Arlington's form of Government--our system of rotating the Chair of the County Board, a County Board has five Members and not more, and having at large elections as opposed to districts were all part of a bill, HR 1225, that Delegate Patrick Hope put forward this session. Some of the elements in the bill are supported by the Civic Federation (longer term for the Chair of the Board of two years and seven members as opposed to five, but not districts.) The Arlington Branch of the NAACP also supports the bill's goals of returning authority to Arlington. (The bill would leave our County Manager form of government where the Manager is the chief administrative officer of our government, an approach I support that I will share more about in later emails.)
I support Delegate Hope's overall effort: he correctly points out that the bill only give powers to the County Board and Arlington voters via a referendum, the ability to engage in a dialogue to make the best decisions for Arlington and does not actually make the changes. In other words, under current law, the legislature in Richmond is the entity with the power via state law, to allow us to have seven members as opposed to five, to elect a County Chair like every other jurisdiction in Northern Virginia except Falls Church, and to allow us to consider whether say three districts and three at large seats might make it more likely that the Board would be better representative of the progressive ideas and accountability that we will need over the next decade. It was time to move this bill into the public dialogue, so I give credit to Delegate Hope.
For the bill text and an Arlnow article on this, go here:
Hope files bill allowing form of government changes but County Board says more discussion is needed | ARLnow.com
However, I think it clearly for the best that the bill will not be enacted this year so that our whole community can engage in a conversation about this bill. Many veteran Arlington Democrats are worried that these changes might undermine the progressive governance that makes Arlington a great place to live. Others want full dialogue regarding these changes. Both are fair concerns. I believe we already are changing, so our system of governance needs to evolve.
More importantly, I do not believe the Legislature in Richmond should be the entity that can make changes. That power should, in my view, be in the hands of Arlington residents through their elected officials on the County Board (after a full public process for consideration) and, in certain cases, referenda. Finally, I will share with you in subsequent emails how when I lived in Austin this type of change happened. I started out mortally opposed but came to agree that change was needed for some of the accountability and representative concerns that the Civic Federation and the NAACP support. I want to be clear that I want to keep Arlington consistent with progressive ideals and help us evolve for the future; my thinking on this will do both.
Particular credit on this should go to my colleagues, Chair Garvey for hueing to a process that will be over the coming year and not passing this bill without greater public debate, Board Member Cunningham for working to find a way forward, and Board Members Coffey and Karantonis who worked very hard to engage in Richmond and listen to the reasonable desire to move forward. I was tending to Evelyn via a modified paternity leave, so I engaged only where able and needed: I want to give credit where it is due.
More to come on this and the work to serve you and Arlington. For now, thank you for reading: I've shared plenty for this month :)
Yours,
Matt