To the Editor:
I attended the Mayoral debate at George Washington Middle School on May 18 hosted by the Chamber of Commerce and moderated by Drew Hansen. It was a good turnout, and the sponsor and moderator did a great job.
What did I learn?
Like many attendees, I already had my front runner in mind. I thought that, maybe, the debate could add some new perspectives to my thoughts, being out of town for the first debate. In retrospect, it did, but did not basically change my thoughts on who was the best candidate.
Having attended several council meetings, I came to the conclusion (reinforced by the debate) that the vice mayor is not anywhere close to being mayor. The problem is that her vision of the future of Alexandria will not work for several reasons: First, given her voting record, and positions on several developments, her vision cannot be paid for without a significant increase in taxes. Second, should she be voted in as mayor, she has demonstrated an inability to effectively run the council and reach consensus which is critical to the position.
In the debate, one fact stood out very clearly. While Mayor Euille and former Mayor Donley could both articulate a significant amount of detail on every issue put forth by the moderator, Ms. Silberberg could barely scratch the surface, constantly going back to bromides to make her case.
There was agreement that Alexandria needs commercial development to fix its imbalance on residential/commercial real estate tax revenues. That is where a significant difference emerges. History shows that Ms. Silberberg basically votes no on development issues.
Even in agreement with the other candidates as to the location of the proposed Metro stop in Potomac Yards, she had to say that it needs to be brick with green paint, and not glass and steel. How can you take these positions seriously? She hides behind the campaign pledge of “thoughtful, appropriate development.” But in practice, what does this mean? Her voting record makes me think she is quite willing to vote against the interests of the city as a whole, while currying favor with individual neighborhoods. On the Robinson South vote, other council members expressed concerns about the architecture, but knowing that the issue is larger than that one item, they voted (appropriately) for it. Ms. Silberberg was the only no vote.
Mayor Euille, or former Mayor Donley, both are clearly up to the task of being mayor. Both have command of the issues, and proven leadership skills. When I look at what is on the city’s plate for the next three years, and what is the best set of skills to get the job done, I come to the conclusion that Mayor Euille is the best candidate. Mayor Euille has
demonstrated that he can run the city through good times and in hard times like we have gone through recently. Through the banking recession and sequester, we have maintained our coveted AAA bond rating. We have increased our debt, but stayed within our debt limits and have taken advantage of the historically low interest rates to appropriately invest in our future. He also strikes a good balance as to involving the
citizens as much as possible in the decision making process while still moving needed issues forward. My concern is that while former Mayor Donley will also get things done, the right balance of community involvement will not occur.
For the next three years, Mayor Bill Euille is the best candidate to lead our city.
Dennis Auld
Alexandria