June 10, 2025: Duncan outraises Shreve in latest campaign finance reporting period

Plus: Charlottesville Planning Commission learns more about forthcoming changes to Development Code

Eighty-five years ago today, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt gave the commencement speech at the University of Virginia just hours after learning that Italy had declared war on France. He quickly updated what he was going to say to those graduating to reflect the turn of world events. You can listen to this or read this on the Miller Center’s website. For now it’s time for the June 10, 2025 edition of Charlottesville Community Engagement. I’m Sean Tubbs and now I’d better write some stories.

In today’s installment:

• Charlottesville has to move a polling place a week before election after Charlottesville City Schools informed the registrar that Buford Middle School was unavailable

• Campaign finance reports are in for local races in Albemarle County and Charlottesville

• Charlottesville’s Planning Commission gets a look at some ways the city’s relatively new zoning code may be changing

• A trial date has been set for June 26, 2026 for a lawsuit seeking to throw out that zoning code

First shout-out: Charlottesville Community Bikes

In today’s first subscriber supported shout-out, Charlottesville Community Bikes strives to provide wheels to anyone who needs a ride. That includes:

• There’s a Kid’s Bike program for people under the age of 12 (learn more)

• Several social services organizations refer people to Charlottesville Community Bikes for access to reliable transportation (learn more)

• Keep an eye on their calendar for the next mobile repair clinic (learn more)

• There’s also a workforce development program that “blends mentorship and comprehensive training in bicycle mechanics” (learn more)

Visit the Charlottesville Community Bikes website today to learn more!

With one week before primary, Charlottesville to temporary relocate Buford precinct

On April 2, the Albemarle Board of Supervisors passed an emergency ordinance to relocate a polling place for the Branchlands precinct.

The Charlottesville Area Association of Realtors withdrew permission for their offices on Hillsdale Drive to be used and provided notification for Albemarle to go through the public process. That included a public hearing on May 7 that formally updated county code to reflect an official voting place.

With one week to go before the June 17 primary, the City of Charlottesville has announced one of its polling places will be moved for in-person voting.

“Due to construction at Buford Middle School, the usual facilities will be inaccessible, and the polling place must temporarily relocate to Tonsler Recreation Center at 500 Cherry Avenue for the June Democratic Primary election on June 17, 2025,” reads an information release sent out at 10:32 a.m. today.

Taylor Yowell, the city’s director of elections, said her office was notified yesterday that the space would not be available.

“My office yesterday made a submission to the Department of Elections an alternative polling place for approval, because there is not enough time to bring this before City Council with the election next Tuesday,” Yowell said in an email. “As soon as we received approval, we have begun the notifying process in §24.2-310 (D).”

That section of the code refers to an emergency that renders a polling place unusable and requires all candidates to be notified of the change.

“For the purposes of this subsection, an ‘emergency’ means a rare and unforeseen combination of circumstances, or the resulting state, that calls for immediate action,” reads the state code.

The relevant section of state code

Construction at Buford Middle School has been underway for two years. Yowell said she had no indication Buford would not be available because several elections have been held during that time.

“From what I was told when we were notified yesterday is that they have now entered ‘phase 2’ of the Buford project as of last week,” Yowell said. “This is the existing portion of the building and all power has now been shut off and the bus circle has been torn out.”

Charlottesville City Schools posted an update of the school modernization project to their website on June 3. A request for clarification has been sent to Charlottesville City Schools to know more about when they knew the polling place would not be available. I’ll update this story accordingly.

The Tonsler Recreation Center was a polling place for many years until March 2023 when Council adopted new boundaries.

Duncan outraises Shreve in Jack Jouett District

The Democratic primary is a week away with local nomination races in one of Albemarle’s magisterial districts and the City of Charlottesville.

The latest campaign finance reports have been filed and Sally Duncan raised more money than David Shreve according to information compiled by the Virginia Public Access Project. Both are candidates in the Jack Jouett District seeking to succeed Diantha McKeel.

Duncan raised $17,983 between April 1 and June 5 including a $710 in-kind contribution. The school teacher received $5,000 from the Realtors Political Action Committee of Virginia, $2,500 from the Blue Ridge Homebuilders Association, and $2,000 from civil engineer Justin Shimp. The Monticello Business Alliance contributed another $1,000. (view all contributions above $100)

During the period, Duncan spent $14,789 and repaid a $443 loan. She had a total of $6,012 on the ballot. View a raw version of the report here.

Shreve raised $3,022 during the reporting period with no contributions above $500 and none from a political action committee. The amount raised includes $297 in in-kind contributions. (view all contributions above $100)

The economist spent $3,435 during the period and had a balance of $5,236 as of June 5. View the raw report here.

So far there are no independent or Republican candidates for the general election for the Jack Jouett District. Candidates have until June 17 to qualify.

There is a contested race in the Samuel Miller District between Democrat Fred Missel and Republican Scott Smith.

Smith began his campaign after April 1 and raised $15,167 during the period including a $3,000 contribution from himself as well as another $3,000 from Kevin Keating. (view all contributions above $100)

During the reporting period, Smith spent $5,993 including $3,266 to WINA radio show host and former City Councilor Rob Schilling for consulting. View the raw report here.

Missel began the period with $15,704 in the bank and raised $1,370 from April 1 to June 5. (view all contributions over $100)

The director of design and development and current chair of the Planning Commission spent $194 and had $17,089 on hand as of June 5.

Ned Gallaway is running for a third term representing the Rio District. He began the campaign period with $9,495 and did not raise or spend any money. View the raw report here. Gallaway did not face opposition in either 2017 or 2021.

Watch a campaign forum

Incumbents Pinkston and Wade outraise Fleisher in Council race

There are three candidates seeking two Democratic nominations for City Council, and the two who are already in office have raised more money than the lone challenger through their political action committee.

Brian Pinkston and Juandiego Wade are running as a joint ticket with campaign contributions being solicited by the Wade-Pinkston Victory Fund. Political Action Committees have a different reporting period than individual candidates.

The Wade-Pinkston Victory Fund began the year with $16,403 and raised $49,505 between January 1 and May 25. That includes $5,000 contributions from 11th and Cochran LLC, developer Chris Henry, developer Richard Hewitt, and the Virginia Realtors PAC. There’s another $3,000 from Hidden Leaf LLC and $2,500 from the Blue Ridge Home Builders Association. (view all contributions over $100)

The Wade-Pinkston Victory Fund spent $45,790 during the period, including contributions to the candidates themselves. Much of the spending was on joint campaign materials. The PAC had a balance of $16,273 on May 25. (view the raw report)

Jen Fleisher is running alone and began the reporting period with $2,546 in her campaign account. She reported $20,272 in contributions between April 1 and June 5 including $17,989 in cash contributions. That includes a $5,000 contribution from Sonjia Smith. There is also a $1,771 in in-kind contributions and a $511 loan. (view all contributions over $100)

In a press release, Fleisher highlighted that 110 people contributed less than $100 to her campaign. In Virginia, that’s the threshold before someone must identify themselves.

"More than 100 donors have invested $100 or less in this campaign because they believe in our vision for a healthier, more connected Charlottesville,” Fleisher said. “Our campaign shows that local races can and should be powered by community.”

Both Pinkston and Wade are required to file individual reports.

Brian Pinkston began the month with $560 in his campaign account. He reported $5,486 in cash contributions and $11,500 in in-kind contributions. All of that funding came from the Wade-Pinkston Victory Fund.

Pinkston spent $5,517 during the period with $3,750 to Lifeview Marketing and $1,767 to the Charlottesville Media Group.

Wade began the month with $3,246 in his campaign account and raised $6,136 in cash and $11,500 in in-kind contributions. All but $650 of the cash came from the Wade-Pinkston Victory Fund.

Watch a campaign forum:

Second shout out: Rivanna River Otter Monitoring

Have you seen a river otter lately? The Rivanna Conservation Alliance wants to know! The group is conducting a study of the presence of Lontra canadensis. The creatures have been spotted throughout the Rivanna River watershed—in rivers, streams, and even backyard ponds!

While they’re best known for their playful antics, river otters are also important indicators of stream health. They depend on clean water, healthy riparian buffers, and abundant prey sources (including fish, amphibians, and benthic macroinvertebrates) for survival. As such, their presence or absence within our waterways can provide valuable insights into the overall health of our rivers and streams.

To learn more, the Rivanna Conservation Alliance has launched the Rivanna River Otter Monitoring Project to gather valuable data on river otter populations while encouraging community members to get outside and explore our local waterways. This project aims not only to inspire public appreciation for river otters, but also foster a deeper community connection to our rivers and streams and the diverse wildlife populations they support.

To learn more and consider a donation, please visit the Rivanna Conservation Alliance.

Charlottesville Planning Commission briefed on forthcoming updates to zoning code

When Charlottesville adopted a new zoning code in December 2023, the idea was to implement the Comprehensive Plan’s call for additional residential density.

“This means our code was designed not just to set the rules, but as a tool to shape how our neighborhoods grow in a structured yet flexible way,” said Matt Alfele, the Development Planning Manager for the city’s Department of Neighborhood Development Services.

Enough time has passed and enough experience has been amassed for staff to suggest potential changes. The Planning Commission got a first look on May 27, 2025.

Alfele groups the potential changes into three tiers. The first covers minor grammatical errors, state requirements, and other corrections. The second addresses oversights and clarifications.

“Tier 3 is more involved and provides a deeper policy level change which naturally requires in depth analysis along with meaningful community engagement,” Alfele said. “These changes are more substantial and will shape the way we approach long term planning for tiers one and two.”

The idea is to get changes from the first two tiers to public hearing in the fall while beginning further work on tier 3 issues.

Several of the items suggested for changes under tier 1 relate to state code and new legislation that will soon effect. For instance, HB2660 requires localities to review site plans, development plans, and subdivisions much faster. Alfele said some of these changes can be made in the Development Review Manual and not the code, but others need to be adjusted in the official city code.

“We will need to amend the code to align with the shortened time frames for acceptance of complete applications for review,” Alfele said. “That time frame has been shortened from 10 days to 5 days.”

Additionally, SB974 completely removes Planning Commissions from the site plan review process.

Alfele said Tier 2 changes are intended to fill in the gaps where things were not stated clearly, leading to confusion.

“The current code is preventing attached dwelling units in the [residential} districts,” Alfele said. “Staff has worked with applicants on a workaround involving sublots, but that process wastes time and money and is not contributing to the goals of more and different types of housing within the city.”

Some of the technical language involved with Tier 2 (view the full presentation)

Another Tier 2 amendment is to exempt projects involving only one or two new residential units from the development review process, allowing them to skip to the building permit stage. Alfele said they would still be checked against zoning, but this would reduce the number of development plans.

Tier 3 changes will include altering the Development Code to allow height to be reviewed in both height and stories within residential districts.

“Due to interlocking regulations tied to the facade and street facing, how stories are counted becomes very different for development,” Alfele said. “Staff continually runs into issues related to height in the [Residential] districts that was not present under the old code. These complex regulations may be preventing additional units by too strictly controlling story counts that could be regulated by maximum feet.”

City Council will review the potential changes on June 16. Staff will incorporate their feedback and that of the Planning Commission over the summer before returning with a new version.

New documents file in lawsuit against the city’s Development Code

A trial date has been scheduled for June 22, 2026 in Charlottesville Circuit Court for a lawsuit seeking to overturn the city’s Development Code.

On June 2, attorneys for the plaintiffs filed a new motion calling for default judgement based on a claim that the City failed to respond to an April 30 order that the city answer to the amended complaint based on a ruling by Judge Claude Worrell earlier that month.

“Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter default judgement in favor of Plaintiffs and against the city,” reads the motion filed by the firm Flora Pettit on behalf of a group of Charlottesville property owners.

The following day, attorneys with the firm Gentry Locke working for the city responded with a request for relief and to allow a late answer. Their appeal is based on the fact that the city filed a motion asking Judge Worrell to reconsider on April 25, a motion Worrell denied on May 7.

“In the days since the Court denied the Motion to Reconsider, Plaintiffs’ counsel and outside counsel for the City have been discussing trial dates,” reads paragraph 11 of their response. Following paragraphs outline good faith efforts to move the case forward.

“The City had fully and fairly participated in this suit since it was filed nearly a year and a half ago,” reads paragraph 19. “The City has participated in two rounds of dispositive motion briefing, responded to voluminous discovery requests, and fully intends to defends its actions in the merits of this case.”

The city attached their answer as Exhibit A in their response. No hearing date has been scheduled for this matter.

“When the facts are laid bare, it will be clear that the City followed a model process, fully compliant with Virginia law, that resulted in a positive and well-supported policy to make Charlottesville a more inclusive and affordable community,” reads a portion of the answer.

A trial date of nine days has been set.

Thoughts at the end of #878

How do you snap yourself out of a bad mood? I really want to know.

Today’s story about the temporary relocation of the polling place made me angry. How could that be unforeseen?

My life has been disrupted by the construction of the middle school for nearly two years. Work takes place six days a week most of the time and it has been loud. My house is covered in dirt and grime from the endless grading. I’m aware of it every single day. This is part of living in a city.

But now the polling place changes, seven days before an election. How could that be unforeseen?

How many people will show up to vote confused? Then again, perhaps I’m over-estimating participation for a three-way race for two seats in what will likely be the general election.

I’m discouraged over a trend toward fewer candidates in the 20 years I’ve done this work. I’m discouraged about a lot of things today, but that could be because it is summer and living does not seem easy.

Do I get to be discouraged? Do I get to have thoughts? For my entire career I’ve had to say as little as possible to as few people as possible. I have to bite my tongue a lot, which is good for the profession but sometimes bad for the soul. I only do this work because it exploits several severe flaws in my personality. Mainly, self-doubt, hyperactivity, and a need to explain.

I snap myself out of a bad mood by telling myself there’s no time for that. Even though some days this work feels Sisyphian, at least I get to do work that usually feels okay. I know there’s worth in what I do, and I know my own moods cannot be trusted.

I do know that this will be a summer of soul-searching. Do I really want to keep doing this work the way I have? I do not know the answer today, but I am hopeful I can find a seventeenth wind.

I also snap myself out of a bad mood by entering in random things into YouTube. This is the result of using the word “maudlin” in the search box.