Hoping to increase voter participation, Virginia Beach city council is set to vote next Tuesday, June 13, on moving council elections from May to November. Six votes are needed for passage. So far, five members of the council are on board.
Council member Ron Villanueva is one of the 5 undecided but may support the change if council will consider a ward system, like Norfolk has.
Anything that increases voter participation is a good thing. The fear that council elections may become mired in partisan politics is a bit of a red herring. The elections are already partisan, or at least this past year they were. Take a look at the articles written. In many instances, party affiliation of the candidates is disclosed. So it’s kinda like trying to close the barn door after the horse is already out.
And Villanueva has a valid point. All of the council members run city-wide and vote in all the races. I understand this is a holdover from earlier days when the city was first incorporated and the Kellam machine was in place. I think it is time for a city the size of Virginia Beach to have a ward system. Not only will the cost of campaigns decrease but it increases the likelihood of election of minority candidates.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Not only increase the chance of minorities but a ward system would mean that oceanfront interests wouldn’t control the entire council. Elected represenatatives would be held accountable by their consituents, not the entire city. The current system makes absolutely no sense.
The ward system would have to pass Justice Department muster but I can’t imagine that such approval would not be forthcoming. And you are right – it would be much more difficult to have control of council in the hands of a few. (Difficult but not impossible, unfortunately.) Prior to Norfolk’s switch to wards, we had the West side in control.
November elections would be very bad for candidates running for local office. They would have to compete for attention among the much “noisier” statewide and/or national candidates. Local races are already way too expensive. Having that added layer of noise ringing in voters’ ears would make their campaigning even more expensive.
Plus this would make it hard to get Democrats elected. Even though local races are nonpartisan, there are like you said some candidates that run unofficially endorsed by Dems or GOPers. If local races were held simultaneously to state delegate races for example, this would be disasterous for any non-GOP-inclined candidate. Unfortunately, there have been state races with no Democratic candidate in the past. GOP-endorsed local candidates would run on a slate containing the GOP state delegate candidates. And unfortunately, VB is still a Republican stronghold, and any local candidate despite their leanings that is without the GOP nod fights an uphill battle.
Eileen – the constitutional officers are all local candidates who run in November elections. So the precedent already exists for having local candidates run in November. Trust me, I understand trying to be heard above the noise. Not only did I run with the entire house of delegates up for re-election, but also it was (and will always be) a gubernatorial race year.
There are some trenedous benefits to having local elections in November, not the least of which being actual cash savings. Another piece would be that the local candidates would benefit from up-ticket affliation. Kaine won Virginia Beach last year. An association by council candidates with him may have actually been beneficial.
The other piece to me is voter participation. Anything that increases that is a good thing. I have no doubt that people – especially those who move here from other areas – are more than a bit tired of the seemingly endless election cycles that exist. We have elections in Virginia every year! Having them every six months tires out even the most politically involved.
I just wish Norfolk would consider this. But they won’t because it would mean that they can’t manipulate outcomes, which is what small turnout numbers end up doing.
Here’s an example of what I’m talking about. Suppose we had local elections in November 2005. In November 2005, we also had state delegate races. The Bayside area had the lovely Leo Waldrup running for re-election. Guess who else is running in Bayside? Why, it’s none other than Leo’s ol’ pal Jane Brooks. No way that Dem Pat Edmundson pulls out a win with Leo plugging for his pal at every turn.
But what about Pat teaming up with Kaine? And Georgia Allen, who ran against Leo? And Phil Kellam?
For that matter, what’s to stop Leo from campaigning for Jane Brooks, even though he’s not running? Heck, he actually has more time to help her in May than he would in November, when he’d be concerned with his own race.
I understand what you’re saying but I still think November is more beneficial.