Sunday, September 13, 2009

County must move past the 4-3 split

Comment: The following comment: "No matter how much Ecker, Ingram and Davis want to see their districts more fully developed, large businesses and industries have little interest in locating in small towns like Gretna and Hurt" is not true. The R&B forgot to mention Blairs. Blairs is not a town but a district that is next door to Danville, Blairs has the Danville Expressway close by. Gretna and Hurt are located on Rt. 29 (Future Interstate part of 85), near the Danville Expressway, near water and electric companies. Pittsylvania County is larger than the City of Danville and Danville status may change because of the population drop. Danville needs to work with all our supervisors not just Harville.


By Published by The Editorial Board

Published: September 13, 2009

Pittsylvania County ought to be big enough for the seven personalities that sit on the Board of Supervisors.

But with many votes ending in a 4-3 split between supervisors representing the “northern” and “southern” ends of the county, the question that has to be asked is what would happen if that delicate political balance was disturbed.

“Northern end” supervisors Marshall Ecker, Hank Davis and Fred Ingram are frustrated by the amount of attention — and money — that has been spent to develop joint economic development projects with Danville. For them, the phrase “Dan River Region” loses relevance as one moves north on U.S. 29.

But those economic development projects are the cornerstone of the regional plan that has brought thousands of new jobs to the Dan River Region since 2004. City-county cooperation has become a model for other parts of the state.

The state government wants local governments to work together because it knows industries want to locate near population centers — and they don’t want to get caught up in local bickering.

Danville-Pittsylvania County economic development cooperation has been held up as a model for the rest of Virginia by no less than Gov. Timothy M. Kaine.

It’s a stark, yet positive, change for a state long known for bitter city-county rivalries.

But does the county’s support for its economic development plan hang by a single vote? If so, that’s a pretty shaky majority.

Board Chairman Coy Harville and supervisors James Snead, William Pritchett and Tim Barber must work more closely with Ecker, Davis and Ingram to dial back some of the animosity while finding a way to get some “northern end” projects done, even if they can’t be done in the next year or two.

Clearly, this is part of Harville’s job description.

As the political leader of the Board of Supervisors, Harville has to find a way to smooth ruffled feathers and address real concerns. He can’t afford to risk having the economic development work of the past 10 years abandoned — or scaled back — if just one seat on that four-member majority changes.

No matter how much Ecker, Ingram and Davis want to see their districts more fully developed, large businesses and industries have little interest in locating in small towns like Gretna and Hurt. The county is right to place most of its efforts — in the short run — where they have the best chance for success.

But in the long term, the best thing for Pittsylvania County is for all of its supervisors to feel like their communities are benefitting from that success.

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/editorials/danville_editorials/article/county_must_move_past_the_4-3_split/13822/

No comments: