Milde: Let the public choose its chairman

At its first meeting of 2012, the Stafford County Board of Supervisors will choose a new chairman. While the formal vote on who will hold this important position will be taken in public, the real decision process will have already taken place in private, out of view of the voters and absent their input.  The vote at the meeting is more akin to a ceremony, the decision having been made long before the board is gaveled to order.

Stafford chooses its chairman, a position similar to that of a city mayor, in this manner because it has always done so. Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William changed their charters to elect the chairmen of their respective boards. They did this because, unlike a supervisor representing an individual district, the chairman often represents and acts on behalf of the entire county.

Stafford authorizes its supervisors to select a county leader amongst themselves. But in doing so, residents effectively cede their own judgment on effective leadership to their single elected supervisor and the six other members of the board, for whom they have never voted.

As the board of supervisors is Stafford’s sole governing body, wouldn’t it make more sense to have voters make the choice on who should serve in this critical position? At a minimum, shouldn’t voters be able to decide whether or not Stafford should have a chairman who is elected county-wide?

A lot of Stafford residents think so. More than 6,000 signed petitions to ask the board to have a referendum placed on the ballot, allowing Stafford citizens to decide whether or not it was time to elect their chairman in a county-wide election.

Getting elected officials to enact changes that could conceivably shift even a modicum of power to the electorate is understandably difficult.  This situation has been no different.  The sentiment of the public notwithstanding, the board has reliably opposed every effort to hold a referendum on having an elected chairman. A majority of supervisors have steadfastly refused to request that our representatives in Richmond file the necessary legislation to hold one.

Opponents of an elected chairman have expressed multiple reasons for their opposition.   But if they truly believe their positions to be valid, why would they consistently and vigorously thwart efforts to put the decision to the public?  If their arguments are as strong as they believe, why are they not willing to entrust their own constituents with this choice?

The decision of whether or not to have an elected chairman is not the same as enacting a budget, setting a tax rate, or deciding on the merits of a new development. At its core, it is a decision about the constructs of our local government and the authority and input of the electorate. That effectively makes the board majority’s hardline stance against a referendum an affront to the judgment of Stafford voters.

I have long been an advocate of Stafford having an elected chairman. Regrettably, I have been unable to secure the support necessary — just four of the seven supervisors — to begin the process of holding a referendum. Supervisors who are content with the current closed-door process of choosing a chairman have been reluctant to support any effort that might enact this change.

Supporting a referendum that would put this issue to the voters is not the same as supporting an elected chairman. Believing that it is would be to presume the judgment of the electorate. But, that is exactly the manner in which supervisors opposed to having an elected chairman have been behaving. In their view, handing this decision over to the voters might result in a “yes” vote, an outcome they are unwilling to risk.

As a supporter of an elected chairman, I do not fear the verdict or the judgment of the electorate.  If Stafford voters decide for whatever reason they are satisfied with the current structure of local government and the existing method of selecting a chairman, that decision should be respected. But to deny voters the ability to make this decision is another matter entirely.

It is my hope that as the new board organizes, newly elected board members will join those members who have previously supported holding a referendum to produce a majority.  But if that doesn’t happen and the Board remains intransigent on this issue, it is the judgment of voters that has again been discounted. Supervisors should trust the people of Stafford County, and vote in favor of holding a referendum on having an elected chairman.

Paul Milde is the Aquia District representative on the Stafford County Board of Supervisors.