Nader Baoukh's attempt to distance himself from Pro-Referendum platform backfires

Nader Baroukh supports the Falls Church Referendum to change the City's Charter. He has been a proponent of the Referendum since he decided to run for office along with the other Pro-Referendum candidates: Ed Hillegass and Margaret Housen.

While Hillegass and Housen have been papering the City with their Pro-Referendum flyers all weekend, which attack everyone from the School Board Chair to the Falls Church Housing Corporation, Nader Baroukh has been busy trying to distance himself from a campaign platform that he now realizes may cost him the election: his stance in support of the Referendum.

I talked to 2 friends yesterday who both told me the same story:
Both of my friends have CBC yard signs and they told me that Nader came to their houses campaigning - he asked them both to vote for him and then only 2 of the CBC candidates. When asked why they should vote for him since he supported the Referendum and they were against it, he told them: "City Charters get changed all the time" (after one friend objected to changing the City's Charter) and "Even if it passes, it will never be enacted" - saying in essence it was ok to vote for him even though they didn't support the referendum, because "it will never be enacted anyway"!

Both friends were turned off and deeply skeptical of Nader's message. One said "If it will never be enacted, then why waste people's time and the taxpayer's money?" The other one said, "I wonder if all the people who actually support the Referendum know this is what Nader Baroukh is saying??"

Voters should be appalled by the dishonesty and manipulation such statements reveal, no matter which side of the Referendum issue they're on. Nader Baroukh should be ashamed of himself... and Voters should beware!

Falls Church Referendum key to Election on Tuesday

The Falls Church Charter Change Referendum question which will be on the ballot May 6th is turning out to be the key to City election for City Council. All 3 CBC Candidates for City Council OPPOSE the Referendum, and the 3 Opposition candidates SUPPORT it. Nader Baroukh, Margaret Housen and Ed Hillegass all SUPPORT the passage of this very controversial Referendum which would change the City's Charter to restrict economic development in the City. See the Deliberation Falls Church article which just came out yesterday for more information: http://www.citizensovereignty.com/dfcva/2008/05/candidates-a-re.html#more

Confused about the Falls Church Referendum on the May 6 Ballot?

Confused about the Referendum on the May 6 Ballot?

You’re not alone! Many citizens we’ve talked to feel the same way. They say the language of the Referendum proposal is so confusing, they can’t figure out what it’s asking them!

The Referendum language has drawn criticism from the very beginning… even the State Board of Elections (SBE) initially refused to certify the Referendum for the ballot due to “improper wording” and “confusing language”. Apparently, it was only after the proponents of the Referendum threatened to sue the SBE that they modified the language and cleared it for the May 6 ballot.

Certain candidates who have said they SUPPORT the Referendum, now seem to be distancing themselves from the Referendum. However, candidates Nader Baroukh, Margaret Housen and Ed Hillegass are on record as supporting the Referendum. They are running on a Pro-Referendum platform.

The CBC Candidates: Robin Gardner, Lindy Hockenberry and Lawrence Webb are all AGAINST the Referendum.

It seems that for many voters, this campaign is boiling down to a vote for or against the development direction the City is heading in. But this election is about so much more than that. It is also about the long, proud CBC tradition of service to building a strong community and strong schools vs. the opposition’s record of non-service, “no-shows” and non-support of the schools.

VOTE CBC. VOTE FALLS CHURCH. VOTE NO ON THE REFERENDUM.

Clear Divide Among Council Candidates on Referendum Question

3 of the 6 Candidates for City Council do NOT support the proposed Charter Change Referendum which will be on the ballot May 6th for City voters. The CBC Candidates: Robin Gardner, Lindy Hockenberry and Lawrence Webb are clearly against the Charter Change Referendum.

Nader Baroukh, Margaret Housen and Ed Hillegass have all declared they support the Charter Change Referendum.

Gardner, Hockenberry and Webb give reasons why they don't support the Charter Change:

• "The proposed Referendum would restrict the ability of City Council to seek and approve commercial developments (which ultimately places more of a tax burden on residential homeowners)."
• "It's bad government to start changing your City's Charter of Government; it should only be done for very compelling reasons and when there are no other governmental tools available, and that is not the case here."
• "The proposed Referendum would create a hostile climate towards developers seeking to build any commercial development in our City - and would actually drive projects away. Again, without the much needed commercial tax base, the tax burden of supporting our schools and city services would fall squarely on the backs of the residential homeowners."

Nader Baroukh finally gave a clear YES answer in support of the controversial Referendum when put on the spot by Mayor Gardner at the Chamber of Commerce's Candidate Debate Tuesday night at the Falls Church Community Center. Baroukh had formerly been vague on the Yes or No question of "Do you support the Referendum?", at both the Chamber debate and the League of Women Voter's Debate last week, by sidestepping actually saying Yes, he supports the referendumb.

Margaret Housen had already declared her support for the Referendum at the LWV Debate. Ed Hillegass, the perennial No-Show Candidate (he did not show up at either the Chamber or LWV Debates), declared his support for the Referendum in flyers which he handed out around town.

Patrice Lepcyzk stated she did NOT support the Referendum, for many of the reasons cited above (bad government, too restricting, would increase taxes, etc), at the LWV Candidate Debate as well.

Council Debate clips on You-Tube!

Please check out the NEW YOU-TUBE clips of the Candidates for City Council(http://www.youtube.com/dfccva) from the League of Women Voter's Debate last week. The clips were recorded and posted to You Tube by the Deliberation Falls Church organization, another great place to go if you're looking for information: http://www.dfccva.org/. Thanks to DFCCVA for this EXCELLENT opportunity to see the candidates in action (except for the one candidate who did not attend) and hear their positions on important issues such as the Charter Change Referendum!

Candidates who attended the LWV/VPIS Council Debate:
The CBC Candidates: Robin Gardner, Lindy Hockenberry, Lawrence Webb.
The Opposition Candidates: Nader Baroukh, Margaret Housen, Patrice Lepczyk.
No-Show: Ed Hillegass

Ed Hillegass a No-Show at League/VPIS Council Debate

Ed Hillegass was a no-show at the League of Women Voter/V.P.I.S.' City Council Candidate Debate last night in the Council chambers. The packed house was told just prior to the start of the debate that the League heard from Ed Hillegass yesterday that he would not be attending the debate. No word on why.

Ed Hillegass is apparently taking lessons from his mentor, Sam Mabry, regarding campaign "strategy". (Note to Hillegass: Not showing up at the League of Women Voter's Debate is NOT a great strategy - unless you think the "no-show" label is less harmful to you as a candidate than your possible performance at the debate if you had shown up?? That's what's on everyone's mind...)

At least Ed Hillegass called; Mr. Mabry didn't even make a courtesy phone call to the League when he was a no-show at their Council debate in 2002 (in fact he criticized THEM in the paper that year!).

Well, the public will have another chance to familiarize themselves with Ed Hillegass as a candidate for City Council at the Chamber of Commerce's Council Debate on April 22nd. Let's hope he shows up.

The citizens of Falls Church deserve the opportunity to know who they are being asked to vote for!

Letter to Falls Church - from Sharon Schoeller

Below is a Letter to the Editor of the Falls Church News-Press from Sharon Schoeller, a long time resident and highly regarded advocate of Falls Church schools. This is a shortened version for the News-Press. Click HERE for the original, full version.

Dear Editor,
As a 29-year resident of Falls Church and a past president of PTAs at every level of our schools, I’m concerned about some of the candidates running for City Council and their “plans” for our City. Our schools are among the best in the nation and we want to keep them that way. To keep our schools competitive, we need funds to support them.
For decades, Falls Church tried with little success to attract significant commercial development. Then a number of expert studies showed that a key factor in attracting business is incorporating high-end, mixed-use development - because new residents in the mix add the buying power needed to draw businesses.
Recent Councils have successfully increased our tax base through mixed-use development, so much so that we will pay lower taxes this coming year, while we fully fund the School Board’s budget request.
New development has replaced blighted sites with high-end buildings, new shops and restaurants (e.g., The Broadway replaced the long abandoned AdCom building and The Spectrum replaced an overgrown lot vacant more than two decades).
Some candidates say the new development “overcrowds” our schools. This is not the case. Buildings such as the Broadway and Byron house very few school children. These kinds of mixed-use projects generate substantial new revenue for the City, and put little load on our schools. They also mean more customers for our local businesses, helping them prosper and generate more sales tax revenue, further enhancing school funding.
Thanks to diligent planning by recent School Boards & Councils, and strong community support for construction of our new middle school and expansion of Mt. Daniel, our schools have ample capacity. As the current School Board chair stated in a letter Feb. 24th, “we can handle the anticipated influx of students in our current buildings and classroom space in the upcoming years.”
I plan to vote for Robin Gardner, Lindy Hockenberry and Lawrence Webb for Council because they support reasonable mixed-use development as part of an overall strategy to attract business, citizens and tax dollars to Falls Church to support our excellent services and schools.

Sharon Schoeller
Falls Church