Comments (3)

By Marc, February 1, 2010 5:31 pm

Unless you have been living under a political rock, everyone should be no doubt aware of a pubic hearing scheduled for tomorrow to reinstitute the merchants’ capital tax and nix the BPOL tax. Republicans made BPOL a key issue during the last campaign and pledged to kill it. They ended up winning a majority on the Stafford County Board of Supervisors (5-2) and are poised to follow through on their pledge tomorrow (this is actually a forgone conclusion).

How do Republicans plan on paying to repeal BPOL (since the money was already included in the FY ’10 budget)? As I predicted back in December (here and here), they plan on using the remaining $4.8 million surplus. That’s right, the $4.8 million (It was actually $6.2 million, but some of the money was already spent) that was discovered late last year because of an accounting error between the school board and the county two years ago. When Democrats proposed spending the surplus in December, Republican outrage boiled over. Supervisor Cord Sterling (R-Rock Hill) had the following to say when Democrats proposed spending the surplus,

We have a bleak financial outlook…It’s not a responsible way to govern. We need to put governance ahead of politics. Let’s wait and figure this out during the normal budget process.

And Supervisor Paul Milde (R-Aquia) added,

This amounts to a $6.2 million raid of Stafford’s accounts…I see Democrats trying to give away $6.2 million.

I would ask Sterling and Milde what has changed since December? Could it be that they are now in the majority and want to use the funds for other purposes? To Sterling, how is it good governance to repeal BPOL and cover the revenue loss with the surplus? I guess the financial outlook isn’t as bleak as it was in December or the outrage a month ago was more about wanting to save the money so that it could be used to repeal BPOL. It sounds to me that politics is being put ahead of good governance.

To Milde, I guess the Republicans are now trying to give away the remaining surplus. The only difference is that Democrats were giving the money to teachers and deputies, plus funding a required trust setup for post-employment benefits of school and county employees; and Republicans are choosing to give money to local businesses by repealing BPOL. This is not to say that one group deserves the money over another, but these are just simple facts.

Like I said back in December, both Republicans and Democrats wanted to spend the money in different ways. That is what made the Republican outrage so disingenuous. I was against spending the surplus until the budget picture became clearer. It is now clear that things are continuing to deteriorate and the FY ’11 budget already contains a $6.9 million revenue shortfall. Given declining state revenues, the picture will surely get worse. Repealing BPOL will only compound and exacerbate the already precarious budget situation.

It is no secret that I have been highly critical of the way in which BPOL was passed in the first place and have some serious issues with the structure of it. The reality is that localities are limited in the number of tools at their disposal to generate revenue. Unfortunately for homeowners, when additional revenue is needed that usually equates to higher property taxes. What we need is an equitable tax structure for homeowners and businesses. That doesn’t mean that businesses should be punished, but we need to understand that everyone has a stake in our communities and work towards some compromise.

Del. Mark Cole (R-Spotsylvania) recently introduced a bill to prevent any localities that have not enacted BPOL by January 1, 2010 from doing so in the future.  This doesn’t seem like much of a compromise to me, but politics at its’ worst. It is important to note that BPOL is a tool provided by the state to the localities and any changes to it must be introduced and passed in the state legislature.

Whether you are for or against BPOL is beside the point right now. The reality is that a bi-partisan group of supervisors, including Sterling and Dudenhefer (R-Garrisonville) approved the FY ’10 budget, which clearly included BPOL as a revenue stream. It seems fiscally irresponsible to me to remove a revenue stream by spending the surplus (double whammy there), which could instead go towards reducing the looming budget deficit. We need to do everything in our power to protect our core services (e.g. education, police, fire and rescue). The reality is that we are in for either severe cuts to these services (many of which are already cut to the bone) or a massive increase in homeowner’s property taxes to sustain them. So what are Republicans proposing going forward? I’m waiting…

I, for one, am deeply concerned about our schools. Did you know that approximately 53% of Stafford’s schools did not meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) last year? No Child Left Behind stipulates that any school system that receives federal funds must meet 100% AYP by 2014; and that schools that don’t make AYP for two or more consecutive years in the same content area be sanctioned, which would ultimately affect federal funding. If Stafford is hoping to attract businesses to the area, I assure you that a failing school system will not convince them.  The remaining $4.8 million surplus could easily mean that more teachers keep their jobs (ensuring reasonable class sizes) and we can make the necessary investments in our schools for fiscal year ’11 and beyond.

The Republicans have tried to make the argument that BPOL will hurt businesses and cause them to leave Stafford County in this economic climate. If that is the case then why isn’t Spotsylvania or the City of Fredericksburg considering a repeal of BPOL? Again this isn’t an argument for or against BPOL, it is simply a fact. Yes, a fact that current Supervisor Gary Snellings (R-Hartwood) agreed with in 2004.

Snellings said the following about BPOL back in 2004,

My argument has always been that if you have BPOL, you will run businesses out of the county…But I don’t see businesses jumping across the Rappahannock River because Stafford doesn’t have BPOL.

Snellings went on to say back in 2004,

I have never been in favor of BPOL…Until now. I don’t see any other way we can relieve some of the burden on homeowners other than putting it on BPOL. Nobody likes taxes, but the reality is, this is not as big a burden as we are being led to believe.

So in summary, Snellings didn’t see businesses coming to Stafford because of not having BPOL, believed BPOL provided a means to relieve the tax burden on homeowners and it wasn’t as big of a burden as everyone was being led to believe. Now he and his Republican colleagues have changed their mind on BPOL? Since I don’t believe there have been any substantive changes to BPOL since 2004, why the sudden change in opinion? Again, this is politics at its’ worst.

Going forward, we can only hope that our elected officials put the needs of the many over their own. The severe budgetary problems we are facing belong to no political party. It is time for them to put Stafford County residents first. I’m tired of the hypocrisy. What we need is fiscal restraint and responsibility and not political posturing.

It is already a forgone conclusion that Republicans will use the surplus to repeal the BPOL revenue stream (which some have stated would equate to $140 million over the next 20 years). The problem with all of this is that Republicans still have failed to address the revenue stream problem moving forward and have instead tried to make repealing BPOL appealing through the use of the one-time windfall (surplus). They are essentially out selling the bearskins before they have even found the bear.

At this point, I can only hope that Republicans level with county residents on what this will mean in terms of our property taxes and core services moving forward; however, if history prevails, I won’t be holding my breath.

Comments (0)

By Marc, February 1, 2010 4:52 pm

…or a certain former Stafford County Supervisor named George Schwartz (D-Falmouth) (see Spaceballs).

In 2007, Stafford Democrats met with great success at the local level. Dr. Harry Crisp (D-George Washington) and Bob Woodson (D-Griffis-Widewater) defeated their Republican opponents and provided Democrats the necessary votes to flip the board majority from 4 votes Republican to 4 votes Democratic.

Enter George Schwartz (D-Falmouth) who pulled off a major upset victory in 2005 in the Falmouth Supervisor race against Mark Osborne (R-Falmouth). After the 2007 victories, Crisp, Woodson and Joe Brito (I-Hartwood) voted to elect George Schwartz as the new Chairman of the Stafford County Board of Supervisors; thus, putting a Democrat in charge for the first time.

Schwartz decided, immediately upon his election as Chairman, that Stafford’s implementation of the Business, Professional and Occupational License (BPOL) should be the first major piece of legislation that the new democratic majority take up. Schwartz was certainly no stranger to controversy, earning the nickname “Furious George” from his Republican opponents (and some Democrats). It is without a doubt that George possessed a strong intellect, but what would quickly become his Achilles heal was his poor temperament, “me first” attitude and his yearning for power. The potential was there for Schwartz, but unfortunately it was never realized.

Many democrats warned Schwartz that making BPOL the first issue that this new democratic-led board takes up was rife with many land mines. Schwartz mostly won his election in 2005, based on a populist message that developers needed to pay for their impact on our community (e.g. schools, roads, other infrastructure) and that homeowners should not be asked to subsidize this impact through higher property taxes. Fast forward to the end of 2007. According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Bush recession began in December 2007. As we all know 2008 was a difficult time for many businesses and families, with employers shedding over a million jobs. The problem for Schwartz was that 2007 was not 2005. Secondly, the BPOL fee affects all businesses and not only developers.

Schwartz also was ill prepared for the aggressive marketing campaign put forth by the Republicans and the business community to derail BPOL, even though many warned him about this from the beginning. He simply dismissed many of his fellow Democrats and labeled them as not “real” democrats, even throwing off a well-respected local Democrat from Stafford’s Economic Development Authority (EDA). Schwartz’s answer to the aggressive marketing campaign put forth by the Republicans was silence.

If all of this wasn’t bad enough, the manner in which Schwartz eventually was able to pass BPOL provided endless fodder for Republicans. It was passed in the dead of night. Supervisors were so tired that some couldn’t even push the correct voting buttons. Personally, I don’t believe our elected officials should be conducting the people’s business in the dead of night and when they are obviously too tired to press the right buttons. Republicans seized on this and made the Schwartz-led board look foolish in a much-circulated YouTube video. To make matters worse, they decided to pass BPOL and delay actually collecting it until 2010. From a political perspective, this allowed Republicans to make the 2009 elections a referendum on BPOL.

In the days, weeks and months after passage of BPOL, Schwartz again failed to present any organized effort to explain it to the business community and homeowners. The Republicans were successful in creating a huge public outcry opposed to BPOL. Fast forward to 2009. Republicans were able to turn this opposition to BPOL into votes and regained a majority on the Board of Supervisors, sending Democrats into the minority for the next four years.

Also as a direct result tomorrow, Republicans will be voting to reinstitute the merchants’ capital tax and get rid of BPOL (I’ll have more to say about this in a subsequent post here).

I keep hearing cries of outrage from some fellow Democrats who pushed so hard for enacting BPOL that more must be done to save it before it is too late. Too late???? These folks need to wake up and understand that it is too late! If only these same folks were so vocal in opposition to Schwartz’s tactics back in 2008, Democrats might not be in the predicament they are today. Democrats must understand that ideas are important, but choosing the right leadership and candidates are just as important.

The failure in leadership of former Supervisor Schwartz has brought Democrats to where we are today. It is time to face the reality or be destined to repeat the past. It is time for Schwartz and his supporters to stop blaming everyone else and face the facts. To those who refuse to move forward, may the Schwartz be with you!

Comments (0)

By Marc, January 28, 2010 9:09 pm

Sens. Webb and Warner announced today that Virginia has been awarded $75 million in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARAA) stimulus funds to add a third track segment between Arkendale in Stafford County and Powell’s Creek in Price William County.

This will provide a huge benefit in providing more reliable performance for high-speed Amtrak passenger trains and Virginia Railway Express (VRE) commuter trains by allowing passenger trains and freight trains to share the same rail corridor in a more efficient manner. Based on topography, this new 11.4 miles of track will allow trains to increase their maximum speed to around 100 mph. The current maximum operating speed is 70 mph.

…Being a regular VRE rider, this is a great news…I’ve been quite happy with the improvements that VRE has made in their overall on-time performance over the last two years and the addition of this third track will provide for even further improvement…Many thanks to Sens. Webb and Warner…

This project is slated to be completed in 2 years and is actually part of a larger effort to build a Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor in Virginia.

The benefits of this project reach well beyond increased rail performance and extend to job creation in the region. As Sen. Warner explains,

this project will create construction jobs and spur economic activity at the local level, and eventually it will be part of the larger effort to provide congestion relief and help reduce our nation’s dependence on fossil fuels.

Sen. Webb adds that that he is a

strong proponent of rail systems nationwide and also in Virginia, which reduce traffic on our highways in a cost effective way.

He had hoped for additional funding, but adds that

today’s $75 million commitment of stimulus funds will both [help] to spur job creation and economic growth, while making meaningful investments in Virginia’s high-speed rail.

To learn more about this project, you can click here (pdf): http://bit.ly/adWWFy.

Comments (2)

By Marc, January 9, 2010 4:55 pm

At today’s Stafford Democratic Committee (SDC) Reorganizational Caucus, former Aquia Democratic Supervisor Kandy Hilliard was elected Chair of the SDC. As the outgoing Chair of this committee, I believe that Kandy will continue the tremendous progress we have made over the last two years and will be one heck of a Chair! Congratulations to Kandy!

Now, here is a little about Kandy. In 2001, she was elected to the Stafford County Board of Supervisors. While on the board, she served as the Region 7 Director on the Virginia Association of Counties Board of Directors.

She was also appointed by Governor Mark Warner to serve on the Local Government Advisory Committee of the Chesapeake Bay Program and then was reappointed by Governor Kaine. Kandy played a key role in helping to preserve the Crow’s Nest Peninsula. As Kandy explained today,

As Aquia District Supervisor, I worked hard to get $30 million in Virginia Resource Authority funds to purchase the Crow’s Nest Peninsula, one of the last remaining bird and wildlife sanctuaries on the eastern seaboard.

She also helped to spearhead a County-wide roadside litter removal effort which cleaned up more than 50 miles of major roadways each year. They picked up trash from Quantico on the north end to the Falmouth Bridge on the southern end and up Garrisonville Road and Rt. 17. Given the makeup of the current Board of Supervisors within Stafford County, this experience may prove to be invaluable!

Kandy is also the current Chair of the Friends of the Rappahannock Executive committee.

Elected along with Kandy were Laura Sellers as Senior Vice-Chair; Noreen Crowley and Linda Berkoff as Vice-Chairs; David Kerr as Secretary; Bruce Iosco as Treasurer; Bobby Crisp as Sergeant-at-Arms; and Marvin Wagner as Parliamentarian.

Comments (0)

By David, January 4, 2010 6:45 pm

There are a lot of Democrats who aren’t at all happy about the President’s decision to commit additional forces to Afghanistan.  They are convinced this is an un-winnable war and can’t help but make that all too easy leap to saying that this will be just another Vietnam.   Respectfully, I think they’re wrong on both counts.  President Obama didn’t make this decision casually.

First of all, Afghanistan is not Iraq.  Iraq, a war, which for all its terrible costs, still makes no sense to me, was fought because of a determined, single minded desire on the part of one administration.  It had no real justification and now, the best we can hope for, is an unsteady peace.

Afghanistan is different.  There is a history that many of us don’t recall.  Or, I suspect, choose not too.  But it’s this history which makes a moral case for why we just can’t pack up and go home.

Just go back in time a little.  Say, to 1973.  Afghanistan wasn’t a war zone in those days, it was actually a rather pretty country, and its economy generated a healthy GDP.  Then that government (a monarchy of sorts) was overthrown and replaced with a Communist regime.  This didn’t alarm the west all that much (after all, who cared about Afghanistan?), but when the communists were toppled in the late 70’s, the Soviet Union invaded.

The Russians were well on their way to subduing the country.  Their primary resistance, sort of a confederation of tribes, traditionalists, and fundamentalists, was called the Mujahideen.   They weren’t necessarily a lovable bunch, but they were, at least in the eyes of the west, tweaking the nose of the “Evil Empire.” That was an attractive notion in the 80’s and slowly but surely, the CIA, with help from supporters in Congress (see Charlie Wilson’s War with Tom Hanks – great movie), started funneling resources in their direction.  The Mujahideen organization became a more disciplined fighting force, supplies flowed through Pakistan, and eventually, they turned the tide and made the Afghan War a major drain on the Soviet Military.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, there were lots of reasons why, but one of the most notable was Afghanistan.  And, it’s also, at that moment in time, where our involvement in this country came to an abrupt halt.  Afghanistan didn’t really have a government.  Its economy was barely functional, public facilities were almost nonexistent and infrastructure, what there was of it, was badly damaged.  Land mines and explosives, left over by the tens of thousands, were a daily hazard.  But most noteworthy there was now an organized military force, formerly the Mujahideen –  young men, well trained and well armed, with a dangerous cause – and no place to go.  The United States had packed up and gone home and the Soviet Union was history.  We provided no significant aid or nation building.  All that remained were the makings of a very dangerous situation.

The dispossessed warriors of the Mujahideen were ripe targets for international Islamic extremism and the formation of Taliban.  The rest of the story is something we all know pretty well.  But as we debate the future of Afghanistan, we can’t ignore the events that got us to this point.  They didn’t all begin on 9/11.  In a way, through our actions during the Cold War, however justified they seemed at the time, and our inaction following, we played a big part in creating this situation.  Therefore, we can’t, morally, ignore it.

President Bush, to his credit (yes, I said that), had the Taliban on the run, but then, following the invasion of Iraq, turned his attention away from Afghanistan.  However this near criminal neglect of the Afghan Theater allowed the Taliban, and their associated extremists to once again get the upper hand.   It’s hard to tell what the answer may look like in Afghanistan, but the model that General Patraeus has in mind, looks sound.   He wants to stabilize the security of the populated areas and establish some kind of accommodation with the tribal regions.

It would be easy enough to claim that President Obama has taken a wrong course.  That he is going down the road Lyndon Johnson did in 1965.  A lot of progressives have said just that.  And frankly, I understand their anxiety.   Many think we should just leave Afghanistan.  But President Obama knows his history, understands how we got there and most of all feels a moral commitment to the people of this desperate and struggling region.  It’s not war mongering.  There is nothing the U.S. could possibly want in Afghanistan.  Save perhaps to do the right thing.

Comments (1)

By Marc, January 4, 2010 6:43 pm

As we learned from the last election cycle in Virginia, the perceived “safe” candidate doesn’t always equate to electoral success. This brings me to the 2010 race for Congress in the 1^st Congressional District. Over the next several months, Democrats will decide on a challenger to Rep. Rob Wittman (R-1^st CD).

I believe the single most important factor in being able to win this race is the ability of our eventual Democratic nominee to energize Obama voters and get them to actually show up for this mid-term election. I’m under no illusion that the first congressional district is a particularly easy one for Democrats; however, I believe that Krystal Ball is the only candidate who can pull off a major upset. As she often states, this election will come down to “money, mobilization and a good message.”

Krystal has already raised more money than any of our immediate past Democratic candidates were able to raise throughout their entire campaigns. As of the last reporting period, she has raised more than a quarter of a million dollars; and it is likely from what I’m hearing that she will be approaching a half million dollars at the end of this reporting period (12/2009). To put this in context, this would be more than Shawn O’Donnell (D-2006), Philip Forgit (D -2007) and William (“Bill”) Day (D-2008) were able to raise combined throughout their entire campaigns. This huge cash advantage will allow Krystal to gather the necessary resources to get her message out.

In a recent interview with Blue Virginia, she listed education, environmental protection and technology based job creation as the issues she was most passionate about.

Being the husband of a public school teacher, I see firsthand what a vital role our teachers play in providing a quality education to our children. They are constantly being asked to do more with fewer resources. Krystal understands education. She understands that in order to maintain and grow an exceptional core of teachers that we must focus on “recruitment, retention and fair pay.”

Specifically addressing recruitment, I think that it is important to understand why professionals choose fields such as engineering over teaching. To me it is not simply all about the almighty dollar as it is about allowing teachers to actually teach. Teach not to a test, but allow teachers a bit more freedom in actually teaching. It seems to me that each year we are spending more and more time on test preparation, which directly impacts actual instructional time in the classroom. Why is this the case? Under the No Child Left Behind Act, the federal government requires us to conduct tests to measure students’ academic proficiency. If certain academic thresholds are not met, this impacts the amount of federal funding a school receives. And, by the way, the federal government mandates that this testing be conducted, but provides no funding to support it (a.k.a. the “Unfunded Mandate”). I totally believe that we need academic standards, but the system is fatally flawed and is need of a major overhaul.

Krystal strongly believes that the federal government should not be “putting legislative handcuffs on local communities” and so do I.  Krystal also understands that there are many folks in local communities who may have a particular expertise that could provide tangible benefits to students in the classroom; however, they do not meet licensure requirements. She has proposed alternative licensure programs to help attract these folks and deal with an aging teacher population that will result in significant retirements in the coming years. One thing is for sure; Krystal is the candidate who offers the most concrete solutions to improve our education system.

With regards to environmental protection and technology based job creation, Krystal understands that they are not mutually exclusive. She understands that in order to address the ever-widening income inequality gap in this country that we must look at creating jobs in industries which we have a comparative advantage, such as renewable energy. This requires bold leadership and a true understanding of business. As a successful small business owner herself, Krystal understands that once “the costs of environmental destruction are brought from externalities to business expenses” that industries such as renewable energy will become economically viable. This will help create high wage jobs that just so happen to provide an added bonus of being environmentally positive.

If all of this isn’t enough to convince you that Krystal is one heck of a candidate, look at a recent endorsement by Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Chairman, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. In his endorsement he notes

“Krystal will be a strong champion of our armed service members and a fierce advocate for our veterans and their families, both inside and out of the district. I am impressed by her call to service and with her background as a CPA and small business owner. I believe she has a valuable perspective from which to legislate on economic issues, and will be the best voice for Virginia’s first district.”

As the Chair of the Stafford Democratic Committee, I have witnessed many successful and not so successful candidates and campaigns over the last two years. Krystal is one of the most intelligent, hard working candidates I have come across over this period of time and, put simply, is our best chance of winning a very difficult first congressional district race. She inspires people to want to work for her and produces a similar fervor amongst her supporters that was present in 2008 for President Obama. She is far from the safest candidate, a 28-year old first time candidate, but where did safe get the Democrats in the 2009 Gubernatorial race?

Comments (0)

By Marc, December 24, 2009 11:55 pm

I’m guessing that Jack is getting a bag of coal for Christmas this year! Ha!

Have a great Christmas!

Comments (1)

By David, December 24, 2009 11:30 pm

The Republican Party, eyeing the 2010 elections, has convinced itself that the Health Care Bill, slowly, but surely progressing through Congress, will be what political experts call, their “wedge issue.”  They are already talking about targeted seats, and pickups in the House, sufficient, or so they claim, to give them back control of the lower chamber.

It is grandiose talk and not unusual posturing for a party desperate for a comeback.  The Democrats are just as good at it.  But this time, in crowing about voter resentment and anxiety surrounding the Health Bill, and what they hope will be a backlash at the polls in 2010, they had better think again.  The new Healthcare Bill, once it’s enacted, may prove far more popular than anyone at the moment can imagine.

It’s happened before.  In 1935, after raucous debate, divided almost entirely on party lines – Democrats for it and Republicans passionately against it – Democrats in Congress succeeded in passing the Social Security Act.  There were dire predictions from the Republicans that the new bill was just one step away from socialism and a direct challenge to our American way of life.  They claimed it was reckless, dangerous, and oh yes, they assured everyone that it would bankrupt the nation.

For awhile, the public, having heard the details of the debate, and the arguments against it, were skeptical about the new program.  However, as they read more, and most importantly in their decision making, eyed their own old age, or that of their parents, they warmed to the idea.   Maybe President Roosevelt, along with leaders of the House and Senate, who had pushed and cajoled the bill through Congress, had a good idea after all.  Maybe, it was even long overdue.

The Republicans had another view.  They were convinced that there was a massive voter backlash brewing that would give them a big boost in the elections the year to follow.  But that’s not the way it turned out.  In the 1936 Presidential election, President Roosevelt won by the largest majority in history and increased, dramatically, his party’s already lopsided majorities in Congress.  The Republicans couldn’t have been more wrong.

But it’s amazing how little politicians, and this year it’s the GOP, learn from history.  When it comes to the Health Care Bill the public has been subjected to bit of misinformation and all the back and forth behind every compromise.  It’s no wonder that they’re a little mystified and even confused by what they’re hearing.  However, that’s not going to last.  So far, the debate has belonged only to the proposal’s detractors.  When this dynamic shifts, and the bill becomes law, that’s going to change.

Several features of the legislation, once they become known and understood, are going to be hard for the Republicans to argue against.  Take preexisting conditions for example.  Millions of Americans, with everything from diabetes and cancer, as well as more obscure conditions, many of which represent little risk, are denied coverage when they change jobs because they have these preexisting conditions.  This cruel practice will come to an end with the new bill.  Then there is the situation, common to parents with young adult children where their kids can’t get insurance because they don’t have work coverage yet or are still in school.  Their parents plans drop them when they turn 18, or in some cases when they’re 21.  The new bill will allow parents to keep them on the family policy until they’re 26.

Finally, through breaking down artificial protections for insurance companies, and allowing more dynamic competition in the insurance industry, as well as mandating coverage (while also providing tax breaks to small businesses to help off set the costs) some 30 million previously uninsured Americans will have health care coverage.  For many Americans, this prospect alone, which haunts so many people, will no longer be the gut wrenching fear it is today.

That’s why I am anxious, when the Republicans take to the stump, to hear them propose, repealing what will probably be one of the most popular pieces of legislation in our history.  The GOP may find, as they did in 1936, that once again, they are on the wrong side of history.

Comments (0)

By Marc, December 19, 2009 10:40 am

The following is a special weather announcement from LeavingMyMarc.com:

URGENT – WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE NATIONAL BLOGGERS WEATHER SERVICE LEAVINGMYMARC.COM 1000 AM EST SAT DEC 19 2009  DCZ001-MDZ006-007-009>011-VAZ052>057-192215- /O.EXA.KLWX.BZ.W.0001.000000T0000Z-091219T2300Z/ /O.EXT.KLWX.WS.W.0008.000000T0000Z-091220T1100Z/ LeavingMyMarc.com-

…BLIZZARD WARNING IN EFFECT UNTIL 6 PM EST THIS EVENING… …WINTER STORM WARNING NOW IN EFFECT FROM 6 PM THIS EVENING TO 6 AM EST SUNDAY…

THE NATIONAL BLOGGERS WEATHER SERVICE IN LEAVINGMYMARC.COM HQs HAS ISSUED A BLIZZARD WARNING…WHICH IS IN EFFECT UNTIL 6 PM EST THIS EVENING. THE WINTER STORM WARNING IS NOW IN EFFECT FROM 6 PM THIS EVENING TO 6 AM EST SUNDAY.

* PRECIPITATION TYPE…SNOW DHTML SNOW.

* ACCUMULATIONS…HEAVY SNOW WITH ACCUMULATIONS OF 12 TO 22 INCHES THROUGH TONIGHT.

* TIMING…SNOW WILL CONTINUE THROUGH EARLY SUNDAY MORNING. SNOW WILL BE HEAVIEST BETWEEN 8 AM AND 6 PM TODAY.

* TEMPERATURES…UPPER 20S TO LOWER 30S THROUGH THE EVENT…LOW TO MID 30S IN COASTAL SOUTHERN MARYLAND.

* WINDS…15 TO 25 MPH…WITH GUSTS UP TO 40 MPH DURING THE DAY   TODAY.

Comments (0)

By Marc, December 16, 2009 7:41 pm

Gov. Kaine announced today that Stafford County Schools will receive $462,860 to help expand the Early Head Start (EHS) program, thanks to funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment (ARAA). This will likely mean more jobs in Stafford for teachers and family service staff, due to increased enrollment thanks to these funds.

EHS is a federally funded program for low-income families with children under the age of three and pregnant women. The program’s mission is to promote healthy prenatal outcomes for pregnant women; enhance the development of very young children; and to promote healthy family functioning. The mainstay of the program is a unique home visitation program that provides families with parental education and parent-child activities, comprehensive health and mental health services and access to high quality child care.

Gov. Kaine:

“Virginia has made great strides in our early childhood learning programs, including pre-kindergarten Head Start”

[…]

“Creating the healthy habits and nurturing environments that support learning and development start very early, so access to prenatal care and parent education can’t begin soon enough. It’s excellent news that more families will be helped through an increase in Early Head Start funding.”

Secretary of Health and Human Resources Marilyn B. Tavenner:

“Information shared in a home visit can address a family’s immediate needs – nutrition assistance, for example”

[…]

“In addition, family service staff reinforce the parenting skills that help moms and dads create and maintain an environment that supports early learning and healthy development.”

For more information or to learn more about the Early Head Start Program, visit the Early Head Start National Resource Center.