THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, April 12, 1996 TAG: 9604110118
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Medium: 60 lines
In 1994, when my wife and I returned to Virginia Beach we registered to vote in the Lynnhaven borough. We were feeling good about being back in this area and wanted to participate in the electoral process of the city of our choice in retirement. Our first opportunity to vote was for the council and School Board seats.
Following the election we were disappointed, however, to learn that the candidate of our choice, who had won by a plurality in our borough, had been defeated because his opposition had received more votes in the Kempsville and Bayside boroughs. How could such a thing happen, we asked, when the ballot stated that our candidate was running from the Lynnhaven borough? We soon received a quick tutorial on the At-Large Voting System utilized by this city wherein every candidate for office must run citywide to be elected.
It was frustrating to discover that the plurality vote for the candidate of choice in the Lynnhaven borough was literally wasted and the voters were denied any way to hold those elected responsible. The At-Large Voting System negates the old saying ``if you don't like the conduct of an elected member, just vote them out.''
It is little wonder why the voter turnout is so low in this city. Now ask yourself, who benefits from a small voter turnout? One can understand how an At-large Voting System might serve a town of 10,000 or 20,000 people with a small geographic area and where everyone knows each other. However, such a system can never effectively serve a growing city of 400,000 plus people spread over an area of 450 square miles. How can anyone in Thoroughgood assess the character and capabilities of a council or School Board candidate from Pungo? Or vice versa? Clearly it is impossible, because the At-Large Voting System is a flawed, outdated system which will not serve the best interests of the voters in a city the size of ours.
In 1994, a legal referendum was passed citywide by the voters to establish seven Equal Population Voting Districts to ensure equal representation on City Council and School Board. This proposal would allow voters to elect one candidate to represent their voting district and three at-large candidates plus a mayor. With this system voters can become familiar with those elected and hold them accountable at the ballot box. Knowing they can have a positive effect at the ballot box voters will have the incentive to participate in the democratic process.
The primary benefit of creating Equal Population Voting Districts throughout Virginia Beach is to ensure that voters can hold their elected officials accountable. Under the At-Large Voting System, a district council or school board member can hardly be held accountable if elected by factions in another district. Why bother with the pretense of residency in each district if the candidate cannot be held accountable?
If the proposed Equal Population District Voting System is so flawed, why do we continue to use this identical system to elect our delegates to Richmond?
Martin D. Carmody
Virginia Beach by CNB