Part I: City leaders react to reversion study proposal
The Martinsville City Council recently addressed concerns about reversion after Mayor LC Jones mentioned requesting a consolidation study and a reversion study. Many residents opposed past reversion efforts and still do, and council members clarified their positions on whether to support a study or pursue the process.
Jones said he individually asked the city manager for a reversion study and emphasized that it was not discussed by the full council.
“So, it’s not that all of council asked. I’ve said I asked” during “my conversation with the city manager. This is what I would like to see. I would like you to present (it) just (to) the council, to see if all of council would like this. So, nothing is approved.”
Other council members were not involved in the request, according to Jones.
“It’s not a council initiative; nobody else talked about it,” he said, “and I’m not talking about it to push it. I’m just saying, ‘Hey, the conversation is coming up. I feel that I can better defend it if we’ve had a study.’”
Jones acknowledged residents’ concerns but said some form of consolidation could be a consideration.
“I still feel like overall the majority of citizens in the city don’t want reversion. I think everybody would be willing to probably look at some sort of consolidation, whatever that might look like,” he said.
Jones, who was among the candidates in the 2022 election to previously run on a platform opposing reversion, added that the study would only move forward if a college conducted a study for free.
“I think that it’s fair and it shows transparency on the city’s behalf to just have (the) study done, you know, the same way we have all these other steps done. It’s not to say that we would go in that direction or not. I certainly don’t want to, but I think it’s a worthwhile study, especially if we could get a college or someone to do it for free.”
In a Monday interview, Jones said Vice Mayor Kathy Lawson had not been informed.
“I’ll get a chance to meet with the vice mayor this week and I’ll let her know,” he said, again noting that a study had not yet begun. “It hasn’t even started yet. It’s just, we asked for it from the city manager.”
Lawson confirmed Monday that she was unaware of the possible reversion study.
“There’s been no discussion by council about engaging a reversion study, so I’m completely unaware of any discussion. Reversion was killed by a majority of council in January of 2023 after the first study was completed,” she said.
She also noted that studies are “very pricey” and that the results of previous studies are available on the city’s website.
At the council meeting Tuesday, she vehemently stated, “We are not doing a reversion study.”
Council member Aaron Rawls expressed strong opposition to the idea, calling a study a “silly idea and a disservice to our citizens that we are spending so much as a dime on it.”
Council member Rayshaun Gravely, while not a fan of reversion, said the city needs to “keep its options open for the future.”
Council member Julian Mei said he had not been informed of the study and found it unusual that it wasn’t brought up in any council meeting.
“It’s not just a question of someone snapping their fingers in Martinsville anymore and saying, ‘I think we should revert so let’s start spending a bunch of money on it,’” Mei said.
While not completely opposed to the idea, Mei said strong data would be needed to prove reversion is in the city’s best interest.
“I’m not completely against anything. I like data points to be presented to me properly, current, as of the time of the point of concern,” he said, adding that he didn’t “agree with how it was presented” in the past.
Both Jones and Mei indicated the city’s finances appear stable.
“From weekly, monthly budget updates, from everything I’ve seen, finances look good,” said Jones.
“Regarding our finances, to the best of my knowledge I’m not seeing anything on my end that’s concrete and makes me think the city is in trouble,” said Mei.
Rawls, however, raised concerns that the city’s financial health could be undermined by internal conflict.
“Something has gone awry with some of the bad behavior of people at city hall, and missed opportunities. Reversion doesn’t solve any financial issues for us anyway, so I certainly wouldn’t consider reversion on the radar of viable solutions,” he said.
At Tuesday’s work session, neither reversion nor consolidation was discussed, with members of the council hearing updates on the electric department and options for relocating services and employees currently housed in the municipal building.
“We’ve exceeded the useful life of this building,” said Eric Payne, director of Community Development.
An air quality study revealed elevated particle levels, though not in the basement where some offices are located. Measures are being taken to improve conditions.
Relocation plans span five to seven years, with some employees expected to move sooner. Temporary locations include the Clocktower, modular trailers, and Patrick Henry Mall. Long-term solutions may involve the former BB&T building or other options.
Further planning is underway, and any court relocation would require a public referendum.
Part II: County leaders say process still puts county at disadvantage
Several Henry County officials expressed surprise and skepticism after learning that a Martinsville City Council member had requested a reversion study — an idea that has stirred controversy in recent years.
Henry County Administrator Dale Wagoner said he had not been made aware of a new study, but emphasized that previous studies are already available.
“We’ve been through this before,” Wagoner said. “Reversion is not set up to be advantageous to the county. State law automatically puts counties at a disadvantage. That’s why county residents have no desire for the city to revert.”
Wagoner said that unless the state changes the law to make the process more equitable, counties will continue to oppose reversion.
Board of Supervisors Chairman Jim Adams, of the Blackberry District, also said he had not heard about a potential study.
“Honestly, I don’t know what to say,” Adams said. “They’ve gone through this cycle several times, so something being their choice … I really don’t know what to say.”
Adams said that without knowing the city’s intent behind requesting a study, it is too early to form an opinion.
Vice-Chairman Joe Bryant, of the Collinsville District, said he was aware of the conversation but was not familiar with the details.
“I think that it’s something that needs to be discussed. I don’t know how to react. I’ve never been for reversion,” Bryant said.
Debra Buchanan, of the Horsepasture District, said she learned about the study through media coverage.
“Of course, they have every opportunity to do that if that’s what they choose to do. We can’t tell the city what to do,” she said.
Garrett Dillard, of the Iriswood District, said the city has the right to conduct a study if it chooses.
“They have to do what they feel might be best,” he said. “I hope it’s not a process like it was before, where it caused all this tension and commotion and confusion.”
Dillard said he hopes for a more constructive process this time.
“Hopefully they come together first and foremost as a board, as a council, and they can get on one accord first and foremost and get with their citizens and follow the process accordingly,” he said.
Travis Pruitt, of the Ridgeway District, said he also learned about the potential study from reading the newspaper.
“We didn’t know anything in advance, but again, it’s the prerogative of the city,” he said. “The way the state law stands now, it’s hurtful to any county government to absorb the city, so they can study and spend their money, but again, it will go to that referendum of the city citizens. But it’s not good news for Henry County, because again, we’re taking the bad side of the deal.”
Pam Cobler, of the Reed Creek District, said she understood that under state law, reversion would go to a referendum unless the General Assembly says otherwise.
“Being a new supervisor, I guess it’s their prerogative to do a study,” she said. “I mean, I’ve heard a lot of information and comments. When I say a lot, as it has been discussed either on social media or whatever, but I don’t feel like the reversion impacts me at all as a new supervisor.”
Cobler added that she did not support reversion during her campaign.
