Comments on: LETTER: Councilman Baroukh Says Focus on Budget, Not Moving Election http://fallschurchtimes.com/12761/letter-councilman-says-focus-on-budget-not-moving-election/ Falls Church City's Online Community Newspaper Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:01:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Andy Rankin (Falls Church) http://fallschurchtimes.com/12761/letter-councilman-says-focus-on-budget-not-moving-election/comment-page-1/#comment-5578 Andy Rankin (Falls Church) Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:31:56 +0000 http://fallschurchtimes.com/?p=12761#comment-5578 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. 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.

]]> By: Lou Mauro http://fallschurchtimes.com/12761/letter-councilman-says-focus-on-budget-not-moving-election/comment-page-1/#comment-5568 Lou Mauro Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:15:54 +0000 http://fallschurchtimes.com/?p=12761#comment-5568 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. 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.

]]> By: Andy Rankin (Falls Church) http://fallschurchtimes.com/12761/letter-councilman-says-focus-on-budget-not-moving-election/comment-page-1/#comment-5534 Andy Rankin (Falls Church) Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:43:09 +0000 http://fallschurchtimes.com/?p=12761#comment-5534 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. 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.

]]> By: Lou Mauro http://fallschurchtimes.com/12761/letter-councilman-says-focus-on-budget-not-moving-election/comment-page-1/#comment-5530 Lou Mauro Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:50:47 +0000 http://fallschurchtimes.com/?p=12761#comment-5530 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. 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.

]]> By: Gordon Theisz http://fallschurchtimes.com/12761/letter-councilman-says-focus-on-budget-not-moving-election/comment-page-1/#comment-5516 Gordon Theisz Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:53:22 +0000 http://fallschurchtimes.com/?p=12761#comment-5516 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. 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.

]]> By: Daniel Green http://fallschurchtimes.com/12761/letter-councilman-says-focus-on-budget-not-moving-election/comment-page-1/#comment-5506 Daniel Green Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:26:09 +0000 http://fallschurchtimes.com/?p=12761#comment-5506 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. 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.

]]> By: Hendrik Jasper, Falls Church http://fallschurchtimes.com/12761/letter-councilman-says-focus-on-budget-not-moving-election/comment-page-1/#comment-5501 Hendrik Jasper, Falls Church Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:48:00 +0000 http://fallschurchtimes.com/?p=12761#comment-5501 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 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.

]]> By: Peggy Monahan http://fallschurchtimes.com/12761/letter-councilman-says-focus-on-budget-not-moving-election/comment-page-1/#comment-5437 Peggy Monahan Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:18:22 +0000 http://fallschurchtimes.com/?p=12761#comment-5437 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. 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.

]]>