It is about time that the public was allowed to have a say! Four months into the work of the Task Force we have largely been muzzled, allowed only to submit some written questions and colllectively given only 30 minutes to ask quick questions at a single meeting.

And you know what we're going to say right? Save the Green Belt; don't transmute "transit-oriented" development into some inchoate "transit-friendly" concept; and pay attention to asbestos in the soils and the stream running through the property.

But while I know that these sentiments will be overwhelming presented tomorrow, I do wonder how much all this is just window-dressing. After all, Joan DuBois has made it plain that this is only, yes "only" a recommendation to be made by the Task Force.

Methinks the fix is in already. No wonder people are angry.

My daily commute takes me down Hunter Mill road. It is a pleasent drive in the early morning. I enjoy seeing the beautiful trees, wildlife and historical landmarks on the road. I recall the beautiful farms on Hunter Mill Road. Keep it a two-lane road.

We do not need high-density housing on the large tracts. The board needs to listen to the citizens, not to the developers.

I heard that citizens often had to stand, the rooms were crowded and hot and they could not hear nor see the information being presented to the Task Force.

On the one hand they are told this is an open process and community input is necessary. On the other hand, they are not permitted to speak except through e-mails that are not answered. Citzens were given 30 minutes to ask the developers questions about their plan to put in up to 2000 plus houses where less than 150 are allowed. I intend to attend the next Task Force meetings and see for myself.

We will see what Saturday's visioning workshop brings.

Hopefully FINALLY is wrong and the fix is
not in...........but then.............

The county says it wants public input. But what has the county done to "advertise" the meeting. It will be interesting to see how many show up.

The developers proposal is a flagrant attack on existing residential areas which is set to net hundreds of millions of dollars in profits for the fat cats.

The tract in question is designated by the comprehensive plan to seperate the family neighborhoods which make up the area and the metro development planned for the herndon-reston corridor.

It's part of a cordon which is supposed to prevent reston and tysons from merging over time. Reston and tysons may be destined to become edge-cities, but the rural huntermill road with its quiet family neighborhoods (and the network of similar roads which make up the area) should be protected against aggressive, deep-pocketed developers and unwanted sprawl

page 29 of the upper potomac plan provides a detailed map showing the scale of the proposed urbanisation on the corridor http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpz/comprehensiveplan/area3/upperpotomac.pdf

so why a massive development, outside of walking distance from the metro stations, when space for denser metro-housing development including affordable housing has been identified in the metro-zone and hasn't even been started?

the current proposal seems to be for 2400 units, and given the metro-west experience could easily double to perhaps 4800

this is just a bizarre christmas present to the developers who will see this as a precedent for the whole area

the roads just will not take this amount of extra traffic - has anyone tried commuting through the huntermill road underpass? Do we need more trailers in our schools? Do we need longer commutes?

no good reason has been given why this unprecidented proposal should be even considered by the county, let alone be given its own little fast-track

this is the wrong proposal, in the wrong place at the wrong time

but its time for a line in the sand

keep to the plan, commit to metro-oriented development and not spawl, protect our neighborhoods

in fact, come say it tomorrow and then write to all of your elected officials

just say no!

At the early September meeting (the 4th?) I approached Steve Lee, the consultant hired by the County to convene the focus groups and tomorrow's meeting, and I gave him a www.FairGrowthNetwork.org flyer and offered him a guest column or other highlighted spot on the website to advertise the 10/1 workshop. I wrote a note with my email on it for him too, but I never heard from him.

When I finally got the first email about the 10/1 workshop this past week, I responded, putting Steve Lee's name right in the subject line, and AGAIN made the offer. No response.

Only yesterday were there any announcements in the printed press, and only today did I get another form email announcing the workshop.

Gee, given our recent press release announcing www.FairGrowthNetwork.org, which was even covered by the Post's Fairfax Blog (http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/fairfaxfocus/2005/09/antirail_group_.html#comment-9673712), you'd have thought Mr. Lee would have jumped at this offer of free (and uncensored) advertising.

Hmmm. Does anyone think that the County told Mr. Lee to steer clear of us?

People have to be pretty worked up to write letters to the editor. Here are four sent to local newspapers just this past week, and I could dig up two or three times that many just going back a month or so.

http://www.timescommunity.com/site/tab5.cfm?newsid=15302661&BRD=2553&PAG=461&dept_id=565197&rfi=6

http://www.timescommunity.com/site/tab5.cfm?newsid=15302667&BRD=2553&PAG=461&dept_id=565197&rfi=6

http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=56282&paper=73&cat=110

http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=56284&paper=73&cat=110

If we give in an inch, they will take 100 feet. NO CHANGE TO THE EXISTING ZONING. Of course the hired gun, Circle Point will try and make some people feel VERY important so that " a few" changes are wanted by the community. Then wham...we will get hit hard.

Dear god, if you have any doubt how nasty this can be, go to Gainsville at Route 29 and 66-any time from 8-5. It is a total zoo. You can not get any place. And now, since the developer will pay for a new exit, they can build 3,000 MORE homes on Wellington Road. When will it end? Those people can not get to their homes.

Affordable housing, check out Old Town Alexandria. Once build, those in those affordable housing units were offered big bucks to leave. They did! Now affordable just jumped through the roof......

Joe

For those who are unfamiliar with this area the land in question is zoned for on the order of 200 or so homes. The developers would like to build out over 1800 - 2400 units plus commercial space. Think about that for a moment. 200 households stretched to 2000+. The difference is mind boggling. Assume a conservative average of 5 car trips per household and the added traffic jumps from 1000 new trips to 10,000 new trips. The people who would have lived at the lower density numbering in the hundreds will quickly jump to a higher density number in the thousands. The already overcrowded grade school will be pushed to its limits most likely causing a re-districting, the community will be hit due to the increase in cost of community services and the low density / country like setting current residents so treasure will be forever destroyed.

So who really profits here? Do the math. The land is owned by developers and they stand to make HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS more if they build at the higher density levels. Don't be fooled. This is not about "affordable housing" or work force housing or providing a service to the community. This is about maximizing return on investment.

As this process plays out it is beginning to appear that the Supervisors are operating with some sort of agenda. A growing number of residents feel that instead of responding to citizens concerns, the supervisors have little interest in the desires of their constituents but are more interested in working to facilitate the plans of the developers.

Residents in this area moved here because the comprehensive plan that guides development in the area purposely set up a "green belt" between Reston and Tysons. This area is low density, filled with green and open spaces, and acts as a buffer between the two city centers. Take a look at a map or an aerial photo and you will see the elegance of this thoughtful planning.

What the developers are seeking is not a way to "better the area" but something that goes against the very planning principles that have been in place for decades. Developers see a continuous block of a few hundred acres and see the opportunity to drive their revenues orders of magnitude.

Before you judge the residents of this area as "anti-development" or the "not in my back yard" crowd, drive down Hunter Mill Road. Look at the area and imagine 2000+ units in an area that is zoned for 200. The developer's plans and weak justifications are insulting to one's intelligence and are the result of nothing more than greed.

see you all later today at the event folks

don't forget to hug a developer

Hug a developer? Why? because they have already cut down all of the trees? Ha ha.

Looking forward to this meeting tomorrow.

Since our elected officials no longer represent those that voted them into office, it's so good to see so many citizens assembling for a injection of direct democracy in this confused and misguided special study process.

Make your voice heard.

Should say from a voice in the early am.

I hope the Visioning workshop gives the adjacent neighbors to the "proposed dramatic increase in density project" a chance to be heard.

May their voices rise above the commuters who want to 4-lane Hunter Mill Road so their trip through our neighborhoods will be 5 minutes faster.

It is bad enough trying to get out of neighborhoods such as Tamarack and Wayside without adding an additional 20,000 vehicle trips to the already start and brake gridlock.

How many voices will it take for Supervisor DuBois and Supervisor Hudgins to get the message that their constituents want no change....not even a little bit. Just ask the citizens near Fairlee what happens with a compromise.

Citizens do not want their gridlock plan. Why destroy perfectly good neighborhoods?

Wow -- there is a lot of passion around a lot of worst case scenarios. Today, the property owners can build 150+ homes. They are asking to build as many as 2,400 homes. I don't know any elected official or county staff person who thinks 2,400 is anywhere near serious or relevant. Unfortunately, the community seems to be really focused on the 2,400. It's just a "put out the maximum conceivable number and hope it moves the 'compromise' above what it might otherwise be", so let's stop focusing on 2,400 and focus on something more meaningful.

First, our choices are between (A) 150 with no road safety & flow improvements, no trail connection, no school financial contribution, and no parks/rec requirement, or (B) something above 150 with lots of community investment.

Would all the no growther's really turn down millions of dollars of community improvements if the # was 175 instead of 150? What if it was 250, and it included $750,000 for Wolfrap Elementary, trail connections from all of the landlocked neighborhoods, and a real fix to the safety hazards at Crowell/HM and Sunset/HM?

If the # was 1,000, I would lead the charge against. At 250 with lots of community investment, I'm in. At 750, no way. Depending on what they offer above 250, I might be supportive of more.

It's time to change the discussion from "150 instead of 2,400" to "Here is what I would want to give you 200, and here is what I would want to give you 250, etc." Let's get past the rhetoric and have a real dialogue about trade offs.

Steve you raised some interesting points. However, I believe you need to talk to the people who live around the Fairlee Metro West project. They saw a project grow from 67 housing (the Plan) to residents reluctantly accepting a change for 1110 dwelling units to 2225 dwelling use, plus retail/office/loss of open space, towers, etc.

So the bottom line is...........when the Plan is broken, the door is opened. It is only a matter of time before a developer asks for and the supervisors approve the high density goal....to cram as much housing and commercial in a spot that the developer wanted in the first place.

That developer refused to reduce the density level and the supervisors fell right behind.

The trust factor has been erroded.

I too believe that with billions of developer dollars reaching the hands of a few peple devoted to eventually increase the planned density of the Bachman and Thoburn properties that the "fix" is in.

Steve:

As shown by the Supervisors' actions at Metro West, the Goat Farm and now the Wedderburn replanning, in which the Supervisors specifically and directly have done immense damage to those greater communitees, there is no opportunity for compromise.
Based on those actions, apparently once the flood gates are opened by agreeing to any change, that beciomes the "nose of the Camel under the tent."
The developers have now been hoisted on their own Petard (sp). Now the whole county knows how their neighbors have been treated and continue to be treated.
Fairgrowth has been communicating to people all over. I was at the April neeting and was surprised to hear people from Loudoun County and even Maryland.
I know affordable housing is important. Maybe, together, we could get the developer to build 150 ADUs at the current planning & zoning on the land in question. That would certainly show the community over there that the developres are actually great Americans with a real interest in those who are in need of subsidy to buy houses in FFxCO.

Student

Hundreds of people came to the workshop today. What I heard, both in the initial joint session and in the halls during the break-out groups and afterwards, was a strong consensus to retain the density of the current plan, and to work within that to maximize protection of buffers, habitat, open space, trails, and the environment, and to improve transportation.

I also heard about an ongoing workgroup studying traffic-calming measures for Hunter Mill that I did not know about. Article here: http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?archive=true&article=29419&paper=73&cat=104

I heard a lot of people concerned about schools also.

And of course my own special interest has to do with the stream on the Bachman property and insuring its environmental protection.

Readers can find a good collection of information put together by the Hunter Mill Action Coalition here: http://www.fairgrowthnetwork.org/Network/HunterMillActionCoalition/tabid/1406/Default.aspx

I was at the visioning workshop today. I will be letting the Board of Supervisors know that Cathy Hudgins behaved in quite an unprofessional manner this morning. Her comments were scheduled to be 'welcome and thank you for coming.' Instead she used OUR time to sound off about 'people' lying about the projected density, traffic, etc. numbers --- these numbers come from the county. The 'people' who she is referring to are concerned citizens trying to disseminate information and make sure we know what is happening in our community.

My other major complaint about today's session was the way Circle Point handled the crowd. People were trying to ask questions about the slides and they were rebuffed. "Let me just get through the presentation," said Maryann ? over and over. It may be just a job to her, but it's our lives that are directly affected by all of this. Yet we are not allowed to ask questions! They finally provided a 'Q & A' after the presentation which lasted approximately 5 minutes and consisted of citizens asking their questions, but not getting any answers. It was interesting to note that Supervisor Hudgins had the floor for as long as she wanted, but the citizens had no voice. Wasn't this our turn to speak out?

This was my introduction to the special study players and I have to say that Cathy Hudgins and Circle Point look very bad indeed! I have no idea if Supervisor DuBois was even there.

FYI Ms. Hudgins: I vote and so do my neighbors and my vote will not be for you. Maybe the people in the new high density housing will vote for you --- oh by then hopefully we will have voted you out of office!

Yes, I heard those remarks also and was reminded of of Supervisor Smyth who keeps telling the public that Wedderburn Neighbors has been spreading "misinformation." Here are two newspaper articles in which she does this:

http://www.timescommunity.com/site/tab5.cfm?newsid=15290658&BRD=2553&PAG=461&dept_id=506096&rfi=6

http://www.dcexaminer.com/articles/2005/09/29/news/n_virginia_news/09newsv29streams.txt

Like "Disillusioned" I can prove we did no such thing.

Some facts speak for themselves, but when the Supervisors realize those facts will ignite strong opposition to their pet development projects, they try to suppress them and then accuse citizens of spreading "misinformation" when they try to get the word out. Perhaps they think this is an effective technique to marginalize opposition. Hopefully they are learning now that it does not work.

But, regardless, between the galvanizing efforts of Hunter Mill Action Coalition, this blog, the workshop today, and the continuing communications at www.FairGrowthNetwork.org, the true facts are becoming known.

Poor Cathy Hudgins, She has been sold down the river by her associates on the Board, as Joan DuBois and Gerry Connolly just stood back and let Cathy take the fall.

Sadly, it is probably appropriate she leave after this term.
However we Democrats need to get a suitable replacement. Remember Bob Dix. How about one of the Dems who live in Reston and are active and knowledgeable in community affair, do some informal polls now to see if she will be replaced. Remember, Vienna is pretty much screwed by Cathy and they may be persuaded to hold their nose and vote for a "shudder" Democrat to get her out.

I thought the community visioning workshop went pretty well, considering the tight schedule and the breakneck pace. THe only unwelcome note was the participation of the developers, their lawyers, planners and staff without full disclosure. I think it was fine for them to participate. This is a free country. However, I did not like it that many of them were not upfront and did not disclose that they were there for interests over and above just their own.

I attended the Hunter Mill Visioning Workshop. Citizens holding on to one vision also attended. Their vision, RETAINED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

Citizen after citzen said the same thing. the Plan works, it is not broken and it does contain good planning principles for protecting the Difficult Run Watershed, stable communities and the Virginia Byway and historic Hunter Mill Road.

The revealing news by staff was that at the Wiehle Ave Transit Station already in the Plan, the area is planned for 6000 dwelling units. Based on the type of dwelling units built there could be an additional 60,000 vehicle trips on the local roads...Hunter Mill, Dulles, Wiehle, Sunsrise Valley and Sunset.

This number will total destroy the local roads. Adding 20,000 additional vehicle trips from the HM project would bring traffic to a deadstop. Think about the air quality of all those idling cars.

One participant said, this project should be held back for 60 months until the Wiehle Ave project is designed if not built. The Affordable Housing component could be placed at Wiehle, next to the transit station.

What are some thoughts of others?

I attended the workshop today. When our break-out group made introductions one of the members introduced himself as "representing a land owner". Initially I interpreted this to mean he was there on behalf of a resident who could not attend. However.....as the workshop progressed, I realized that he began to provide input that was essentially the "bullet points" from the developer's proposal. When our group began to work on the final stages of "themes and strategies", 6 out of 7 of us agreed on the theme "no change to the comprehensive plan". He blocked this theme and said he felt the plan should remain flexible. Please note that because he would not agree with everyone else in the group, our facilitator would not record our "no change" theme as the group product. The result is that the Task Force will not know that the majority of our group wanted no changes to the comprehensive plan.

It suddenly clicked that this "owner representative" was not what I initially assumed.
I asked him point-blank if he was representing / working for one of the land bay owners (i.e. developers). He acknowledged that he was.

I find this to be a conflict of interests and highly unethical. He is an agent working on behalf of the developers attending the "community visioning process" to insert the developer's "basis of proposal" messages into the community input.

Think about this.......

The developers make a proposal which can only be carried out with CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN....The county sets up a "community visioning process" to see what the community thinks about changes, and the developers then insert their agents into the community visioning process to insert messages supporting change, and block community messages against change.

If I had gone out and hired people to participate in the "community visioning process" and drive home my messages, I would clearly be operating in an unethical manner. However, that is exactly what it appears the developers have done.

To the visioning survivor. I hope that you reported to the main facilitator that the workgroup facilitator refused to report accurately the conclusion of the group. The Facilitator from CirclePoint and the Task Force members need to have this information. I believe there is a website where you can send a message to staff.

It is okey to a have miniority opinion. I was told that in one group, the developer's agents said they represented the developer. Full disclosure is the honest approach.

To the Post: Thank you for this blog. Without it, we would never have known that a so-called professional facilitator blocked the overwhelming consensus for the will of the developer. Who would have reported it?

I requested on Sept. 9, 2005, to be a participant on the Hunter Mill Project Pedestrian/Bicycilsts/Equestrian Focus Group, and I was accepted. I was given a few days notice about the phone meeting to be held on Sept. 9, 2005, at 6:00 to 7:30 p.m.. On Sept. 9, I received an e-mail cancelling the meeting. I was then sent an e-mail on the same day, at 5:34 p.m., telling me the meeting was on for 6:00. Foolish me, I missed the meeting, because I wasn't reading e-mails then! The importance of the focus groups have been stressed throughout this project! They appear to me to be just a pretense!

Terry -- Here is what I heard about the Pedestrin/Bicyclists/Equestrian Focus Group telcon. Apparently, just two or three people had signed up or RSVPed or something. So staff/consultant decided to cancel the telcon assuming that there was little or no interest from the group. But one of the people who RSVPed and called in really raised a ruckus so the consultant asked her to assemble the focus group members she knew and sent the message and reconvened the focus group. If you have time, please email the staff/person organizing the focus group and let them know about the mishap plus let them know whatyour responses to the focus group questions are.

Terry - take a look at the handouts provided by CirclePoint at the 9/20 "public meeting". It says that the Task Force (appointed by the District Supervisors) and county staff were asked to identify focus group members. Then requests by residents were accommodated if possible. Of my neighbors, most that requested to participate were either ignored or turned away. That includes triatheletes and avid bikers in my neighborhood. At least you had a group - it was a battle to get homeowner representation. Still makes no sense to me that the facilitator thought that was unnecessary. Oh, the notes handed out on 9/22 reference one particular Task Force member (who is NOT a resident of the District she is representing on the Task Force) being asked to identify people with a specific pro-development agenda. Stacking the Task Force and the Focus Groups - stunning, but not altogether surprising.

I attended the Hunter Mill visioning workshop on Saturday, October 1st. I was appalle by the behavior of supervisor Hudgins. She railed against the citizens assembled for disseminating false information. This entire public participation senerio is fraudulent. The break-out group I was in was composed entirely of Hunter Mill Area residents and we all unanimously stated that the comprehensive plan should be maintained.

I was also very shocked to hear that employees of the developer were in attendence and participating in this "community" visioning workshop.

HI,
I am not very good at this. However, I appreciate the opportunity that Steve has provided for a dialog. There are many very eloquent expressions of views that parallel my own and some equally eloquent expressions of views that I have disagreement with.

I am a resident at 'ground zero' living near Hunter Mill and Crowell roads.

Steve Feher, thanks for your article. Reporting on this problem is long overdue in the Washington Post. Why did you not report that the current property owner of the Bachman property purchased it for much beyond its market value(as presently zoned)? In doing this, would it not seem that there is something unusual (to say the very least) going on? Steve, would you purchase something much beyond its market value if you were not fairly confident that you could make changes to increase the profitability?

As a citizen, this makes me very uncomfortable in this entire process.

I do not 'oppose growth of any sort'. I welcome the planned growth as it was originally designed and reflected in the current comprehensive plan. Sure, this will be a change for us as we have grown accustomed to seeing open fields and trees on this undeveloped property. These sort of changes are inevitable. We are not 'welcoming' them, but we recognize that it must occur. This sort of planned growth can be accommodated by roads, schools, parks and other infrastructure needs. Yes, it will have significant impacts. The low density planned would not require water or sewer additions that the proposed high density will require.

Vienna was selected by Money magazine as the fourth most desirable place to live. If the current unbridled growth and development continues, I wonder, in a few years, would this still be the case?

I have been to most of the task force meetings and other related meetings. The presentations I have seen do not strike me as providing 'affordable housing'. For the gentleman talking about something someone earning 50K could purchase, I doubt seriously that you will find it in this 'proposed' development.

Believe me, if this proposed 'smart growth' is allowed to proceed, it will very definitely adversely impact my quality of life. It will also, however, add to the adverse effect that is spreading throughout Fairfax County.

The supervisors need to place other considerations on par with profitability and tax revenue from intensely dense development breaking with the comprehensive plan.

Thanks.........................

I am disgusted that two out of state developers come into Fairfax County and select a site to burst up neighborhoods.
They will do their development that produces 20,000 additional vehicle trips /day on HMR and neighborhood roads. They then disappear with their pockets stuffed with $$$$$$ and Hunter Mill residents and Fairfax County residents end up footing the bill for roads, parks, schools, and other services.

Could someone please explain why Supervisor Hudgins and Supervisor DuBois buy into "zoning for dollar" plan?

I live off of Hunter Mill Road and I attended the visioning workshop on the 1st and every member of my break-out group was strongly in favor of maintaining the current Comprehensive Plan. We did not have county employees in our group though, or ringers placed there by the developers. Like others, I am not anti-development per se but I do not like the way the BOS has been trampling the citizenry and the process they have in place currently to evaluate the devlopment bid for the Hunter Mill area is biased toward mega-development. Why have they consistantly voted to maintain the Comprehensive Plan in the past and why not now? As another person posted earlier this is not a parcel of land that is going to have affordable "workforce" housing. The devloper spent too much money on the land and will not be able to afford to put in affordable "workforce" housing. This is all about greed (developers) and other agendas (BOS). I for one am going to try and vote my Supervisor out next time around.

Suggest that everyone read the most recent article by Ari Cetron in the Vienna Connection this week. Should receive a copy in the mail on Friday or pick up a free copy at Whole Foods, some drugstores, etc.

Steve, will the Washington Post publish a similar article?

Thanks for providing the site.

To HM Vision Participant. There is a pattern that is occurrig......a demographic accident is happening in our communities.........the character of a community is compromised by those who profit from putting in high density development and uses.

Now would someone answer this question...who profits....the developer or the Supervisors whose district where the high density development occurs?

How does a Supervisor profit...........

From elsewhere in http://blogs.washingtonpost.com, by Steve Fehr:

Careful readers of The Reston Times may have noticed the full page color ad in Wednesday's paper taken out by K. Hovnanian Companies and WCI/Renaissance Communities.
The ad, on page A13, promotes the Parkview community, the proposed 226-acre development near Hunter Mill and the Dulles Toll Road. This is the project that is the target of criticism by many residents of the area who object to as many as 1,800 homes in their low density community.
What's striking about the ad is that it presents the Parkview project as if it has already been approved. It shows a photo of four townhouses as if they have been built. It describes Parkview as a community "taking shape" and "whose time has arrived."
But the project is a long way from approval. The county Board of Supervisors would have to change the comprehensive plan and approve the developer's rezoning request before Parkview could "take shape." The board probably won't get to that until next year.
Here is a text of the ad:

From another elsewhere in the Fairfax Blog.

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/fairfaxfocus/2005/10/dubois_aide_lea.html

I attended the meeting at Madison last night October 17, 2005. The homeowners of the Hunter Mill area came out in big numbers. It is clear that this community is overwhelmingly rejecting the proposal of increased density housing on Hunter Mill Road. There were a few proponents of increasing the density. None of whom that came forward to speak lived close by. I wonder who were they? It seemed odd to me that someone living in Arlington would drive to Vienna to attend this meeting. We (the homeowners) were only made aware of this meeting through neighborhood action groups. It seemed odd that they would take to the microphone in the midst of such an upset crowd of homeowners to insist that condos and a strip mall should be erected on this pastoral site. Are there people other than those profiting from this development that could truly state with passion that this site is in need of a grocery store? We, the home owners were scolded for being unwilling to hear these proponents of over development. We were referred to as being "disingenuous". We are simply trying to protect our homes and the community we live in. I wondered what could be more genuine. I noticed as some of these proponents filed out they seemed to know eachother. Disingenuous may have been the right word just aimed at the wrong people.

I agree, Homeowner Huntermill! These individuals did seem to know each other.....much too much of a cozy relationship, don't you think? Not only that, but some of the members of the Task Force (those who I think don't want to keep the current Comprehensive Plan) seem a bit too cozy, too! I think the "staging" aspect of this whole "Visioning Process" extends to the members of the Task Force.

I ask the same thing you do....who are they? What are their connections to either the developer or development in general? Something doesn't sit right....these people, whom I don't know, are supposed to fairly represent the communities involved. Uh, I don't think so! I hope others are seeing this, too. Someone needs to fully investigate this cast of Task Force members. Just how much have the ones conducting this process influenced who is on this panel?

The one word that comes to mind is "manipulation." Do they really think we will allow ourselves to be manipulated this way? Do they think that we won't speak up about it if we are inadvertently manipulated?

They...those that choose to manipulate...will have their work cut out....we have done our homework!