THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, February 19, 1995 TAG: 9502170215
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: INTERVIEW
LENGTH: Long : 384 lines
At the Feb. 14 meeting, Councilman John Moss, who served on Council from 1986-1990 and from 1992 to date, announced his resignation from Council effective March 15. Following are excerpts from several conversations Editorial Page Editor Beth Barber had with Mr. Moss over the past several weeks. From '86 to '90, 'Some real vision'
The first time I served, the public said they wanted a change. The people in '86 said they wanted a change and they got all the change they asked for, and probably more.
The people were saying that we're behind in our roads, we're behind in our schools. We need to pause and catch our breath; like any business that expands too rapidly, we're putting the quality of life in jeopardy.
People forget that the Oceanfront project was instituted in 1986 and that was Mayor Oberndorf, Barbara Henley, John Moss, Nancy Parker, Al Balko. That was the group that initiated the Oceanfront Beautification Project.
But likewise, downzoning also took place. I always thought that had to be done. We took a vote and got by by the skin of our teeth. Would I do it again with the same information I had then? Absolutely. It bought the community four years of time.
During that four years, we passed a couple bond referendums. We started many of our road proj-ects. Ferrell Parkway, South Independence Boulevard, Lynnhaven Parkway - all these roads were a big part of this master plan that we did in 1986 through 1990. We added 25 police officers. We greatly reduced the backlog of services. We opened up a new police station and a new library, the 50-acre park, City View Park.
The outdoor recreation plan, that's something I felt I accomplished, that I initiated. We needed a tax increase to buy vacant land for a neighborhood park. That took a council vote. No one person can accomplish anything on council. Tallwood High School - that was not something the School Board requested. It was something that we saw an urgent need for and council really pushed.
There is such a long lead time from when you want to do something until you get the money to make it happen. Generally, it's more than one term of office. Landscape ordinance, billboard ordinance - these are all things that are paying dividends. There was a team of people that were willing to make that happen. There was a clearer sense of direction in '86 and '90 than there is currently. Council can't be very effective today. Every election, everything is renegotiated.
(In) '86 through '90 we consolidated. We made sure the comprehensive land-use plan, the CIP and operating budget were all integrated documents. The CIP should support the comp plan, make sure that you're building an arterial system. Look at South Independence, Ferrell Parkway, General Booth Boulevard. You can get around the city remarkably well.
Some people had some real vision.
I'd do it again. I wouldn't change it. Better wards than $100,000 races
A City Council member is not a vocation. Thank goodness we're not career politicians and we have other things to do in our lives and we have to pay off mortgages.
I think it's best when you have people whom (City Council) is not a career for. John Baum and the mayor, I guess you'll have to call them career City Council people, given their tenure. They're legacies in their own right. I think that's a plus. I don't believe in term limitations. I do believe the public will get rid of people they don't want.
A district system or reapportionment reduces the cost and increases the ability of people to understand government.
People don't spend $100,000 on a council election. People don't spend it because they're civic-minded. And they don't raise $100,000 because they promise people to judge everything on merit.
You just don't raise that kind of money from people who don't expect to get a return on their investment. I think any other politician tells you otherwise, he couldn't pass the polygraph test.
If an individual is willing to take the time and go door to door and meet all 60,000 households that vote, with $15,000 and a couple of home computers, they can run an effective campaign.
The at-large system disenfranchises all but the most powerful and well-financed individuals in the community. (Councilman William) Harrison came out of nowhere with $100,000. Give me $100,000 and I'd get them elected too, if no one knew them before. It's a style election vs. a substance election.
I think ultimately it will change. People are going to feel so alienated over time because people want their own advocate. It's only a logical extension. I want someone that really knows my neighborhood. I don't want all my council members to live in North Great Neck, Bay Colony and lunch at the Town Point Club, but people who have to go out there and take their kids to day care like I do; people that have to balance a checkbook at the end of every pay period. Our council needs people like that for the working-class families of Virginia Beach.
Look at council. Who really lives and walks the walk of that parent that makes as little income as the fixed-income elderly person but who has to pay all that personal-property tax, real-estate tax and child care and try to make a living?
I try to bring that sensitivity, that people out there that are supporting us don't live as well as maybe we do in government. We got this (Hampton Roads Planning District Commission) report about the economy and wages here and how poor they are in the private sector. The average- and above-average-paying jobs are mostly in federal, state and local government. So the people that are the servers, they are consumers of wealth, not the producers of wealth. Why they're glad to see me leave
I put 34 hours a week into this job. I may not be out shaking hands, but I'm doing a more important job on Council: paying attention and reading all the staff reports, understand(ing) the budget to be a good steward of the people and be a defense between the growing government and people's paychecks. The common enemy is not the Council. We need term limitations on staff. They aren't downsizing enough. Government has grown at the expense of the private standard of living and I think that's wrong.
You have to cut the size of government and that means reducing services. Maybe we don't always want to have libraries open on a Sunday. If we're going to hire all these third parties to lobby, what do we need an economic development department for? Maybe we should look at the private sector and say, Chamber (of Commerce), you do it.
Look at all the stuff we're doing with Channel 29. Why do we have to have a program on smart shopping? Those are big expenses. Why?
Why do we have to have an extra 3 percent cost-of-living increase for (Virginia Retirement System) if it's going to cost us $2 million a year? Why? As hard-pressed as those (retirees) might be for that 3 percent, they're not as disadvantaged and as hard-pressed as the people who are having to pay the taxes.
We got a policy report that showed us what the consequences were. They don't want to talk about it, the majority of Council, because its easier to be Santa Claus when that's someone else's bill tomorrow: Let's don't do the right thing. Let's do the politically correct thing and let someone else deal with it.
Now we have no choice but to raise taxes for schools. You wait and see; 5.2 cents. We're talking about increasing liabilities voluntarily when we knew we had expenses we couldn't pay without raising taxes. I think that's unconscionable.
What can Council do about it? I don't think they're hard choices, but they're too hard for the current majority to make.
If you're not giving that pay raise they plan to give, you can help pay for that tax increase. Just don't give that 3 percent raise.
It's incredible. But we come up with ways to spend it all. They seem to think they are unsatiated demands, all these people crying to government. I think Governor Allen is right on track.
Basically what you have here is a real struggle, which is why I'm sure they're glad to see me leave. There is a real struggle; the struggle is in the community as well: There are those that want to make Virginia Beach something other than what it is because what it is isn't giving them enough money. A backyard-barbecue-kid kind of city
Virginia Beach is a suburban environment. This is a kind of backyard-barbecue-kid kind of place. I think the people that like the lifestyle here in Virginia Beach are willing to stay and fight for it instead of flight.
A lot will depend upon what will happen with the schools. People who pay the bills and create the jobs move to Virginia Beach, live here and put up with some of the commutes to get to Norfolk. But they'll pay more to live in a house so their kids can go to Kingston.
Virginia Beach as an attractive place to live is going to have nothing to do with the Oceanfront. And ultimately, nothing to do with how successful Corporate Landing is. We have family-oriented communities and a good school system. People make cities. You show me a place where the middle class has moved out and you've got urban places: You work there, but you leave there.
Virginia Beach is a suburban place, because people are living where they work. It's a neighborhood park, bikeways. People have a feel of their own neighborhood more than of the city. I see nothing wrong with that.
As long as Virginia Beach stays family-friendly, it will always be successful. People buy value. They want their trash picked up. They want to be able to wash their cars, be safe, have good schools. I think America has always been focused on the children; and as we lose our focus on the future, we make bad decisions.
There's always a tradeoff between the future and today, and in the last several years, the shift has been: Let's take care of today rather than let's take care of tomorrow. People are concerned about (school) parity - how much it's going to cost - but they won't think twice about spending $6 million cash contribution to an amphitheater. So we're not really looking at what brings people. Business isn't concerned if you have an amphitheater or not but with public safety and a well-qualified, well-trained workforce.
Building a technical education magnet school or doing an amphitheater - I can tell you that the amphitheater can't compete. Weed whacking and school spending
Our education today is college-prep oriented, but the labor market is telling us that a degree isn't necessarily the training they're looking for. So if we're interested in making the city economically viable, then we have to retool the product.
A technical education might require as much or more in rigor and discipline than some college programs. I envy those people that have the technical knowledge and cognitive reasoning skills. These people ought to be treasured, because in reality it isn't politicians who are have made life better. Politicians are low in the food chain of making things better. People who really make life better? The guy who invents the weed whacker or remote control for your TV or the thing that cleanses blood. Those things have improved the quality of life.
Just because I'm pro education doesn't mean I'm pro School Board. There's a difference in for education and for school spending. There is a difference between saying we need to spend more money for additional education, which I believe we do, and saying how they want to spend it is the best way to go.
I never did support this block grant approach - if we just give them their money and tell them to make it fit, then they'll just go away. It's never going to work. They're all going to need more money and they're going to come back to you and ask for it and you're going to have to say no. Well, we don't have the guts to say no.
Here's a good example. We gave them a certain amount for payroll increases. They phased their increase for later and gave (employees) a bigger percent that then forwarded to next year's operating budget. They got $2.9 million of unfunded liability.
I don't think we should eat it. I'd say: You gave them too big a raise. You solve it. Your problem, not my problem.
The schools said they didn't realize that was the case when it happened. I said, Then why is Sid Faucette still working? If he cost me $2.9 million, he'd be looking for a job. Water will never not be an issue
I think we're going to be just as thirsty when we get the water because it took us so long to get the water that the breathing space between getting this water and having to have some more water is going to be a very short window. If we get the water in 1998, by the year 2000, 2010, this region as a whole, we'll have to go out looking for water. Chesapeake isn't going to be able to sustain its growth rate on the 10 million it's going to get from us.
I don't see Lake Gaston ending the water battles. It may serve as ground-work for North Carolina and Virginia to come to an overall agreemen between the states as to how to apportion, ultimately, the safe flow out of Lake Gaston, because obviously they're going to want Lake Gaston water too.
Water systems should be operated regionally by the state. Water will never not be an issue and will never not be a scarce resource in Hampton Roads.
As a matter of fact, you wonder why they don't try a water moratorium because they're using 2 million gallons more a month, every month, than what Norfolk is giving us. We have four years until Gaston; we have people that can still connect to the system. How many people can you put on the same pacemaker? When do we say, ``Until we get the pipeline, no one gets water''?
That's a tough question because once you answer that in the affirmative, you have basically put a stake in the heart of your economic development for the short run. TGIF: A tourist-entitlement program
Two million of the TGIF money came by moving $2 million out of the operating budget so we can then charge for a stormwater management fee for a service that people used to get for no additional cost.
Then all the amusement taxes which were going in the general fund (go) into growth and development and TGIF. And the growth from the meal tax - and guess who pays the meal tax?
There's no cap, no after you raise $10 million, anything over this amount goes into the general fund. Who couldn't think of more things to do?
I'm not so much against TGIF. I don't like fenced revenues. It's like an entitlement program, a tourism entitlement program, independent of need because there is no need assessment. Whatever money (is generated) is spent.
All the money should go into the general fund and all the projects should have to compete.
All government is about is decisions. They're mostly value decisions. It's who is going to benefit and who is going to pay for it. We have a massive redistribution of income going on down there. Citizens aren't first on the agenda. Residents aren't coming first. Tourists are more important. Lake Ridge: A good deal for what?
What's interesting about Lake Ridge is the process that Council itself used. This is a major investment of money. Council never articulated to the public why it was buying Lake Ridge. Then after they decided that they wanted to buy it, they then looked to see what they would use to justify the purchase: We'll use the schools, but we can't use the money from the schools yet because that would take a vote from the School Board and we have to close on this property right away.
Who else is going to use it? What's the rush? Shouldn't we publicly debate the use for Lake Ridge and shouldn't that be the basis for buying it? It's a good deal - a good deal for what purpose? How do you evaluate the things (Council) won't do with that $9.5 million?
I don't know the real value of the property. If we're going to spend the public's money, shouldn't we know?
Lake Ridge was I believe purchased for about $10,000. Certainly the Southeastern Expressway was to go through that property, so I'm sure that value would reflect that. I don't know how many times they rearranged the partnership and upped the value of the property. And guess what? In 30 days they got the whole comp plan revisited. And then (Council) rezoned the property.
Now people who voted for it, the vice mayor and John Baum, are saying it was a mistake. Well, it was a mistake. Now anyone that wants to build has to live with all these proffers. The likelihood of that property being developed any time soon is slim. One, there's no water for four years. Second, where do you find the market that can pay for the property relative to other properties that are available to be built on that don't carry that liability? We don't subsidize bowling
Obviously they are now looking for an amphitheater site, that's the big drive.
If someone comes and tells me (that) we can't do an amphitheater here in the private sector because local people couldn't afford to pay the ticket prices, which is basically what they said, I'm going to tax the general public to subsidize a small segment of the public's en-ter-tain-ment?
Those new movie theaters on Constitution, I'm sure that's a $10 million project. Are we subsidizing that? No, they're giving us 10 percent of every movie ticket that goes through there. So I'm subsidizing lower ticket prices so (the amphitheater) can be profitable?
It's not my job to tax people who will never walk in the place to pay for someone else's entertainment. We don't subsidize bowling. Southeast Expressway: R.I.P.
I don't think you'll ever see a Southeastern Expressway. I think it's dead.
People have radically underestimated how the work is accomplished and where the growth industries are. The growth industries are not going to be in transportation. The main product of an office park is information, which is now electronically being moved. So what's the four-lane highway doing, getting them to work or moving the parts they produce somewhere to create value?
If the purpose of the Southeastern Expressway is to create economic development, the answer is no. If it's to create housing, the answer is yes. I don't think we need more housing, so I don't want the highway. It's only designed to create further urban sprawl. It's just Toll Road Two. And we don't need a Toll Road Two. A city-owned homeless shelter? No
The private sector and the churches have to decide that there are some things that are best done by the community. If I'm taking money from people and doing it, I've got the bureaucrats I've got to feed, just suck the money off the top. I've got all these rules and regulations that I have to deal with. Government is not compassionate. It's not as same as those people that volunteer for a rescue squad. That's compassion.
Does that mean that the city might not be able to give someone land to build a homeless shelter? Great idea. But does the city want to be in the business of owning and operating and paying for a homeless shelter? Absolutely not. It has to come from the community.
Government can't solve social problems. Its incapable of solving social problems.
By trying to solve them, in a sense it subsidizes certain behavior. It can't make the same kind of demands on people as the Christian outreach center can in terms of access to the service. Staff's vested interest in the system
I'm an analyst and I don't depend upon the staff to do my homework for me. Give me the raw data and I'll read it myself. I'm not a staff-dependent person as some Council members obviously are.
Although I'm not anti-staff, I realize they have a vested interest in the system. That's how they got where they are. People don't voluntarily say, Close down my base, shut down my department. I realized that if we want those things to happen we can't ask staff to recommend it. Council has to say: We looked at the big picture and this is something we want. We're not asking for permission; we have that. We've been elected. We want to cut the costs. This year's budget's got to be lower than last year's.
I don't expect the staff to make value choices. They're not elected. No one that is not elected should be making value choices or setting priorities. And they certainly aren't accountable for them. If I am not going to decide something, then I don't want to be there.
I'm not so sure we need a public works engineering staff. I'd just as soon have an engineering firm that's bonded for the decision so if they make a mistake, there's someone to sue. I'm not happy with the job that we do. I'm disappointed that we don't hold ourselves to a higher accountability in oversight of construction. Our track record has been awful.
And I think you have to say what's happening to the city has been happening to homeowners for years. The quality of building inspections are just that. They're not very high-quality and we're not getting the oversight that we're paying for.
Council should not have to work as hard as we do to figure out what's going on. Some of the presentations that we get (are) way too long and not on point. A good example is the RFP process that we went through with Cellar Door. If you read what we received and looked at the relative difference, you'd say, Why would you throw out all the volunteers for this small difference? You wouldn't. And when you looked at the RFP's themselves, it was a whole different conclusion. If I (had) scored the application, the point spread would have been much greater. A successful successor? Reba
There will be some reconciliation. Who knows, maybe my departure will just facilitate that. Obviously the person that would get appointed to my seat is not the person that would get elected.
I don't know who that would be. If I were a citizen, what would I want? I would want someone who was independent. If they work, where they work could not be leveraged by the subtle pressures of politics and business. They would be willing to do their homework, to do the dirty work and not the parade work. And ask tough questions.
If I had my choice I'd probably get Reba McClanan to come back. She's got stature in the community, she's independent, she does her homework.
I feel like I owe the people who elected me the best job for as long as I'm responsible for fulfilling my duties. I would not have run again because the cost to my family is high and I couldn't ask my wife to bear that burden for another four years. Nor would I take that away from my children.
How fair is it to make decisions knowing that you are leaving, that other people should make them that have to live with the consequences? I'm sure some people would like me to stay until the budget process was over, but I don't think my vote would truly make a diffence in the outcome.
I personally think everyone on Council is a nice person. I wish some of them weren't there, but I fully respect (that) the public elected us all to be there and their position is just as legitimate as mine. They're not accountable to me as a councilperson.
Sometimes they say, ``John, you're just not a team player.'' Well, City Council is not a team. This isn't like we have a coach that picked everybody that's on the team. My coach is the public. ILLUSTRATION: John Moss
by CNB