THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, April 28, 1996 TAG: 9604300507
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 18 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: COVER STORY
LENGTH: Long : 213 lines
VIRGINIA BEACH voters will be asked May 7 whether they want to change the present system of government.
Under the current system, voters elect all 11 council members, though seven members are considered borough representatives and must live in their boroughs.
If the system is changed, voters would elect five council members, including the mayor, three-at-large representatives and their district representative. The same would apply to the School Board.
Staff writer Karen Weintraub talked last week with Maury Jackson and Judy Connors, the leaders of the ballot question debate. Jackson, a civic leader, has fought against the present system of government for more than five years. Connors, also active in the Council of Civic Organizations, supports the current system.
Karen: Maury, why do you think that we need a new system of government in Virginia Beach?
Maury: Well, because it's in-actable the way it is.
Karen: Judy, what do you think are the strengths of the current system?
Judy: I think it's the most accountable form of government. It's the clearest form of one man, one vote. I have 11 advocates on City Council. It's worked for the city all these years and I see no reason why. . .
Maury: It's worked for a certain group in the city, you're right. It's worked fine for them.
Judy: It's worked fine for me.
Karen: Why do you say that it doesn't work for people? How would your proposed system work better for the average citizen like you?
Maury: Everybody votes for everybody. They lose responsibility in anonymity.
Karen: Can you give me an example of what has happened, a concrete example of where there wasn't accountability because of this system?
Maury: It was in your own paper here last Sunday. Beacon editor Kevin Armstrong says, ``Most conversations I've had about the Beach always lead to the same conclusion. How did anyone in charge allow the city to develop in such a helter-skelter manner? And who was asleep at the wheel?'' Doesn't that explain it?
Karen: So you think development would have been different had we had a different system?
Maury: If you had somebody that you could hold their feet to the fire, you could have said, why did you let them do this to us? Why did you build these tenements? . . . . I think you would have had people who were more responsible to the voter. I've been to many City Council meetings and the real estate developer will present a plan with his strip shop and his curlicue streets and his cul-de-sacs and so forth. He'd present it to them and bam-bam! They approved it. This is in the 1980s.
Judy: There's nothing to indicate that it would have been different if we'd had a different form of government.
Karen: What do you see as the negatives? What do you think would happen negatively if we got the system Maury is talking about?
Judy: Right now I have the right to vote for all 11 people who represent me, who can raise my taxes, sell my land, adopt a comprehensive plan, the whole nine yards. Under his plan, I'm going to give up six votes. It takes six votes to create a majority on the council and the School Board to enact the policies and legislate. . . . The six people, conceivably - and I don't believe this is true - but conceivably, the six people that I could not vote for and influence in having them removed from office are the same six people who could raise my taxes or re-zone my property. I don't see any justification for asking me to give up six votes. The right to vote is something that we women worked awfully hard to get. We've only had it for 75 years. And to ask me now to give up my right to vote for those six seats is not right.
Maury: But you've got to have an effective vote.
Judy: I have very effective votes right now.
Maury: Well, we don't believe you have an effective vote.
Judy: Well, I believe I do.
Karen: Maury, you've said the system you propose would make it cheaper to run for local office.
Maury: Sure. An average person who's qualified could be elected.
Judy: If it truly is going to be cheaper - and I have a question in my mind as to whether it will be very much cheaper - but if it is less expensive to run for a ward seat or a district seat, we then have four at-large candidates. at-large seats.
Karen: You've both used the term ``accountability'' to describe the benefits of the system you like. Judy, you said the current system is much more accountable. Can you talk a little bit about what you mean by accountability?
Judy: If each one of the council members looks to each voter to keep them in office or get them in office, consequently, they care about each one of the voters. Because if they don't and they wish to be re-elected, they're going to lose that election. So I feel that because I can vote for all of them - or vote against them - they are accountable to me.
Karen: So you wouldn't feel comfortable, for instance, calling up the Kempsville representative if you don't live in Kempsville?
Judy: Oh, I'd call him. Yes, I call (Kempsville council member) Louisa Strayhorn now, but under the ward system . . . Now, I don't believe Louisa Strayhorn knows me. But I can and will call her and expect her to listen. Under a ward system, I'm not too positive that whoever represents the district that they'd pay too much attention to me because I can't vote for or against them. That's what I believe will happen.
Karen: What if you work in that borough or you have an issue in that borough?
Judy: Now, you're opening up another thing that I feel very strongly about. This is going to create a lot more divisiveness if we go to a ward system, because each little group of constituents is going to be fighting for or urging their advocate to promote what they're interested in. They may go to church in another borough, their children may go to school in another borough so their interests are citywide.
And they're going to see these signs citywide as they cross the city. They're going to see the campaign signs and they're going to have to sort through all these names, faces, whatever to decide which ones are the ones they can vote for.
Karen: So you're saying it will actually make it harder to campaign?
Judy: It's not going to make it any easier nor on the voter.
Maury: Not if you have money.
Judy: What's that got to do with it?
Maury: Well, it takes money for television, it takes money for newspaper ads.
Judy: Absolutely. But you're not going to be able to reduce the amount of spending as you were saying, Maury.
Maury: I know, but a person can walk his district if it's only 50,000 or 60,000 people.
Judy: But, you know, Maury, you talk about money - I've had a lot of business people say to me recently that their personal convictions may be to keep the at-large system but the wards are going to be much easier to buy a seat. When you keep talking about the person who spent $100,000, if someone wants to go out and buy a ward seat, it's going to be much easier to buy and cheaper under the ward system.
Karen: Maury, why don't you address the issue of accountability and why you think in this system people will be more accountable?
Maury: Well, because you would have direct voting for the person who represents you. Therefore, he's accountable to you. One of the problems with the School Board and their lack of accountability is that when everybody is elected by everybody you have no real accountability to anybody and you'll just sit there and listen and not really dig into the thing. Well, if you're accountable to somebody, accountable to a specific constituency that can hold your feet to the fire, you'll dig into it. That's human nature. . .
One of those things about the present system is the confusion. If you don't think there's going to be confusion on this ballot coming up with 55 names on it, I have a feeling that, in the last election, 25 percent of the registered voters voted. I bet we don't get 20 percent this time.
Judy: Hopefully, the School Board mess will be straightened out within another election or so and we'll not have 20-some people running for one seat. This is unusual. And I agree with Maury - it takes some work. But it takes work to live in a democracy, to study and become an informed voter. And that's what we need to do. We need to work to inform the voter. . .
Maury: You're not close to the people when you don't have anybody that's your direct representative. It's like the squad leader in the Army. He's the closest to the people. When you get down to the group who elects the person and he is one representative and he's closest to you. Most people vote like they're throwing darts at the board.
Judy: But because people do that, Maury, is not a reason to change the system. Municipal government is the one that is closest to the people and it is the one where the citizens should have the most votes.
Karen: Any last comments on this? I'll give you both a parting shot here if you want.
Maury: Well, I'll say what this brochure says, ``(If) you want a council and a school board which are representative, accountable, responsible and not controlled by bloated campaign chests, just vote no.''
Judy: This, to me, from the very beginning has been an issue of the right to vote. Currently, I have the right to vote for all the people who represent me. I don't take that lightly. I feel that at the municipal level, I have a vested interest as do all citizens in municipal government. It's the government that's closest to us, that most directly effects our daily lives and, consequently, I have the right to have a say either in voting for or voting against the people who have the responsibility to approve the city operating budget, approve funding for schools, approve capital improvement programs, levy taxes to balance the budget, set real estate tax rates, establish personal property tax rates, create and appoint boards and commissions, appoint the city manager, city clerk and real estate assessor, set policies and procedures, approve the comprehensive plan for land use, approve zoning ordinances. I mean, I want the right to vote for all those people and I feel that I currently have that right and I'm being asked to give it up. ILLUSTRATION: Staff photos including color cover by D. KEVIN ELLIOTT
Judy Connors is president of Citizens for Accountable Government,
which urges voters to say YES to the referendum. She can be reached
at 464-4981.
Maury Jackson is president of Citizens for Electoral Reform, which
urges voters to say NO to the referendum. He can be reached at
428-1470.
Graphics
IF YOU VOTE YES:
You will keep the present election system.
You will continue to vote for all 11 City Council and School
Board members.
All city leaders will, theoretically, be responsible to you
because you will vote for all of them.
All city leaders will be primarily concerned with the best
interests of the city as a whole, rather than one particular area.
IF YOU VOTE NO:
You will shake up the present system of local government.
You will get one council and School Board member whose primary
interest will be the region of the city in which you live.
You will vote for one district representative and four at-large
members of the council and School Board, simplifying your decisions
in the voting booth.
It may be cheaper and easier to win local office because
candidates will have 56,000 constituents instead of 425,000.
KEYWORDS: ELECTION VIRGINIA BEACH ISSUES VIRGINIA
BEACH CITY COUNCILMANIC RACE CANDIDATES by CNB