May 5, 2009
Jewell, Tyler, Conner, Trammell seek Flynn’s resignation
Style Weekly has the story on how City Council seems to be closing ranks against the city’s planning director Rachel Flynn for for her flat rejection of amendments to the Downtown Master Plan that benefit the Echo Harbor :
Critics of the process say those remaining amendments stem from the undue influence of private landholders and developers kept alive by public officials in a position to benefit from them  such as Planning Commissioner Bob Mills and City Councilman Bruce Tyler, both architects whose firms do business with some of the landholders most upset by the master plan. [...] “The mayor makes the decision with regard to who’s in charge of community development,” Tyler says. “I would respectfully ask him to consider what she has done and respectfully ask her to leave.”
Flynn’s supporters are equally vocal, particularly among civic activists and local bloggers. Envision Richmond, a residents’ group, has formed to support passage of the new master plan and enactment of its recommendations, and the Better Housing Coalition just named Flynn Community Revitalizer of the Year at its annual community leadership awards. The incident inspired local blogger John Sarvay, who’s been following the ins and outs of the planning process, to compose a post entitled, “The Downtown Plan: Why I Love Rachel Flynn.“
63 Responses to “Jewell, Tyler, Conner, Trammell seek Flynn’s resignation”
Share a Comment
By posting, you are agreeing to this site's Privacy & Use Policy.
No mention of The Esteemed Ms.Squire who actually represents the area in which all of this is taking place. Perhaps she is still studying the facts.
We need to immediately protest this action!!
Save Rachel!
It’s time to clean house on City Council. These “grassroots leaders” all need to go.
It’s not just John Sarvay who loves Rachel Flynn. This is absolutely ridiculous. Someone actually stands up to represent the people of the city, and to support the Master Plan…and this is their thanks?! This is frightening, since City Council needs to approve the amendment to the Master Plan discussed in the RTD today…
As I have said before Flynn needs backup City Council only plays one way and that is cut throat. If you believe in any part of the Master plan you better support Her because when she goes it all goes and all of city council has at least one Developer or 2 willing to contribute to them for their re-zoning. Rachel Flynn needs everyone right now cause all they see her as is a roadblock.
business as usual, Richmond style.
Ouch this hurts. It is certainly where the rubber meets the road now. What kind of city do the citizens want Richmond to be? It is up to no one but us as citizens to decide.
Time for petitions and letters to city council and the mayor -let them know we like Flynn.
An appointee has a constituentcy of one…the mayor. If the mayor supports an appointee she stays. If the mayor does not have faith in the individual, she goes. The opinion of the four council members is irrelevant. Looked at another way though, five members of council, a majority, did not call for her resingation.
Other than writing to our elected officials, what else can we do to show our support for Ms. Flynn? I’m sure that most council members don’t read their e-mails, much less let them influence how they vote. It would be a tragic loss to lose Ms. Flynn!
Rachel’s job is to implement policy according to the zoning regs and rule of law-not create it.
I think where Ms. Flynn has a problem is with the business leaders, design community and potential developers is where she has chosen to “create policy” vs. “implement policy” as defined by the zoning laws that Council has adopted. It’s the same rules and laws you and I are expected to follow.
What if the Chief of Police started interpreting the laws and enforcing something that wasn’t law? Would you be bothered by this? Are you willing to give up your rights as a citizen, taxpayer and property owner?
An unelected administrator shouldn’t be creating laws and rules that run contrary to the printed law.
I assure you that our appointed councilperson, Betty Squire, does read and take seriously email from 7th District constituents. I would encourage you to email her on this and any other issue of importance to the neighborhood.
I think Flynn’s problem is that she is working for/with a city council / city govt that has shown itself time and time again to be petty, corrupt, short-sighted, irrational and incompetent. The only thing that’s consistent there is inconsistency. That’s not to say that there aren’t some great, professional people at city hall – because there most certainly are. But this city, the “leadership,” is just…. argggg!
Hey, what’s up with the $300K the city is spending to “maintain” the boarded up and defunct remnant of 6th St. Marketplace? Anyone got the scoop on that?
wow the flynn kool-aid has really gone around. wasnt it the flynn cult that approved of the oakwood heights monster?
And in what way is she creating law? She is just enforcing a plan that was accepted by City Council and They now seem to find a need to Change things when They are encouraged by the Developers who did not have the proper zoning set up for their property and bought it anyway. Council members have a habit of supporting those who support them and that is not what we need for this City. She refuses to cowtow to a Developer who thinks all he has to do is just waltz in make a contribution to a councilperson to change zoning that is in place for a reason and that was in place before even the Master Plan. Lets face it City Council has a nasty habit of doing what is best for them and not the city.
I don’t see enforcement of zoning as Creating policy you might have done well to consider that point. There is interpreting of laws and then there is bypassing them and City Council tends to just ignore them without someone in place who does not need re-electing or has to worry about building a nest egg.
It is interesting that many who are supporting Ms. Flynn now were loudly unhappy when the planning staff, led by Ms. Flynn, endorsed the Oakwood Heights application.
Ms. Flynn is one of the most dynamic, impressive employees of Richmond City government. It is shocking (though, maybe, sadly, not surprising) to realize that members of the city council or planning commission would dare to publicly call for the dismissal of a lauded public employee when the entire city knows that they are doing so simply to line their pockets with the bounty their clients will no doubt pay for Flynn’s head. I bet even Rod Blagojevich would be shocked by such blatant abuse of power.
Good luck Ms. Flynn!!
#9 is absolutely right. PointcounterPoint is so transparent and inconsistant,today he the great defender of zoning, just not when it comes to Echo Harbour’s request for change or override of 3 or 4 major zoning regulations. This must be EH and Baskervil’s new talking point and strategy to get rid of Rachel Flynn. Everyone who doesn’t work for one of the above please let the Mayor and City Council know of your support for Ms. Flynn.
This move against RF is a tragedy on a personal and professional basis for the entire City of Richmond. Finally, when we get somebody in place with vision, integrity, gumption and guts – that we need to make progress and move ahead – we simply eat them and spit them out. Was it not less than 6 months ago in City Council she was recognied by the very same people for her work both inside and outside the box for the City and Region? How short the memory is – when the pockets are empty?
PointCounterPoint: Rachel is fighting for and trying to get city council to enforce what was agreed upon in the downtown master plan. She isn’t just making stuff up here.
I called Betty Squire first thing this morning to try to find out her position. Her aide took my number and said she would call me back. I hope she does! Does anyone have any idea of her position on Echo Harbor?
Personally, I didn’t understand the about face Ms. Flynn took on the Oakwood Heights project. As a result, I did not expect her to take the position she did on the amendments to the master plan. I had assumed that she was pro-developer regardless of the historic nature and protective overlay of this region.
Taking a stand is difficult in most circumtances. I applaud her rejection of the amendments to the city’s master plan. Rachel made that stand knowing all too well the size and influence of the opposition to her opinion. Tyler’s voice does not carry much weight but he should be ashamed of his statement. A person should not be in fear of losing their job for DOING their job.
I’d much rather have someone making a stand for what they believe in working for the city over a “tool” put in place to move along an agenda.
Email, call and write the Mayor’s office. You can email your thoughts to your council person, or all of city council as a whole but that may be falling on deaf ears. I’m sure the local news would pick up the story if we, the citizens called with our concerns.
PointCounterPoint – would you mind listing the printed law you are referring to?
Well I don’t like Flynn. She is arrogant and has a nasty personality sort of like the folks on the hill.She needs to go. She should have left with the Wilder administration. Goodbye Rachel.Get out of Richmond with your nasty attitude.She is also a liar.
Remember Ms. Betty Squire, 7th District Rep., is on the City Council and votes. As Echo Harbour is in her District, Ms. Squire opinion and position carries a whole bunch of weight with the Council.
If you have an opinion, don’t just post it here but also write or call her. She needs to hear from the folks in the 7th on both sides of the issue.
I support Rachel Flynn! I hope the council members lose their seats. This is turning their backs on the people they represent.
#15 ShockoeBottomDweller… you are a rock star.
The problem with Richmond is that the old guard tends to stiffle “vision” – in favor of a neverending petty game of one-up-manship and look-out-for-me-ship.
Do you realize that this area was colonized BEFORE Boston? We have loads of history from the Colonial, Revolutionary, and Civil War periods. And we have a number of great colleges & businesses and historic neighborhoods in the area. And the river? the parks? SOOOOO much potential here.
But Richmond has been too poorly managed to become a “great” destination city – cosmopolitan, forward looking, but with lots of well preserved history -like a Boston.
The difference?
Leadership, cooperation, integrity, and… vision.
I support Flynn, the master plan, and even Oakwood. I’ll be contacting Squire’s office.
The key thing is you look at other Cities they are overdeveloped we have a chance to do it right and that is what the Master plan is for.
A little bit of Downtown Master Plan history. Last fall, the deadline set by the Code of Virginia for approval of the DMP was approaching, and there were still about four issues to resolve. Mrs. Graziano took over the role as patron of the plan for purposes of getting it passed, with the clear, and well-announced understanding that council would immediately start the process of amendment to resolve those points. Riverfront development (read Echo Harbour) was one; several of the others dealt with the flood plain in Shockoe bottom, connectivity of streets and alleys and Mrs. Flynn’s insistent that the Commonwealth appoint an Architect of the Commonwealth. The Land Use Committee met in open session several times during the fall, and came forward with recommendations for amendments. Mrs. Flynn took part in the process, and either agreed or acquiesed (sp). Then the amendments went to the planning staff to prepare actual language for consideration of the planning commission. In at least three cases, Mrs. Flynn brought forth language that was either different or directly contrary to the language directed by city council, and she presented the new language to the planning commission without telling them of the contradictions. When the CPC discovered the Flynn changes, they rejected most of them for language much closer to the orginial intent of council, or to a compromise position. Simply put, Mrs. Flynn was so passionate that she behaved dishonestly. Rachel is far and away the most intelligent, best educated and most passionate Director of Planning Richmond has enjoyed in many years, if not ever. But she has let her belief in her own vision blind her to other voices, other visions, and that has led her to behave unethically. I can fogive the outburst at the public hearing two weeks ago. Who has not said things they wish unsaid? What is not forgivable is the attitude lying behind the words. At the end of the day, she is an employee, not a policy maker.
Ron,
Do you offer your erudite opinion as a citizen or government employee? Does your opinion also reflect that of the esteemed Mrs. Graziano?
Thanks in advance for the clarification.
At the end of the day, why pay a salary for a Director of Planning Commission when it seems she has to constantly make happen what Council orders, especially one who is intelligent well educated and passionate. They could save a lot of $$ on the budget by hiring a layman/yesman/woman. I do get that there is some compromise, but where do you draw the line?
Policy-Maker Hall of Shame Nominees:
For “Mendacity and Amoral Politicking” –Bruce Tyler, Marty Jewell, Reva Trammell and Doug Conner.
For “Offensive Spineless Silence” —
Dwight Jones, Charles Samuels, Chris Hilbert, Kathy Graziano, Ellen Robertson, Betty Squire
I don’t know what Mrs. Graziano’s opinion might be, although I know she has been Mrs. Flynn’s “godmother” in Richmond city government, and helped her weather the last months of the Wilder Administration. I personally am happy to be a city employee. Public Service is a good thing.
Betty Squire, 7th District Rep., is on the City Council and our Rep. As Echo Harbour is in her District, Ms. Squire position on this issues carries lots of weight with the Council.
If you have an opinion, write or call her. She needs to hear from you in the 7th – on both sides of the issue.
Mayhaps “godmother” as in “The Godfather” is more like it. She busted Tyler off of committees because he had been “talking bad” about her.
Regardless, she is eerily silent and she is the Council President.
From the City Ordinance…aka the law?
(a) The head of the department of community development shall be the director of community development, who shall be appointed by the chief administrative officer. The director shall be a person trained and skilled in city planning.
(b) The director shall have general management and control of the department and, subject to applicable personnel policies adopted by ordinance, shall appoint and remove all officers and employees of the department. The director shall have power to make rules and regulations consistent with the Charter, this Code and other city ordinances for the conduct of the department’s business and shall have such other powers and duties as shall be assigned by this division or by ordinance.
Re-read the last sentence once or twice. No power derived except what is permitted by and consistent with the law.
Ron your entitled to your opinion but it seems to me that it is City Council is against Rachel Flynn because they had no intention of sticking with the Master Plan. She is immune to be lobbied bought and payed for by developers. Elected officials who make policy on contributions.
I’m not sure “City Council” is against Rachel. SOme members clearly are; they have outed themselves. But Mr. Samuals and Hilbert and Mrs. Squire were silent; Mrs. Graziano and Mrs. Robertson appropriately said it a personnel matter for the Administration. It is unfortunate that some members would write this Mayor a letter about Rachel, then leak it, when they said nothing for four years about Harry Black and some of the Wilder cronies.
If you look at City Council’s budget amendments, you will see the $3 million the Mayor allcoated to purchase the Tarmac site (Echo Harbor) has been re-routed by Council “leadership” to projects in each of the nine Council districts to spend as each rep sees fit. Remember the Paygo scandals? They’re baaaaaaack!
I’m gland Flynn is standing up to the these people. I hope she does stay she has done a good job. And I hope the memebers of council that called for her to go, go away themselves.
Richmond needs to keep or get more green space. Thank you Ms. Flynn.
“No power derived except what is permitted by and consistent with the law.”
okay, if that is the case isn’t that what she did with Echo Harbour, which is why she now is being chastised? laws or no laws, there still is a substantial amount of politics going on for big development, including what most probably happened at Oakwood Heights.
#38 if you think the council members leaked these memos you are incredibly naive. This is classic Flynn p.r. work. She contacted the media with the memos to create the firestorm to cover her ass. Yeah, yeah Flynn is the poor victim of the big mean developers and corrupt politicians. She is standing up for the little guy – she’s our hero. You people have no idea what you are talking about. Re-read #29. Just because you don’t like what was said doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Anyone who has worked with Flynn – really worked with her, not oohed and aahed over her “vision” – knows she is devoid of ethics, morals and, frankly, original ideas. She has no issue lying – she will look someone dead in the eye and absolutely lie. She is a tyrant and fake. This has nothing to do with EH (I’m not a supporter) this has to do with a corrosive influence in city government. If you don’t think her friends don’t benefit from the “strong” stands she takes, again, you are incredibly naive (I am not referring to EH – I am referring in general terms). Flynn’s friends and “supporters” absolutely benefit from her influence and her action. Just because you like what you think she stands for doesn’t mean you shouldn’t dig deeper and ask some tough questions.
Bob,
There is a process for addressing Echo and pretty much any project that doesn’t conform to zoning. It is called a Special Use Permit.
While Rachel may not personally approve of Echo, it is not her prerogative to NOT process the project under this application. She can certainly provide her recommendations to council and others. However it is her job to follow the planning commission’s recommendations and the rule of law.
BTW- For all those that are opposing the construction of “additional housing units” in the Bottom area because “the need isn’t there” and “the developers will lose money” or “we already have enough apartments/condos”, how come you guys weren’t speaking against the recently approved 204 unit project that was submitted via a Special Use Permit at 318 North 18th Street? Is it just certain housing projects that you oppose or all of them? (Ordinance 2009-45)
Steve You are hilarious you turned her into Hitler’s right hand City Designer and she will have power at all cost and you call her supporters Naive? Far as I can see she has not been on some Power grabbing scheme nor has she created an Iron Robot to do her will. She is doing her job one that was created to be sure that we did not overdevelop our city and lets face it another large Overpriced Condo Complex counts as over development.
I am still trying to figure where they plan to find people to live in Rocketts Landing,Tobacco Row, The expensive parts of Church Hill and now Echo park,Shockoe Properties and The New complex next to the Firestation. when there are Condo Complexes that have vacancies right now in Shockoe Bottom. In this case if you build it they will leave it empty applies
Steve You are hilarious you turned her into Hitler’s right hand City Designer and she will have power at all cost and you call her supporters Naive? Far as I can see she has not been on some Power grabbing scheme nor has she created an Iron Robot to do her will. She is doing her job one that was created to be sure that we did not overdevelop our city and lets face it another large Overpriced Condo Complex counts as over development.
I am still trying to figure where they plan to find people to live in Rocketts Landing,Tobacco Row, The expensive parts of Church Hill and now Echo park,Shockoe Properties and The New complex next to the Firestation. when there are Condo Complexes that have vacancies right now in Shockoe Bottom. In this case if you build it they will leave it empty applies.
Considering 18th Street Required no zoning issues and they plan do it on their own dime if they want to build tons of Useless Expensive Condos let them. Their money but considering we have so many Vacancies around Shockoe Bottom I really don’t get this need to have more stuff that is out of most people’s price range
Post #42 gave me pause. If steve statements weren’t true, they would be libelous, wouldn’t they?
the so called city “master plan” (the general assembly requires a comprehensive plan) lacks elements required by the general assembly. that is one reason for it going back and forth. the city can call the comprehensive plan anything they want, in this case, a “master plan” but it still must meet the test of virginia law. i expect that flynn knows all of this but it is just not what she wants to do.
it is just more of the abuse of power that came from the previous mayor, when he (the mayor) told developers that they would not work in/for the city if bfe construction was involved in the hilton hotel.
an example of “doing it my way”, flynn refuses to have the comprehensive plan say that the Commercial Slave Trade archaeology area exists in shockoe bottom.
check out the comprehensive plan required elements in the code of va. then check the most recent “master plan” and see how many elements are there.
shockoe bottom dweller. so if the 18th street project had no zoning issues, why the “special use permit” with exceptions to exceed building height, exceed parking requirements, allow 519 sf apts (something no one else was allowed to do) with a no recourse loan from hud. IT IS on your dime.
sbd, by the way flynn didnt bother to tell the planning commission the 18th st project was in the commercial slave trade archaeology area. and has refused to recognize it, after being notified by hud
So again I ask:
BTW- For all those that are opposing the construction of “additional housing units†in the Bottom area because “the need isn’t there†and “the developers will lose money†or “we already have enough apartments/condosâ€, how come you guys weren’t speaking against the recently approved 204 unit project that was submitted via a Special Use Permit at 318 North 18th Street? Is it just certain housing projects that you oppose or all of them? (Ordinance 2009-45)
Hey Bill that is good info to know and That does change my opinion of the project and shows me Flynn is not playing by the same rules but seeing how City Council plays they seem to set to out do each other. It is now a case of who is the lessor of two evils and I choose neither
Steve,
How much money do you stand to make from the libelous ad hominem attacks on Flynn?
You and the late Rev. Jerry Falwell seem be of the opinion that Flynn is, if not, the anti-Christ, then at least his sister.
Get real, man. She is neither as good nor as bad as people are making her out to be. That said, the lady doesn’t deserve to be treated this way.
I admire her courage. Just because I think she is right on this issue, doesn’t mean I agree with her other stances. But on this issue, she is exactly right.
I credit Mr. Wilder with much of the staff turnover and tumult that has infected City Hall. And, just because Dwight Jones IS NOT Doug Wilder, that doesn’t mean he is a good mayor. He’s just different and from the looks of things, the more things change the more they stay the same.
Jones’ silence on this matter and that of Graziano is deafening. No matter how one looks at this, it is shameful. Utterly shameful and sad.
Bill, a small point that does not address your major issue. The downtown master plan is not the comprehensive plan required by state law…it is an element of it. To comply with the code, there will have to be plans enacted for the rest of the city as well and I am told that effort is under way. These are not to be confused with the additional plan Mrs. Sobertson wants to fund for Shockoe Bottom. What she is seeking is really more of a development plan, and not subject to the requirements of the state code.
Richmond is underdeveloped. More development is good for downtown and the surrounding neighborhoods. Thank goodness there are developers willing to invest in the city. Council is right to approve these developments. Residential development is needed to attract future commercial development. Master plans are fluid documents and can and should be amended regularly.
We NEED appropriate and responsible development, not just DEVELOPMENT. Having millions of condos downtown does absolutely nothing for the area if no one wants to live in them, or NEAR them.
so david,
if the downtown element (your downtown master plan) of the comprehensive plan fails to meet the requirements of a comprehensive plan (say less than what is required), then once all of the other geographic plan pieces, when lumped together, to make a comprehensive plan, then they make a valid comprehensive plan?
can you do that with a venn diagram?
i doubt that ms robertson will do a venn diagram cause (if it was possible for her to do it) it would, well you know.
but look at the requirements from the general assembly and it says consider future development. the comprehensive plan is not just to have a justification for a zoning ordinance. it is a stick/carrot for local govt to plan/see a vision for the future.
prior to any of this “downtown master plan” stuff, it was already recognized (1) commercial slave trade is a cultural/historic resource in the area (2) a new ball park here had already been proposed (3) money had already been spent on the main st station multi-modial trans center.
so why were do these things not stand out in the master plan (that as you say) will be a part of the comprehensive plan?
Gee, David. Sounds like you and several members of City Council (nad the still-silent Mayor and Council President) have found a loophole big enough to drive several wrecking balls and a few dredging cranes through. Pity.
Why can’t we look at having baseball on the Boulevard and a cultural/historic resource in Shockoe Bottom? It doesn’t have to be either/or.
I want more for our city than this perpetual fighting over who gets a bigger piece of the action. Wouldn’t it be nice to have City leadershp looking at the BIG PICTURE?
Why is it whenever a politician is about to act like a jerk he or she prefaces their comment with the word “respectfully”? Is this a form of political humor?
It is hypocrisy, Silver. Plain and simple.
But, saying “hypocritically,” for the truth-challenged is such a mouthful.
Wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear a politicoe announce: “Disingenuously speaking, Sir/Madam ……”
Silver, from another view point “respectfully†spoken depends what side of the fence you are on. If you say “respectfully†and then act like a jerk, it might demonstrate complete disdain for the person/authority spoken to. If the speaker does not act like a jerk, it might demonstrate an attempt to bond with the person/authority spoken to. Rhys isaac in “the transformation of virginia 1700 something to 1700 something†describes the factors of cultural communication in virginia that are still with us.
And since you get into poli-speak sometimes it could be a worthwhile reference. Check it out and use some of the stuff on the city council. You will blow them away. No shit. Some might come up afterwards to talk. I bet you could sell them mao’s little red book of quotations. Try it
Respectfully speaking, I do not think Bill understand either Mao’s Little Red Book of Quotations or the members of this City Council.
Actually, Fed Up, I think bill understands all too well.
Actually to be precise, it’s “The Transformation of Virginia 1740-1790″ by Rhys Isaac and it won a Pulitzer Prize.
Fed Up, frankly I think before I’d post against anyone who has read it, I’d read it myself so that I could speak about it intelligently. And given what I know about it, I don’t think the cliff notes version will do it, one might actually have to read the real book.