6 Comments
User's avatar
Sue Sargeant's avatar

Guy Gormley, a resident of Ward 3 in our city, gives us the facts: He tells us what is happening on Fredericksburg's City Council Ward 3 Appointment: This now 6-0 Council is conducting 'CLOSED' meetings and not releasing the interviewee names. They're required to release the resumes for public review. The COALITION FOR OPEN GOVERNMENT says so. They refuse to do so. As the 'Advance' headline states: 'Fredericksburg City Council Again - Keeps PUBLIC in the Dark". What is disturbing is that we don't have REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT anymore. MATT KELLY won the Ward 3/Precinct 301 Councilor position in Nov 2023. 'DO THE RIGHT THING COUNCIL': Appoint MATT KELLY back to Council to be our Ward 3 Councilor. Surely MATT KELLY's WARD 3 APPOINTMENT will have a positive effect on UNITING OUR CITY going forward.

Expand full comment
Julie Lee Kay's avatar

Thanks for sharing this. At the Data Center forum that the environmental groups paid for in order for the community to really have a chance to hear about what building a 90 ft tall building surrounded by three neighborhoods with a constant hum at the decibel level of people talking, Mayor Devine hotly contested the idea that the city council wasn't being open. Despite the VA legislature saying data centers shouldn't be built near neighborhoods and should be only built in industrial area, they continue to put their hands over their ears. All this to say, I'm sure they want a replacement for our wonderful Tim Duffy with another "yes" vote for the data centers so you weren't considered. People need to show up at the Planning Commission meeting this Wednesday!

Expand full comment
Joe Brito's avatar

My research has revealed facts that the Council is trying to keep from the public.

I'm so disappointed in the lack of transparency. There needs to be a full plan presentation at the Data Center Public Hearings. The public deserves the right to be able to know and discuss what is going on. It's a sensitive subject to eliminate existing and proposed recreational amenities from the Plan, but for the Council should be honest and give the public a clear General Development Plan of the project being proposed.

Any recreational amenities that are proposed to be eliminated from the plan should be mitigated and replaced in another location.

Expand full comment
Jeff's avatar

Guy,

I believe this City Council seat is up for election in November, so you can run your NIMBY campaign then. Also, it’s amusing to me that you cite VMI’s “honor code.” Is this the same VMI where an independent investigator found a “racist and sexist culture?” Spare me your faux outrage. Run for the seat in November.

Expand full comment
Joe Brito's avatar

There are other issues happening that will impact and eliminate recreational amenities without the public knowing. It's about transparency, not about being a NIMBY!

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Feb 9
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Joe Brito's avatar

The proposal impacts a regional plan for the River crossing and recreation areas.

I represent over 6,200 people that want a Regional Historic Park and another 5,000+ people Regionally that want a River Crossing and Trail network.

I use facts and research to bring things in the public eye. Any officials that want to approve things secretly will be exposed.

Expand full comment