Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, November 29, 1993 TAG: 9311290033
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: JOEL TURNER STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
Each says he won't make personal attacks in his campaign to become chairman of the Roanoke Democratic Party.
Publicly, the contest has generated little emotion or harsh rhetoric.
Mayor David Bowers said he expects a "friendly horse race" between Garrison and Wilson.
Garrison wants it to stay that way.
"Competition such as this does not have to be divisive," Garrison said, "and it will not be, if both my opponent and I make it clear to our own supporters that we want this to be a constructive, educational process."
Wilson says he gets along well with Garrison and doesn't want to get into a grudge match.
Beneath this public image of friendly competition, however, there is an intense fight for control of the city Democratic Committee that could stir strong emotions before it is over.
The dispute over the manner in which the party's executive committee chose a primary to select candidates reflects the struggle within the party.
Garrison wants the committee to reconsider the decision for a primary, but the Rev. Carl Tinsley, the current chairman, has vetoed the request.
The battle over the chairmanship and the primary election is expected to generate a crowd of several hundred voters when the Democrats meet next month at the Roanoke Civic Center to reorganize the committee and elect a new chairman.
It is a fight between a new group, calling itself the Progressive Democratic Coalition, and some party leaders and regulars.
The party, which has been split over some nominees in recent years, could be divided even more by the contest for chairman.
Garrison heads the progressives, a group that includes representatives from teachers, labor unions, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and others who traditionally favor a more liberal agenda.
The coalition wants to revive the party, promote greater voter participation, create a more open government and become a stronger force for social justice.
Garrison said the coalition represents a reform movement that has been building within the party for several years.
While the coalition has not publicly attacked party leaders, the reform campaign is an implicit criticism of them for not revitalizing and restructuring the party machinery sooner.
Garrison, a former Republican, has made detailed proposals for reviving the party, including a citywide door-to-door canvass to identify unregistered potential Democratic voters and help get them registered.
The coalition's top goal - healing the divisions within the party in recent years - might be the hardest to achieve.
Some party leaders are worried that the contest for the chairmanship will cause even more hard feelings instead of healing wounds.
Sheriff Alvin Hudson, who is supporting Wilson, said the party is being torn asunder by Garrison's attempt to become chairman. Other officials privately share Hudson's sentiments.
Wilson, who has the backing of most Democratic officeholders, contends he is in a better position than Garrison to bring the party together. Wilson said he has a broad base of support, which will help him reach out to all groups.
Garrison, who has the support of Commissioner of Revenue-elect Marsha Fielder and a dozen other party activists, disagrees. He said he can unify the party.
Before announcing he would run for chairman, Garrison said, he met with a number of party leaders to assure them that his campaign would be positive.
"I pledged to them that I would speak no ill of any other Democrat during this campaign," he said, so he could "work well with each of them" if he becomes chairman.
But Garrison's call for reconsideration of the decision for a primary could jeopardize his working relations with some party leaders if he becomes chairman.
At a news conference Saturday, Garrison said he was criticizing the process for choosing the primary, not speaking ill of any individuals.
Still, some party leaders are upset with Garrison's decision to make an issue of the primary - even after he voted for it when it was considered by the executive committee.
Garrison said the progressive coalition wants to be inclusive, not exclusive, in trying to broaden voter participation in party matters.
"We welcome, encourage and, indeed, celebrate diversity within our party - diversity of viewpoint, of background and of other personal characteristics," he said.
Some Democrats are worried, however, that if Garrison becomes chairman, the fact that he is gay could hurt the campaigns of the party's candidates for City Council and other offices.
They said it could cause more dissension within the party.
In an effort to avoid more hard feelings and dissension, the party's executive committee decided to use a primary election next year to select Democratic nominees for council.
Some party leaders said it will prevent labor unions and other special-interest groups from organizing a turnout of several hundred voters and dominating the selection process at a mass meeting.
In the past two years, the nomination of Mayor David Bowers and Commissioner of Revenue-elect Fielder at mass meetings has caused controversy. Some party leaders have complained that unions and other groups have packed the mass meetings and dictated the nominees.
The switch to a primary for the first time in 25 years is in keeping with the progressive Democrats' goal for more open politics and greater voter participation.
Ironically, some members of the progressive coalition have reservations about a primary, while Bowers, who benefited by a mass meeting, supports a primary.
On the primary issue, Bowers finds himself aligned with council members James Harvey and Howard Musser, who refused to support him for mayor after he beat Musser for the nomination.
Bowers supports Wilson for chairman, while Fielder is backing Garrison.
While the flap over a primary is not directly tied to the battle between Garrison and Wilson, it is part of the fight over who's going to run the party.
Garrison said the progressive coalition hasn't taken a stand on a primary, but the group believes that more party leaders and potential candidates should have been consulted about the decision.
Some progressives have reservations about a primary because they fear Republicans would participate in it and they believe it would be too costly to run two campaigns, Garrison said.
Garrison, a member of the executive committee, voted for a primary, but he said he didn't realize that so few people were consulted.
He said some progressives have the perception that the push for a primary came from a small group of party leaders who want to make it easier for Harvey and Musser to return to the party without running the risk of being rejected at a mass meeting.
But George McMillan, party vice chairman, denied there was any hidden agenda for choosing a primary. He said the decision wasn't motivated by any desire to make it easier for Harvey, Musser or any other candidate to win the party's nomination.
Still, Garrison said, some progressives are leery that some party leaders have pulled a fast one on them and opted for a primary to neutralize the influence of labor and other groups at a mass meeting.
Said Garrison: "There is a perception that a small group slipped something by them."
Keywords:
POLITICS
by CNB