2005-11-21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

472 Charlottesville City Council to either allow at large elections of the school board members or to establish election districts prior to the May 2006 election date." During the October 3, 2005 closed session of City Council meeting in discussions with our hired counsel, Mr. Carter Glass, ! directly asked Mr. Glass if we had options other than submitting for Department of Justice approval of at large elections. Mr. Glass then suggested that the City Council could decide to pursue district-based elections rather than at large elections, but that, in his opinion, this was a less legally defensible position to take. Mr. Glass also noted at that meeting that it was unlikely, although possible, that anybody would challenge the Council's decision to seek Department of Justice permission for some sort of ward-based elections rather than at large elections. During the October 17, 2005 City Council meeting, Mr. Brown, confirmed that the advice given to Council by Mr. Carter Glass (to pursue at large elections) was simply guidance on what was the most legally defensible position. Even Mr. Carter Glass's own pre- clearance submission letter to the United States Department of Justice states that, "ambiguity exists in the language of Code{} 22.1-75.3" ! have repeatedly requested that this council request enabling legislation to be granted this General Assembly session that will clear up any ambiguities in Council's ability to go forward with either ward, or mixed ward elections if we so desire. This application can be done concurrently with our pre-clearance submission to the Department of Justice. ! have spoken with Delegate Tosca, o who assured me he would be happy to carry this bill [the language in italics was struck from the record later in the meeting] and with other delegates who have told me that the bill would most certainly pass. Yet, the Council majority has been reluctant to seek enabling legislation in previous discussions regarding the content of our legislative package. So then, there have been options open to council all along and this council never has been as narrowly constrained by state law as has been portrayed by some. Not having options and not using the options you have are two very different things. In addition, there is recent historic precedent for City Council disregarding our attorney's advice on what was the most legally defensible position to take on an issue and for pursuing a less legally defensible course because the council felt strongly that it was the right thing to do. According to the City Attorney, Craig Brown, there are several instances in which City Council has declined to accept his department's legal advice and instead has chosen to adopt a less legally defensible position. This council could have, at its own discretion, moved forward at any time over the past several months to pursue necessary legislative authority and to begin work on preparing our wards for Justice Department approval. Finally, a majority of this council has publicly stated for months that the referendum was all but certain to pass: C-Ville Weekly, August 8, 2005: ...Mayor David Brown believes there's an elected school board in Charlottesville's future... Daily Progress, August 14, 2005: Councilor Blake Caravati agreed that elected school boards appear likely in the city's future. Daily Progress, October 16, 2005: Mayor Brown said that the referendum "has a good chance of passing." Cavalier Daily, November 9, 2005: Regarding the referendum Mayor Brown said, "I always expected it to pass..." The Hook, November 17, 2005: Councilor Lynch stated he believed the success of the referendum was a "foregone conclusion." Why do these comments matter? Because, given the public statements of confidence from almost all councilors that the elected school board referendum would pass, it's curious that the majority of this council, instead of acting proactively to prepare for the possibility of public demand for ward or mixed ward elections, decided to wait until after the election before taking action that could have enabled districts to be in place before May, 2006. This avoidance was even in the face of the City Attorney's suggestion in August that the Council begin to make preparations in terms of redrawing ward boundaries should new wards be needed by spring. In conclusion, the past is behind us; however, we must not forget it. Tonight, we have the opportunity and the power to affirmatively break with a past that has sought to systematically and institutionally silence minority voices. The future of Charlottesville contains an elected and not an