LETTER: Councilman Baroukh Says Focus on Budget, Not Moving Election
TO THE EDITOR OF THE FALLS CHURCH TIMES:
I want to take this opportunity to express my thoughts regarding a suggestion by some of my City Council colleagues that we should push off the scheduled May 2010 City election until November 2010.
Each Council member has different life experiences and perceptions of what public service means in a democracy. Those experiences often times cause us to view the initiatives and the process of government in a more critical light. I came to the United States as a child, a Jewish immigrant from Iran – a country where any law or legal process can be twisted and perverted. I am therefore extremely sensitive to any action which can be viewed as disregarding the democratic process for political purposes. This is a criticism we are already hearing about the election date proposal, and consequently I think we must proceed with great caution.
While I don’t believe anyone would seriously disagree with the proposition of increasing voter turnout, achieving that goal should be free from the taint of anyone or any group attempting to achieve personal or political gain. Accordingly, that objective cannot be accomplished by rushing through an election date change during the last busy weeks of the year and during the holiday season. Our citizens deserve the opportunity to thoroughly understand and debate any change in their most basic right as citizens—the right to vote, as well as, in this case, when they wish to cast that vote.
Our citizens are likely to see a quick change in the election date as an attempt to deflect citizen reaction to decisions and actions by the Council that could have adverse political consequences. In fact, Council Members voting in favor of changing the election from May to November would be voting to extend their term by six months.
I fervently believe that it is the responsibility of elected office holders not to undermine voters’ wishes in the name of increasing the democratic franchise. Such action corrupts the democratic processes, leads to increased cynicism and diminishes the collective character of the community.
It is not the City election calendar that needs immediate repair; it is the City budget and fiscal practices. None of us welcome the serious and unique financial difficulties our small city faces. The 2010 budget decisions have been difficult and the 2011 budget will be even more daunting. Recent preliminary budget projections from City officials indicate a $7.6 million dollar budget shortfall for FY 2011. I urge my colleagues on the City Council to put first things first. The important task before us is to gain a solid financial footing.
We must own up to the challenges and make the best decisions possible for our citizens and concentrate our time and resources on the budget rather than focusing on moving the election calendar.
NADER BAROUKH
City of Falls Church Council Member
Letters to the Editor should be submitted to contact@fallschurchtimes.com. They may be on any subject relevant to our City. Writers should include their full name and city of residence. All submissions are subject to editing.
By (see byline)
November 19, 2009
Nader, you are a voice of reason in what appears to be a snippy, unprofessional, pandering atmosphere in the Council chambers. I think the most damning statement in your letter is: “Council Members voting in favor of changing the election from May to November would be voting to extend their term by six months.” Council Members are elected for a specific term of office, and should not, as a matter of integrity, wave the red cape of “improved voter turnout” to distract us from the bull of self-aggrandizement.
I agree with the previous poster that Mr. Baroukh is making the right stand here. I was appalled at how the Mayor tried to close down debate on this subject during the recent Council working session. I was impressed with Mr. Baroukh’s professionalism in the face of the Mayor’s closing comments tirade, when she managed to be both whiny and patronizing at the same time.
I agree it is time to focus on what is important. Who cares if the election is moved? The city is in a crisis and that should come first.
Nader Baroukh’s letter is well written and I agree with his sentiments – moving the election in a rush is a mistake. I welcome the debate, I welcome the thoughts of all, but I think the City Council would do well to encourage a citizen-led referendum and let the voters decide. Voting is not an issue of governance, it is a civil right, and therefore its timing should be decided by the people. In future elections, I for one will be very reluctant to cast my vote in favor of any councilperson who votes to move the election without a referendum.
Well said, Gordon. By the way, a referendum does not have to be citizen-led. Under the City Charter, the City Council can call a referendum on its own. They have done it in the past, the most recent being the referendum on the middle school bond. A Charter-based referendum called by the Council would be highly appropriate in this case because the current proposal, to move the election date to November by enacting an ordinance, would effectively amend the Charter, which explicitly calls for municipal elections to be held in May, without actually amending it. A very sloppy and wrong-headed way to significantly change such an important electoral provision which, as you say so well, has nothing to do with governance.
Lou, could the Council get a referendum on the May, 2010 ballot or do we not have enough time to do that? I know if they want to change the May, 2010 election to November directly with an ordinance they would have to do so before January 1, 2010.
Andy, see the first sentence of the Charter provision below. The answer is YES. But they would have to wait until sometime in April 2010 to get a referendum on the May 2010 ballot because of the 30 – 60 day window requirement. The fact is, though, they could pass a resolution tomorrow and schedule a referendum anywhere between the end of December and the first three weeks of January, while the issue is still fresh in everyone’s minds,……………….if they cared about what the citizens think. Obviously a big “if”. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO PASS AN ORDINANCE BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR THAT CHANGES THE DATE OF MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS WITHOUT HAVING A VOTE OF THE CITIZENS.
Sec. 4.12. Submission of propositions to the qualified voters of the city.
The council shall have authority, by resolution, to submit to the qualified voters of the city for an advisory referendum thereon any proposed ordinance or amendment to the city charter, not less than thirty (30) nor more than sixty (60) days after the passage of such resolution. The election shall be conducted and the result thereof ascertained and determined in the manner provided by section 24-141 of the Code of Virginia. If a petition requesting the submission of an amendment to this Charter, set forth in such petition, signed by qualified voters equal in number to ten (10) percent of the largest number of votes cast in any general or primary election held in the city during the five (5) years immediately preceding and verified as hereinafter provided, is filed with the city clerk he shall forthwith certify that fact to the council. The signatures to such petition shall be witnessed by a person whose affidavit to that effect is attached thereto. Upon the certification of such petition the council shall order an election to be held not less than thirty nor more than sixty (60) days after such certification, in which such proposed amendment shall be submitted to the qualified voters of the city for their approval or disapproval. Such election shall be conducted and the results thereof ascertained and determined in the manner provided by law for the conduct of general elections and by the regular election officials of the city. If a majority of those voting thereon at such election approve the proposed amendment, such results shall be communicated by the city clerk to the two houses of the General Assembly and to the representatives of the city therein with the same effect as if the council had adopted a resolution requesting the General Assembly to adopt the amendment.
Lou, thanks for the clarification. I didn’t realize the Council could compel a referendum vote at any time (i.e. it didn’t have to line up with a scheduled election).
If moving the election from May to November is urgent (as in, move it in 2010) then the only option seems to be for the Council to pass an ordinance since the move has to be made before 01/01/2010 to move the 2010 election. Actually, if they pass a resolution tonight we could have a vote during the last week of December and that would allow us to move the 2010 election. Of course, that’s a bad idea – because there isn’t a rush, is there?
I’d hate for the City to spend more money on a special referendum election so my preference would be to time it so the referendum ends up on the May, 2010 ballot. I’m guessing turnout next year will actually be pretty good (if we can get enough candidates running) because there are some important issues at stake – which historically seems to drive higher turnout in the local elections.