THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, October 14, 1994 TAG: 9410130184
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Long : 111 lines
Following are excerpts from the October newsletter to all member civic leagues from L. K. Fenlon Jr., president of the Council of Civic Organizations.
Where do we stand on reapportionment? All members of the CCO should be exceedingly proud of the role which we played in forcing the referendum with petitions signed by nearly 28,000 registered voters, 5,000 more than were required. We should also be proud of the leadership shown by the CCO prior to Election Day. During this period, we contended with the entrenched power structure of the city in media advertising and letters to the editor and reapportionment won at the polls with a clear majority of 52.7 percent.
Since the election, a few CCO members have disagreed with our position on the ``balanced district system,'' preferring to call it a ``ward'' system with which they strongly disagree. Such disagreement is part of the democratic process; and on this issue both sides have had a fair hearing before City Council.
It should be noted, however, that the balanced district system designed by the Mayor's Committee on Reapportionment is not a ward system. It contains four at-large seats in addition to seven borough representatives elected only by the residents of the individual boroughs, this to overcome the sad situation in Lynnhaven Borough, where twice in the past four years a favored candidate has received a majority of the borough votes only to be defeated by votes from other bor-oughs.
What is the role of the CCO on such issues? An important part of this disagreement centers on whether the CCO has been in violation of its by-laws, which preclude ``political'' activity. This is a a matter of semantics. How do you define ``political''?
The No. 1 definition in Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (tenth edition) is, ``of or relating to . . . the conduct of government'' and that is certainly what reapportionment is about, as well as many of the other activities in which the CCO has been involved; i.e., the Southeastern Expressway, preservation of agriculture in the southern watershed, the future of Corporate Landing, the Virginia Beach Outdoor Plan, etc.
The CCO wants to be recognized as a major voice in civic affairs. We can't do that by sitting on our hands and failing to take positions on political (see definition above) issues.
Where are we now on reapportionment? Strange as it may seem, two public hearings have been held on the outcome of the May referendum. The reasoning on this is that the referendum was advisory in nature and apparently City Council cannot trust the majority vote and must have advice. In any event, they will vote on whether or not to send the results to the General Assembly at an evening meeting on Oct. 25 commencing at 6 p.m. We should have a 7-to-4 vote in favor if Councilman Sessoms and Councilwomen Henley and Strayhorn keep their public promises to honor the majority outcome and vote in favor of sending the referendum results to Richmond.
Following are excerpts from a letter to the Council of Civic Organizations from James F. Willenbrink, CCO representative, and Henry K. Dean, president of the Pembroke Meadows and Shores Civic League.
With this letter, the Civic League of Pembroke Meadows and Shores submits its withdrawal from the Council of Civic Organizations (CCO) of Virginia Beach.
Our civic league has been a concerned and active member of the CCO for more than 20 years, strongly supporting the purposes and objectives of the CCO and the noble principles upon which it was founded. Regrettably, however, we have learned within the past year that the current leadership of the CCO apparently does not fully honor its responsibility to adhere to the CCO's Constitution and By-laws, particularly in that said leadership has clearly, flagrantly and willfully violated the prescribed objectives of said constitution. Specifically violated has been Article III, Section IID, which calls for the CCO ``to provide a citywide forum for full and free discussion of civic, governmental, commercial, social or moral questions and to avoid at all times any partisan, political or religious position.''
During the May 1994 city election campaign, the CCO leadership actively participated in partisan politics by blatantly and persistently supporting an election issue (referendum for reapportionment and ward system) even to the extent of sponsoring paid newspaper advertisements and promulgating biased articles in its newsletters and fliers. Moreover, said advertisements, articles and statements were, in large part, misleading and false (relative to Virginia Beach) and egregiously failed to represent significant facts concerning the total referendum issue (to wit, the ward system proposal).
Furthermore, when some members of the CCO attempted to express their concerns or opposition to the above-mentioned electioneering activities, which were clearly contrary to the CCO's Constitution and arguably against the city's best interest, the current CCO leadership rudely and improperly (i.e., contrary to parliamentary procedures as well as CCO principles) stifled further discussion of the issues.
Also, we have noted that the current board of directors of the CCO appears to be dominated by members of a small, confirmed political action group, the Citizens Action Coalition Inc. (CACI). Our count indicates that at least six of the directors of the CCO are also directors of CACI; and we note that both organizations' newsletters are published by the same editor and distributed concurrently. This obvious affiliation is undesirable at best and is outrageous to many of us. It certainly is conducive to continued bias and disregard of the purposes, objectives and spirit of the CCO.
With the above considerations in mind, our Civic League of Pembroke Meadows and Shores chooses not to be associated with the Council of Civic Organizations unless and until new leadership of the CCO shall reassure its members that future violations of the CCO Constitution and By-laws will not be willfully and knowingly tolerated.
Finally, this action should in no way be interpreted as opposition to the current issue of equal-district reapportionment, which our civic league supports. We are, however, strongly opposed to the proposed ward system, which issue should have been (and should be) entirely separated from any consideration of reapportionment. by CNB