Author: Progressive Voice

Progressive Voice is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in the column are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their organizations or ARLnow.com.

By Greg Greeley

As a community, what kind of Arlington will we get? Will we get the Arlington we want, or will we have an Arlington that just “happens?” With all the potential growth that we’re facing as a community — now more than ever — this is an important question for us.

When I was the parent of a young elementary student, I saw that our schools were getting more crowded, and I was concerned that we had no plans to build new schools despite the clearly growing enrollment. This was a real change from when I moved here in the 1980s. Back then, I remember families moving out to Fairfax for the “good” schools. Now we see many parents staying in and moving to Arlington for the good schools.

But, the change was not pre-ordained. There are still many who remember the decades when our school population was shrinking, and Arlington was discussing which schools to close — a painful process.

Today, we’re a growing community. But, the growth has been difficult. Many see the towers rising in Pentagon City and decry the density and the traffic. At the same time, few would want to go back to the desolate warehouses and empty lots that were there decades before. So again, what kind of future do we want for Arlington?

Last year, the county purchased the “Buck” site on N. Quincy Street. Some of the early proposals would have included swapping part of the site for bus parking in South Arlington. If that happened, we would have been looking at the construction of a six-story storage facility on Quincy Street. Many in our community were clear that this was not the future they wanted. I am happy that our Joint Facilities Advisory Commission (JFAC) could recommend better alternatives. Alternatives that will allow us all time to consider what we could imagine as a long-term plan for that site.

As we look into the future, it’s clear that we will need to build more schools. We will need new elementary schools, perhaps a new middle school, and certainly more seats for our high school students. So, as our schools grow, we should not just build schools where it is the fastest and easiest to build. We should use tools like JFAC to look into the long-range future and select, as a community, where the schools should go. We should look at which neighborhoods have students, but don’t have a neighborhood school. We should look at where we can put schools to help balance the diversity that so many want to achieve. And, we should look at how could we give more of our students the opportunity to walk to school.

I have been fortunate. I am the parent of a high schooler who walks to a diverse, neighborhood school. The diversity has given him a perspective on the world that he would not have otherwise seen, the proximity to school fosters a sense of community, and the ability to walk to school gives him a real feeling of independence. I hope that in the future we can provide these benefits to even more of our students in Arlington.

So, that brings us back to the question. What kind of Arlington will we get? One tool to help us plan our future is the relatively new Joint Facilities Advisory Commission. But, JFAC is only one tool, and to be effective it must be used well. As a commission, we must look into the future and help the community discuss and plan for the Arlington we want. If we don’t, we’ll get an Arlington that just happens, and that’s no guarantee of a positive future for our community.

Greg Greeley is the Vice Chair of the Joint Facilities Advisory Commission. He is a long-time resident of Arlington and has been an active parent in Arlington schools. 

Progressive Voice is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in the column are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their organizations or ARLnow.

By Howard Solodky

Much has been said recently about Arlington County’s Neighborhood Conservation (NC) program that pays for neighborhood infrastructure projects such as sidewalks, streetlamps and traffic safety improvements. Because of misconceptions and rumors about the program and its overlooked public benefits, some have even suggested the program be terminated, while others have simply advanced unfounded criticisms. It’s time to set the record straight.

The Neighborhood Conservation Advisory Committee (NCAC), formed in 1977, administers the program with the valuable help of county staff. Representatives from most of the county’s civic associations participate on the NCAC and review and recommend action on projects proposed for their respective neighborhoods. This “bottom up” approach has resulted in the completion of missing link sidewalks, traffic flow enhancements and other pedestrian and commuter safety projects that would otherwise go unidentified.

County bonds fund the projects, with awards made through a rigorous, but fair, “points” process managed by the NCAC. The program has completed hundreds of neighborhood improvement projects and demand remains high. Notwithstanding that, the 2019-2028 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) cut NC funding from $12 million to $5 million for 2019-2020 and then to $4 million for the following two-year cycle.

Recent criticism falls into two categories: Lack of equity; and cost effectiveness.

Lack of equity. Allegations of unfair distribution of NC projects among Arlington’s roughly 60 neighborhoods have arisen because some neighborhoods don’t participate in the program. The reality is that more than 85 percent of Arlington’s civic associations are active on the NCAC, and projects are not concentrated disproportionately in any particular neighborhood. One look at a map showing the dollar amounts and location of projects over the past 17 years reveals widespread geographic distribution. Three of the top five neighborhood beneficiaries, measured by dollars spent, are in south Arlington.

Length and cost of process.  While, historically, the time elapsed from project approval to completion could take five years or more, that is no longer the case. Through right-sizing county design and engineering staff assigned to the program, the time from County Board approval to project completion now averages roughly two and one-half years, similar to the time it takes to design, engineer and complete a typical county transportation project.

Another factor contributing to length of process is the county’s aging, and in some cases inadequate, infrastructure. With limited bond proceeds available to the NC program, and infrastructure repairs and improvements needed in many neighborhoods, only a fraction of the qualified NC projects can be funded each year. The rest must wait in line. Terminating or reducing the NC program won’t solve this problem; only more financial resources will.

Alleged cost overruns are also often cited, even though close to 90 percent of NC projects are completed within budget. Moreover, 15 years ago, if the NCAC approved the construction of a sidewalk along a neighborhood street, the program would only pay for the cost of the actual sidewalk. Today, because of state and local legal requirements, a “simple” sidewalk project also entails costs for site control and management, storm water management, water mains and meters and potentially for underground utility conduit repair or replacement. The county requires that those costs be borne by the NC program, rather than by the Department of Environmental Services (DES) that has historically paid for those items. These “cost overruns” are, in fact, hidden savings for the budgets of various DES departments.

The 2019-2028 CIP required that the County Manager form a Neighborhood Conservation and Community Infrastructure Working Group to review and make recommendations regarding the NC program. That Working Group might want to consider how to:

• Account for and share within DES the numerous costs that have been imposed on the program;
• Discuss with DES staff and the County Board how to shorten their project review and approval processes; and
• Reach out to neighborhoods that do not participate actively to more effectively educate them on the benefits of the NC program.

The future of the NC program is uncertain during this period of budgetary belt-tightening. Decision-makers need to move beyond the unsupported criticisms of the program, gain a better understanding of the hidden benefits realized from an all-volunteer program that identifies needed infrastructure repairs and improvements before that infrastructure breaks down, and fairly apportion among the divisions of DES the costs associated with NC capital projects. These steps can help preserve the scope and vitality of a valuable, community-based, neighborhood improvement program.

Howard Solodky is a tax attorney who recently retired from the law firm of Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, and is the Old Glebe Civic Association’s representative on the NCAC.

Progressive Voice is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in the column are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their organizations or ARLnow.com

By Nathan Zee

As an Arlington resident for 17 years, and a former PTA president with two elementary-age children in the Arlington school system, I’ve been closely following the race between Matt de Ferranti and John Vihstadt for County Board.

Four years ago I voted for John Vihstadt — and I now regret it. John campaigned on promises to reduce the commercial vacancy rate, proactively address school capacity challenges, support parks and recreation, including youth sports, and deliver other core services. He also promised to replace the Columbia Pike streetcar proposal with a robust Bus Rapid Transit System.

John Vihstadt has not delivered. Over and over again, he emphasizes a “delay and obstruct” approach to governing — often in response to only a few shrill voices — which results in rising costs for core services over time.

In the face of a capacity crisis plain to any parent of an APS student, John spearheaded efforts to delay the new Alice West Fleet Elementary School. The school is scheduled to open in 2019 instead of 2018, which increased construction costs and trailer expenses. He led the charge to postpone addressing youth soccer capacity challenges with his vote against adding lights at the Williamsburg Middle School and has aligned himself with a group focused on reducing the number of sports fields in Arlington. This is despite years of work from community groups and constructive solutions at other lighted fields across Arlington. He also voted to delay the contract award for the new Lubber Run Community Center.

John Vihstadt has failed to lead or advance Bus Rapid Transit on a meaningful timeline along Columbia Pike. Earlier he was loudly vocal against the streetcar, but over the past four years he has been strangely silent in showing what being “for” Bus Rapid Transit really means. His delay tactics, always pushing decisions on down the road, increase future costs to taxpayers while denying us much needed services today.

As I cast my vote for County Board on Nov. 6, this time I’m choosing Matt de Ferranti, a candidate who is more deliberately and urgently focused on making things better for future generations. Matt de Ferranti will make fiscally smart, prudent investments to achieve progressive goals like education, parks and recreation activities and the basics like storm water management. He will make decisions with plenty of community input, yet without dragging out decisions and actions for years.

Matt de Ferranti has clearly articulated what he will focus on as a member of the County Board.

His priority is bringing down Arlington’s commercial vacancy rate more quickly and more purposefully. Unless the county brings in new businesses (and revenue) more quickly, Arlington will never be able to fund our countywide priorities like schools. Matt advocates bringing in different types of businesses in the fields of the future, like cybersecurity, while investing in small and independent business to create jobs that grow our commercial tax base.

Matt de Ferranti supports our world-class school system. In his leadership role on the School Board’s Budget Advisory Council, he’s demonstrated the ability to make tough choices like taking the lead on reducing the APS budget deficit by $20 million in a tight budget year while prioritizing spending on core services for our students. Matt has actually shown he can make the tough choices on governing instead of just saying “no.”

Matt understands the importance of community centers, parks and youth sports. He is opposed to efforts that will shrink the number of sports fields, and is committed to identifying cost-effective solutions and putting them into action promptly, putting into practice the same sound judgment that helped the school system.

Matt’s values demonstrate fiscal responsibility. Please don’t fall for Vihstadt’s fear mongering about wasteful spending or tales from many years ago. John’s way is to rail “against” something, but it’s much harder to do the heavy lifting of government and nimble decision-making that shapes what Arlington is “for,” and there Vihstadt has failed. His delay and obstruct approach results in higher future costs while limiting progress for us today.

We need a fresh perspective on the County Board. Matt de Ferranti will make the tough choices in a timelier, cost-effective manner for investing our limited resources to address countywide challenges. Let’s elect Matt de Ferranti for County Board on Nov. 6.

Nathan Zee is a long-time resident of the Arlington Forest neighborhood. He’s married with two children and loves to call Arlington his home.

Progressive Voice is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in the column are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their organizations or ARLnow.com.

By Beth Arthur, Sheriff

Reentering the community after incarceration is daunting. Imagine being locked up for days, weeks, months or years knowing the stigma society attaches to it. Often, incarcerated individuals are unemployed with drug or mental health issues. They often have no family support and no housing, money or even photo identification when they get out. They may have no idea where to start to get back on their feet.

As part of our evolving and open philosophy to new strategies to ensure the success of inmates, we are concentrating fresh effort on this transition back into the community. This builds on our core responsibilities such as managing the Arlington County Detention Facility (ACDF) and overseeing Arlington’s courthouse/courtroom security (Juvenile, Domestic Relations, County, Circuit and General District courts)/civil process service.

Through 18 years serving as Sheriff for Arlington County, my staff and I have continually looked for better ways to securely serve Arlington’s 230,000 residents and to effectively manage and prepare the inmates for life after incarceration.

One example is the new Community Readiness Unit (CRU), established in May 2018. It focuses intensely on individualized reentry planning, work readiness and programming for substance abuse, mental health and life skills.

“The CRU is producing a steady flow of purpose and promise,” says Inmate Service Counselor Camille Watkin. “Most of the inmates who participate in the re-entry and community readiness classes are also dedicated to participate in GED classes/tutoring, mental health, substance abuse awareness and work force programs in the community.” Watkin added, “This group of inmates are seeking and learning coping skills.”

The CRU builds on early work of the Arlington County Reentry Committee (ACRC), created in 2009 to ensure successful offender reentry, reduce recidivism and enhance public safety for Arlington residents. ACRC’s goal is to assist those incarcerated with supportive services — such as job training or mental health services — so that they may more easily transition from jail to the community and sustain a life that will not lead to repeat offenses.

“After completing the ACT Program (Addictions, Corrections Treatment), I was placed in the CRU,” says one inmate. “In the few weeks I’ve been in this unit, I’ve created a much needed network system and sharpened the tools I need to ensure success.” He added that the CRU “has allowed me to sustain my recovery by participating in NA/AA and the Cognitive Distortion Recognition program. I’m staying positive and productive prior to my reentry to the community in a few days.”

One distinctive of the CRU is that it brought many of the ACRC programs together in one male housing unit for individuals that are eligible. Individuals must be post-sentence 12 to 14 months or less, reside in the DMV area, participate in a formal interview and have no detainers from other jurisdictions. (Reentry services are also available to the one female inmate unit in the detention facility.)

Some of the CRU’s programs may seem surprising, such as Fatherhood, Wellness, Money Management, or Peer Group and Cognitive Distortion Recognition. Yet such topics can be just as vital to a person’s successful transition as programs on Employability Readiness, Individual Re-Entry Planning or Addiction Awareness. All classes are conducted by Sheriff’s Office case managers, Arlington Department of Human Services (DHS) staff, Offender Aide and Restoration (OAR) staff and volunteers.

Our hope is that everyone that reenters the community from the CRU will, like the inmate mentioned above, have a network system and the tools they need for success. The key is helping them identify and eliminate barriers before they get out.

ACRC assists incarcerated individuals with a discharge plan focused on their needs, appropriate resources and referrals to enhance successful reentry to the community. Resources include ID cards, mental health and substance abuse services, shelter, and job placement. Our partners include DHS, OAR, the Public Defender’s Office, and the Adult Probation and Residential Program Center-Shelter.

Inmates returning to the community face many challenges and those who have difficulty adjusting often re-offend. As the sheriff of Arlington County, I am committed to ensuring that individuals who are remanded into the custody of my office receive opportunities to “right” their wrongs and become successful citizens of our community.

Sheriff Beth Arthur was first elected in 2000 and is the first woman elected to a County Sheriff’s position in Virginia. She has served more than 31 years with the Arlington Sheriff’s Office. She is a member of the Virginia Sheriff’s Association Board and served as its first female President from September 2012 through September 2013 and is a member of the Board of Regents for the Leadership Center of Excellence.

Progressive Voice is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in the column are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their organizations or ARL.now.

By Eric Harold

When I emerge from the natural oasis of the Four Mile Run creek bed, I am greeted by an Ethiopian family teaching their son to ride his bike on the Arlington Mill Plaza. Following the spirited African rhythms enjoyed by a group of friends gathering near the bridge, I catch the tempting scents of the Bolivian food truck readying for the lunch crowd. I am reminded why, many years ago, my wife and I quickly fell in love with Columbia Pike — a vital and vibrant corridor with good local businesses, active neighborhood associations and energetic mixed-income communities. Still, we recognized this high potential area was struggling to develop as a valued Metro corridor.

After 20 years, thousands of hours of planning meetings, and many county initiatives later, the Pike appears to be thriving. We had envisioned three legs of a stool that would solidly support Columbia Pike in the future: a streamlined development process, a Pike neighborhoods’ plan with a goal of preserving over 6,000 affordable housing units, and a blueprint for greatly improving the transit system to support expected growth.

So are we where we wanted to be 20 years ago?

While some development has happened, the transportation “leg of the stool” has wobbled. Four years ago, the County Board abruptly canceled the long-planned streetcar, endangering and undermining progress in other areas. Pike neighborhoods were told that transportation investments would continue. What we received was a mediocre transit plan, delayed construction of the transit stations, and no attention to much-needed utility undergrounding.

To be clear, the current growth and development on Columbia Pike was spurred on with the implementation of the Form Based Code, an alternative development process that offered streamlined reviews and approvals for developments that supported our community’s vision and needs, as described in the Code and associated plans. As a result, we are seeing redevelopment of properties along the Pike that is bringing new residents along with some affordable housing and new amenities. We are seeing the development creep west on the Pike, as well.

But with this development comes some significant challenges. New development brings new residents, many with children attending already overcrowded schools. Businesses that were “early adopters” to the Pike, like P. Brennan’s, have shuttered. Storefronts remain empty at key locations along Columbia Pike, while new developments like Centro Arlington and 4707 Columbia Pike will bring more retail spaces to fill.

As we look forward to the next 20 years, the Columbia Pike communities need the County’s focused effort and planning to ensure continued growth along the corridor while addressing the significant weaknesses in the current plan implementation.

What should happen now?

• Update Transit Plan now: Fast and efficient completion of the current projects outlines in the Multimodal Street Improvements plan will send a clear signal that Columbia Pike remains a critical area of growth for the county. More important, however, should be revising the Transit Plan for Columbia Pike, to include updating capacity projections based on current development and growth patterns.
• Increase daytime population: Current development has been entirely mixed-use residential and commercial. Commercial vacancies remain high while businesses struggle, primarily due to very low daytime population. The Columbia Pike Revitalization Organization (CPRO) and the County need to provide incentives that will bring offices and other services to the Pike.If we are going to be true to maintaining Columbia Pike as a diverse community, we need to provide spaces and encourage services to support low-income and disadvantaged populations. Clinics, job training services, and other community assistance can fill vacant spaces and increase daytime traffic. Providing incubator spaces, shared work locations, and other office/business development can help improve the mix of development. Combined, this has the potential to make the Columbia Pike corridor a true live-work destination while maintaining the vibrant, mixed-income communities we love.

• Improve planning with/for Arlington Public Schools: The Career Center property, just a block off Columbia Pike and now in the middle of conceptual planning for new school/community uses and space, is a prime example of the need for better integrated planning between APS and the County. Creative use of spaces along the Pike has the potential to help APS manage student population growth.

Columbia Pike has come a long way in the 20 years that I have lived here. The time is now for the county to aggressively help reinvigorate our plans and processes so that Columbia Pike remains the vital and vibrant community we love.

Eric Harold resides in Barcroft with his wife and four children. He served as president of his civic association, served for 13 years on the Environment and Energy Conservation Commission (E2C2), and now serves on the APS Advisory Council on School Facilities and Capital Projects (FAC).

Progressive Voice is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in the column are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their organizations or ARLnow.com.

By Kelley Coyner

Less than a year ago the city of Arlington, Texas, became the first municipal government to deploy an automated transportation service — a cute shuttle named Milo. In a couple of weeks, Arlington, Texas will move ahead with an autonomous vehicle (AV) taxi.

Meanwhile in Arlington, Virginia, we are beginning to look at how to launch similar services. The technology is moving forward quickly, especially for lower speed AVs that mix well with pedestrians and bicyclists. What should we be thinking about this technological game changer?

Money talks: First focus on economic development, job loss and creation, and revenue loss

Our Arlington and its neighbors — including their transportation agencies — need to look at the impacts of AVs (what some people call “self-driving” vehicles) on their revenue. Greater fuel efficiency and shifts to electric vehicles will accelerate the downward spiral of gas tax revenues. Changed ownership models also may undercut personal property tax and rental-car tax revenues. Decreased demand for parking may cut into parking revenues and an anticipated decline in traffic violations will reduce revenue from fines. Secondary impacts include the potential for decreased revenue from transit and toll fares.

Understand equity

AVs can dramatically improve opportunities for blind, older and younger riders — if we consider those travelers in the planning and design. You need only try to find your Lyft or Uber in Clarendon to appreciate that we need to pay attention to the last 50 feet from home or restaurant to your ride. Also, let’s make sure that shared vehicles are universally designed starting with wheelchair access. Meanwhile nationally, job and wage losses could hit transit and taxi drivers, delivery drivers, truckers, bus operators and Lyft/Uber drivers disproportionately, so training programs will need to come into play.

Figure out what you want your place to be like

Over the years, Arlington, Virginia, has given thought and taken action on the intersection between transportation and land use. How might AVs change all this yet again? How might they change our affordable and workforce housing? Is there a new paradigm for transit-rich hubs that also include shared-AV drop-off areas, electric charging stations, and rich networks of walking and bike paths?

What to worry about: Favor safety gains and protect against cyber dangers

There are indeed real reasons to be worried about the vulnerability of automated vehicles to cyber-attack. The answer is to address that risk, not to let it highjack automated technologies that protect occupants and people in the path of the AVs, such as pedestrians, bicyclists and people at bus stops.

That said, I am flabbergasted when anyone is dismissive about the potential of saving a portion of 37,000 lives that are currently lost to human-caused crashes each year. Most traffic accidents are attributable to human error. To be sure we need to take steps to operate AVs safely. Experts such as researchers at Rand note that the sooner we start adopting automated technologies, the more lives will be saved.

Define your principles and set measurable objectives to reach them

Beyond those first four paths I think cities should take, there are still many ways to maximize the safety and environmental benefits while guarding against increased congestion, sprawl, job loss and the further weakening of public transit. Arlington should start by understanding how AVs can help and hurt us and then set a course that allows us to experiment safely with AVs.

We should avoid esoteric debates about obscure hypotheticals, and instead, focus on understanding the implications of an automated mobility. Then pull out all the stops to safely channel the technology revolution on the street where you live.

Kelley Coyner is CEO and Founder of Mobility e3. A Senior Fellow at George Mason University, she advises cities on how to analyze the pluses and minuses of autonomous vehicles. She lives with her family in central Arlington.

Progressive Voice is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in the column are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their organizations or ARLnow.com.

By Cheryl Moore

In August, I travelled to Dilley, Texas, to volunteer for a week with immigrants who are seeking asylum. The South Texas Family Residential Center, 80 miles south of San Antonio, houses 2,400 women and children, most from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador, who were apprehended by border patrol agents when trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border.

I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t speak Spanish very well, but when I heard from an attorney friend about this opportunity, I felt compelled to go. With so many stories in the news about family separation, detention and the cruel treatment of immigrants at the border, this was my chance to “do something,” even if I didn’t know exactly what I would be doing. I wanted to be a witness to what is happening to immigrants coming to the U.S. amidst this unwelcoming political climate.

Along with other volunteers with the Dilley Pro Bono Project, my mission was to help women prepare for their Credible Fear Interview (CFI) with asylum officers. Receiving a “positive” after their interview means they are freed from detention (after paying a bond or submitting to wearing an ankle monitor) and can begin the long process of seeking asylum, as is their legal right under U.S. law.

It was not an easy week. We worked 12-hour days, filled with non-stop activity, noise and, often, tears.

For much of the week, I helped women fill out basic forms. As I showed them where to write their name, date of birth and other details, I learned part of their story. The answers to questions on the forms also offered clues about wrenching decisions some of the women had had to make when deciding to leave their country.

Some mothers asked, “Do I only put the name and birthday of the child who is here with me?” Clearly, many had had to leave another child behind. As a mother myself, I couldn’t imagine making that choice.

Other volunteers spent the week helping women prepare for their CFI by asking them to recount the testimony they would tell the asylum officer. Why did they leave their country? What persecution did they face there? What might happen if they went back home?

The extreme danger and violence our clients described was appalling — gangs, rape, death threats, kidnapping, extortion. We learned more about the culture and government of the countries that these women were fleeing, and about the extreme poverty and inequity that contribute to crime and lawlessness. It was clear that these women were escaping from systems that would never protect them. They were victims, not criminals; yet they were in a detention center.

With many CFI interviews looming toward the end of the week, I was asked to do some CFI preps on my own, working with an interpreter by telephone. Thanks to the in-depth training we received and wise counsel from the Dilley Pro Bono Project legal staff, I was able help two clients. It is not often that I feel I’m holding someone’s fate in my hands, but I did that day.

After I returned home, their faces swam before my eyes as I tried to go to sleep at night. Fortunately, I was able to check on their status and it appears that they both have been released from detention, and presumably are now with family or friends as they proceed through the asylum-seeking process.

While I may have helped some women start a new chapter in their lives, I will never know how their stories unfold. As with all mission work, the difference is in me. The women I met are part of my story now.

Back in Arlington, I will never look at the woman from Central America standing next to me in the supermarket line without contemplating her story. I will wonder what happened to make her leave her birthplace, and I will pray it wasn’t as bad as some of the stories I heard in that Texas detention center.

Above all, my week at the detention center reminded me that immigrant detention and family separation are more than just policy issues. They are human issues.

Cheryl Moore has lived in Arlington for 35 years. She has been a volunteer for Arlington Public Schools, her church, civic association, the Arlington Community Chorus, and many nonprofit organizations serving the Northern Virginia community. She continues to work on her Spanish language skills.

Progressive Voice is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in the column are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their organizations or ARLnow.

By John F. Seymour

Updated 3:45 “Why am I doing this?” It was a lovely summer morning and I could be watching my grandson’s soccer game, or finishing the crossword, or dividing perennials. Instead, I was knocking on the doors of 35 strangers in Arlington.

The homeowner looked at me with the familiar impatient frown. But it (thankfully) morphed into a wry grin as she saw this thin, white-haired, unprepossessing guy. I could see the speech bubble above her head –“No clue who this is, but he seems harmless.”

I introduced myself as a volunteer for Arlington Democrats. I asked whether she was registered to vote, and was likely to vote in the upcoming election. For a likely Democratic voter, I simply highlighted the importance of every vote–a message made more credible following the one-vote loss of the Democratic candidate for the House of Delegates in Newport News in 2017 and the repercussions of that loss on the evenly-divided House. I was prepared to engage on issues, but Saturday morning conversations with the uninvited typically hold little appeal — for either person. I thanked her and went on to the next door. Thirty-two doors to go.

So why do we canvass, particularly those of us who guard our own privacy, dislike arguments and are by temperament very reserved?

The Practical Reason: At bottom, we do it because we believe in the party’s platform and values and have the time to, perhaps, nudge turnout a tiny bit. Door-to-door canvassing is generally believed to increase voter turnout among frequent voters–at least marginally. Turnout in non-presidential elections is particularly important for Democrats. And Arlington Democratic turnout has become critical in statewide races.

Where Sen. Warner and then-Gov. McAuliffe won with narrow statewide voting totals (a 1% margin for Warner and 2.5% margin for McAuliffe), Arlington voters provided winning margins of more than 40% for both candidates–enough, together with other northern Virginia jurisdictions, to offset deep red voting elsewhere. Although Sen. Tim Kaine’s re-election race this year is unlikely to be close, turnout can help with down ballot candidates, proposed constitutional amendments, and bond referenda.

The Real Reason: But canvassing these days is, at least for me, far more important as an outlet for outrage at the flood of voter suppression measures championed by Republican legislators in Richmond. Virginia’s photo ID law–among the strictest in the country–purports to fight an epidemic of voter fraud but is viewed, by all but the most credulous, as a tactic to disenfranchise eligible Democratic voters.

Indeed, Republican legislators have fought hard for legislation requiring any voter submitting an application for an absentee ballot by mail to submit a photo ID. Such a law seems absurd because the registrar would have no corporeal being standing before him to compare to the photograph. The absurdity did nothing, however, to discourage the Virginia House and Senate from passing the bill on party line votes, although the Republicans were unable to override then-Gov. McAuliffe’s veto.

Virginia also remains one of four states to permanently disenfranchise citizens with past felony convictions, unless the Governor grants relief. Such laws have their roots in Virginia’s Reconstruction Era efforts to deny civil rights to newly freed slaves. In most states, convicted felons regain the right to vote upon release from prison or at thereafter.

Although then-Gov. McAuliffe expanded upon the efforts of prior governors by issuing an Executive Order restoring voting rights to convicted felons upon completion of their sentences, the order was subject to a successful Republican legal challenge. Currently, the Governor has begun to issue voting restoration orders on an individual basis, over the strong objections of Republican legislators.

Absentee voting, too, continues to be curbed by Republican lawmakers. Republicans continue to oppose efforts by Virginia Democrats to extend and legitimize early “no-excuse” absentee voting. Republicans have even opposed legislation seeking to allow certain caregivers or voters older than 70 to vote absentee without an excuse. As Republicans are well aware, Democrats lead Republicans by a wide margin in absentee voting.  Broadened absentee voting rights, irrespective of their obvious benefits in furthering democracy and civil society as a whole, simply do not serve Republican interests.

In the face of efforts to dampen voting rights, canvassing represents, for many of us, an individual act of defiance against the dysfunctional ugliness of contemporary politics and Republican efforts to preserve and extend Jim Crow-era restrictions on state voting rights. However time-consuming and awkward it can seem, canvassing is the very stuff of democracy. In these days when a governing national party sows discord and incites contempt for government and its institutions, canvassing is not an antidote to cynicism and despair. But it can be, even for the shy, a weekly tonic.

John F. Seymour is a long-time resident of Arlington, Virginia.