobbying the Richmond City Council on Freund’s behalf, urging them to approve the Oakwood Heights Development despite overwhelming opposition by her former District constituents. McQuinn has gone so far as to collect signatures from East End residents outside of the Chimborazo historic district as noted in the RTD article. At the Tuesday Land Use Subcommittee meeting, two gentlemen spoke in support of the project, one of whom was McQuinn’s son and neither of whom do we believe currently live in Church Hill.
Perception when it comes to ethics is important. And ethics appear to be stretched. We believe that Del. McQuinn should recuse herself from lobbying on behalf of Oakwood Heights given her perfectly legal but obvious financial association with the developer.
Additionally, according to CHPN today, Delores McQuinn’s son apparently was at the meeting Fulton Hill Properties held Thursday night at Franklin Military Academy (mtg is also noted in RTD article) and according to what I read on this site about the meeting, M. Freund told the crowd a reason why Dolores was behind her project is that she and Fulton Properties went to CAR and did everything right. In contradiction to this comment about Fulton supposedly doing everything right — I would suggest that the Committee For Architectural Review did everything right and went above and beyond in their attempts to assist Fulton Hill, M. Freund and her Architectural firms’ thorough understanding of the Historic Guidelines agreed to when buying property in this historic district.
There were meetings public and private to assist her to comply with what she knowingly bought into. What anyone choosing to live in Historic District must comply with. Not everyone agrees with historic district designation and that’s understandable — but if the District exists and you choose to buy property in it, you also sign up to comply with the very publicly available guidelines.
Apparently attendance at the Architectural Review meetings is considered by McQuinn to be doing things right while actually listening to the Committee and complying with the guidelines doesn’t play into the judgement.
I would like to continue my belief that we as a Country and as a City are entering an era of Change where the people’s opinions and grassroots work really matter again but it appears that the old political games will always exist in reality and in perception. I can only hope that the games are more obvious to all and less tolerated as a means to get things done. According to CHPN again, the neighbors beyond the immediate project blocks talked Thursday night — really talked to each other outside the confines of a set agenda. We are neighbors and we must look out for each other. We can listen to each other. We can learn from each other. And when we work together, we can change the old game.
Thank you Michael Paul Williams for the article shining the light on and adding insight to the games we are observing.
Corrupt people stick together–that is why McQuinn and Freund have each others back.
all i can say to anyone who opposes this plan is show up monday night a 6pm at the city council meeting. let’s make our community opposition seen and heard. email our current councilwoman and let her know how you feel.
By all means, e-mail Betty Squire at Bett1705@aol.com and make your concerns known.
Also, someone needs to figure out who will run against McQuinn this fall when she actually has to run for House of Delegate’s seat as opposed to having Mayor Jones place the crown on her head like some rhinestone tiara.
Make her work for the vote. This stinks and she needs to be held accountable. Perhaps there is an explanation, if so, the voters of the 7th District deserve to hear the answer from McQuinn herself.
JoeRichmond:
I was of the understanding that you lived Northside. Am I wrong? Do you live in the East End?
Just curious about your fairly recent interest in CH and it’s environs. Are you planning to move up here, or is this hood blog more interesting that North Richmond News?
Bravo to Mr. Williams for having the gumpf to stand up to some,and report the news as it has been unraveling.
Hillkid,
You have no idea where I live and given the way you consistently — and personally — attack people who disagree with you on this blog, I have no intention of telling you where I live.
My family and children do not need to be threatened the way you have threatened Gray. Got that?
So, back your backside up and don’t even try this gambit. For all anyone knows, you live in the West End and play landlord games in the East End when you aren’t personally attacking those who dare to disagree with you.
That which happens in any part of Richmond affects us all and the sooner we all realize this, the better. Or, far better stated by John Donne in his eloquent poem:
******For Whom the Bell Tolls*****
“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were: any man’s death diminishes
me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.”
~ John Donne
Devotions upon
Emergent Occasions, no. 17
(Meditation)
1624 (published)
#9/Joe Richmond:
Whoa dude, take a pill. I have not personally attacked anyone. I do confront people when I disagree with them. Big difference. Gray was the one who (foolishly, in my opinion) came on and admitted taking funny money. I challenged that, and others who took the freebee. No threats, no attacks. It ain’t right, period. I live here in Church Hill and care about my neighborhood.
I’m not interested in you trying to start some kind of faction war. What’s your problem? My comment to you in #7 was an honest question. Forget it & save the poetry.
Why don’t you give it a rest for a while.
#10, I took the free membership to vote “NO” to the stadium proposal. I admitted to it b/c I wanted to respond to the allegations in Murden’s post. I thought the public should know. If being honest is foolish, then yes, I’m foolish. Any regrets? Yes, for not writing under a pseudonym and for leaving myself open to attacks by you.
I understand why you, in your position, post under a fake name, but must you use it to attack neighbors personally? Why not use the shield of your pseudonym to chastise corrupt local politicians?
Now on the topic of this thread: Why not ask McQuinn to return campaign contributions to the Oakwood Heights or Echo Harbor developers?
#10 As a longtime reader, and infrequent comment-maker, I’d respectfully disagree with you Hillkid.
You consistently attempt to verbally mount people with your words . Disagreement can and often does happen without being unkind and mean. You are passionate, yes, but it is accompanied with a bully-like tone and a generous helping of self righteousness and it ain’t pretty.
I don’t *think* I know you personally, but I do wonder if you save this behavior for the online community or dish it out to folks face to face in the same fashion.
Either way, maybe YOU should “take a pill.”
#11/gray & #12/richmond19:
First of all, I do not have to defend how I post – real name, pseudonym, whatever. I always post to further my argument. I don’t ask you or anyone elase why they don’t post under a full or real name. I don’t care. When I respond to people, I respond to what they have posted, and information they have provided in their posts, personal or otherwise.
That being said, I will get back to the debate. I have a valid question here and I would like a straight answer, not a retort saying what a bully I am. In my opinion money was distributed for unethical reasons at the CHA meeting. Are you saying it is OK to accept such money, knowing the intent was unethical, as long as you disagree with the that intent? It’s a yes or no question.
In answer to one of your questions, I think we are talking about corrupt politicians here. Someone is behind this money.
Richmond19: If you have something to contribute to the debate at hand, I’ll respond.
According to Whitepages.com McQuinn lives on 35th St.
Yes it is acceptable to accept money or other compensation, whether it be a bumper sticker or a membership to CHA. It is in fact legally permitted. You cannot sell a vote in a secret ballot because no one can determine how you voted, it is one of the safety devices built into the system. How exactly do you think lobbyists and other campaigners operate? It’s part of the system. I don’t like it, it’s vulgar and allows the wealthy undue influence over elections, but hey, that’s the way it works.
#15/Ramzi:
First of all the question was addressed to Gray, but the question was not if it is acceptable, the question was, is it RIGHT?
And as for your contention that a vote can’t be bought if it is a secret ballot, your logic is flawed. All you can say is we can’t prove how the person voted. A vote purchased that we don’t know about, is still a vote purchased. What you want me to believe is that it’s OK for someone to accept money from an unethical source as long as that person says, “It’s OK I’m not going to do to anything wrong.”
As for the comparison to lobbyists and campaign donations: Lobbyists have to register, and campaign donations have to be accounted for. It’s not perfect but at least it lends a small degree of transparency.
Your defending the acceptance of that money is taking the focus away from the problem here. Dirty politics is working it’s way down to the neighborhood groups, and your right, it’s vulgar, and should not be happening. Taking that money did not help the situation, only encouraged it.
All I will say is Gray is not the one running for office. Right or wrong, it’s done. You have made your opinion known loud and clear. Give it up. Agree to disagree as in your other post. Being so confrontational because you can, ain’t pretty.
Hillkid, If you would like to further discuss this, you are welcomed to come by my place of work.
Jesus Hillkid, leave Gray alone. Enough already. Do you really think she owes you some kind of explanation or apology?
Gee, Hellkid,
Why aren’t you calling for McQuinn to return money “given” to her campaign(s) by the various developers?
I meant “Hillkid” — not “Hellkid.”
Please pardon error. Thanks!
Honestly, would all of you just over yourselves?
Yes – let’s get off the attacking each other mode and remember the post.
hillkid – do you direct you passions asgaint things spelled out so eloquently in Michael Paul William’s article as strongly as you do against the neighbors that post here?
If not, you can’t change the world like that. I hope you are getting out, getting organized, getting involved, have the balls to walk into an elected official’s office or write a letter and make your opinion known as a part of this community.
If you aren’t, then, get out there and then get back here and tell us all about it. It feels pretty damn good.
In case someone missed this piece from Michael Paul Williams column:
“Del. Delores L. McQuinn, who until recently represented Church Hill on the City Council, also supports the Oakwood Heights project. Its developer, Margaret J. Freund, and her firm each donated $1,000 to McQuinn’s campaign since last year, according to the Virginia Public Access Project.”
See why she wanted to appoint a “you know who” to city council. She had to keep her hand in the district.
What’s Thweatt’s stake in the bottom?
Didn’t Thweatt ran against McQuinn a few years ago?