SONS REPORTS SUPERVISOR CANDIDATE SURVEY RESULTS

Common threads in the supervisor candidate survey responses abound and center on issues that we all know to be of paramount concern. Growth (7), Water (5), Roads (3) and Services (3) dominate those concerns. Of these four areas, four candidates hit three of the issues (Elliott in D1, Wolff in D2, James in D5 and Gordy in D7), two candidates hit on two of the four (Mallette in D6, Gray in D5). Other areas of concern included jobs (2), education (2), waste/sewage (2). gangs (1), taxes (1), small town vitality (1), and teacher pay (1).

Several specific comments are worthy of additional consideration. Supervisor Steve Mallette (D6) correctly points out that good County solutions are those that deliver benefits to all citizens not “pork” to a few in a specific district.

Candidate Phil McCaleb (D9) sees a need to review tax dollar use with the major departments in order that we optimize results and efficiency. This is a cause that we feel is well overdue. The general patterns of expenditure for the County have changed little in the last few years and inefficient spending, associated with political initiatives, abounds. It is high time, in our opinion, that costs be measured against results.

Supervisor Ron Wolff (D2) points out that the Public Safety System “is not working and needs to be fixed.” Candidate Wayne Wills (D6) expresses concern about “rationalizing” district emergency services. Supervisor Laura Belle Gordy (D7) correctly acknowledges “our community has changed significantly” and points to needed changes in the Fire/EMS plan. Supervisor Grayson Chesser (D3) points out that these changes require us to think differently as a county-more proactive planning and less fragmentation of services, also citing Fire/EMS as an example.

We might have enjoyed hearing from Ms. Majors (D9) on the subject of ambulance service in D9 which is an important issue for many people. SONs representatives have heard her discuss it and she knows our concerns. 55% of her district is over the age of 50 and nearly 25% are over age 65. Unfortunately, she refused to let us know her thoughts on this critical matter. It is not difficult to understand the need for rapid response from EMS personnel against the demographics of aging.

Supervisor Sandy Mears (D4) points to the need for sewer capacity to allow economic expansion in small towns, which, in turn, increases the potential for new jobs. Candidate Emory Hurst (D7) raised this issue also. Ms. Mears has been working hard for the Town of Parksley to expand their business district through increased sewage disposal capacity.

Onancock faces similar issues albeit with a waste treatment facility that is undersized for growth and under frequent review by the Health Department. Mid-County sewer solutions are a vital part of solving any town growth scenario and Supervisor Gordy (D7) has been actively pursuing options. Supervisor Mears has also publicly called for an autonomous public service agency to administer such a mid-county solution.

Candidate Tammy James (D5) points to the fragility of our ecosystems as key to being able to sustain any growth, much less what we already have. Ms. James is absolutely right. Candidate Terry Elliott (D1) sanguinely points to the inter-relationship of growth and available resources and speaks about the need for a “balanced” approach. This is a pivotal issue for SON’s members.

Several comments, we think, are equally noteworthy because of their optimism or because they fail to grasp the true nature of a specific problem.

Candidate Jack Gray (D5) is focused on education issues as he has been all his life. He says “We are losing so many good teachers…” He sees a need to “work to raise education funding from the State, looking to alternative funding locally.”

In fact, the statistics suggest that just as many teachers come to Virginia as go to Maryland. If, as Mr. Gray implies, the exodus is the sole result of low salaries, one is challenged to reconcile the fact that Accomack County is in the upper third of all Virginia counties for per capita student expenditures but in the lower third for student performance. Mr. Gray’s comment regarding “alternative local funding” sounds suspiciously like a tax increase.

It is unclear how the County would be able to affect the State’s distribution of funding for education when the governor has recently mandated a 5% budget cut to all municipalities due to revenue shortfalls.

Supervisor Mallette (D6) laments the high costs of “narrowly focused decision making.” His position is that supervisors must consider “big picture views on what are the best interests of the entire county.” Mr. Mallette is part of a group of sitting supervisors, including Sandy Mears, Ron Wolff and Grayson Chesser, who hold this view and we heartily endorse this approach. While there are certainly specific issues which may affect one district more than others, this is not the rule.

Mallette and Mears have said in public meetings that the County should chose well-qualified citizens to serve on the many boards and commissions. Chesser echoes this sentiment in his own response. Instead, the pattern has been to retain the old line cronyism that rewards the friends of certain supervisors. Happily, the voting dynamics of the Board are changing and a more enlightened attitude emerges.

Candidate Terry Elliott (D1), from Chincoteague, speaks about “working together to craft a Comp Plan and ordinances than enhance business opportunities as well as preserve the resources that attract people here in the first place.”

To this we say “Bravo, Mr. Elliott.” His comments are very revealing. First, he identifies cooperation as a means to problem solving. Second, he advocates creation of a Comp Plan and supporting ordinances that answer business development issues (read: jobs). Third, he recognizes that this County has resources which make it unique.

Candidate Tammy James (D5) points to the lack of “a long term plan for dealing with the growing impact on the County’s natural resources.” She would focus on “informed, data-driven proactive decisions… to improve the management of water and natural resources.” Ms. James is right on the money in this response. The facts don’t lie. We may not always like what those facts tell us but a responsible person reacts intelligently to the reality they represent.

The predisposition of certain supervisors to repeatedly reject any study that does not agree with a narrow, and sometimes personal, agenda is insulting to the electorate. Tax dollars have been expended seeking the advice and counsel of people more expert in an area where the County needs help. To summarily reject the results of these studies without proper consideration is an outrage to the taxpayers.

Candidate Phil McCaleb (D9), a respected local businessman, asserts that we should impose “managerial responsibility over the income and expenses of the County.” Saying further that “ we do not have plans to upgrade infrastructure consistent with the growth that is coming. We need to do everything possible to encourage job growth while maintaining the character of the Shore.”

Mr. McCaleb recognizes many of the characteristics that make the Eastern Shore unique but he also recognizes the need to provide meaningful and competitive jobs around and beyond agriculture if we are to be able to sustain a level of service that people have come to expect. Mr. McCaleb was one of only a few respondents to the survey who linked growth to taxes and the budget. His comments on efficiency of expenditure are part of responsible growth.

SONs would like to thank all the candidates for their responses. We respect and value their desire to serve the public and recognize that many aspects of public service are difficult. We respect their rights to hold unique opinions with which we may not always agree. Hopefully the voters will feel better informed as a result of this effort and will exercise their fundamental right to choose on November 6th. We encourage everyone to engage in the discussion forum on our website to hear your thoughts and comments.

Lastly, we would like to make the obvious observations that if growth is to occur at any level in the county, then certain infrastructure costs are implicit. One cannot have the one without the other. We have argued in many different ways that the burden of these costs, both imputed and real, must and should be borne by the people who create the burden. In this case, the developers might reasonably be expected to bear the costs of road improvement, impact fees to fire and rescue services and to creation of some kind of reserve fund suitable for financing future County needs.

It is certainly true that tax revenues must rise if services are to increase. Tax revenues rise for only two reasons: 1) the capital base upon which the taxes depend expands or 2) tax rates increase.

Interestingly, nobody addressed the benefit/burden relationship of vast numbers of illegal immigrants in Accomack County. While no reliable information has been collected, it is informally estimated that perhaps as many as 20% of the children in Accomack County schools are the children of non-taxpaying illegal immigrants. If we measure the school budget simply on the basis of a head count (which is admittedly a simplistic analysis) then 20% of the $53MM budget, or $10,600,000, applies to educating these children. Additionally, how much of the Social Services budget, currently $7.75MM, applies to these same people is unknown. But again, if 15% of the budget applied, that amounts to more than $1,000,000. This is a lot of money in a county where we don’t have a lot of money. The facts must be determined and then addressed.

SONs activities have been built over and upon many issues for the last two and a half years. Thoughtful and intelligent approaches to difficult problems, carried openly and discussed freely, are the means to properly solving major problems. We agree strongly with many of the statements and assertions made by both candidates and incumbents. There are good reasons to retain some of these people and equally good reasons to replace others. For the first time in many years, Accomack County Voters have some real choices when they go to the polls to advance what we consider to be this more thoughtful approach.

Political agendas aside, it is time to think about why any of us live on the Eastern Shore of Virginia. We will wager that nobody lives here or has moved here to live because they want to live in suburbia. It is time for us to remember what makes the Shore a special place and why we should treasure and protect what we have so much more ardently.