Comments from Tonight's Meeting-September 22

The following are the prepared comments I delivered at the end of this evening's City Council meeting under Comments by City Council.

Since our last City Council meeting I have been giving a lot of thought about what I would say this evening, not just on the issue of restoring the real estate assessment function to the Commissioner of Revenue, but also the tone and tenor our political discourse has taken over the last two weeks here in the City of Fairfax.

Much has been said about the issue, some factual and some not. There’s also been a good deal written and discussed about what happened at the last council meeting.

I’d like to provide some clarity and a few facts on both.

First, the issue itself and where I stand:
o When I came on the Council in July 2008 and as part of an early start to the budget process, I put together a memo detailing various ways the City could possibly save money. One was to consolidate various departments including the Real Estate assessment function into the Commissioner of Revenue’s office. At the time I did not realize the history or controversy involved. The idea was soon dropped;
o As we started discussing how to fill the very big shoes our previous assessor, Dorrie Bennett, I felt that we should look at moving the function back under the Commissioner, which is how our City charter originally structured it;
o Upon listening to the debate and discussion at the two public meetings and throughout the community, I realized that this issue wasn’t just about saving money, it was about the very issue of separation of powers and having a local system of government where the Commissioner’s office assesses, the Council taxes and the Treasurer collects revenue;

We live in a small town surrounded by a large metropolis right next to the Nation’s Capital. Every day and night we see and hear news reports about how we have become less civil and forgotten what we were taught in civics: agree to be disagreeable, but don’t be disagreeable doing it.

So with regard to what happened at the last Council meeting, let me tell you what I was planning on doing – and how it was not out of the ordinary.

First, I was planning to introduce an ordinance and set a public hearing date for tonight, September 22 – two weeks from the time of introduction when it could be again discussed and debated. There would not have been a vote on the issue itself.

Second, according to City Code, policies and procedures adopted unanimously in July 2008 by this Council and stated by the City Attorney, introduction of an ordinance during Council Comments is both appropriate and legal. As the policies and procedures state:

Any ordinance may be introduced by any member of the council at any regular meeting of the council or at any special meeting when the subject thereof has been included in the notice for such special meeting or has been approved by a two-thirds vote of all members of the council present at such special meeting.

Third, my colleague who first walked out of the meeting stated that he had never seen this been done before on issues of controversy. However, I would like to remind my colleagues that this has happened multiple times over the years, with the two other members who walked out seconding such motions introduced under Council comments. For instance:

o On April 14, 2009, one colleague seconded a motion to increase the property tax on commercial property and set a public hearing
o On June 10, 2008 another colleague seconded a motion to sell what was once TT Reynolds to a private developer and set a public hearing
o Both of these were fairly “controversial” as defined by not having complete agreement among council and/or the community. What makes this issue any different?

We are our own individuals. And I’m my own person, independently elected to serve the citizens of Fairfax. I take that responsibility seriously. I can tell everyone now and forever more that my motivations are true – to serve this City and support policies that I believe are best for today and for the future. My only motivation is to do what I think it right. And I would never ever call into question the motivations of my colleagues as I believe their aim is true.

I’m reminded by John F. Kennedy’s words that to be civil is not a weakness. No, it is not. Rather it is a mark of strength.

And in responding to the many accusations and insults that have been free flowing over the last couple of weeks, I’m reminded by my Christian faith that it is better to turn the other cheek, yet at the same time have the courage to stand up for what’s right and speak the truth.

I ask that as we all move forward tonight we will pledge to work together to restore the trust that has been broken and the relationships that are unsettled. Our citizens deserve us working together to tackle the challenges we face.