All About Turnout Pt. 4: Could New Voters Reduce Role of ‘Small Groups?’

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

Advocates of shifting municipal elections to November believe that a higher turnout is more reflective of the entire community.  They contend that spring elections are unduly influenced by a minority of registered voters, who in turn are swayed by a handful of activists.

A November 24 editorial in the Falls Church News Press referred to opponents of the move  as a  ”small group of citizens that have been able to wield disproportionate influence over events in Falls Church by, among other things, their ability to influence low-turnout May elections.”

Former Councilman Dave Chavern, who favors the move, supported this view in an October 30 post on Blueweeds:

The dirty little secret here is that the Council and School Board are now chosen by a small group of voters who disproportionately represent long-term residents.   .   .   .   In this environment, the CBC can consistently turn out its base to support most of its candidates, while the “opposition” (whoever that may be) can usually gin-up enough stalwarts to land a Council seat or two.

If a ”small group” of citizens actually wields such influence over a “small group” of voters, then perhaps every member of the Council should be indebted to it.  All seven won their seats in elections where less than one-third of the voters turned out.  Four were elected in 2006, when turnout was 13%.  But several Council members now have spoken in favor of moving City elections to November, which would theoretically reduce the influence of “small groups,” whether citizens or voters.

November turnouts, with the exception of 2007, are always larger, especially in presidential election years.  Presumably, a small group would find it more difficult to “wield disproportionate influence” if the municipal elections were held that month.

The only visible small group now active is the Citizens for a Better City (CBC), six of the seven members having won their current seats under its banner.  Nader Baroukh is the only member of the Council elected as an independent.

The lower the turnout, the greater CBC’s success over the years.  When the party faced well-organized opposition, first in the early 1970s, then from 1988 to 1992, turnout rose above 50%.  Between those periods, the CBC was invincible and turnout very low.  In 1986 the Fairfax Journal explained the major reason:

A nomination by the [CBC] convention virtually assures election.  Since 1974 no CBC candidate has lost.  Since 1978 no one has even opposed a CBC-endorsed candidate.  The three losing candidates [at the convention] said they would not run in the general. [February 14, 1986]

When the election was held that May, turnout was just under 11%.  The City registrar stated, “We’ve had about a 10% turnout in the last four elections.”   [Northern Virginia Sun, May 7, 1986]

The CBC remains a powerful force today, winning 14 of  the last 17 Council seats at stake, but it does not completely dominate local politics to the extent that it did in the past.

May turnouts in this decade, with percentages averaging  in the low 30s for contested elections, now seem exceptionally large and far more representative than most polls held in the 1970s and 80s when the CBC was unopposed.

However, recent turnout statistics do seem to confirm Mr. Chavern’s point that long-term residents are more inclined to vote.  The results of all elections from 2000 to 2007 are posted on the City’s website.  In some respects the returns from the various wards reflect two different cities.

In all but one election, Ward V had the highest turnout.  This is the only ward in Falls Church without an apartment complex and very likely the ward with the lowest percentage of renters.  Turnout there over four May elections was 50% higher than that in Ward II, which has the highest number of rental units in the City.

The turnout in Ward I closely paralleled that in Ward II, the numbers never varying by more than 3 points.  Ward I has fewer apartment rentals than Ward II, but does contain several hundred condominiums and townhouses in Winter Hill, which are more likely to be rented than single family homes.

Wards III and IV results were nearly identical and much closer to Ward V’s than those in the other two wards.

Here are the percentages of registered voter turnout, first for May and November for all wards, then the November turnout numbers in odd (state) and even (national) years.  The last figure is the current number of rental units in each ward, less Pearson Square in Ward I, which was not open until 2008:

.                      May/Nov     Even/Odd    Rentals

Ward I          22 / 53           41 / 64            206
Ward II         22 / 51          40 / 62            767
Ward III        30 / 56          45 / 68            209
Ward IV       28 / 56          46 / 67             216
Ward V        33 / 60          49 / 70              0

The patterns are remarkably consistent over the course of 12 elections (primaries excluded), with the percentage differences between the wards steadily diminishing from local to state elections (odd year) and from state to national (even year).

Note that the huge gap in May between Wards II and V shrinks dramatically in November.  Ward V’s fall turnout over eight elections is only 18% higher than Ward II’s, compared to 50% in the four elections held in the spring.

In even year November elections the turnout in Ward V is only 13% higher than that in Ward II.   Ward V turnout is 23% higher in the odd years, less than half the 50% difference in May.

The numbers reflect that citizens’ concepts of their civic duty vary considerably in different parts of the City.  People are more likely to vote in November than in May, regardless of where they live, but the disparities between certain wards are far greater in the spring than in the fall.

Proponents of change theorize that the influence of small groups would diminish if local elections were shifted to November when turnout is larger, whether the year is odd or even, and maintain that greater voter participation would be “better.”

Whether such elections would be better or not is purely subjective.  They certainly would be different from any of those previously held in the spring.  Many habitual November voters likely have never voted in a municipal election.  Some might come to the polls as usual in the fall and ignore the local contests entirely, just as they have in May, but others would be exercising a right they had previously declined to use.

The challenge for all candidates and any group of supportive activists would be how to win over those new voters, many of whom would not be property owners or parents with children in local schools.  Given the level of turnover in the City, this would be the case in every future election, not just in 2010 or 2012.

The final results might not be significantly different from the pattern of the present decade, with CBC-endorsed candidates usually winning and independents struggling to be competitive.  Much would depend upon how well the CBC or any rival party succeeded in making its case to neophyte voters.

However, in the November environment many voters would look for traditional Democratic and Republican labels as their primary guide.  They would not find such tags in the voting booth, but candidates could easily identify themselves with either major party during the course of their campaigns, especially if they believed that such an association would bring them more votes.  This could serve to significantly reduce the impact of recommendations from the CBC or any other other non-partisan group.

In that case, those now advocating the change from May to November presumably would be happy, irrespective of the election results, secure in the belief that a “small group” no longer was exerting as great an influence as in the past.

What is unclear is how the rest of the community would feel and whether many would find themselves yearning for the long-established system of spring voting.

Previously in this series:

All About Turnout – Part 1:  Two Decades of Decline

All About Turnout – Part 2:  From Old to New and Red to Blue

All About Turnout – Part 3:  The Partisanship Question