Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, October 18, 1994 TAG: 9410180078
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-2 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: Paul Dellinger
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Some say it's broken out already - that the town hedged over letting the county build its war memorial in downtown Pulaski the way it wanted, so the county shot back by threatening to tear down a landmark movie house in the town.
Well, Pulaskians in both the town and county do seem to enjoy a good old wrangle now and then. It gives individuals a chance to improve their public speaking skills and maybe even helps clear nasal passages and provide other cathartic benefits.
But a feud? Nah ... at least not yet.
The war memorial itself was at the center of a firestorm a few months ago, and the debate had nothing to do with town or county affiliations.
A committee headed by retired Army Col. Dallas Cox literally had spent years planning the memorial, but it was generally not known until recently that it was going to be located in front of the Old Courthouse facing Main Street.
The courthouse lawn in Pulaski's recently revived downtown had seen use in townwide activities to draw shoppers and boost business, and some merchants were sorry to see it go. But objections at a county public hearing came from a different segment - including some veterans - who said a memorial should be more low-key and go in front of the newer brick courthouse facing Third Street.
At no time did anyone ever object to the memorial itself. But the location argument soon overshadowed everything else. A clear majority of veterans and others viewed Main Street as the most prestigious site and anything less as an insult to those who had given their lives for their country.
People whose patriotism had been stirred by that debate carried it to the town's Architectural Review Board, which approved the memorial with three changes: matched flagpoles instead of two kinds, fewer connecting sidewalks, and dropping the old courthouse bell from the memorial.
The county appealed the board's decision to Pulaski Town Council, which upheld it by a close vote, certainly not by any solid bloc. The county plans to appeal again, to Circuit Court.
Afterward, one supervisor - Bruce Fariss - suggested that the county board consider demolishing the Pulaski Theatre building in downtown Pulaski to provide more public parking space. The building was given to the county when it closed as a movie house several years ago. A local group has been working toward renovating and reopening it as an arts and cultural center, and Fariss' idea took its members by surprise.
Fariss also suggested banning use of the Old Courthouse lawn and other county properties for activities benefiting private business.
Only one supervisor expressed those proposals, other board members were uncomfortable with them, and even Fariss had no problem with considering them later.
Adding fuel to the feud notion were actions at the same meeting after a closed session, such as offering an unused county building to the Chamber of Commerce, which was then negotiating with the town about occupying part of its Train Station building. The town-chamber agreement seems to have gone forward regardless, and motivations behind the county offer remain unknown. (Which prompts a reminder: The Freedom of Information Act says governing bodies can go into closed session for certain types of discussions; but nowhere, no time, nohow does it ever say they must.) County Administrator Joe Morgan said later that it simply was an offer of an alternative for the chamber and nothing else should be read into it.
What is promising is that council put Mayor Andy Graham's admonition for more town-county dialog into action by authorizing a meeting to include both entities, the Architectural Review Board and veterans' groups to resolve the war memorial issue. Feuds can be fun but, at a time when some positive things are under way but require county-town cooperation to complete them, this probably isn't the best time for one.
by CNB