THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, September 18, 1994 TAG: 9409170107
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 53 lines
On the balanced/district referendum issue, more than one member of City Council is between a rock and a hard place. If they take the advice of the voters who considered the issue on May 3, they will approve a change to what is in effect a ward system. If they reject those voters' advice, potential opponents have a ready club. But Council's immediate approval or disapproval of this referendum aren't the only options.
Passing the issue - with the buck - on to the General Assembly (which must approve charter changes) is an option. The city's state delegation can more readily arrange the best of both worlds: The local legislators vote yes as required for home consumption, but enough legislators from elsewhere vote no to kill wards. A pol's gotta do what a pol's gotta do. Occasionally, voters benefit, too.
And occasionally a pol just does what a pol ought to do: Take a deep breath and a big step into leadership, and reject May's referendum results as too small a turnout to accurately measure citizen sentiment, too subject to misunderstanding and too radical a remedy for what ails this city's government.
Mobil might strike oil on Dam Neck Road - or, better yet, water - before a majority of Council steers so clear a course. But a third option re-flects the heat the referendum has generated and could add needed light. It takes note of how polarized this debate has become, how obscured is the goal and how important is the outcome not just to the good burghers but sore losers of Lynnhaven Borough who initiated this process but to the city as a whole.
This option? Start over.
Call a host of political scientists, practitioners, their critics and citizens before a Council's (not Mayor's) Committee on Municipal Elections (not Reapportionment). Have it research (not surmise) what the problems are and the ramifications, good and bad, of potential remedies. Then hash them out in public hearings, civics classes, civic leagues, Council sessions, opinion polls. If consensus emerges for specific changes, let Council put them on the ballot. If Council thwarts the public will, the public can vote them out.
A pain? Yes, but no more so than a referendum tainted by charge and countercharge, confusion and recantations, and increasingly outlandish explanations of what voters really meant by supporting, opposing or abstaining. How many citizens didn't mean to support wards? How many meant to support reapportionment? How many of either does it take to express ``the will of the people''? Inquiring minds want to know. Wise ones will ask, once more, with clarity. by CNB