Buttermilk & Molasses

Richmond's Next Mayor: Six Candidates Walk Into A Bar...

It should come as no surprise to long-time Richmonders -- or recent transplants who work as corporate lawyers, private developers or senior executives for Fortune 500 companies -- that the race for Richmond's next mayor is largely populated by establishment candidates.

What's different this time around -- the last time being the 2004 election of Doug Wilder as Richmond's first popularly elected mayor -- is that there is a candidate for every establishment. Including the old school alternative community.

(Apologies to Paul Goldman, who doesn't really fit neatly into any mold. If anything, Goldman is the anti-Franco's candidate what with his rumpled shirts and slack hanging neckties.)

Although the final roster of candidates won't be known until June 10 -- the filing deadline -- it looks like Richmond will have as many as four candidates who fit somewhat neatly into one of Richmond's traditional political communities. Here's my off-the-cuff take at the moment on the six people who have declared or are expected to declare soon:

Dirtwoman -- My mother-in-law didn't know who Dirtwoman is, but every hipster between the ages of 30 and 50 does. His/her candidacy is more than a bit of a lark, but Richmond.com did do a sit-down interview with Donnie Corker earlier this month. Why vote for Dirtwoman? From Richmond.com's interview: "Because I think we need a change here in Richmond. There's too much mudslinging. The other day up on Broad Street, there was a poor lady and she tells me, 'Sir, do you please have money to buy me something to eat?' I took the last $5 I had in my pocket and gave it to her ... I'm a good person. I'm for the people, not for one person, for the all people and [if] I do get elected, I will help the School Board out. I won't fight them. I will help City Council too." Thanks, Donnie. They need all the help they can get these days.

Paul Goldman -- Is it a stretch to suggest that Goldman and Dennis Kucinich were separated at birth? The second smartest guy running, Goldman is also the savviest man in the race having honed his political chops over two decades as the Cardinal Richelieu to Doug Wilder's Louis XIII. Sadly, Goldman has been unable to land his obvious smarts in a way that leaves the public wanting more. He's destined to be one of those individuals who does pushes the right dials and never receives the credit he may deserve. Goldman is likely to siphon off votes from Pantele from people who actually pay attention to policies and campaign promises, but don't count on him to win a single district.

Robert Grey -- The best dressed, and perhaps best prepared, candidate in the race suffers one significant handicap in that he is hands-down the guy Richmond's corporate community wants to redecorate Wilder's current office. That handicap is actually erased to a large degree by the fact that Grey is virtually unknown to the white voters who dominate four of Richmond's nine districts. To them, Grey will have the appeal of Barrack Obama -- times five. Grey is gracious to an extreme in social settings, and may well be the smartest, best prepared candidate in the race. He'll score points for his poise and his policy statements, and you can count on his old friend Doug Wilder to help him pull a few more districts into his corner. Out of the gate, Grey is the one candidate who can stitch together a win in a majority of the nine districts without breaking a sweat. For better or for worse, he's going to set the bar for this race.

Dwight Jones -- Former Chairman of the Richmond School Board (though who wants to tout that, these days?) and current state delegate representing parts of Richmond, Henrico and Chesterfield, Jones represents the black political class of Richmond at its best. It doesn't hurt that he's also know as the Rev. Dwight Jones, and his congregation at First Baptist Church is one of the largest in South Richmond. I'm not convinced that Jones has the political chops to distinguish himself in this rowdy field of candidates -- or the vision to stand apart.

Bill Pantele -- The Bill Richardson of Richmond politics only in the sense that Pantele comes across as a genuinely nice, somewhat distracted fellow who is always a few minutes late to every engagement. It seems sweet, and then it registers that VCU's Eugene Trani exudes a very similar vibe until you feel the cold steel shiv slide between your ribs. Metaphorically, of course. Bill will play well with the Fan District he represents on City Council and the many developers who have contributed graciously to his campaign war chests over the years. Unfortunately for Pantele, no one else really knows who he is. Or much cares, even if they should. There's that Bill Richardson comparison again. He hasn't declared, but his candidacy seems likely. He may take New Mexico, and get a handful of delegates in Michigan.

Lawrence Williams -- If at first you don't succeed. Williams has taken a run at the mayor's office, as well as several attempts at a City Council seat, but the architect seems undeterred. He's the one candidate I know the least about, which probably means he's the one candidate everyone else knows the least about. When you're running against two political powers (relatively speaking), a gadfly and a transsexual, being the nice guy isn't going to land you many votes. Here's a bit from Williams' chat with Richmond.com earlier in May: "Oftentimes, people look at electability. I think mine represents electability plus, the plus dealing with very technical issues and management issues, like the baseball Diamond. That should have been negotiated on a conference table over a year and half ago. I had contact with architects on that, and many thought the scale was inappropriate for Shockoe Bottom and others felt the Boulevard was not the greatest priority for the city ... What I represent is more of a management style for a mayor. Most mayors in the past 30 or 40 years have been somewhat politically-oriented in terms of how to get elected, but I want to take Richmond politics and move it forward so we can begin to look at task force politics as opposed to banquet or social politics." It seems to me that Williams will be hoping to benefit from Dwight Jones' presence in the race. The flip side? He's the one person I could see coming out of nowhere to snatch a slim majority in the race.

The Great TD Revamp: Much Ado

As I was leaving the office on Monday -- the front section of the revamped Times-Dispatch tucked under my arm -- I stopped to chat with a coworker, another former journalist gone awry.

"Whoa, old school. That sort of screams, 'I'm irrelevant!'" he said, nodding in the general direction of the paper. "I'd hate to see their demographics. Remember the Methodist church I was married in? There was us, a couple in their 50s and the rest of the congregation was well into their 70s."

Which brought a couple of obvious things to mind.

First, the fact that as a 40-year-old lover of newsprint, I am an anomaly among the Times-Dispatch's readers. An anomaly they wish they could replicate, but an odd bird, nonetheless. I'm the guy who goes out of his way to pick up the latest issue of Style or Skirt or RVAMagazine, even after reading them online. I enjoy sitting at a table in the morning with my laptop, a copy of the Times-Dispatch and a cup of coffee. It's quickly becoming apparent that I am, in fact, well into my 70s.

Translation: Most people don't start their day with a printed newspaper.

The other thing that struck me -- not for the first time -- is that the physical form of newspapers has been run over by technology. I think of the guy who used to deliver glass bottles of milk to our front stoop in the morning. (See? I really am well into my 70s.) One day he woke up and grocery stores were selling milk in plastic jugs -- with an eternity before it expired, at least two frickin' weeks. Or the poor chump who delivered coal in a horse-drawn cart to those houses in the Fan, and the way he snickered at the other chumps installing a gas pipeline down Grove Avenue. As if...

But there's the crux of the issue for newspaper publishers -- Is the delivery system as important as the content? Is the printed form of news a distinct product (design + format + content) or simply the packaging for the product (content alone)?

In the case of the milkman and the coal chump, they were simply delivery systems. Someone else produced and owned the content [milk], which essentially is where the profit lived. And how that content got delivered -- direct from the cow, through the grocery store, refrigerated or in pasteurized boxes on the grocer shelf, turned into ice cream or yogurt -- really didn't matter to the guy with the dairy farm.

So, if my curmudgeonly 70-year-old self is overly concerned with the look and feel of an archaic delivery system [the newsprint version of the Times-Dispatch], it's no wonder that my hep 24-year-old self [poor, tiny, repressed self] keeps checking out inRich.com in hopes that they've somehow learned to deliver a vast swath of content in a clean, easily-accessible, aesthetically snazzy way.

I'd be an ass if I didn't acknowledge that they are getting there. Slowly, yes, but they just exorcised Virginius Dabney from the publisher's office and Ross MacKenzie from the editorial conference room!

This week's change-up in the TD's printed content was two parts right direction, one part waste of time. And it simultaneously reminds me that it is possible to redesign yourself into obsolescence, and that I don't envy the job of the Times-Dispatch's staff as they try to tangle out whatever it is they do that will remain relevant 10 years from now.

No one asked me, but I'm sort of thinking the content will still matter -- if the content is well-written, timely, interesting and not available elsewhere.

 

Publisher Tom Silvestri certainly framed the challenge as he sees it in an open letter to readers last week:

Our business is going through a transformation in which general news and highly specialized information is available, often for free, on multiple platforms, such as online or on your cell phone. At the same time, we're feeling the effects of a stubborn economic downturn, fed by an apparently tapped-out middle class...

... The planned fewer pages can be traced, in part, to higher newsprint prices, which are projected to rise by more than 12 percent this year. The subscription-rate increase has its roots in higher gas prices and other rising manufacturing costs. Our retailers, on whom we rely for advertising dollars, are hoping for better days as well -- some, such as A&N and CompUSA, have gone out of business, taking with them ad dollars we no longer have.

Thank goodness for the thousands of valued readers who have subscribed to this newspaper for 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50-plus years. In our conversations last week, many of you acknowledged that your children, their friends or younger neighbors don't read a newspaper as their main source of news. This trend stings the newspaper side of the business.

It also worries us all on how informed this community really is or will be in the future. Feeding the broader information habit is one reason our newsroom has adopted a Web-first approach, so inRich.com is updated throughout the day with breaking news and updates. In the bigger picture, we see where this is going, and that's why Media General has been a multimedia leader.

The Times-Dispatch's livelihood is a balancing act: Publish the best regional newspaper possible given our resources. Expand online capabilities. Launch niche products aimed at satisfying a specific, narrower audience and winning smaller advertisers. Embrace emerging technologies. Do it faster.

All of which leads me to the restructuring and reformatting of the TD's content this week. It was a week of hits and misses:

• I read the A section of the Times-Dispatch for the first time in a decade on Monday, when international, national and local news all lived together for the first time in ages; there was no distinct Metro section. Tuesday through Saturday, no dice. I read the front page of the main section, tossed it into the recycling pile and moved on to the Metro section. Who needs Associated Press stories on the rest of the world when you have an RSS feed to 16 international news sources?
• Another win for Monday's paper -- the Getting Started box on page A1. It actually had interesting tidbits of information about the week ahead. Too bad it doesn't repeat daily.
• Marianne Matera wondered what "wraps" are. I'll just tell you that wraps are crap. All week, the paper was shrouded in fluff -- half-page and single-page wraps of comics and Dear Abby and puzzles. It may well be the most annoying way to package content that I've seen.
• Wednesday's Food section was more interesting than it has ever been. Ditto Thursday's revamped Home section.
• Moving the Weekend section to Friday makes it  bit harder to actually plan, but I suspect the reality is that few people actually plan their lives with a newspaper these days. The broadsheet format is so much better than the old tabloid look.

By the end of the week, I realized that the "major change" touted by the Times-Dispatch was a fair bit of sound and fury. I was hoping for something more dramatic, more significant. Of course, the last dramatic change almost made me poke my eyes out.

Downtown Plan: Catching Up

While I was out welcoming a new baby into the world, the Times-Dispatch's Sunday Commentary section did great work presenting an array of perspectives on Richmond's proposed Downtown Plan. Without further editorial ado:

• From "Raising Downtown" (April 27, 2008): The foundations of the plan are entirely laudable, offering a clear and creative vision for the future. The emphasis on making better use of Richmond's remarkable and truly unique assets -- the James River, the wealth of history, the enormous stock of historic buildings and distinctive architecture -- represents a refreshing and uninhibited celebration of downtown's strengths. At last!

  The plan's focus on better mass transit, its insistence on maintaining economic diversity, its hopes for a greener city, and its appreciation of the amenities and characteristics of a traditional urban landscape move beyond bricks and mortar to address the character of the city -- and provide a blueprint for its ambitions.

  Some of the key suggestions are simple common sense, even if long overdue. Plant more trees. Open more streets to two-way traffic. Build parking garages behind and above street-level stores and offices.

  The citizens and the city have created a most excellent plan. We offer our congratulations and our support.

• From developer Robin Miller's "Increase Quality of Life by Capitalizing on Richmond's Assets" (April 27, 2008): But the Master Plan is only a step in the right direction, because it is primarily a guideline. Actual development is controlled by the underlying zoning. Examples of frequent problems under current zoning include archaic suburban-style parking requirements, lot setback requirements that render some properties unbuildable, and commercial restrictions that preclude any mixed use, such as neighborhood coffee shops and cafes in residential districts.

  Current zoning restricts much of the spirit of the Master Plan. In fact, if the Fan District were to burn down today, current zoning would not allow it to be rebuilt the way it is. Because the underlying zoning often does not work for the new intended use, developers must rely on cumbersome special-use permits or rezoning to achieve the same outcome. Unfortunately, both options are very time-consuming, expensive, and unnecessarily hamper the efficient development of our resources.

  During the past 30 years I have preserved historic buildings and rejuvenated depressed properties in five states. Richmond has by far been the most difficult city to navigate due to the old suburban-style Master Plan, the still-existing suburban-style zoning, and the cumbersome special-use permit process. During the past 12 years I have had to obtain seven special-use permits to revitalize distressed neighborhoods in Downtown Richmond, the Fan, Old Manchester, and the Museum District.

  Adjusting our zoning to reflect the new Downtown Master Plan's vision would establish a coherent, long-term plan that reflects community needs and consensus. In addition, such action would decrease the need for special hearings and would encourage more efficient development of downtown.

• From VCU President Eugene Trani's "Master Plans Acknowledge Symbiotic Relationship" (April 27, 2008): I am struck by the similarity of the foundations of the VCU and Richmond master site plans. For example, there is an emphasis in both plans on being "green," not only in providing green spaces in an urban environment, but also in building design and infrastructure projects. There is acknowledgment of the strength of developing the plans around our histories and heritages. Most important, there is recognition that the plans must support economic and cultural viability. According to the city's plan, economic diversity should be encouraged -- that it is not only how a city looks but also what it offers that makes it a vibrant place to live and work.

  The current draft of the city's master site plan recommends working with VCU to support economic diversity specifically in terms of social, cultural, and economic advancement. Coincidentally, a theme of VCU's strategic plan is to maintain the university as a model for university-community partnerships.

• From Richmond Mayor Doug Wilder's "Our Citizens Want a Vibrant Downtown" (April 27, 2008): I made it clear, and our city officials have insisted, that what was needed was "the people's plan" because our citizens are voicing an unprecedented degree of interest in what they want our downtown to become.

  This new Master Plan serves as a blueprint for the look and feel of how Richmond's downtown and its riverfront will develop and grow in the coming years. Not only do people work and visit downtown -- it also is one of the city's fastest-growing residential areas.

  Citizens have said that they want recreational access along the north bank of the James, which our downtown so noticeably lacks at present. They have said they want guidelines in place and a systematic approach to further maximize the historic qualities for which Richmond is already known.

  A Master Plan is a guide for localities to use in making future decisions. As Rachel Flynn, the city's director of community development -- who has ably overseen the Master Plan's development -- has repeatedly noted, "It all starts with a city having a firm vision in place for what it wants to become."

Another Conversation Richmond Needs To Have

On the heels of a highly successful, collaborative process to develop a new Downtown Plan for Richmond and the highly critical report on the Richmond region's ability to work together for a shared vision, there are more opportunities for different conversations that engage our broader community around a new future.

Over at Smart Communities, Suzanne Morse points us to the work of one community -- Cedar Rapids, Iowa. What I particularly like about Cedar Rapids' Fifteen in Five initiative is that it addresses one of the most fundamental issues that a broad spectrum of any community ought to be discussing -- what kind of place do we want our community to be?

This type of discussion is similar to the conversations generated by Richmond's Downtown Plan process, but go beyond the planning aspect to chase aspirations. Cedar Rapids not only decided it wanted to pursue light rail, it wants to launch a best-in-the-nation early childhood eduction program.

As the Chamber of Commerce-initiated Capital Region Collaborative takes shape, I wonder if they will take the typical Richmond approach -- develop initiatives based on what those at the table already know -- or if the new organization will lead with a sense of genuine curiosity and help the Richmond region's residents craft a vision for tomorrow.

Tuesday Night: See Me Read Poetry, Break Leg

On Tuesday, May 13, I'll join a half-dozen other [read: better] poets for "Sound & Sense: Poets Teaching Poets," a reading organized by the Hand Workshop Visual Arts Center of Richmond and the Library of Virginia. The event is free, includes a reception following the readings, and features poet Josh Poteat -- along with three instructors from the Visual Arts Center and a handful of their students.

I plan to read three pieces -- Misr, Grandfather and Elegy for September 10. The deal goes down at 6:00 p.m.

Award-wining poet Joshua Poteat (left) and several other poets present Sound & Sense: Poets Teaching Poets on May 13 at the Library of Virginia. In addition to Poteat, Visual Arts Center writing instructors Catherine MacDonald, Darren Morris and Leslie Shiel will read from their work and introduce student readers. Deirdra McAfee, instructor and award-winning writer, will moderate the evening of poetry readings beginning at 6 PM. The event, cosponsored by the Library and the Visual Arts Center, is free and open to the public. A reception will follow.

... Visual Arts Center student readers are Allen Chamberlain, Alexandra Iwashyna, Kathleen Markowitz, John Sarvay and Lorraine Waltz. The Library of Virginia is located at 800 E. Broad St. Free parking is available in the library's underground deck, with entrances located on 8th and 9th Streets just south of Marshall Street in the block between Marshall and Broad Streets.

Award-wining poet Joshua Poteat (left) and several other poets present Sound & Sense: Poets Teaching Poets on May 13 at the Library of Virginia. In addition to Poteat, Visual Arts Center writing instructors Catherine MacDonald, Darren Morris and Leslie Shiel will read from their work and introduce student readers. Deirdra McAfee, instructor and award-winning writer, will moderate the evening of poetry readings beginning at 6 PM. The event, cosponsored by the Library and the Visual Arts Center, is free and open to the public. A reception will follow.

... Visual Arts Center student readers are Allen Chamberlain, Alexandra Iwashyna, Kathleen Markowitz, John Sarvay and Lorraine Waltz. The Library of Virginia is located at 800 E. Broad St. Free parking is available in the library's underground deck, with entrances located on 8th and 9th Streets just south of Marshall Street in the block between Marshall and Broad Streets.

New Partnership, Same Conversation? Let's Hope Not.

It's nice to see Don Harrison pull his head out of whatever he does for a living long enough to post on some recent developments at Save Richmond. His posts usually set me to thinking about the incredibly dysfunctional power relationships in the Richmond region -- between the private and public sectors, between politicians and the communities they represent, between for-profit and not-for-profit organizations.

Most of the dysfunction is rooted in the past, rooted in habit and not easily changed. But the disconnect in these relationships is high on the list of those things that are not only holding us back as a region, but is also what continues to eat away at what passes for civic health -- not only in the greater Richmond region, but within our neighborhood communities.

At the heart of all of these relationships is the nature of citizenship -- what it means for individuals and organizations within a community to actively hold, believe or support something larger (even slightly larger) than their own interests. This is something that sat at the center of a workshop I attended last fall with community advocate Peter Block.

True accountability hinges on the choice to care for the whole thing, Block said. I've sat in plenty of private meetings with regional players -- politicians, business people and residents -- where there was an active desire to care for the whole thing, and to speak passionately about the city, the region, the school system, the James River, the issue of affordable housing, you name it.

But something happens when people move from private conversation into the public space. And Block spoke to that, as well -- What kills the future isn't opposition, it's lip service.

All of this leads me to an emerging organization in the region called the Capital Region Collaborative, which I spoke to the Greater Richmond Chamber of Commerce's Jim Dunn about back in April. In recent weeks, more information has been revealed about the collaborative, and Don Harrison at Save Richmond recently asked some relevant questions and concerns about the new regional group.

Save Richmond sees shades of Mayor Wilder's Performing Arts Committee in the creation of this new group, especially since attorney Robert Grey will be leading the new collaborative -- and chaired the mayor's incredibly secretive arts committee. But Harrison's key point is how he ends his post -- whether or not the Capital Region Collaborative will lead the region down a new path.

Lacking details, it's a tough call. Certainly, I believe the intentions of the key players behind the CRC and have discussed the new organization with a few of them. Unlike some on the sidelines, I don't see the politics and power struggles in the region as being a matter of good versus evil -- in most cases, people are driven by what they know and what they want.

What I do see is that even the good intentions behind the CRC run the risk of being co-opted by old habits. In its efforts to avoid "jumping off the cliff," as Dunn puts it, the organizers behind the CRC are setting an early tone for the organization of a top-down, consensus-driven body. Lots of preliminary planning meetings coupled with dog-and-pony shows to invite regional leaders to get on board with the new organization builds on one of the worst habits exhibited by Richmond's leaders over the years -- the sense that buy-in trumps vision, transparency and discussion.

If I were masterminding an organization like the CRC, one of the first things I would do would be to issue an invitation to area businesses, community and civic groups, non-profits and elected officials to a series of conversations about creating a shared future. Again, I turn to Block -- The only ethical use of power is the leader as a host, a convener, one who invites others ... knowing that your job as a leader is to help bring the gifts of those on the margins to the center.

For too long, regional conversations have limited the gifts of those on the margins. That the reason for this is primarily that those leading the conversations don't believe that those on the margins have an interest in being engaged goes a long way toward explaining why our progress as a community remains fragmented.

The Cost of Transportation Will Eventually Change Our Policies

When Virginia's political leaders convene in June to discuss transportation funding, it's pretty likely that they'll be addressing a very real crisis with a limited palette of solutions. That's because the planning will largely be rooted in auto-centric policies that treat cars as the most efficient and reasonable way for individuals to go about the business of living.

With a barrel of oil at a record $125 -- up 30% since just January -- and the likelihood of $200 oil in our near future, reality is about to outstrip political planning. Which is a shame, since good policymaking and planning are among the few mechanisms in place currently that can change the dynamic.

There are at least two important changes that are likely to take place in America in the coming decades. One revolves around how individuals get what they need. The second will be changing what individuals believe they need.

Others have blogged recently about the new Housing and Transportation Affordability Index, which unfortunately does not include the Richmond metro region in its mapping logic. It does, however, do a great job of showing how residents of two of Virginia's more populous regions -- the Norfolk/Virginia Beach/Newport News area and greater Washington/Baltimore -- pay through the nose to live where they live and then get where they need to go.

In the maps below, residents in the blue shaded areas pay at least half of their income on housing and transportation. The light yellow areas represent sections where residents pay less than 48% of their income on housing and transportation.

It would be interesting to overlay DC's Metro system over the Washington area map.

In the Richmond region, it would be interesting to look at the costs of housing and transportation for all of those new residents of western Chesterfield, Powhatan, New Kent and Culpeper counties who drive to work alone adds roughly $400 to their cost of living where they live (at 4 gallons a day, five days a week for two drivers) -- not to mention the added costs of shuttling to and from the regional big box stores.

It would be even more interesting to begin seriously looking at land use and transportation solutions that could fundamentally change this increasingly untenable dynamic. I'm the furthest thing you're likely to get from an expert on this subject, but at some point common sense (and financial need) will drag everyone into this issue.

The Downtown Plan: Public Square Tackles the River

While it's new format -- a slate of panelists discussing an issue, followed by public comments -- may have limited the number of people who could speak, last week's Pubic Square appears to have provided a stronger narrative than most of the Times-Dispatch's previous 19 or so events.

That's a good thing.

The great benefit of the TD's attempts to open the public conversation on all issues great and small (affordable housing, development along the James River, pop culture) is that it creates a space for community dialogue -- rather than the host of lecture series that seem to have materialized around the region. That the paper can then leverage the Public Square events means that tens of thousands of Richmonders who did not attend a session can get a broader perspective on the issues addressed.

But over time, the Public Square events have started to feel a bit like City Council meetings with the usual suspects showing up time and time again to share their opinions on everything under the sun. And the sessions have tended to attract those with a stake in a particular game -- advocates for affordable housing, for instance -- more than they have attracted citizens interested in learning more about the issues facing the region.

Last week's Public Square attracted about 200 people to hear from six panelists with opinions on and expertise around the James River. Their moderated discussion was followed by a dozen or so residents who shared their perspectives on the topic. Here's a snapshot, focused on the panelist's vision for the James River:

White: My vision would be to ensure the sustainability of the resources. Everybody wants a piece of the river -- whether it's development, water withdrawal, whatever. And I think it's going to require a lot of innovative thinking, cooperation, and communications in the future. And I would like to just mention one thing to [Secretary Bryant] that I am extremely proud of: the program DEQ put together last year on water treating for nutrients in the river. That's out-of-the-box thinking. It was one of the first in the nation.

Bryant: My immediate goal is kind of a boring, technical one. And that is in terms of wastewater treatment plants. A decade ago the commonwealth set certain goals in conjunction with Pennsylvania and Maryland and D.C. to meet certain pollution reduction goals in terms of phosphorous and nitrogen going into the bay. We are on track right now to meet our 2010 goals for wastewater treatment plant upgrades. Two years ago, three years ago, we never would have thought we were going to get there.

Silvestri: I bet you have a broader vision.

Bryant: Access points. We want a sustainable river -- not just for the fisheries, but for those of us who like to enjoy them. I think between Richmond and Williamsburg, what have we got, two? I think we've got two real good accessible public access points between this very historic part of the river, Richmond to Williamsburg.

Ross: I see from the end of the present Canal Walk a promenade and a linear walkway, Capital Trail and Canal Walk, and park, all the way down to the city limits at Rocketts Landing. And I think that it is possible to have sustainable structures and commercial enterprises that produce taxable income and help pay for all the wonderful things that we all like to have and want to have.

Flynn: Our vision is Central Park, a flowing central park to really celebrate the river. And the downtown plans in the past, the river was always on the edge. Now it's in the center. And we really want to make it the focal point of Richmond, the surrounding area, and indeed, the state, given that this is everyone's capital. How can we turn the flood wall from an eyesore and something that blocks access and views into something attractive? If you look at Europe and you see these high walls, they're always beautiful, and they have attractive buildings behind and above them. How can we build stairways and landscaping along it so it's not just a liability but an asset?

How can we use native species and bring back the original species that were all along the river, which would better protect it, which would provide nourishment for the fish in there, and get back to nature? How can we build that continuous promenade and river walk that George [Ross] talks about. People really have this desire to be able to walk from one end all the way down to the other. We hear it time and time again on both sides of the river. And finally, how can we create entertainment venues and retail that can complement the recreational and other aspects of the river so that it's a one-stop shop, if you will? And we've just started, but we need to make those links even better.

Powell: Ditto to everything Rachel [Flynn] just said. And I really think Scenic Virginia's broader vision is this: A promenade where you can walk your dog, you can bike, you can rollerblade, you can push a stroller, you can fish.

It will be interesting to see if the Public Square events continue to evolve. Somewhere along the lines, perhaps, they will morph into large discussion sessions that mix experts and laypeople together around tables to share perspectives, generate ideas, build relationships and create something new. It's worked in other places.