Valley Forward makes an assumption.

Find the op/ed piece here.

Or the original posting of the same thing (with additional writer information) here.

I have been biting my tongue on this one for 5 days now.

So I guess the easiest way to do this is to tit-4-tat it, but I do ask that you read the piece alongside the VF document, so you can follow along.

Fiction: Valley Forward wants to destroy and desecrate the Mountain.

Fact (as I see it): Valley Forward does not have the combined brainpower to understand exactly what are the ramifications of what they do want. Each time they are called on the carpet - the definition of what they are trying to do changes - like in this piece. Now it is a "Community Center." Well, I think the mountain has one currently. Two if you count the 2nd floor of the hot dog stand in the zoo. 3 if you consider the picnic pavilion. I could go on, as there are more - hidden meeting places. Clandestine and secluded, but I am sure none of the folks from Valley Forward know where they are.

Fiction: Valley Forward will personally benefit from the Rockledge Plan.

Fact (as I see it): Directly, no they will not profit. But in the long run, as the legal wrangling and day to day operations of the "thing" grow - they will absolutely profit. Certain members of Valley Forward will take their clients up there and woo them to land major contracts, all the while writing it off as a business expense.

And this $2.5 million over 20 years? Thats $125,000 a year. A nice sum, but when split among the Zoo, the Mountain, and the greenways - well - it's equal to a good corporate sponsorship or two for the zoo. And that's still without defining profit for the "thing." Will it be after overhead? Before? Will this be some City/Enron style accounting?

Fiction: Valley Forward doesn't understand the environmental impact.

Fact (as I heard it): That's not what your old Bio Professor told me. LEED certification is nice, but untested in the long run - and means about as much as those EnergyStar appliances that still run up your bill every year. Anyway - if you are going to build something, build it smart - forget the nonsense of LEED and all the rest. Oh - and those 2 parking lots you will be adding? Won't they be on uneven ground? How do you propose to remedy this problem?

Fiction: Citizens are against this plan.

Fact (as I see it): Citizens are against this plan. It's ok to have 2 differing viewpoints on something. The company hired to survey the citizens of Roanoke has a checkered history with polling, and the methodology of this particular poll has not been made public. Put a poll online, and no - a petition does not cut it. But thanks for the strange history lesson.

Fiction: The Rockledge plan is just a restaurant.

Well, it would have been if they did not feel the need to suck up to the Fishburn family, and the public at large. But in that case, they could have kept the Inn too. Meddling public ruins everything! Although I do like the "bike racks and water fountains would be added." Now, explain to me - as a businessman - I get the bike rack concept, but why would you give water away free when you are charging for it inside?

Fiction: A restaurant on Mill Mountain will fail.

Fact (as I see it): Possibly. There are no assurances that you, your franchisee, or anyone involved with the project can give that will say otherwise. What you have is an untested theory, that people will come more to the mountain if you put food on it. A safe idea would have been to test a few hot dog stands up there, or approach the Zoo about a partnership to test the waters. All it would take is one bad winter to sink a project like this. And again, I ask - who will plow the Mill Mountain Parkway? Who will maintain the access roads, and when will Sysco deliver? And how? An 18 wheeler on Mill Mountain 2-3 times a week? 52 weeks a year (barring weather issues)? Thats some wear and tear. Not to mention a supply-side logistics problem. Putting all this on your franchisee and expecting him to be your saving grace? Insane.

Fiction: As a public park, no development was ever intended on Mill Mountain.

And here we go... Fact (as I sarcastically see it): Fishburn himself allowed construction on Mill Mountain!! What's wrong with you people! You'll upset the ghost of Fishburn, a smarter man than you!

Fact (as I see it normally): Fishburn was a smart businessman. He offered the Roanoke Merchants Association (of which he was an influential member) the space to put one giant sign advertising Roanoke for the holidays, at which time they chose the Star. Mind you - that was only supposed to last a year. The Zoo was built to give a "children's area" to the Mountain, as it had always been a popular destination for families during nice weather. It's "fee" was nearly non-existent at the beginning, it was not until the Zoo became a full Non-profit in 1975 that a "structured fee" was enacted. But through both instances, Fishburn had a greater reason in mind. Something for the community. There once was a watchtower atop Mill Mountain. For many years, one could go climb to the top and look out over the Valley. For a time, you could even shine a high-powered spotlight on your neighbors and annoy them from afar. All for a nickel.

Problem was, this tower burned twice after lightning strikes. Generally unsafe at any wind-speed, and a steep hike. Putting a Star up there seemed the next best thing. Gave a lookout point, and soon followed with an actual overlook. The Zoo gave the City community a place to go experience things they might not at home. The Central Park Zoo started much the same way. A way to bring kids into contact with "simple" animals - Cows, goats, chickens, and the like. In your average city, the odds of actually touching one of these before the age of 18 is slim. Thats why all Zoo's have a small domestic animal area, it's part of the reason they exist.

So tell me now, was Fishburn concerned about making a buck while looking good before the future environmental crowd? I say no, he was genuinely interested in giving something to this community it did not have. A place to breathe, get out and stretch their legs. And be above it all. It was an escape from the valley floor, where trains belched smoke and soot - and factories added more of the same. The buildings he would have considered adding would be the bathrooms and such, and as for the old Rockledge Inn? It was a shell.. harmless and useless and utterly defunct. In 1964, when the Mill Mountain Playhouse emerged there - it was a near miracle that the building did not collapse around them. Did he allow the presence of the Rockledge? Sure - like you allow the presence of that decorative rock someone gave you when you moved in. It's there, and until you find a use for it - it's going to stay there.

So Valley Forward, I ask you. Am I not open minded enough to grasp your stunning plan? Do you sleep the sleep of angels at night knowing this is going to be the thing that either saves Roanoke from itself, or condemns it to Hades? Have you considered asking the public directly, yourselves, without fraud or misleading questions (as you have done once before) - or did you just assume that because I am opposed to YOUR concept (not the concept of food and some light service on Mill Mountain, just YOUR concept for it), I must be "one of them" who does not wish to see Roanoke progress.

If you know anything, Lugar & Co., if you have learned anything from the times you have been here to read my blog - you should know better than that. I just try and keep an eye out for everyone's interests.

And one final question, as a non-profit entity (MMCF) would you be seeking a reduction in the property taxes you would owe the city, as the Art Museum has done?

Open your minds on that one.