The historic district of Manassas got just a little bit more colorful today with the addition of yet another sign by Gaudencio Fernandez that spouts his “Mexica Movement” garbage. While legitimate property owners in Manassas’ Old Town are required to get a permit from the Architectural Review Board for any sign they want to put up, no matter how big it is, City Manager Larry Huges apparently thinks whatever Fernandez does is OK and refuses to enforce any zoning ordinances against this civic vandal.
People of Manassas, how long are you supposed to put up with this? Every time the city refuses to enforce zoning ordinances, all it does is encourage this radical to erect more signs calling you names. The city acted like compliant little subservient cowards to this type of outrage only a few weeks ago, and as a result it only encouraged more bad behavior from Fernandez. This has got to stop. The law applies equally to everyone, doesn’t it?
I find it rather amusing that someone who ascribes to the policy of forcibly removing all white people from North America has the cojones to call others “white supremacists.” It almost eclipses the ridiculousness of the call of this serial lawbreaker for “equality and justice,” which he has so far evaded by playing the race card every opportunity he gets. Had anyone else engaged in such a persistent pattern of disrespect for the law, they’d have been pounded by the city long ago. Fernandez instead gets to be the poster boy for the famous phrase “everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.”
And you’re part of the side of this equation that gets to be a little less equal. How wonderful.
I think Manassas City needs a new park. I think this would be a great location for it. I really think an eminent domain seizure for that purpose would significantly improve the quality if the City of Manassas. It’s got to be easier than getting the city to actually enforce the rules when the violator happens to be a rabble-rousing racial supremacist like Gaudencio Fernandez, isn’t it?
UPDATE: There’s been an interesting discussion in the comments thread between Councilman Andy Harrover and some readers about whether signs must be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board. One smart reader bothered to look up the city code, and noted the following (emphasis added):
“Sec. 130-546. Certificate of appropriateness.
(a) Activity requiring review, unless exempted by this division:
(1) No building or structure, including signs, shall be erected,reconstructed, altered or restored within an HOD unless approved by the ARB or, on appeal, by the city council as being architecturally compatible with the historic structures within.”
(b) Approval of certificate of appropriateness. Prior to approval of any certificate of appropriateness, the ARB shall determine if the following conditions have been adequately addressed:
(1) The activity is consistent with the secretary of the interior’s standards for:
a. Rehabilitation; and
b. Being architecturally compatible with the historical, cultural and/or architectural aspects of the HOD, structure and its surroundings.
(2) The visual impact of the proposed exterior architectural features, including all signs.
(3) The general design, scale and arrangement of new construction and additions.
(4) The texture, material and color of new construction, unless otherwise exempt from review.
(5) The relationship of features in subsections (b)(2), (3) and (4) of this section, to similar features of the buildings and structures immediately adjacent to or visible from the proposed activity.
(6) The extent to which the building or structure would be harmonious with, or incompatible with, the historic aspects of its surroundings.
And since a white sheet sign could be considered contempory, let’s look at that part -
(c) Contemporary construction. It is not the intent of the city or this division to discourage contemporary architectural expression, or to require the emulation of existing structures of historic or architectural interest in specific detail. Harmony, or incompatibility, shall be evaluated in terms of the appropriateness of architectural features, materials, scale, size, height and placement of a new structure in relationship to existing structures and to the setting.
I guess I’ll give up English speaking and switch to my German or Korean since I read the code as saying the ARB does have a say in Historic District Signs.
Now I’m not going to blame Andy for not knowing the code, since the City Attorney is who the council members depend on for guidance on legal matters. Andy is an IT guy, not a lawyer, but at least he’s one of the few with the courage to engage the public on this issue and for that he is to be commended. I’m going to lay this right in the lap of the City Attorney Robert Bendall who despite being in this position since 1975 is somehow giving legal advice to the City Council that is easily trumped by a layman effectively using google. WHAT THE HELL IS BENDALL DOING THERE IF HE CAN’T EVEN TELL THE CITY WHAT THEIR OWN ORDINANCES SAY????
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.