Revisting Democracy in the Heart of Virginia

We spend a fair amount of time worrying about spreading democracy around the world these days but often forget about practice of democracy here at home. We tend to forget that democracy is a relatively rare and fragile concept. Even in America, it does not always work perfectly and it is not always pretty. But democracy, imperfect as it may be, is surely better than all the other systems of government we see around the world.

Sometimes, here at home, we see situations that remind us that the principles of democracy have to be constantly guarded by vigilant citizens. A good example of this is the ongoing controversy concerning citizen rights in Prince Edward County, Virginia (see BAD DAY FOR DEMOCRACY, November 24, 2005).

Recently, the Prince Edward Board of Supervisors voted five to three to reject a proposal to restructure the County Planning Commission to give fair representation to all voter districts in this rural community in the Heart of Virginia.

This came about when citizens became frustrated that the Planning Commission seemed to be rubber stamping controversial development proposals. Citizens noticed that the Planning Commission seemed eschew objective evaluations of zoning proposals and to precede with little discussion, and typically no dissent or justification, to approve controversial zoning proposals. Citizen concerns were not only ignored but they were derided by Planning Commission members. It seemed that the County Planning Commission was not functioning as it was suppose to in a free and open democracy.

An investigation this fall by Prince Edward County Supervisor Sally Gilfillan revealed that the County Planning Commission was a relatively stagnant body with the same chairman serving for nearly two decades. Similarly some of the other members of the Planning Commission had served for many long years with apparently little effort to recruit new talent. County records obtained indicated questions about the process of appointing Planning Commission members, its fairness and its accountability to the citizens. Supervisor Gilfillan also discovered that some voting districts were over represented on the body and that one voting district (hers - District 701), which happened to be in a development hot spot, was not represented at all. It was understandable that Supervisor Gilfillan sought to remedy this obvious problem.

One could argue that the five to three vote was an example of democracy in action with the majority position prevailing to keep the status quo. However, there is also evidence to suggest that this might be a case of a “tyranny of the majority” seeking to block true democratic principles of fair representation. The most obvious evidence of this tyranny is the absence of any logical explanation as to why Supervisor Gilfillan’s concerns were left unaddressed. The Chairman of the Planning Commission even made a feeble attempt to argue (with support from some of the Supervisors I might add), that “electoral districts do not relate to land-use planning.”

If such ridiculous arguments are not enough evidence, this tyranny of the majority is also hinted at in the comments of a second member of the Prince Edward Board of Supervisors, Lacy B. Ward who suggested that the problem may be the result of a fear on the part of some members of the Board of Supervisors that there would be a “loss of control” if the Planning Commission were to be reorganized. What does this mean?

Well for starters, the Planning Commission has far reaching influence on all development activities in the County. The Planning Commission is the first step in any effort to change land-use zoning in the County. A zoning change to allow more intense land use development can, with the stroke of the pen, make land speculators, realtors, developers and property owners a lot of money. While there is nothing inherently wrong with people making money, the concept of zoning is to protect against incompatible land use developments. In other words, zoning is not supposed to be manipulated for financial profit… but it sometimes is. The control issue that Supervisor Ward may be alluding to could have some very practical implications for those who seek favorable zoning decisions to facilitate windfall profits.

Because of the great potential for abuse in the arbitrary manipulation of land use zoning, the Virginia legislature passed laws many years ago requiring that zoning decisions need to be made following a logical and open process that assures public participation, objective justification, and accountability. The law divides the responsibility for making zoning changes between two different public entities. The planning commission is supposed to make informed recommendations and the governing body is empowered to make the final decision. These are what we might consider democratic safeguards to prevent abuses.

Local planning commissions have the responsibility of assuring that the public is informed on pending zoning matters and that public input will be fairly considered. According to some of the citizen complaints in Prince Edward County, this has not been happening. Thus, these citizens want a voice on the Planning Commission. This seems to be a reasonable request.

While fair representation of all citizens on the Prince Edward County Planning Commission may not solve all the problems of that body, it certainly is an important and obvious first step. That the Prince Edward County Board of Supervisors has so far refused to take this first step to address the legitimate concerns of its citizens is not a good sign all of the members of that Board truly understand or embrace the basic principles of democracy. Nor are they helping matters by not even attempting to explain their actions.

Making matters worse, Supervisor Ward also expressed concern during a recent meeting about attitudes and comments by other members of the Board and county personnel reflecting “animosity” towards citizens who have complained about functioning of the Planning Commission. What is that about? Why might County elected officials or appointed personnel feel “animosity” towards citizens who they are duty-bound to listen to and serve? Are County officials angry that citizens are questioning their actions?

While Supervisor Ward did not name names or give specifics, he made it abundantly clear that he was concerned by the behavior of certain County officials. Any reader who has some specific insight on this matter please let me know so that I might be able to explore this matter in more depth in the future.

Citizens are a demanding lot. As a general collection of humanity, citizens are admittedly a quite unpredictable group. Indeed, there may be some citizens out there who are crazy. But most citizens are reasonable people who just want their government to function properly.

Whatever the situation, people who serve the public as either as elected or appointed officials are duty-bound to listen to citizens. When county Supervisors are elected to office, citizens are not giving up their rights to express their views. Nor are citizens telling elected Supervisors to do all of the thinking and decision making in total disregard of citizen concerns. Supervisors need to listen to citizens even when election-day is not looming in the near future.

Citizen participation in government is good thing. It should not be discouraged or viewed with disdain by local government officials. Any local government official, elected or appointed, who gets personally offended or feels animosity towards citizens just because those citizens want to participate in the democratic process of governing their own community might want to think about pursuing another line of work.

As a closing thought, I want to thank the young university people in Farmville who did such a great job in making the Prince Edward County meeting videos. As they say a picture is worth a thousand words. These young people are getting some great “real life” insights as to how government works in America. Please keep these videos coming. Anyone wanting to obtain copies of Prince Edward County government videos can send me a note and I will see if I can get you a copy on DVD.

While I am mindful that democracy has its pitfalls, including the messy process of listening to citizens concerns, I think the basic concept has some redeeming qualities that should be considered. There is still hope that the Prince Edward County Board of Supervisors will eventually do the right thing and embrace more enthusiastically the principles of democracy. I will keep you posted on new developments.



PS: I appreciate reader comments on this ongoing story. I am especially interested in factual insights from knowledgeable sources about the details of this unfolding story. Keep those comments coming!