Bothersome issues ...

Like all newspaper columnists, I have issues. Here are two of the most recent …

- Were the good and patriotic folks who pushed for building the National D-Day Memorial in Bedford listening to their hearts more than their heads?

On the surface, it made sense. Who wouldn’t be touched and thrilled by the epic story of the Bedford Boys, or think it only right that this small community be rewarded in some way for giving up nearly two dozen of its young men?

The memorial got off to a grand start when President George W. Bush and other dignitaries joined a large crowd at its opening on June 6, 2001. Eight years later, however, it’s in financial trouble and seems to have ground to a halt as a moneymaker.

Of course, D-Day veteran Bob Slaughter — who is credited with the original idea — made a good point recently when he noted: “The D-Day Memorial … is going to stay up there on that hill, and they may as well keep it up.”

It does seem like a safe bet that no repo men will show up to haul away the majestic Overlord Arch.

Yet neither is this working as a private foundation. Part of the problem is demographics — World War II veterans, the core group of D-Day Memorial visitors, are dying off rapidly.

Moreover, the memorial has become somewhat static. Once you’ve seen it, you’ve seen it. What’s needed, obviously, is a program of revolving exhibits and events. Unfortunately, that requires money.

The lesson here is, just because something is worthy of notice doesn’t necessarily mean that people will flock to it. You may visit the grave of your favorite aunt every few months, even though it never changes. The same is not true of something that has been pitched as a tourist attraction as well as a memorial.

Adoption of the D-Day Memorial by the National Parks Service could be the best solution. That wouldn’t mean the original plan was a failure — just a bit too optimistic.

- The problem with boards of any kind is that they all too often turn into self-serving clubs. The lack of information released to the public by the Amherst County Board of Supervisors on the recent resignation of County Administrator Rodney Taylor is a case in point.

Generally, the rationale for closed sessions at local government meetings is either “it’s a personnel matter,” or “we’re discussing a contract.” And yes, in Virginia, county administrators are not elected, but hired by “their” board of supervisors.

But this is also the person who formulates a lot of the county’s policy, not the kind of job you’d fill through a newspaper ad or Craigslist. When that person resigns under pressure, people want to know about it.

Taylor, the ousted Amherst administrator, has a great deal of both political and practical experience in local government. Is it really worth ditching that?

One could even argue that it’s a good thing to have a county administrator who is not in lockstep with his or her board. That’s how creative compromises and new ideas come about.

As for the secrecy surrounding this affair, it’s a little as if the Republican Congress had impeached Bill Clinton behind closed doors, refused to talk about it, and termed it a “personnel matter.”

Maybe I’m wrong, but it will be interesting to hear what the Amherst board members say when they go public on this matter this month. It’s just a shame they didn’t do that on day one.