Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, October 31, 1993 TAG: 9310310035
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: D1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DWAYNE YANCEY STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
In a mailing to Roanoke County voters over the weekend, Democrat Packett seemed to suggest that Republican Griffith supports annexation - always a touchy issue with suburban voters.
Griffith denies he's in favor of annexation, and upped the ante Saturday by calling attention to a radio interview last summer in which Packett voiced support for a consolidation plan that would have split Roanoke County between Salem and Roanoke.
The result: A rhetorical firefight between the two campaigns for the hearts and minds - and votes - of Roanoke County citizens, with each accusing the other of "lies and distortions."
The latest flap in the race for the House seat being vacated by the retiring Republican Steve Agee of Salem began with a flier that Packett sent out:
"Why wouldn't Morgan Griffith stand up against annexation?," the flier asks. "Howard Packett has the clout, and the will, to win the fight against annexation. Who better than a city councilman to know the problems of annexation? Different schools for your children. Less control over your property and your neighborhood. Higher taxes. If you believe annexation is not in your best interests, there is only one way to vote Nov. 2nd. Howard Packett."
So what evidence is there that Griffith supports annexation?
None, concedes Packett, except that he's never heard Griffith talk about the subject. "I've gotten a lot of calls on it, but he hasn't said a word," Packett said.
Packett's annexation flier also zings Griffith for not making it to a scheduled debate with Packett last Sunday on WBRA-TV: "On October 24, Morgan Griffith refused to stand up and debate Howard Packett on public television about the issues facing Roanoke County."
From there, it goes on to play up Packett's opposition to annexation.
Why focus on annexation - especially when the county is, by law, immune to annexation?
"I think that's just an important issue to the voters of Roanoke County," said Packett's campaign manager, Steve Esworthy. "We're not saying [Griffith's] for annexation. We're just saying he wasn't there to stand up for the voters."
Esworthy also points out that annexation is a legitimate issue to raise because Roanoke and other cities have talked about lobbying the General Assemblyto give them back the power to enlarge their boundaries.
But Griffith charges that Packett is trying to inflame Roanoke County voters with "lies and distortions" and called a news conference Saturday to fire back. "I want to say right now to the voters of Roanoke County, I'm not in favor of annexation, but my opponent is in favor of consolidation."
Griffith then played a tape of an August interview on Roanoke radio station WFIR (960 AM) in which Packett, a Salem city councilman, voiced support for a plan that would have split Roanoke County between Salem and Roanoke.
"I know that west of Salem, a great many people would love to be in Salem," Packett said on the radio show. "During the last consolidation effort, there was a plan to really divide the whole valley, with Salem on one side and Roanoke on the other. I think that was a good plan."
The political catch: Most of those west county voters that Packett says want to join Salem aren't in his House of Delegates district. Instead, the district includes much of suburban southwest Roanoke County, which under the "twin cities" consolidation plan would have become part of Roanoke.
In the 1990 merger referendum, those southwest Roanoke County precincts voted against joining the city.
They're also now a prime battleground in the race between Packett and Griffith, which may be why both candidates are waving the red flags of annexation and consolidation in the closing days of the campaign.
Griffith said he didn't make the WBRA-TV debate because of a scheduling mix-up - which the station made up by offering him nine minutes of time later in the week. He then blasted Packett's logic for suggesting that because he missed the TV debate, he's somehow in favor of annexation.
"Now let's use the same logic in Mr. Packett's case: He wasn't at the home builders' forum, and he didn't speak to the home-health forum, so does that mean he is in favor of homosexual rights? Of course not, but it's these types of lies and distortions that so characterize my opponent's campaign."
Packett dismissed Griffith's attacks as a sign of "desperation." But he acknowledged that the tone of the campaign hasn't exactly been one worthy of a civics textbook. "There are a lot of mean telephone calls going around," he said, and blamed Griffith supporters for tearing down his signs. "In Montgomery County, every sign I put up is down. It has to be someone with his campaign."
The district covers Salem, most of southwest Roanoke County, and eastern Montgomery County.
by CNB