homes that are geographically separated from the main downtown corridor by roads and geography, just like the FHA recommended.
This hyper concentration of apartments can cause lower health outcomes over time. In Richmond, there are blocks of "affordable housing" apartments that were built with no AC, no landscaping, no attention to mitigation of heat.
On current heat maps they are bright red, where more affluent areas, with mixed housing are so much cooler they read blue on a color map. Heat is a known killer and as climate change increases these areas will only get worse.
What can be done about this?
The historic impacts of direct and indirect racial and economic segregation will be hard to undo, but people are trying. Modern zoning trends have moved toward Form-Based zoning that allows for a better mix of multifamily and single-family homes based more on conformity of form rather than on occupancy.
An example of this would be a three-story apartment building with 6-12 apartments situated in a neighborhood that contains two and three-story homes as well as blocks of townhomes averaging 2 to 3 stories. This mix allows for people of various economic and social backgrounds to be able to live and enjoy the same amenities.
Reducing Parking minimums and height restrictions can help as well as reducing lot size requirements and setbacks.
But there are still a lot of pitfalls, and our city is not immune to them. Zoning can still be used to divide the haves from the have-nots if it's improperly applied. Zoning that regularly requires or allows exceptions is inherently economically biased. Asking for a zoning exception takes time and money, so it disproportionately benefits the wealthiest folks who can work the system to meet their needs.
Housing affordability in general is also a huge concern in our area, as land is naturally limited. Even if we build, building itself can cause affordability issues with developers motivated to make the most money possible and not to build for the masses.
We are limited in what we can do in Fredericksburg at this time to address this because of the Dillon Rule, which does not allow our city to create certain kinds of rules and regulations. A prime example of this is rent control or affordable housing requirements.
We do not have the ability to place these requirements on builders, and instead have to offer them carrots and incentives to motivate them, which do not always match their main economic motivations. Changing this at the state level may be possible in the coming years and would be helpful as costs continue to increase.
Part 4. Page 2 of the FDC ‘Racism & Zoning’ handout read out loud at the 8-13-25 Fred Dems mtg (cont’d):
colors to designate lending suitability. The portions outlined in red were "hazardous" to indicate that they had the greatest risks, and mortgages should not be issued in those areas. These maps were later adopted by the FHA and Veterans Administration and used by the federal government to reinforce segregation in housing on a federal level during the New Deal, when the Federal government started to back loans as part of the recovery from the Great Depression.
The FHA created the "Underwriting Manual" that, despite the aforementioned Supreme Court case, explicitly stated that the newly federally backed mortgages should not be provided to black families seeking to relocate into predominantly white areas. The reasoning behind this was that their presence would reduce property values, but this was a presumed reason, not one based in fact.
Research now indicates that property values may actually have increased because black home buyers paid larger sums for homes in white areas and drove up the comps for anyone wishing to sell or buy.
In 1968, the Fair Housing Act was passed, which outlawed redlining practices, but the reality is that even though loans could no longer be denied, the impact that these laws had was profound and lasting.
Today, Black Americans as a whole make 60% of what White Americans do annually, but only have 5% of the cumulative wealth. This disparity can be directly attributed to being shut out of purchasing homes when they were affordable and to the fact that the properties they did own had reduced appreciation due to the past effects of redlining.
And let's not forget: Property taxes pay for your services in most states. That means when an area is deemed "hazardous" or "blighted," the property values fall, and the money collected in those areas is reduced and thus funding for schools, roads, sidewalks, parks, maintenance, and transportation is also reduced. It can have a cumulative effect of making the areas less and less desirable as years pass.
Modern Zoning can be still weaponized and is.
While not as obvious as the above examples, modern zoning has a lot of insidious issues that can amplify disparities. Simple things like lot sizes, minimum setbacks, restrictions to build only single-family homes, or even parking requirements can make the affordability of neighborhoods intentionally out of reach for people of less means.
Remedies like subsidized housing are also harder in single-family home zoning, because they are inherently cost-prohibitive. In addition to that, zoning requirements like special use permits and historical protections that often fall over wealthier and whiter areas leave development of density to poorer, less advocated for areas, even if they too have historic roots worth protecting.
And the cycle of apartments being built away from single-family homes during the FHA redlining period continued long after the practice was officially disbanded. Bragg Hill, and Fall Hill are examples where there are historic and current massing of multifamily
Part 3. Page 1 In tying in to the way this 7-0 Council voted ' all in for DATA CENTERS' and not sticking to spending the time needed to get solid standards' specific language in the DATA CENTERS Performance and Water Services Agreement, their candidate clones will vote in a majority (maybe not the 7-0 because this is also a very controversial issue, like Data Centers) for 'ZONING FOR ALL'. ZFA. The following 4 pages were read out loud to the attendees at the 8-13-2025 Fredericksburg Democratic Committee/FDC meeting to get voters ready for a post-Election Council vote for ZFA.
I made a comment to the entire FDC gathering, after it was read, that this read-aloud was done to prepare the attendees that the city appears ready to move to 'Zoning for All' Urbanism. As per this FDC handout, that means taking away current R-4 zoning for single-family homes in FXBG neighborhoods to put a R26 apt/mixed use next to your home. See p. 3 paragraph 2 of this handout for details.
As happened at the 3-6-2024 Arlington Co Planning Commission mtg (watch it on YouTube as Fredericksburg Neighborhoods Coalition members have done repeatedly to note methodology and strategy), the church groups will be rallied to come out and pit against the homeowners who are objecting to taking away R-4 Zoning and gutting neighborhoods, by portraying them as racists who won’t share their property with ‘people of various economic and social backgrounds to be able to live and enjoy the same amenities’ (as cited in this handout, same paragraph).
This is another YIMBY ploy, use the church groups, as happened in the DATA CENTER vote, but this time the issue is 'ZONING FOR ALL" to destroy intact neighborhoods, by eliminating their R-4 zoning to add more DENSITY in them.
All people, regardless of race, care about their major life investment, their home. Refer to the effort expended by African-American residents in Fairfax County to work towards ‘historic designation’ for their historic ‘Gum Springs’ & ‘Randall Estates’ neighborhoods.
'Gum Springs' and 'Randall Estates' residents didn't put up with the Democrat attempts to remove their residential zoning so those ‘1-800-we pay cash for your home’ vultures can come in and put up ‘apt bldgs and ‘blocks of townhouses’ (mentioned in this handout) in your neighborhoods because R-4 Zoning has been removed.
For Pete’s sake, Sept 19 through Nov 4, don’t take the Fred Dem ballot handed to you with the names bubbled in for FDC endorsement and vote that YIMBY Dem slate.
Or take it and vote opposite for the BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY candidates.
Whatever you do, don’t leave your LOCAL candidate selection blank or write in 'Mickey Mouse' because you’re fed up with dirty politics in the city.
This city election is going to determine FXBG as 'a mirror of Alexandria', urban growth, YIMBY influence, and Zoning for All.
or you voters, including the renters, reject parts of it, and vote 'Don't Fairfax Fredericksburg!'.
You have the Power to vote for candidates who have experience and do right by the city. They will add BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY to dais business: 1. Ken Gantt, 2. Anne Little, 3. Matt Kelly, and 4. Jesse Dominguez.
You a UMW student voting? You want to come back to your 10-year reunion and see these DENSITY builds in the city and look at one another and say, ‘what happened to Fredericksburg? It’s not as charming as it used to be. Ugh, another NoVA’.
UMW students and Ward 2 residents: Then vote for BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY on Council. Those who know and understand the principles of 'Sensible' Growth.
and not these YIMBYs who have the FDC endorsement. (Office of Special Counsel still hasn't issued its official letter on HATCH Act employees status in a Partisan race which includes an interpretation that the FDC endorsements on HATCH act employees still stand because FDC rescind was not done properly).
DO NOT VOTE for these Pro-Density candidates who are slick enough to tell you that's not them. They won't vote that way. Who me? Not me. Couldn't be. They care about you. Nah, they have handlers:
They're going to learn how to spin a controversial vote so it's a 4-3 majority and get this 'Zoning for All' passed.
The writing on the wall is there with releasing this handout and making sure it was read out loud, every single, signaling word, to attendees so they vote for the endorsed Dem ballot candidates.
As Hamilton says, ‘RISE UP’. Don't throw away your shot:
Vote for 'BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY' on Council.
Do NOT vote for these candidates who have the Fred Dems endorsement. They are going to remove Zoning in neighborhoods. Two were there at the 8-12-25 FDC meeting nodding their heads in agreement. Ward 1: Matt Rowe & Ward 2: Joy Crump.
They’ll spin it for you that they won’t vote for going with 'Zoning for All'. That they’ll listen to the people.
No, they won’t. They'll listen to their ‘echo chamber’, the ones who voted them in, that they're doing the will of the people, just like this current Council did with the DATA CENTERS vote. Their handlers will ensure that messaging happens.
These are the YIMBY Dem candidates who want to change FXBG into ‘a mirror of Alexandria’ and remove R-4 single-family residential zoning out of neighborhoods. These clone candidates have no concept of what they’re doing.
And when asked, do you buy into YIMBY and ‘Zoning for All’ ideology? They will deny it. That instead, they do believe 'all people of various economic and social backgrounds should be able to live and enjoy the same amenities'.
Just as those residents, like me, who live in neighborhoods, believe too.
but these YIMBY Dems-endorsed candidates need to be stopped: They are not going to tear up our neighborhoods by removing our R-4 Zoning to build 'blocks of townhouses' and '3-story apt buildings' in our neighborhoods. (as stated in the 8-13-25 Fred Dems handout).
and they're not going to do it by selling out the neighborhoods close to the rail-line behind The Colonial Tavern and displace current occupants with YIMBYs in their 3-piece suits wanting a quick commute to their jobs in NoVA or Richmond when the new train transit line comes in.
That's what the city of Alexandria did for their Urban renewal. Ran out 16,000 residents, mainly black folks, living in the less affluent neighborhoods so they could move the YIMBYs in.
You hear any of that in their City of Alexandria history marketing? I saw it happen as a high school student in Alexandria. The Sisters of the Holy Cross in Religion Class said, 'look at whose housing is being demolished right now. Think about that. What is happening?'
But actions speak louder than empty words.
Do NOT vote for these YIMBYs endorsed by Fred Dem Committee who will vote to get a pass for a 'No Zoning in 22401' ordinance. Using the same methods that the Dems in Alexandria did. And who now regret doing it because developers swooped in to profit.
Here are the candidates who are endorsed by the Fred Dems to get them to join their All Dems on City Council to do major structural change to FXBG. again they'll deny it. Ploy. They agree with 'Zoning for All'.
Do NOT vote for YIMBY ZFAs: Ward 1: Matt Rowe; Ward 2: Joy Crump; Ward 3: Susanna Finn; Ward 4: Chuck Frye.
Here's the Dem 8-13-25 HANDOUT on ideology of 'Zoning for All'. How ZFA playbook runs it. It is first introduced in the community. Through the local Dem party.
Racism in Zoning, a VERY VERY VERY Abridged Overview. (Written and Read on 8-13-25 by D.D. Lecky):
**| HIGHLY recommend diving into the links I have provided below and exploring the materials in full. I have pulled some segments of this talk directly from some of them but was unable to dive into the immense detail that would be required to do them justice. I also provide you with two books that I think would be very useful to anyone who wants to understand racially motivated zoning and it's modern implications.**
What is zoning?
Zoning is a legal mechanism designed to support balanced and orderly growth in a community. Throughout much of the United States, counties, cities, and towns use local zoning codes and maps to regulate land uses. Zoning typically restricts land uses by district; describes the basic forms, dimensions, and density of buildings; and establishes processes for making changes and approving variations to permitted projects.
How was zoning used to reinforce or even increase racial segregation?
The most direct way that urban governments have attempted to segregate their populations is through the adoption of explicitly racial zoning ordinances. Passed by cities between 1910 and 1917, these ordinances prohibited members of the majority racial group on a given city block from selling or renting property to members of another racial group.
This practice "ended" in 1917 with the landmark Buchanan v. Warley decision, in which the United States Supreme Court struck down a racial zoning ordinance adopted by Louisville, Kentucky. But did it really end?
After this case, cities adopted what were purported to be "non-racial" or "racial blind" zoning policies that were anything but. Harland Bartholomew is a notable figure in St Louis who pioneered some egregious methods of zoning.
He was known for having a "scientific" method of planning that weighed factors like neighborhood conditions, plumbing, housing upkeep, prevailing winds, and light. He used these criteria to declare areas that contained large number of poor and thus black and brown residents as "blighted" a term that he used to evoke a contagion that if not remedied, could spread.
The neighborhoods were often in poor condition, but his zoning did not see this as a community issue to be resolved with assistance and compassion; but rather, they saw these neighborhoods as places where investments would go to die. His work can be directly connected to the idea of Red Lining, a term that was used by HOLC, Home Owners Loan Corporation, which outlined maps with
Part 2 of comment on DATA CENTERS. We need your vote starting Sept 19 with the Early Vote for 'Balance and Transparency' candidates who are informed on the truth about DATA CENTERS. 22401 residents should keep in mind that even though the DATA CENTER vote is now a Done Deal, this current Council was NOT TRANSPARENT with residents/voters/stakeholders. They have their clone candidates coming in if they're not running again. under the guise of it's time to turn Council over to the 'young uns'.
These 'young - uns' are no spring chickens themselves. but their handlers are hoping to fake the younger voters out using AGEISM in selling their clone candidates. Get in the 'young - uns'-the ones who are puppet-mastered by their handlers to vote 7-0 all in! because 'diversity of thought' is not valued on this current Council dais.
That's not healthy to have a council like this. We need BALANCE and TRANSPARENCY on it.
Be savvy like the UMW students on DATA CENTERS who did their research and found out enough info in the FOIA that there was hidden info/emails that revealed what they were doing behind the scenes with the DC honchos.
This Current Council doesn't want you -the voter- to have all the info. When informed residents go to the public comment mic that uses up Planning Commission and City Council time to get their Done Deals passed.
Realize that there are dedicated, engaged residents who show up for almost every single Planning Commission and Council meeting or view Regional Web TV from home to watch-dog them. Vote for Experience and 'Diversity of Thought'. Vote for BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY on Council.
We don't see much of the naive, uninformed people who are tricked to come out to speak at the public comment mic, except when they're whistled for by the handlers of their 'dog and pony' shows to attend the last meeting prior to the Planning Commission or Council vote.
And these residents/stakeholders have no idea that the vote question has been dumbed down for them. Yes/No (hurry up and vote so you don't have the time to think that this vote could be more than what you're being told to do in your vote):
What's your vote on ADUs/Accessory Dwelling Units? What's your vote on DATA CENTERS? When the answers and vote question is: 'is there enough technical language in this document to make sure grandma in the basement ADU has an egress window to crawl out of when there's a fire?' or 'can you see the top of the 8-10 DATA CENTERs near the Fred Nats if you're sitting in a kayak on the Rappahannock River?'
Enough of this 'young uns' need to get on Council. Grandstanding on passing the baton to them. Horse hooey: They're inexperienced, no time in their lives and job to do the 24/7 doc reads, use the 'Father Knows Best' paternalistic approach in governing the citizenry, don't know what they're doing.
and that's where their handlers want them to be. so they can tell them just enough info to get them to vote 7-0 because they have no time in their lives to do the 'deep dives' and 'going down the rabbit hole' to see the other side of the issue. so that FXBG residents/stakeholders get the best deal.
Even in the clone candidates' speeches in neighborhood meetings, the 'young uns'- YIMBYs all endorsed by the divisive Democratic ballot mess up their answers, confuse a building project.
Here's the 22401 Council candidates who have spent hundreds of hours reading documents on city issues, some of whom have been on Commissions. boards for decades. Their Experience matters.
VOTE FOR 'BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY' ON CITY COUNCIL.
Ward 1: KEN GANTT; Ward 2: ANNE LITTLE; Ward 3: MATT KELLY; Ward 4: JESSE DOMINGUEZ.
Ward 3 School Board: SARAH STELMOK
I am a strong 'cradle' Dem, I've knocked 40,000 Planning District doors for Dem candidates since 2007, previous officer, Sec and Vice Chair in the local party. on the DPVA Central Committee. I want 'BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY' on Council and School Board because that's a healthy way of governing.
i respect the City Charter that states: LOCAL elections are non-partisan. Political party has no business making endorsements. That's a candidate taking the 'lazy' way out of not knocking doors. Using a piece of paper handed out on Nov 4 to get a vote because they don't have the time to door knock.
'The Hidden Cost of the Cloud: DATA CENTERS in Virginia' (Piedmont Environmental Council, 2024)
Bring back the 1980s Fredericksburg bumper sticker campaign: 'Don't Fairfax Fredericksburg'. Challengers to the 'Balance & Transparency' Council candidates are YIMBY ideologues:
Part 1 of DATA CENTER comment: Let's be clear. Curry Roberts' livelihood depends on him selling you, the stakeholders, the billion-dollar industry shill on DATA CENTERS.
We FXBG residents as well as others in the Planning District (Fred, Caroline, King George, Spotsy, and Stafford) have caught on to the DATA CENTER billion-dollar industry slick MO to play their mind games with naive, uninformed residents and local govt reps who have no idea either what's happening.
Shortly after Council's 2/25/25 vote, the one that was their usual unanimous 7-0!!!!! We're all in for DATA CENTERS!!!'. (7-0 votes, because this particular Council won't allow any dissent to happen. or to hear the other side of a controversial issue: They have to pose to us as 'We're all in Harmony. as noted in a handwritten note on a FOIA request to see their retreat papers that said their votes have to be unanimous).
Shortly after this 2-25-25 vote, the one in which Susanna Finn voted 'YES! The DATA CENTERS Technical document is ready!' -first as a Planning Commissioner, that the Fredericksburg DATA CENTER regulations were ready to present to Council for consideration when 4 other Commissioners (majority) said they were not. and voted NO.
and then again, Susanna Finn voted as a Council appointee a few weeks later that the language in the standards was fine, the American Rivers organization placed our beloved RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER as 6th on the list for the 'Most Endangered Rivers in the US'.
The Fredericksburg Neighborhoods Coalition has spent hundreds of hours studying DATA CENTERS. Spent hundreds of dollars on FOIAs to get info from the city on what was going on.
We had no idea what a DATA CENTER was back in Jan 2024 when Council took off in pairs to look at DATA CENTERS in Prince William with talks led by the DC honchos selling them.
We FNC members took off to visit the same sites a few days later after finding out from a resident-advocate Bill Wright about how these DATA CENTER admins take local govt officials to the top of the roof so they don't hear the noise on the ground.
But at Bill's advice, we stayed on the ground and talked to residents in the half million dollar neighborhood 'Great Oaks'.. These homeowners/residents can no longer enjoy their backyards because there's DATA CENTERS within 200 ft of their once peaceful respite.
The Constant Noise gives them headaches. They will not move. They're done with moving. They sued the county and after months of litigation, they recently won that they had not received proper notification from the county on a DATA CENTERS meeting.
So rushing a decision on a local govt agenda is also a DC strategy. Just like they did in the city. which even admitted on Regional Web TV that we are on an 'aggressive timeline' to get this done.
So sign up for Prince William resident Bill Wright's email on DCs. Bill is the one who educated all of us in FNC on DC ploys, bait and switch, like Manassas thinking it was getting big buckos from DCs so the tenant put a bank inside the DATA CENTER to avoid paying the promised BPOL Business fees that Manassas was anticipating as revenue.
This DC revenue coming in? Nah, it's our money. The stakeholders' money. We've been billed by Dominion Resources for a while, little bits at a time, within our power bill, across the Commonwealth, even when the locality doesn't even have a DATA CENTER coming in.
That DC fee is 'embedded' within your power bill. The State Corporation Commission is so concerned that Virginia stakeholders are bearing the brunt of the cost of DATA CENTERS that they are pushing legislation in the Virginia General Assembly to make it more transparent that WE are paying for DATA CENTERS and those fees need to be 'decoupled' from our Dominion bills so it's more transparent what is our actual energy usage and what is the DC fee.
So is money coming in from DATA CENTERS? It's a yes/no. It's taxpayers' money. Do you think some residents in Prince William would pay for a new Parks and Rec facility by gradual increases in their taxes over a few years to fund a state-of-the-art facility?
Nah. that strategy is outdated. It ticks off voters that their taxes are going up. But what if you present it as it's funded by DATA CENTER money? That works. Taxpayers are paying their power bills not knowing that the DATA CENTER fee is embedded within it. Over time, that generates enough income that the honchos look like heroes 'gifting' it back to our community. Nah, it's a racket going on. We're getting our money back. and a state-of-the-art Parks and Rec facility is cool to have in any community. People will enjoy it for decades.
So be sure to watch the PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL short video on 'The Hidden Costs of DCs' (link below) which again, we residents/stakeholders had to chip in our own money to pay rental fees for rooms to show it and educate hundreds of area residents in 4 meetings on what the DC honchos are up to with getting their billionaire dollar industry down here in Planning District 16. That education includes collaboration with PEC, Sierra Club, Facebook's INFORM FREDERICKSBURG and with Data Center industry experts themselves on the dais to give us the lowdown on DATA CENTERS 101 basics.
University of Mary Wash students even did a FOIA to research the behind-the-scenes that the city was not sharing with us. The city is caught in a bind in figuring out proprietary info. and what to redact on the emails and the Non-Disclosure Agreement with Stack Infrastructure.
Which BTW had their representative, Kevin Hughes appointed to the city's Econ Dev Authority. Another DC MO: 'fox guarding the henhouse'.
Certain EDA reps and all the Councilors were NOT TRANSPARENT. Most of them were out of it. They had no idea either about DCs. Played to us at one DC forum with Mayor Kerry Devine saying just 'Trust Us', which elicited a groan from the room. Told us it was about the dB level of the noise. and it'd be reduced. FALSE info. Nah, it's about the 'Constant' nature of the noise that drives the brain nuts. including the children and seniors who are more sensitive to it and get headaches sooner.
The 8-10 DATA CENTERS going in next to Wegman's and Fred Nats are within 150-200 ft of senior living and children living in the Jubilation condos and the apts. This build won't be happening for 6-7 years because Dominion Resources has been pushing the billionaire dollar DC industry so much in Virginia that they've run out of power so FXBG is on the wait list.
Councilors had no time to devote to reading hundreds of pages about DATA CENTER Performance Agreement Standards, they bought in to the DC industry trick that this was the best deal ever for the city, and they were going through this Done Deal on their 'aggressive timeline'.
So they dumbed down the vote to a simple 'Are you for or against DCs?' another DC industry strategy.
when that 'Yes/No' wasn't even the question in front of them. So the Council worked with the DC applicant and brought out the church groups and naive residents wearing their big orange buttons, braying 'I support DATA CENTERS'. No idea they were being manipulated in the dog and pony show that DC admins have as another trick in their playbook.
That ignorance of what the vote really was on, the technical language needed in the Performance Agreement Standards and Water Services Agreement, contrasted with savvy students at UMW who plotted out the red dots on a map to show DC locations. how DCs sucked NoVA dry and/or their residents caught up to what they're doing and ran them out of PW, Loudoun, and Fauquier. so those red dots are now in a scatter plot line in this area, going into Caroline.
https://www.arlnow.com/2022/05/02/new-missing-middle-draft-calls-for-legalizing-multifamily-housing-countywide/
Part 5, Page 3 (8-13-25 FDC Mtg handout: 'Racism & Zoning):
homes that are geographically separated from the main downtown corridor by roads and geography, just like the FHA recommended.
This hyper concentration of apartments can cause lower health outcomes over time. In Richmond, there are blocks of "affordable housing" apartments that were built with no AC, no landscaping, no attention to mitigation of heat.
On current heat maps they are bright red, where more affluent areas, with mixed housing are so much cooler they read blue on a color map. Heat is a known killer and as climate change increases these areas will only get worse.
What can be done about this?
The historic impacts of direct and indirect racial and economic segregation will be hard to undo, but people are trying. Modern zoning trends have moved toward Form-Based zoning that allows for a better mix of multifamily and single-family homes based more on conformity of form rather than on occupancy.
An example of this would be a three-story apartment building with 6-12 apartments situated in a neighborhood that contains two and three-story homes as well as blocks of townhomes averaging 2 to 3 stories. This mix allows for people of various economic and social backgrounds to be able to live and enjoy the same amenities.
Reducing Parking minimums and height restrictions can help as well as reducing lot size requirements and setbacks.
But there are still a lot of pitfalls, and our city is not immune to them. Zoning can still be used to divide the haves from the have-nots if it's improperly applied. Zoning that regularly requires or allows exceptions is inherently economically biased. Asking for a zoning exception takes time and money, so it disproportionately benefits the wealthiest folks who can work the system to meet their needs.
Housing affordability in general is also a huge concern in our area, as land is naturally limited. Even if we build, building itself can cause affordability issues with developers motivated to make the most money possible and not to build for the masses.
We are limited in what we can do in Fredericksburg at this time to address this because of the Dillon Rule, which does not allow our city to create certain kinds of rules and regulations. A prime example of this is rent control or affordable housing requirements.
We do not have the ability to place these requirements on builders, and instead have to offer them carrots and incentives to motivate them, which do not always match their main economic motivations. Changing this at the state level may be possible in the coming years and would be helpful as costs continue to increase.
Part 6. Page 4. Ref page 4 of the FDC ‘Racism & Zoning’ handout read out loud at the 8-13-25 Fred Dems mtg (cont’d): Links and other resources:
https://www.nber.org/reporter/2018number1/origins-urban-segregation-united-states
https://apps.urban.org/features/advancing-equity-affordability-through-zoning/#home
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/8cd986b3c5ab4f1c8bedba85f195662f
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/08/24/climate/racism-redlining-cities-global-
warming.html
https://www.npr.org/2017/05/03/526655831/a-forgotten-history-of-how-the-u-s-
government-segregated-america
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/10/19/498536077/interactive-redlining-
map-zooms-in-on-americas-history-of-discrimination
https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/
https://www.fdrlibrary.org/housing#:~:text=A%20Redline%20Around%20Housing%20Assis
tance,generational%20wealth%20through%20home%20ownership.
Further Reading:
Arbitrary Lines by M. Nolan Gray
Color of Law by Richard Rothstein
Part 4. Page 2 of the FDC ‘Racism & Zoning’ handout read out loud at the 8-13-25 Fred Dems mtg (cont’d):
colors to designate lending suitability. The portions outlined in red were "hazardous" to indicate that they had the greatest risks, and mortgages should not be issued in those areas. These maps were later adopted by the FHA and Veterans Administration and used by the federal government to reinforce segregation in housing on a federal level during the New Deal, when the Federal government started to back loans as part of the recovery from the Great Depression.
The FHA created the "Underwriting Manual" that, despite the aforementioned Supreme Court case, explicitly stated that the newly federally backed mortgages should not be provided to black families seeking to relocate into predominantly white areas. The reasoning behind this was that their presence would reduce property values, but this was a presumed reason, not one based in fact.
Research now indicates that property values may actually have increased because black home buyers paid larger sums for homes in white areas and drove up the comps for anyone wishing to sell or buy.
In 1968, the Fair Housing Act was passed, which outlawed redlining practices, but the reality is that even though loans could no longer be denied, the impact that these laws had was profound and lasting.
Today, Black Americans as a whole make 60% of what White Americans do annually, but only have 5% of the cumulative wealth. This disparity can be directly attributed to being shut out of purchasing homes when they were affordable and to the fact that the properties they did own had reduced appreciation due to the past effects of redlining.
And let's not forget: Property taxes pay for your services in most states. That means when an area is deemed "hazardous" or "blighted," the property values fall, and the money collected in those areas is reduced and thus funding for schools, roads, sidewalks, parks, maintenance, and transportation is also reduced. It can have a cumulative effect of making the areas less and less desirable as years pass.
Modern Zoning can be still weaponized and is.
While not as obvious as the above examples, modern zoning has a lot of insidious issues that can amplify disparities. Simple things like lot sizes, minimum setbacks, restrictions to build only single-family homes, or even parking requirements can make the affordability of neighborhoods intentionally out of reach for people of less means.
Remedies like subsidized housing are also harder in single-family home zoning, because they are inherently cost-prohibitive. In addition to that, zoning requirements like special use permits and historical protections that often fall over wealthier and whiter areas leave development of density to poorer, less advocated for areas, even if they too have historic roots worth protecting.
And the cycle of apartments being built away from single-family homes during the FHA redlining period continued long after the practice was officially disbanded. Bragg Hill, and Fall Hill are examples where there are historic and current massing of multifamily
Part 3. Page 1 In tying in to the way this 7-0 Council voted ' all in for DATA CENTERS' and not sticking to spending the time needed to get solid standards' specific language in the DATA CENTERS Performance and Water Services Agreement, their candidate clones will vote in a majority (maybe not the 7-0 because this is also a very controversial issue, like Data Centers) for 'ZONING FOR ALL'. ZFA. The following 4 pages were read out loud to the attendees at the 8-13-2025 Fredericksburg Democratic Committee/FDC meeting to get voters ready for a post-Election Council vote for ZFA.
I made a comment to the entire FDC gathering, after it was read, that this read-aloud was done to prepare the attendees that the city appears ready to move to 'Zoning for All' Urbanism. As per this FDC handout, that means taking away current R-4 zoning for single-family homes in FXBG neighborhoods to put a R26 apt/mixed use next to your home. See p. 3 paragraph 2 of this handout for details.
As happened at the 3-6-2024 Arlington Co Planning Commission mtg (watch it on YouTube as Fredericksburg Neighborhoods Coalition members have done repeatedly to note methodology and strategy), the church groups will be rallied to come out and pit against the homeowners who are objecting to taking away R-4 Zoning and gutting neighborhoods, by portraying them as racists who won’t share their property with ‘people of various economic and social backgrounds to be able to live and enjoy the same amenities’ (as cited in this handout, same paragraph).
This is another YIMBY ploy, use the church groups, as happened in the DATA CENTER vote, but this time the issue is 'ZONING FOR ALL" to destroy intact neighborhoods, by eliminating their R-4 zoning to add more DENSITY in them.
All people, regardless of race, care about their major life investment, their home. Refer to the effort expended by African-American residents in Fairfax County to work towards ‘historic designation’ for their historic ‘Gum Springs’ & ‘Randall Estates’ neighborhoods.
'Gum Springs' and 'Randall Estates' residents didn't put up with the Democrat attempts to remove their residential zoning so those ‘1-800-we pay cash for your home’ vultures can come in and put up ‘apt bldgs and ‘blocks of townhouses’ (mentioned in this handout) in your neighborhoods because R-4 Zoning has been removed.
For Pete’s sake, Sept 19 through Nov 4, don’t take the Fred Dem ballot handed to you with the names bubbled in for FDC endorsement and vote that YIMBY Dem slate.
Or take it and vote opposite for the BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY candidates.
Whatever you do, don’t leave your LOCAL candidate selection blank or write in 'Mickey Mouse' because you’re fed up with dirty politics in the city.
This city election is going to determine FXBG as 'a mirror of Alexandria', urban growth, YIMBY influence, and Zoning for All.
or you voters, including the renters, reject parts of it, and vote 'Don't Fairfax Fredericksburg!'.
You have the Power to vote for candidates who have experience and do right by the city. They will add BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY to dais business: 1. Ken Gantt, 2. Anne Little, 3. Matt Kelly, and 4. Jesse Dominguez.
You a UMW student voting? You want to come back to your 10-year reunion and see these DENSITY builds in the city and look at one another and say, ‘what happened to Fredericksburg? It’s not as charming as it used to be. Ugh, another NoVA’.
UMW students and Ward 2 residents: Then vote for BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY on Council. Those who know and understand the principles of 'Sensible' Growth.
and not these YIMBYs who have the FDC endorsement. (Office of Special Counsel still hasn't issued its official letter on HATCH Act employees status in a Partisan race which includes an interpretation that the FDC endorsements on HATCH act employees still stand because FDC rescind was not done properly).
DO NOT VOTE for these Pro-Density candidates who are slick enough to tell you that's not them. They won't vote that way. Who me? Not me. Couldn't be. They care about you. Nah, they have handlers:
They're going to learn how to spin a controversial vote so it's a 4-3 majority and get this 'Zoning for All' passed.
The writing on the wall is there with releasing this handout and making sure it was read out loud, every single, signaling word, to attendees so they vote for the endorsed Dem ballot candidates.
As Hamilton says, ‘RISE UP’. Don't throw away your shot:
Vote for 'BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY' on Council.
Do NOT vote for these candidates who have the Fred Dems endorsement. They are going to remove Zoning in neighborhoods. Two were there at the 8-12-25 FDC meeting nodding their heads in agreement. Ward 1: Matt Rowe & Ward 2: Joy Crump.
They’ll spin it for you that they won’t vote for going with 'Zoning for All'. That they’ll listen to the people.
No, they won’t. They'll listen to their ‘echo chamber’, the ones who voted them in, that they're doing the will of the people, just like this current Council did with the DATA CENTERS vote. Their handlers will ensure that messaging happens.
These are the YIMBY Dem candidates who want to change FXBG into ‘a mirror of Alexandria’ and remove R-4 single-family residential zoning out of neighborhoods. These clone candidates have no concept of what they’re doing.
And when asked, do you buy into YIMBY and ‘Zoning for All’ ideology? They will deny it. That instead, they do believe 'all people of various economic and social backgrounds should be able to live and enjoy the same amenities'.
Just as those residents, like me, who live in neighborhoods, believe too.
but these YIMBY Dems-endorsed candidates need to be stopped: They are not going to tear up our neighborhoods by removing our R-4 Zoning to build 'blocks of townhouses' and '3-story apt buildings' in our neighborhoods. (as stated in the 8-13-25 Fred Dems handout).
and they're not going to do it by selling out the neighborhoods close to the rail-line behind The Colonial Tavern and displace current occupants with YIMBYs in their 3-piece suits wanting a quick commute to their jobs in NoVA or Richmond when the new train transit line comes in.
That's what the city of Alexandria did for their Urban renewal. Ran out 16,000 residents, mainly black folks, living in the less affluent neighborhoods so they could move the YIMBYs in.
You hear any of that in their City of Alexandria history marketing? I saw it happen as a high school student in Alexandria. The Sisters of the Holy Cross in Religion Class said, 'look at whose housing is being demolished right now. Think about that. What is happening?'
But actions speak louder than empty words.
Do NOT vote for these YIMBYs endorsed by Fred Dem Committee who will vote to get a pass for a 'No Zoning in 22401' ordinance. Using the same methods that the Dems in Alexandria did. And who now regret doing it because developers swooped in to profit.
Here are the candidates who are endorsed by the Fred Dems to get them to join their All Dems on City Council to do major structural change to FXBG. again they'll deny it. Ploy. They agree with 'Zoning for All'.
Do NOT vote for YIMBY ZFAs: Ward 1: Matt Rowe; Ward 2: Joy Crump; Ward 3: Susanna Finn; Ward 4: Chuck Frye.
Here's the Dem 8-13-25 HANDOUT on ideology of 'Zoning for All'. How ZFA playbook runs it. It is first introduced in the community. Through the local Dem party.
Racism in Zoning, a VERY VERY VERY Abridged Overview. (Written and Read on 8-13-25 by D.D. Lecky):
**| HIGHLY recommend diving into the links I have provided below and exploring the materials in full. I have pulled some segments of this talk directly from some of them but was unable to dive into the immense detail that would be required to do them justice. I also provide you with two books that I think would be very useful to anyone who wants to understand racially motivated zoning and it's modern implications.**
What is zoning?
Zoning is a legal mechanism designed to support balanced and orderly growth in a community. Throughout much of the United States, counties, cities, and towns use local zoning codes and maps to regulate land uses. Zoning typically restricts land uses by district; describes the basic forms, dimensions, and density of buildings; and establishes processes for making changes and approving variations to permitted projects.
How was zoning used to reinforce or even increase racial segregation?
The most direct way that urban governments have attempted to segregate their populations is through the adoption of explicitly racial zoning ordinances. Passed by cities between 1910 and 1917, these ordinances prohibited members of the majority racial group on a given city block from selling or renting property to members of another racial group.
This practice "ended" in 1917 with the landmark Buchanan v. Warley decision, in which the United States Supreme Court struck down a racial zoning ordinance adopted by Louisville, Kentucky. But did it really end?
After this case, cities adopted what were purported to be "non-racial" or "racial blind" zoning policies that were anything but. Harland Bartholomew is a notable figure in St Louis who pioneered some egregious methods of zoning.
He was known for having a "scientific" method of planning that weighed factors like neighborhood conditions, plumbing, housing upkeep, prevailing winds, and light. He used these criteria to declare areas that contained large number of poor and thus black and brown residents as "blighted" a term that he used to evoke a contagion that if not remedied, could spread.
The neighborhoods were often in poor condition, but his zoning did not see this as a community issue to be resolved with assistance and compassion; but rather, they saw these neighborhoods as places where investments would go to die. His work can be directly connected to the idea of Red Lining, a term that was used by HOLC, Home Owners Loan Corporation, which outlined maps with
Part 2 of comment on DATA CENTERS. We need your vote starting Sept 19 with the Early Vote for 'Balance and Transparency' candidates who are informed on the truth about DATA CENTERS. 22401 residents should keep in mind that even though the DATA CENTER vote is now a Done Deal, this current Council was NOT TRANSPARENT with residents/voters/stakeholders. They have their clone candidates coming in if they're not running again. under the guise of it's time to turn Council over to the 'young uns'.
These 'young - uns' are no spring chickens themselves. but their handlers are hoping to fake the younger voters out using AGEISM in selling their clone candidates. Get in the 'young - uns'-the ones who are puppet-mastered by their handlers to vote 7-0 all in! because 'diversity of thought' is not valued on this current Council dais.
That's not healthy to have a council like this. We need BALANCE and TRANSPARENCY on it.
Be savvy like the UMW students on DATA CENTERS who did their research and found out enough info in the FOIA that there was hidden info/emails that revealed what they were doing behind the scenes with the DC honchos.
This Current Council doesn't want you -the voter- to have all the info. When informed residents go to the public comment mic that uses up Planning Commission and City Council time to get their Done Deals passed.
Realize that there are dedicated, engaged residents who show up for almost every single Planning Commission and Council meeting or view Regional Web TV from home to watch-dog them. Vote for Experience and 'Diversity of Thought'. Vote for BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY on Council.
We don't see much of the naive, uninformed people who are tricked to come out to speak at the public comment mic, except when they're whistled for by the handlers of their 'dog and pony' shows to attend the last meeting prior to the Planning Commission or Council vote.
And these residents/stakeholders have no idea that the vote question has been dumbed down for them. Yes/No (hurry up and vote so you don't have the time to think that this vote could be more than what you're being told to do in your vote):
What's your vote on ADUs/Accessory Dwelling Units? What's your vote on DATA CENTERS? When the answers and vote question is: 'is there enough technical language in this document to make sure grandma in the basement ADU has an egress window to crawl out of when there's a fire?' or 'can you see the top of the 8-10 DATA CENTERs near the Fred Nats if you're sitting in a kayak on the Rappahannock River?'
Enough of this 'young uns' need to get on Council. Grandstanding on passing the baton to them. Horse hooey: They're inexperienced, no time in their lives and job to do the 24/7 doc reads, use the 'Father Knows Best' paternalistic approach in governing the citizenry, don't know what they're doing.
and that's where their handlers want them to be. so they can tell them just enough info to get them to vote 7-0 because they have no time in their lives to do the 'deep dives' and 'going down the rabbit hole' to see the other side of the issue. so that FXBG residents/stakeholders get the best deal.
Even in the clone candidates' speeches in neighborhood meetings, the 'young uns'- YIMBYs all endorsed by the divisive Democratic ballot mess up their answers, confuse a building project.
Here's the 22401 Council candidates who have spent hundreds of hours reading documents on city issues, some of whom have been on Commissions. boards for decades. Their Experience matters.
VOTE FOR 'BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY' ON CITY COUNCIL.
Ward 1: KEN GANTT; Ward 2: ANNE LITTLE; Ward 3: MATT KELLY; Ward 4: JESSE DOMINGUEZ.
Ward 3 School Board: SARAH STELMOK
I am a strong 'cradle' Dem, I've knocked 40,000 Planning District doors for Dem candidates since 2007, previous officer, Sec and Vice Chair in the local party. on the DPVA Central Committee. I want 'BALANCE & TRANSPARENCY' on Council and School Board because that's a healthy way of governing.
i respect the City Charter that states: LOCAL elections are non-partisan. Political party has no business making endorsements. That's a candidate taking the 'lazy' way out of not knocking doors. Using a piece of paper handed out on Nov 4 to get a vote because they don't have the time to door knock.
'The Hidden Cost of the Cloud: DATA CENTERS in Virginia' (Piedmont Environmental Council, 2024)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAPusgiz4B8
Bring back the 1980s Fredericksburg bumper sticker campaign: 'Don't Fairfax Fredericksburg'. Challengers to the 'Balance & Transparency' Council candidates are YIMBY ideologues:
https://www.placeeconomics.com/resources/the-yimby-movement-historic-preservations-response/
Sign up for FREE emails from Bill Wright, Prince William guru on DATA CENTERS in Virginia: wawright4@comcast.net
'Bait & Switch' Manassas Data Center has tenant who put secret bank inside it to avoid paying the BPOL fees:
https://patch.com/virginia/manassas/data-centers-bank-tenant-causes-lower-revenue-manassas
https://www.insidenova.com/headlines/secret-data-center-tenant-in-manassas-not-subject-to-business-property-taxes/article_ec6c7a6b-a233-4e46-befe-6dc56adcd61d.html
Part 1 of DATA CENTER comment: Let's be clear. Curry Roberts' livelihood depends on him selling you, the stakeholders, the billion-dollar industry shill on DATA CENTERS.
We FXBG residents as well as others in the Planning District (Fred, Caroline, King George, Spotsy, and Stafford) have caught on to the DATA CENTER billion-dollar industry slick MO to play their mind games with naive, uninformed residents and local govt reps who have no idea either what's happening.
Shortly after Council's 2/25/25 vote, the one that was their usual unanimous 7-0!!!!! We're all in for DATA CENTERS!!!'. (7-0 votes, because this particular Council won't allow any dissent to happen. or to hear the other side of a controversial issue: They have to pose to us as 'We're all in Harmony. as noted in a handwritten note on a FOIA request to see their retreat papers that said their votes have to be unanimous).
Shortly after this 2-25-25 vote, the one in which Susanna Finn voted 'YES! The DATA CENTERS Technical document is ready!' -first as a Planning Commissioner, that the Fredericksburg DATA CENTER regulations were ready to present to Council for consideration when 4 other Commissioners (majority) said they were not. and voted NO.
and then again, Susanna Finn voted as a Council appointee a few weeks later that the language in the standards was fine, the American Rivers organization placed our beloved RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER as 6th on the list for the 'Most Endangered Rivers in the US'.
The Fredericksburg Neighborhoods Coalition has spent hundreds of hours studying DATA CENTERS. Spent hundreds of dollars on FOIAs to get info from the city on what was going on.
We had no idea what a DATA CENTER was back in Jan 2024 when Council took off in pairs to look at DATA CENTERS in Prince William with talks led by the DC honchos selling them.
We FNC members took off to visit the same sites a few days later after finding out from a resident-advocate Bill Wright about how these DATA CENTER admins take local govt officials to the top of the roof so they don't hear the noise on the ground.
But at Bill's advice, we stayed on the ground and talked to residents in the half million dollar neighborhood 'Great Oaks'.. These homeowners/residents can no longer enjoy their backyards because there's DATA CENTERS within 200 ft of their once peaceful respite.
The Constant Noise gives them headaches. They will not move. They're done with moving. They sued the county and after months of litigation, they recently won that they had not received proper notification from the county on a DATA CENTERS meeting.
So rushing a decision on a local govt agenda is also a DC strategy. Just like they did in the city. which even admitted on Regional Web TV that we are on an 'aggressive timeline' to get this done.
So sign up for Prince William resident Bill Wright's email on DCs. Bill is the one who educated all of us in FNC on DC ploys, bait and switch, like Manassas thinking it was getting big buckos from DCs so the tenant put a bank inside the DATA CENTER to avoid paying the promised BPOL Business fees that Manassas was anticipating as revenue.
This DC revenue coming in? Nah, it's our money. The stakeholders' money. We've been billed by Dominion Resources for a while, little bits at a time, within our power bill, across the Commonwealth, even when the locality doesn't even have a DATA CENTER coming in.
That DC fee is 'embedded' within your power bill. The State Corporation Commission is so concerned that Virginia stakeholders are bearing the brunt of the cost of DATA CENTERS that they are pushing legislation in the Virginia General Assembly to make it more transparent that WE are paying for DATA CENTERS and those fees need to be 'decoupled' from our Dominion bills so it's more transparent what is our actual energy usage and what is the DC fee.
So is money coming in from DATA CENTERS? It's a yes/no. It's taxpayers' money. Do you think some residents in Prince William would pay for a new Parks and Rec facility by gradual increases in their taxes over a few years to fund a state-of-the-art facility?
Nah. that strategy is outdated. It ticks off voters that their taxes are going up. But what if you present it as it's funded by DATA CENTER money? That works. Taxpayers are paying their power bills not knowing that the DATA CENTER fee is embedded within it. Over time, that generates enough income that the honchos look like heroes 'gifting' it back to our community. Nah, it's a racket going on. We're getting our money back. and a state-of-the-art Parks and Rec facility is cool to have in any community. People will enjoy it for decades.
So be sure to watch the PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL short video on 'The Hidden Costs of DCs' (link below) which again, we residents/stakeholders had to chip in our own money to pay rental fees for rooms to show it and educate hundreds of area residents in 4 meetings on what the DC honchos are up to with getting their billionaire dollar industry down here in Planning District 16. That education includes collaboration with PEC, Sierra Club, Facebook's INFORM FREDERICKSBURG and with Data Center industry experts themselves on the dais to give us the lowdown on DATA CENTERS 101 basics.
University of Mary Wash students even did a FOIA to research the behind-the-scenes that the city was not sharing with us. The city is caught in a bind in figuring out proprietary info. and what to redact on the emails and the Non-Disclosure Agreement with Stack Infrastructure.
Which BTW had their representative, Kevin Hughes appointed to the city's Econ Dev Authority. Another DC MO: 'fox guarding the henhouse'.
Certain EDA reps and all the Councilors were NOT TRANSPARENT. Most of them were out of it. They had no idea either about DCs. Played to us at one DC forum with Mayor Kerry Devine saying just 'Trust Us', which elicited a groan from the room. Told us it was about the dB level of the noise. and it'd be reduced. FALSE info. Nah, it's about the 'Constant' nature of the noise that drives the brain nuts. including the children and seniors who are more sensitive to it and get headaches sooner.
The 8-10 DATA CENTERS going in next to Wegman's and Fred Nats are within 150-200 ft of senior living and children living in the Jubilation condos and the apts. This build won't be happening for 6-7 years because Dominion Resources has been pushing the billionaire dollar DC industry so much in Virginia that they've run out of power so FXBG is on the wait list.
Councilors had no time to devote to reading hundreds of pages about DATA CENTER Performance Agreement Standards, they bought in to the DC industry trick that this was the best deal ever for the city, and they were going through this Done Deal on their 'aggressive timeline'.
So they dumbed down the vote to a simple 'Are you for or against DCs?' another DC industry strategy.
when that 'Yes/No' wasn't even the question in front of them. So the Council worked with the DC applicant and brought out the church groups and naive residents wearing their big orange buttons, braying 'I support DATA CENTERS'. No idea they were being manipulated in the dog and pony show that DC admins have as another trick in their playbook.
That ignorance of what the vote really was on, the technical language needed in the Performance Agreement Standards and Water Services Agreement, contrasted with savvy students at UMW who plotted out the red dots on a map to show DC locations. how DCs sucked NoVA dry and/or their residents caught up to what they're doing and ran them out of PW, Loudoun, and Fauquier. so those red dots are now in a scatter plot line in this area, going into Caroline.