2009.10.07
Christiansburg Council fights the free market
We're writing our Sunday NRV Current editorial today about events at Tuesday night's Christiansburg Town Council meeting. Boxley, a company based in Roanoke, wanted to open a concrete plant in the Chritiansburg Industrial Park. It's a permitted use, but the town manager at his discretion may pull an application for such a plant and ask the council to approve or deny it.
The council, on a 4-1 vote, told the plant to take a hike. Never mind that it is located in an industrial park specifically built to handle truck traffic and close to the highway. Never mind that Boxley is a local company that promised to keep its dust under control as it does at its Roanoke plant.
No, the council said no because it worried that Boxley would compete with the concrete company already in Christiansburg. It did not want a new plant to take business away from the existing one.
In our editorial, we will wonder whatever happened to the free market. It is not council's role to serve as guardian for existing businesses, turning away new jobs because they might affect old ones. Now Christiansburg is stuck with an artificial monopoly.
RSS feed 
Ah! Christiansburg fights a business and you "we will wonder whatever happened to the free market" but Blacksburg prevents a business coming in that brings jobs, tax revenue, AND supports the businesses in that development and because it is Wal-Mart, that is a good thing since Wal-Mart is "an evil company and bad for America." (CT - "Blacksburg's big-box juggernaut" Sunday, August 12, 2007).
Comment by Lisa — October 7, 2009 @ 10:55 am
Very good point, Lisa.
So the RTEB is suddenly-free market. That means they oppose 0bamacare completely. Excellent.
Comment by Suzie — October 7, 2009 @ 11:05 am
@Lisa #1: You confuse the editorial board with my personal columns, Lisa. Not that it matters in this case because if you read that column and others, I supported Wal-Mart coming into First & Main and opposed the town's lawsuits. I didn't like it, but I thought (wrongly according to the Virginia Supreme Court) that the town was treating the company inequitably.
We also backed the Wal-Mart (and Sonic) as a matter of law in editorials.
You misrepresent our views by taking a quote out of context. Is that the best you have?
Comment by C. Trejbal — October 7, 2009 @ 11:24 am
@CT just to help unconfuse me... When there appears an article that is posted by the "editorial board"... does everyone on the board write a couple of sentences??
Comment by Marked Man (Mark) — October 7, 2009 @ 11:38 am
@Mark #4, Do you mean a blog post by the editorial board or an actual print editorial? We don't do "articles" per se.
Comment by C. Trejbal — October 7, 2009 @ 11:43 am
Right, that was bad wording by me...
see above
"Posted at 10:13 by The Roanoke Times Editorial Board | Category: Economy, Editorials, New River Valley issues | 5 Comments"
article, blog.... potatoes, potatoes...
Comment by Marked Man (Mark) — October 7, 2009 @ 12:05 pm
No problem, Mark. I just wanted to be clear which you meant because the answer is slightly different for the two types of pieces. Regarding blog posts, if they are posted by "the roanoke times editorial board," they fall into two broad categories.
First are the daily updates posted in the morning. These are the open thread as well as links to everything that appeared in the day's print edition -- letters, guest columns and editorials. I suspect these are not what you are interested in.
Second are the previews for upcoming editorials, such as this post. No, we do not daisy chain authorship of them. Generally, the person who is writing the editorial writes the preview. That said, they are posted by the editorial board because the views in them represent the views of the board not one particular writer. It is possible that the person who writes the preview and the editorial might not even agree with the position of the board, though this happens rarely.
So, to sum up. One writer posts the collective view of the board.
Comment by C. Trejbal — October 7, 2009 @ 12:24 pm
Yes CT, I see your point. When I see "editorial" I never assume it is a board.
How about an editorial about how editorials are done. And yes, I am serious.
Comment by Lisa — October 7, 2009 @ 2:48 pm
Lisa, Here's a link to our editorial page guide. Some of the information as to people is a bit dated. Debbie Meade is the publisher and Leslie Taylor is no longer on our board.
We publish something similar in the Horizon section yearly. Just recently did one for Current and keep it posted on the Opinion section of roanoke.com
Comment by Luanne T. — October 7, 2009 @ 3:02 pm
I've noticed that some posts are NOT 'on topic'..halderbash..THE point is:
Christiansburg's 'brotherhood' has, and will continue, to ruthlessly rule.
The current concrete plant, expanded into a major operation against the will of local residents, is a sore on the community. The community has outgrown the need for the pollution and traffic that is generated. Just ask the 'old' neighbors that have nearby homes filled with pollution, let alone, the unsuspecting 'newbies' in the 100's of nearby townhouses.
There has never been, and will not be a 'free market' in Christiansburg. Someone always 'pays'...(else).
It's really time for non-biased federal and state agencies to step-up. An investigation of this harboring of a monopoly is due.
I wonder, is Christiansburg really in America? It seems to be an entity of it's own.
Most folks that are 'in the know' fear many of the local 'authorities' and their 'dogs' that carry out their orders.
The area reeks with 'legal' discrimination. It is reminiscent of 'The Godfather' or similar movies. Truly, continued virtual and real lawlessness.
Can't the folks on this feed just bite on something other than the criticism of microisms about the RTEB?
Too many pseudo-intellectuals, it seems, let alone, the 'Wal-Marters'.
Get real: this is a real, serious concern: the REAL information in the article about the concrete plant monopoly. The realness borders on central-control communistic principles, or brotherhood activities. The issue deserves national attention, as does much that goes on in Christiansburg.
Unfortunately, many folks that tried to disseminate information and knew a great deal about the area are no longer 'with us'. It is actually dangerous to even write about the real concerns; someone could 'pay', as many have, as others may pay to have things their way.
Comment by Know Nothing — October 7, 2009 @ 10:21 pm
Re: #10 You have got to be kidding. This is not Chicago. Who are the folks that "fear" the authorities and who are the "dogs" that carry out the orders? Have you been drinking the grape kool-aid? C'burg has low taxes, affordable housing, access to shopping, recreational oppurtunities, good schools(I know the county controls the schools but the citizens of C'burg pay r/e taxes to support them). What I gather from the Town council meeting was there were citizens speaking out against the Special Use Permit, there was a petition against with over two hundred names, and approximately 6-8 existing businesses from the park stated it would cause them to move if the added dust caused problems with their high tech machines. Most reasonable politicians would have voted the same way.
Comment by John — October 9, 2009 @ 8:25 pm
Funny that the Roanoke Times is railing against stifling competition. What goes around comes around -- the RT got slapped back in the early '70s for trying to stifle competition from other newspapers in the valley. Of course, those newspapers have pretty much fallen by the wayside now and without competition, the Roanoke Times really doesn't have to do much of anything these days. That's too bad, because in the past there have been some sharp reporters who have turned out some good stories based on good investigative reporting. If the folks at the Current or downtown were really interested in news, they could really turn out a kick-ass expose of how the good ol' boy network has run things in Christiansburg and Montgomery County for the last 20 years -- pretty much to the detriment of most of the residents.
As to the concrete plant, one wonders who whispered in the town manager's ear to have that request come before the town council. That should have been a slam-dunk approval, especially in an area that could use more jobs. Granted, Terpenny does run things on his own quite well, but there had to have been more to that move. I thought Blacksburg had problems with its no-growth town council, but this move in Christiansburg to turn down a business ready to move into a spot specifically zoned just for it really gets the prize.
Comment by Bruce Harper — October 9, 2009 @ 11:21 pm
Per a town administrator the "petition" was not verified for valid signatures and many were not legible. Many were not within the town either. Maybe the "mob" mentality is another swat at local Kiwanis many see as having very selective membership and whose names are probably on this petition. Even if every siganture was actually made by registered voter in the town, that's what - maybe 1% of the population? So less than 10% of the residents even knew about the issue, if that. The zoning code allows the manager to "doubt" something and bring it to his "bosses" but what triggered this approach to a business coming to this friendly town by someone I heard had an engineering background? The existing business who imply they would move should have known they were in an industrial park and may have their own environmental issues or go under or move regardless of this decision. They rent. And John, remember that Cburg has "conditional" permits. Bburg is the special place with special permits. Not sure how you define affordable housing but if you mean vinyl villages with cheap or average construction and no neighborhood amenities or safety you might sell that definition to me. Too much lipstick on this porker. The NRV is held back by Christiansburg's ineptitude and antics.
Comment by NRV Citizen — October 10, 2009 @ 2:22 pm
Back to the topic:) Virginia Tech is getting slammed with some nasty budget cuts. A lot of area businesses are already feeling the cruch. We had better hope that there are other jobs available for those people or else there is going to be a lot of people moving and a lot of empty houses that will not sell because there is no one around to buy them. When those people leave, I'm betting they won't have their groceries forwarded to their new address either.
Both Towns need to get off their respective high-horses and start dealing with the reality that ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT is crucial to what happens in both of them. Cuts at state level will trickle down and become cuts on those monies that normally come from the state. When state funding is cut, services must still be provided. That means Counties, Cities, and Towns have to shuffle money around to get things done. When local governments become so 'comfortable' spending money that comes from the State (in effect, claiming it as their money by right), they create a level of dependency that becomes a 'house of cards' in difficult economies. It will be interesting to see if Christiansburg's cherry picking of businesses or Blacksburg's "Just Say NO" to large employers, prove that both approaches can be successful, both can be destructive, or that one or the other is best. For the people who live in each jurisdiction, you may want to start asking where elected officials are planning on getting the funding to do the things the say that they will do. Ask those candidates what economic development is, what steps do they propose to take if elected, AND how will they accomplish those steps.
Comment by Carol Lindstrom — October 10, 2009 @ 2:55 pm