CBC Shifting Focus From Elections to Voter Education

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

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.

Council Defers Action on Plan to Reduce Number of Wards,
Stormwater Survey Coming to Homeowners

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

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.

Letter: Reflections on the Referendum Vote

TO THE EDITORS OF THE FALLS CHURCH TIMES

November 10, 2011

I’d like to offer my congratulations to all of the referendum supporters. Though I opposed the referendum, I am very happy the question was brought to City residents to decide.

Though many are ready to now move on, I think we’ve really just begun.  November elections on local issues are completely new to Falls Church, there is a lot of work to be done and I hope the community will stay engaged.

Starting first with the election results, I am concerned to see that voter turnout for this first November vote on local issues was still only 30.7%.  As one of the biggest selling points for the change, moving to November didn’t magically improve turnout.  As a community, we need to keep thinking about how to keep everyone informed and engaged, and continue to improve turnout.  One idea that has been raised in the past is introducing vote by mail.  Perhaps we should think about acting on this or other ideas to get the vote out.

Second, I was really struck with what appeared to be a partisan vote. Consider:

- 1,738 votes to pass the referendum
- 1,730 votes for Democratic Candidate Saslaw (the only contested race on the ballot)

Perhaps it’s some anomaly or strange coincidence, but I suspect the local Democratic Committee’s support of the referendum through sample ballots, emails, etc. had some influence on those numbers being virtually identical.  To be clear, it is freedom of speech and well within their right to support anything they want to quite frankly, but in my view this is a slippery slope of political endorsements that will allow partisanship to become an integral part of our local elections.

Going forward, I hope the City Council will do everything in its power to limit partisanship in our elections.  This includes not only a charter change which Mr. Webb recently raised, but I would ask the Council to go further and pass a resolution, or intent statement, stating why this was put to a referendum to begin with, and declaring for future generations that they hope it will not enable partisanship at the polls. While not binding, my hope is it sets the tone for generations to come, and helps preserve the proud
non-partisan tradition that we have.

Second, and equally important, I hope the local Democratic and Republican Committees adopt similar resolutions or intent statements, and perhaps even a code of conduct that reaffirms their current public positions of not allowing partisanship to influence local elections.  Political endorsements of candidates, co-mingling political advertisements, canvassing door to door for state and local party candidates should all be declared off-limits.  I hope this will also help set the tone within their respective organizations to
prevent future partisanship.

While these actions would help, I think we’re kidding ourselves if we think our City Council and the local political committees alone have the final say on whether or not our future elections become partisan.  It really will be up to each and every one of us as individuals to stand firm, stay vigilant and ensure it does not become a staple in our future. The diversity of candidates and opinions that we gain from staying non-partisan will benefit our City for generations to come.

Mike Novotny
Falls Church City

Election Date Referendum Passes by Wide Margin

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

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

May 7, 1974 – When Turnout Peaked in Falls Church City

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

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.

Election Date Issue to be Resolved Tuesday

By GEORGE BROMLEY
Falls Church Times Staff

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..

COMMUNITY COMMENT: Vote NO on the Election Change Referendum

By EDIE SMOLINSKI
November 4, 2011

A NO Vote on the referendum — which proposes switching Falls Church City Council and School Board elections from May to November — will keep those elections in May.

Preserving the nonpartisan election tradition.  Newcomers seem surprised when they hear that our May City Council and School Board elections are nonpartisan.  Voters who strongly favor keeping May politics nonpartisan wish to retain some diversity on City Council and School Board, where differences of opinion are valued.  November elections will most likely become partisan; May elections are nonpartisan.  If we were to lump City elections with state elections held in November, we could lose the nonpartisanship.  We are too small a City to allow divisiveness to replace diversity.

Attracting voters to the polls.  The referendum provides that City elections would occur in odd years.  Since presidential elections occur in even years, we would not be voting for local officials at elections with the highest voter turnout.  In elections for governor, in alternate odd years, voter turnout is higher than in elections for state offices.  In 2007, (not an election for governor but for state offices) turnout was 28%.  Consider past City elections.  From May 1974 through May 2010, five out of the 19 elections had unusually low voter turnout because of being un-contested (no more candidates than open seats).  In all other elections, with opposition candidates, turnout ranged from 24% to 55%.   Highest voter turnout occurred in contested elections (more candidates than seats) when major City issues were on the table.  The sometimes-silent majority becomes less silent when it is perceived that something valued is at stake and that voting will make a difference.

Focusing on state and local issues and candidates in separate elections.  The General Assembly of Virginia enacted a law which took effect July 1, 2000, which provided local option for Cities and Towns to switch to November elections.  Nineteen of the 39 Cities and 28 of the 190 Towns have switched their local elections to November.  Imagine combining the state and local contests.  If you campaign for a state senator and a delegate, and some City Council and School Board candidates, will you be campaigning for all of your choices at one time?  Will candidate forums be doubled?  Let’s preserve our City’s nonpartisan tradition of focusing on local issues and candidates by continuing our May City elections.

Vote NO on the Referendum!

Edie Smolinski is a member and past president of the Citizens for a Better City and the Falls Church chapter of the League of Women Voters.  The views expressed are her own.

This is the fourth and final Community Comment in our series regarding next week’s referendum on moving City elections from May to November.  The four commentaries have included two opponents of the change – Vice Mayor David Snyder, and Edie Smolinski, a private citizen active in local civic organizations – and two advocates of the change – City Councilman Lawrence Webb and Robert Loftur-Thun, also a private citizen active in local organizations.

Those interested in the referendum also are encouraged to watch the Town Hall programs on FCC-TV.  A link to the schedule is  available here.

COMMUNITY COMMENT: The Voting Date Referendum: Remain Independent or Fall Prey to State Party Politics?

By DAVID F. SNYDER
November 1, 2011

The November 8th referendum on voting in Falls Church is about much more than deciding what date to hold local elections; it is about the very democratic system under which we live. Since its creation, the City of Falls Church has held independent, local issue-focused elections that are separate from state and federal elections. This has worked well for the City. Now, however, some people want to change this approach and make our independent-based local political system more like the party-controlled system in Richmond, and even Washington.

There is mounting pressure coming from political machine-dominated Richmond to force local elections and issues onto state or federal Election Days in November, virtually assuring that the two major parties will control the candidates for whom we have the opportunity to vote. So far, the pressure has been in the form of statutes and fines that dissuade localities from continuing to hold local elections in May. However, according to the Washington Post, there is now additional movement to make municipal elections partisan, just as state elections already are, leading to the dysfunctional government we have in Richmond. [See "Virginia Ballots Skimp on Party Affiliation," Metro section, October 26, 2011.]

By moving local elections from May to November, the City would hasten the day when our system would resemble the one in Richmond where two well-heeled, special interest-driven machines determine who our candidates are and require those candidates to adhere to rigid orthodoxies, until one of the parties achieves total dominance. Then that one party effectively selects who is elected, as is the case in the majority of the state legislative districts in Virginia. [See the Washington Post editorial "RIP Democracy in Virginia," October 26, 2011.]

By contrast, citizens in Falls Church currently have a wider selection of candidates for local offices, including a pool of talented federal civil servants who, as a result of the so-called Hatch Act, are prohibited from running for office in partisan elections. Indeed, any resident of Falls Church can run for City Council or School Board because we have independent local elections: just get a relatively small number of signatures of registered voters, and you’re on the ballot. Further, we are probably one of the last few jurisdictions in a major metropolitan area where you don’t have to take out a second mortgage to successfully run for political office or swear allegiance to a political machine and its beliefs. No, here you only need listen to voters, have good ideas, and work hard to be elected and to serve.

Some who argue for November elections would like to believe we can preserve our independence and switch to state or federal-based elections by amending the City’s charter to safeguard non-partisan elections. But such a charter change requires the vote of the General Assembly, the same body that is pushing for more partisanship in local elections. And, a non-partisan clause relies for sponsorship on our own likely new State Senator, Richard L. Saslaw, who as Senate Majority Leader clearly has done well in the Richmond political environment and equally clearly stated his support for November elections in Falls Church.

So the referendum isn’t about just May or November. This vote one week from today is about how we define democracy and opportunities for citizen involvement in our Falls Church local government. A vote for May (“No” to the referendum) will help preserve true independence, assuring that any of our citizens has a real chance to hold office. A vote for November (“Yes” to the referendum) is a vote that increases the risk of being swept into the machine-driven system in Richmond, where the party apparatus determines who you vote for and demands adherence to party dogma.

David F. Snyder is Vice Mayor of Falls Church City

This is the first in a series of four Community Comments regarding next week’s referendum on moving City elections from May to November. The four commentaries include two opponents of the change – Vice Mayor David Snyder, and Edie Smolenski, a private citizen active in local civic organizations – and two advocates of the change – City Councilman Lawrence Webb and Robert Loftur-Thun, also a private citizen active in local civic organizations.

Those interested in the referendum also are encouraged to watch the Town Hall programs on FCC-TV. A link to the schedule is available here.

Next Page »