ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, April 14, 1996 TAG: 9604120043
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: 2 EDITION: METRO
ASKED the other day whether they favor a referendum on adopting a ward system, yes or no, even ward-system skeptics among Roanoke City Council candidates said yes.
Well, that's the easy answer to a superficially easy question. But without further qualification, it's also a poor answer.
If Roanoke is to move from the current at-large system for electing City Council members to a ward or modified-ward system, the decision should not be council's alone. (Or, more precisely, council's and the decision of the Virginia General Assembly, which would have to approve the necessary changes to the city charter.) An advisory referendum is an obvious way to broaden the decision-making.
But whatever your take on the ward issue itself (and count us among the skeptics), unqualified support for such a referendum is imprudent.
First, the initial threshold for justifying a referendum - evidence of sufficient public interest in the ward-system issue - may not have been crossed. Such interest may well exist; the council candidates, their political antennae presumably finely tuned at this point, apparently think so. Their statements of support for a referendum shouldn't be ignored when the election is over.
But if public interest does exist beyond those who've taken the vocal lead on the issue, then it shouldn't be hard to demonstrate it by, say, a formal petition drive. That would help justify a referendum.
Second, an advisory referendum should advise. If it leaves things no more settled than before, it is a waste of time, effort and taxpayer dollars. If not structured carefully, a referendum on the ward-system issue runs a high risk of being just such a waste.
Consider, for example, the idea of first holding a referendum on whether to adopt any kind of modified-ward system, then getting down to details if the voters say yes. Trouble is, there are at least three, not just two, basic concepts on the table, and there are important differences among all three - the current at-large system, a system where the majority of seats are elected by wards and a system where only a minority of seats are elected by ward. (To pass voting-rights muster, the last might require expansion of council from its current seven-member size.)
Without knowledge as to which kind of plan is in store, how could the referendum clarify very much? A big yes vote might mean most voters prefer any kind of ward plan to the current at-large system - or it might mean most voters favor the kind of ward plan they happened to have in mind when voting, but might prefer the existing system to the other kind of ward plan. Conversely, a big no vote might mean most voters prefer the current system - or it might mean they favor one kind of ward plan but fear a "yes" vote would lead to imposition of the other kind.
Once a plan is forged, of course, it could then be submitted to a second referendum for approval or rejection. But if you're going to do that, why bother with the first referendum?
A better answer to the question of holding a ward-system referendum? Yes, if reasonably strong public interest in it is demonstrated and it's not an exercise made empty by lack of information regarding which kind of ward plan is under consideration. No, if those conditions aren't met.
That's not a yes-or-no answer. But this isn't a yes-or-no issue.
LENGTH: Medium: 62 linesby CNB