For the first time in at least 50 years a Falls Church City municipal election will not feature a ticket or slate of candidates.  The venerable Citizens for a Better City (CBC) has stepped aside and no alternative organization has stepped forward to offer a list of their own.  Every candidate for City Council now is a true independent, free to run his campaign as he sees fit and take positions without consulting his running mates.

However, many unofficial slates of candidates have emerged via the signs sprouting on many local lawns.  Tickets of two, three, or even four contenders have been spotted, the last perhaps reflecting some discord in the residences, as voters may chose only three of the seven candidates.

Excluding unrealistic quartets, 56 different Council ticket combinations are possible:  21 duos and 35 trios.  Each candidate has 15 potential matches with his six opponents, either as a pairing or as one-third of a trio.

Yard signs may not be an accurate reflection of wider voter preferences, but in the absence of any formal poll data they provide the only indication of popular sentiments in the City.  Over the past week the Times has surveyed the signs while driving or more often walking through most streets and every neighborhood.

Some blocks are bereft of signs, but on others there are more signs in bloom than azaleas.  As a general rule, the closer one comes to a candidate’s home the more likely one will see more of his signs.  City-wide, signs endorsing Mayor Nader Baroukh, Phil Duncan, and Dave Tarter appear to be the most common, though not necessarily in that order.

The majority of lawns host single signs, but at least 20 full or partial Council tickets also are on display.  While Baroukh, Duncan, and Tarter are more frequently found on these tickets, all seven candidates appear to have at least one running mate.

On Tollgate Way, going for Henneberg, Baroukh and Tarter

The multiple signs on many lawns reflect that voters no longer have the ”straight ticket” option, which CBC always provided in the past and, given CBC’s historic success, proved very tempting.  Now every voter, like every candidate, is an independent.

On Lincoln, the "Lawrence Ticket" - Lawrence Webb and John Lawrence.

How will the voters respond?  The field is an unusually strong one, leaving them with difficult choices.  Will they create full slates of their own or be more discriminating and vote for only one or two candidates?   The choices they make and the City’s future are in their hands next Tuesday.

On Columbia, neighbors crowding in signs for Duncan, Baroukh, Handly, Tarter, and Webb.

April 23, 2012

The Falls Church City Council voted this evening to hold tax rates at their current levels.  The real estate tax will remain at $1.27, the personal property tax will stay at $4.84, each rate for every $100.00 of assessed value.

Prior to the vote Vice Mayor Dave Snyder introduced a motion to reduce the tax rate to $1.26, calling the higher rate a tax increase.   Snyder advocated reducing reserves and removing all proposed non public safety related positions from the budget, achieving a net estimated savings of $560,000.  ”I don’t believe in holding the tax rate today artificially high to make it easier for politicians in the future to pass on taxes,” he said.

Councilman Ira Kaylin, who had seconded the motion, then spoke in opposition.  ”The only thing I agree with is that the tax assessment increases are tax rate increases,” he said.  Earlier Kaylin warned that the City’s finances are still fragile and projected a $1.9 million budget shortfall next year, which could result in a tax rate of $1.33.

Mayor Nader Baroukh said that to get the rate down would impact critical initiatives such as storm water management and could have consequences on the City’s borrowing capacity.  “As much as I’d like to do a one time reduction in the tax rate I don’t think it would be prudent or in the long term interests of the City,” said Baroukh.

Snyder’s motion was voted down, 6-1.  The Council then approved the tax rates and the FY 2013 budget, with the vice mayor dissenting.  The Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for FY 2013-17 was approved, 7-0.

In a statement to the Times the mayor said that the budget and the CIP are the product of a great deal of discussion and work and meet the critical needs of the City in these
difficult financial times.  “This budget and CIP strikes a healthy balance between the City’s fund balance and the needs of City employees, schools, and services.  And it meets the Council’s policy objectives including strengthening economic development, providing greater resources for infrastructure improvements to address items such as school facilities and stormwater managemen,” the mayor said.

Earlier the Council voted unanimously to withdraw the controversial “Ped Plan”, deferring further action until at least June 25.  Many residents spoke against the plan, particularly its proposal to eliminate street parking on Hillwood Avenue, Lincoln Avenue, and West Street.

In his report to Council, City Manager Wyatt Shields advised that representatives of six prospective bidders for the City’s water system attended an informational meeting today that included a tour of the system.

February 29, 2012

Fairfax Water has proposed that the City of Falls Church agree to merge its water system with Fairfax County’s.  Submitted in response to the City’s recent request for expressions of interest (REI) in its water and sewer systems, the proposal suggests that a merger would result in significantly lower water costs, provide robust system backup, and offer tens of millions of dollars in savings for Falls Church’s capital improvements program.  The City also would have a seat on Fairfax Water’s ten member Board.

Fairfax Water also lists three reasons why it would be inadvisable for the City to attempt to sell the system to the highest private bidder.  Falls Church would forego the additional reliability gained through joining Fairfax and its customers would pay considerably more for water.  The City also would likely face major regulatory hurdles, including approval of the sale by the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors.

Falls Church officials had little immediate reaction to the proposal.  “We look forward to reviewing it along with the other responses that we receive, as the City Council evaluates preferred options for the future of the City’s water and sanitary sewer systems,” said city manager Wyatt Shields.

In the proposal’s text, Fairfax Water’s general manager Charles Murray states “In short, the benefits of merging our two systems would be extraordinary.  Not only would your existing customers pay significantly less for their water but our joint water system - with two independent water treatment plants in Virginia and one in the District of Columbia - would be the most robust and reliable in the world.”

Falls Church issued the REI on February 14.  Responses are due by Friday, March 2.  Sale of the water system to a public or private utility would require citizen approval via referendum.  However, a merger with Fairfax Water might only require a majority vote by the City Council.

Falls Church’s system services around 34,000 accounts and 140,000 customers.  Most of its customers reside in Fairfax County.  Fairfax Water services 234,000 accounts and 835,000 customers.  It currently has six wholesale customers.  The City has one.

The full text of Fairfax Water’s response to the REI is available here.

Five days after the Falls Church City Council unanimously approved the release of a request for expressions of interest (REI) in the City’s water and sewer systems, City Manager Wyatt Shields sat down with the Falls Church Times on Friday to discuss the complex and weighty subject.

The Feb. 13 vote (with Robin Gardner absent) may rank as the most significant since the City’s founding in 1948. The water system is older than the City, dating to the 1930s.  It serves over 120,000 customers, primarily in Fairfax County.  For many years, it provided Falls Church with a significant return on investment, but a 2010 Fairfax Circuit Court decision prohibited the City from transferring the system’s profits to its general fund, effectively making it a non-performing asset.

During the interview, Mr. Shields said he was “cautiously optimistic” that the water and sewer systems will be sold for a good price, but he reminded reporters, residents, and interested parties that the City won’t automatically sell the system if the offers received are inadequate.

Falls Church City Manager Wyatt Shields

“The Council is not taking it lightly, not taking it as an academic exercise,” Mr. Shields said.

But he added that while there are risks associated with keeping the system, including the possibility of additional litigation, there also are risks with selling it.

In particular, Mr. Shields said that selling the system would not relieve the City of the water system’s $23 million in debt and its pension obligations. It wasn’t entirely clear why those liabilities couldn’t be part of the sale.

“One basket of risks would be replaced by another set of risks,” he said. “That’s why the Council isn’t rushing into it.”

The REI and the City’s Options -  Mr. Shields advised that the City has sent the REI to approximately 20 government and investor owned utilites.  These include the systems maintained by neighboring jurisdictions, such as the Arlington and Fairfax water authorities, and investor owned American Water, which services Alexandria.

The city manager said Falls Church could transfer the water system to an independent municipal authority or to an investor owned utility.  It also could choose to maintain the status quo.  The water and sewer systems could be sold as a package or to different buyers, or the City could opt to sell one while retaining the other.

“We have analyzed the matter from a legal and financial perspective, but we need more public discussion and industry input,” he said, adding that officials are seeking a “deliberative process.”

“The City Council wants to evaluate all options.  It’s better to do that in a public way than in a confidential way.  We want to have discussions with public and private agencies to identify what problems could exist,” said Shields.

Expressions of interest are due to the City by Friday, March 2.

Referendum Required -  Falls Church’s charter mandates that the transfer of the water system must be approved by a majority vote in a general election.  The Council would set the date of the referendum, which could be held as early as November 2012.  Transfer of the sewer system would not require voter approval.

System Staff Would Likely Stay -  Fifty-five people maintain the water system.  Mr. Shields said that when utilities change hands the work force typically transfers to the new owner, at similar pay and benefit rates.  The city manager spoke very highly of the staff’s skill and devotion to duty, and praised their “can do” spirit.

City and County Still at Odds -  Mr. Shields said that the City was prepared to challenge the Fairfax Board of Supervisors’ December 14 decision to set water rates for County customers and require developers to connect only to Fairfax Water mains, even when City pipes are closer.

“”The County ordinance is bad public policy that will likely increase costs for its residents and drastically increase costs for development in the County,”  Mr. Shields said.  He added that Fairfax City, which maintains its own water system, already has sued to overturn the ordinance.

Some County customers also are continuing to press their claims against the City for refunds of what they regard as overcharges.  A filing in Fairfax Court was thrown out, but several plaintiffs have pursued the matter in Arlington, which is the proper jurisdiction. Others have appealed the Fairfax ruling.

Mr. Shields maintained that the continuous litigation over the water system has not impaired the City’s relationship with Fairfax County.  “The problems over water have not been allowed to color the things we do very well together,” he said, citing cooperation in community services, public safety, family health, among others.

New City Web Page -  The full text of the REI and additional information on the City’s systems is now available at “The Future of the City of Falls Church Water and Sewer Utilities.”

December 6, 2011

Late this afternoon the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved an ordinance which amends the County Code to require that developers hook up with Fairfax Water’s system, even in cases where new lines must be built to reach sites having access to existing Falls Church City, Vienna Town, or Fairfax City lines.  This exclusive service area would apply to both new development and redevelopment.

The measure also allows the Board to fix rates and charges for water service provided to customers located in Fairfax County so that no County customer of the City of Falls Church water system will be charged rates and charges that exceed those of Fairfax Water, unless the City can demonstrate the need for higher rates and charges to the County’s satisfaction.

Falls Church repeatedly asked Fairfax County to defer a vote on the ordinance, most recently via a December 1 letter from City Manager Wyatt Shields to County Executive Anthony Griffin.  Local leaders were quick to criticize the Board’s action.

Mayor Nader Baroukh said the City had sought a deferral to allow time to respond to its serious concerns and create a mutually beneficial outcome that ensures the safety and reliability of the City water system and reflects the value of that system.  ”Instead, the Board chose to rush to enact an ordinance that is anti-competitive and not in the best interests of our County water customers” said the mayor.

Vice Mayor Dave Snyder also voiced dismay. “Over the years, the City has taken on significant risk so that Seven Corners, McLean, Merrifield, and Tysons Corner—the economic engine of the County—could develop. Today’s action by the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors is a blow for regional cooperation” Snyder said.

Councilman Lawrence Webb, a member of the City’s Public Utilities Commission also was critical.  “It is unfortunate that the County Board rushed to enact this ordinance.  The effect of the new regulations will be to increase water costs for County residents, create an expensive new County bureaucracy,  [and] invite litigation” he said.  ”[The action] will force County developers to construct new water mains that overlap the existing system in order to hook-up to Fairfax Water, an enormous unnecessary cost that could stop Tysons and Merrifield redevelopment effort in its tracks.”

Although the vote was unanimous, Supervisors Pat Herrity (Springfield) and John Cook (Braddock) expressed some reservations.  Herrity observed that he didn’t see how dual infrastructure would save anyone any money and said he didn’t think this was how the County should be doing business with its partners.  Cook warned of possible unintended consequences and referenced Senator Petersen’s recent suggestion that he would introduce legislation in the General Assembly to override the Board’s vote.

Representatives of several Fairfax neighborhood associations, who spoke against the City’s rate increase at Council sessions last summer, spoke today in favor of the ordinance.  All reiterated their view that County residents serviced by the City’s water system are subjected to an unconstitutional tax due to their having no means of voting in Falls Church elections.

About 92% of the Falls Church’s customers reside in the County.  However, the City does not impose a rate differential between its City and County customers.  Its water rates are lower than average for water utilities in the region, and in the lowest quartile statewide.

Over the past five years the City invested $20 million in upgrades in the Tysons, Merrifield, and Dunn Loring areas, keeping water rates flat until an 8% increase in 2011.  Fairfax Water has increased water rates by 33% since 2005.  The County has raised sewer rates 80% since then.

Background on the Board’s actioin is available here at Page 611.

November 16, 2011

The Citizens for a Better City’s Executive Committee has voted to suspend its Nominating Convention, the election of CBC candidates, and the CBC campaign, and to turn the organization’s primary focus to community and voter education.

In a November 12 letter to members, CBC president Sally Ekfelt termed the Committee’s vote “decisive.”  Entitled “A New Way Forward”, the letter states that the organization’s primary objective now will be to inform the electorate and vigorously promote civic engagement.

The Committee will convene a working group to create an action plan for 2012.  Among its first actions will be a town hall meeting or forum in February which will showcase all candidates running for elective office in May.  CBC will continue to promote and encourage citizen participation on City and School Committees and Commissions and to scout for effective leaders.

Suspending the Nominating Convention requires a change in CBC’s bylaws.  Members will vote on the revision at the annual meeting on Sunday, November 20, at the Winter Hill Senior Center. 

For 52 years CBC has fielded candidates for Falls Church City Council and, since 1994, for School Board.  Its decision to leave the election process creates a new playing field for the May 2012 election.

Unless a new group suddenly emerges to field a slate, all candidates for three Council seats and three School Board seats at stake will be running as independents.   There will be no “brand” available and voters will have to focus more on the individual candidates, rather than voting a straight ticket.

CBC has dominated Falls Church politics for decades.  From 1974 to 1986 it won every Council seat.  More recently CBC won 14 of the 17 seats at stake from 2000 to 2008.

However, in 2010 only one of its four candidates for Council was elected.  One candidate appeared to break with the slate in the final days of the campaign, issuing his own flyers.

Of the seven current Council members, four were elected as independents and three on CBC tickets.  Vice Mayor Dave Snyder has been elected on past CBC slates but ran as an independent in 2010.   All seven members of the present School Board were elected on CBC tickets. 

The May 2012 election will be the final one held in that month, as voters last Tuesday overwhelmingly approved a referendum to move the polling to November, beginning in 2013.  CBC’s decision to leave the field ensures that next spring’s campaign will be one of the most interesting in many years.

November 14, 2011

The Falls Church City Council moved this evening to defer final action on an ordinance to reduce the number of voting wards.  Members voted, 5-0 (Ms. Barry and Mr. Peppe absent), to take up the matter again on December 12.

The proposal, which passed first reading on September 26, calls for eliminating the Scout House (Ward Three) and the American Legion Hall (Ward Five) as polling places and consolidating voters into three wards.  Both facilities would be retained as emergency polling places.

In his remarks to the Council, City Registrar David Bjerke reviewed the efforts of the Electoral Board to inform residents of the plan.  He said that the response from voters had been overwhelmingly positive.  “We had expected to hear a lot more pushback against the change,” he said.

Bjerke said the revisions will provide more equal access for all voters to a ballot, as well as essential emergency management service and faster service overall.  Regarding concerns that Thomas Jefferson School (Ward One) would be overcrowded, the registrar said that the Electoral Board has called on the School Board to close the school on Election Day, as is the practice in Arlington and Fairfax.

The plan would shift Winter Hill residents, including many senior citizens, from Thomas Jefferson to the Community Center (Ward Four).  Bjerke said that the Board would consider using crossing guards to help assist those voters crossing Broad Street.

Councilwoman Robin Gardner said that she understood the need for consolidation of wards, but expressed concerns about parking at Thomas Jefferson.  She also opposed closing the school on Election Day and pointed out that the school’s renovation would coincide with the November 2012 election.

Noting that the plan’s implementation also coincided with the change of the municipal election date and redistricting, Gardner questioned whether the timing was right.  “I just don’t know if it [the consolidation] needs to be right now,” she said.

Mayor Nader Baroukh, who like Gardner voted against the plan in September, felt that the electoral officials needed to discuss the plan further with the School Board.  “My concern is how the parking is going to work around the construction site,” said Baroukh.

Vice Mayor Dave Snyder called the current voting process at Thomas Jefferson less than optimal.  “Adding additional voters runs the risk of creating more issues with safety and difficulty in parking.  It just doesn’t look to me that it’s functioning that well,” he said.  Snyder added that he thought the Legion Hall was still a good polling place and questioned why the officials recommended moving to three sites instead of four.

Faced with these concerns and with only five members present the Council opted to defer.  It will address the issue again during its December 5 work session.

A map showing the current configuration of wards is available here.   A map of the three ward plan is available here.

Stormwater Survey -  City Manager Wyatt Shields advised that a survey is being mailed to all single family and townhome owners.    The response will enable the City to determine where and to what extent flooding has occurred and to align its resources accordingly.  Surveys can be returned by mail or online through the City’s website.

Other Business -  The Council unanimously approved a resolution endorsing revisions to the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program Handbook.  The Handbook has been shortened and now presents a clearer and succinct presentation of the process.

With Ms. Gardner dissenting, the Council approved first reading of an ordinance to amend the FY 2012 budgets (revenue and expenditures) for City Funds by adding $1,890,000 to the General Fund $3,350,000 to the Water Fund, and $546,205 to the Capital Project Fund.

The Council approved a consent item authorizing the city manager to to purchase up to $200,000 in technology solutions from CDW Government under a National Joint Powers Alliance Contract.

Closed Session -  At the end of the public meeting the Council began a 24 minute closed session concerning the post office lot and water litigation issues.

Video -  Footage of the public session is available at the City website.  Links to all pertinent documents are included.

November 8, 2011

Falls Church voters today overwhelmingly approved a referendum that authorizes the City to move its municipal elections from May to November.  The May 2012 election will be the last.  The first November election will be held in 2013.

Unofficial returns show the referendum approved, 1,738 to 874.  Voters in four of the City’s five wards favored the measure by 2:1 margins.  The vote was closer in Ward 2 (Oakwood), but still substantially in favor.

The vote to move the elections to November tracked very closely to the City vote in 35th District Senate race, where Democrat Richard Saslaw outpolled Republican Robert Sarvis and Independent Green Elizabeh Pettigrew 1,730 to 873 (Sarvis – 801, Pettigrew – 72).

Incumbent Delegate Jim Scott and candidate for Commonwealth’s Attorney Theo Stamos were unopposed.  Scott received 2,071 votes.  Stamos, who will succeed Richard Trodden, received 2,099.

Turnout on a perfect autumn day was 30.71%, a slight increase from the 28% level achieved in 2007, the last election where only General Assembly contests were on the ballot.  A total of 2,658 of the City’s 8,655 registered voters participated.

Unofficial Totals By Ward

Referendum (Yes – No)

Ward 1  -  453 – 213
Ward 2  -  215 – 153
Ward 3  -  270 – 133
Ward 4  -  361 – 185
Ward 5  -  301 – 153
CAP       -  138 -  37

Total       1,738 – 874

35th District Senate (Saslaw – Sarvis – Pettigrew)

Ward 1  -  459 – 193 – 17
Ward 2  -  247 – 108 – 10
Ward 3  -  250 – 142 – 10
Ward 4  -  351 – 171 – 19
Ward 5  -  289 – 151 – 10
CAP    -    134 -   36 -  6

Total       1,730 – 801 – 72

53rd District Delegate (Scott – Write-in)

Ward 1  - 543 -  32
Ward 2  -  288 - 13
Ward 3  -  309 - 17
Ward 4  -  424 - 21
Ward 5  -  357 - 19
CAP      -  150 -   1

Total       2071 – 103

Commonwealth’s Attorney (Stamos - Write-in)

Ward 1  -  540 -  24
Ward 2  -  280 -   7
Ward 3  -  321 -   9
Ward 4  -  444 -  14
Ward 5  -  362 -   7
CAP      -  152 -    0

Total       2099 -  61

November 8, 2011

Much of the recent debate over when to hold Falls Church City’s elections has focused on declining turnout.  For various reasons, fewer and fewer citizens choose not to vote, even in contested elections.  This trend, which seems counter to the City’s long-established reputation for civic activism, has continued for 20 years.

Those who advocate moving the local election believe that the turnout will be higher if polling moves from May to November.  It almost certainly would, but the level still might not reach that achieved on May 7, 1974, when over 55% of the voters went to the polls, a turnout not approached again until 1988-90 and more than double that of 2010.

In 1974 the Citizens for a Better City (CBC) was the major political organization in Falls Church, just as it is today.  However, CBC did not hold a majority of the seats on the City Council.  An opposition group, who referred to themselves as the Independents, was determined to extend their control.  Well financed, they published several issues of their own campaign newspaper. 

A Washington Post story saw the City’s election as pitting those who favored the residential character of the town versus those eager to entice new businesses and offices into what they termed the City’s dying central business district.  The now long-defunct Northern Virginia Sun described the Independents as calling “for positive actions versus negative inaction” and CBC’s position as “in favor of moderate growth versus rampant development.”

CBC’s online history recounts a crucial Council meeting that surely had a major impact on the election.  Members had voted to adopt what was known as a Planned Unit Development ordinance, which was supported by CBC members as a device for planning and development of the City’s commercial areas.  The ordinance did not control density, which was to be done by assigning Land Use Intensity ratings (LUIs) to various areas.

The night the ordinance passed and after most of the audience had gone home, without public notice or hearing, the majority adopted a resolution which assigned interim LUIs for most of the City’s business and residential areas.  If retained, this would have opened certain areas to highly intensive development, such as Winter Hill (then Tyler Gardens) and the tract now occupied by the Oakwood Apartments.  Subsequent public outrage forced the Council to modify these actions.

In a May 4 letter to the Sun, CBC president Hirst Sutton summed up his party’s vision:

“The City needs a Council which will look to the development of Falls Church in the manner desired by most of its citizens and which will reject high-density, high-rise development that would only add to the traffic congestion and other environmental problems, increase governmental costs, and fail to maintain Falls Church as the desirable residential community in which most of us wish to live.”

Most voters agreed, as CBC went on to an overwhelming victory, sweeping all four Council seats at stake.  The party’s candidates won a total of 7,790 votes, while the four Independents garnered only 2,527.  Two other candidates trailed far behind.  Leading vote getter Harold Sliverstein won 2,005 votes, more than twice the 998 votes Ron Peppe received when he led the list in 2010.

Among those elected were Carol DeLong and Ed Strait.  Ms. DeLong, who later became mayor, went on to serve 16 years on the Council, Mr. Strait for 12.  Both have remained active in civic affairs.  Also elected was John Enright, now of Camden, Maine, who served one term.

Passions certainly were high in 2010 and likely will be so again next May.  If the election date is moved, November elections probably will be as contentious.  However, due to massive demographic changes, it seems unlikely that the City will ever achieve an election as intense as that of 1974 or an outcome as decisive.

In the mid-70s Falls Church was still very much a traditional bedroom community, consisting predominately of single family homes, many occupied by long-term residents.  By the 21st Century, the News-Press would accurately call Falls Church ”a city of new arrivals.”

In 2001 researchers determined that 43% of the City’s residents had arrived in the last five years and that nearly two-thirds of them had come to Falls Church since 1990.  That year over one-third of the homes in Falls Church were occupied by residents who had lived there 20 years or longer.  The proportion in 1974 probably was much higher.  By 2001 it had dropped to 11.4%.

Hundreds of condominium units have been added during the last decade.  Many remain unoccupied, but over one-third have been converted to rentals, which have a much higher turnover rate.  New projects such as the Northgate and the Gateway virtually insure that the trends of the last 20 years will continue.

Due to these changes, fewer residents are as settled as those in the 1970s, or as likely to consider themselves stakeholders in the community.  Some may change their perspective, but others will have moved on before developing any strong ties to the City or participating in its political process.

Voters in 1974 clearly held strong opinions about the future of Falls Church.  Future voters may be as opinionated, but even if turnout soars it will be very hard for them to deliver a message as emphatic as the one citizens sent 37 years ago.

The City now is denser, more transient, and somewhat more diverse.  These factors make consensus harder to achieve, resulting in greater demands on elected officials.  However, the ultimate responsibility for the future of Falls Church is in the hands of its people.  Whatever their numbers, whether they choose to live here four years or four decades, they must take that duty as seriously as citizens did on May 7, 1974.

The author wishes to thank Marshall Webster and other staff members of the Mary Riley Styles Public Library for their assistance in the preparation of this article.

November 7, 2011

The question may be at the bottom of the ballot, but it will be foremost in the minds of many Falls Church City voters who go to the polls tomorrow.  After weeks of discussion and spirited debate, citizens will determine via referendum whether municipal elections, long held in May, will move to November in 2013.  A “Yes” vote endorses the switch.  A “No” vote rejects it.

Those advocating the move to November cite higher turnout, which they believe is more representative, and reduced costs as benefits.  Opponents warn that fall elections may lead to increased partisanship and less focus on local issues.

May elections traditionally have been non-partisan.  Both the local Democratic and Republican committees have stated they have no intention of endorsing candidates for the City Council or the School Board.  However, both committees have staked out positions on the issue.  The Republicans oppose the move while Democrats favor it.

Democratic Senator Richard Saslaw, who leads the local ballot, has called for passage of the referendum.  His campaign and that of Delegate Jim Scott together contributed $1,200 to Falls Church Votes, an independent group asking for a “Yes” vote on Tuesday.  The group is chaired by City Treasurer Cathy Kaye, a Democrat.  There is no comparable opposition group, though Vice Mayor Dave Snyder and his son bought yard signs calling for a “No” vote.

A majority vote to approve the referendum does not automatically move future election dates.  Specifically, the question calls for amendment of the City Charter.  Like all Charter amendments, however, it is not self-executing.  If the referendum question passes, to effectively change the Charter the proposed amendment must be sent to the General Assembly for approval, as is required for all such amendments.

Saslaw, who is the Senate majority leader, is seeking election in the 35th District as a result of re-districting.  He is opposed by Republican Robert Sarvis and Independent Green Katherine Ann Pettigrew.  Delegate Scott is unopposed for re-election in the 53rd District, which he has represented for nearly a decade.  Theo Stamos, candidate for Commonwealth’s Attorney, also is unopposed.  Stamos is a Democrat, but under Virginia law her party affiliation cannot appear on the ballot.

Tuesday’s polls will open at 6:00 am and close at 7:00 pm.

Further information on the candidates is available in the Voters’ Guide provided by the Falls Church League of Women Voters.  The League also offers a Pro/Con Fact Sheet on the May/November issue..