Will.I.Am’s new song, “It’s A New Day” debuted on Oprah on Friday. “It’s A New Day” captures the feeling many folks had Wednesday morning after the election and contains many shots from Tuesday night. It isn’t Manassas but close enough. The video can be found on http://dipdive.com/. I am not able to embed it. No charge for the listen. It is the first video.
Will.I.Am appeared on CNN via hologram election night.
Very very cool:)
I had a premonition this morning that I have been dying to share regarding the 2011 BOCS elections in PWC.
You know how John McCain was fighting a hopeless battle against George Bush’s horrible approval ratings, and it turned out McCain’s best line in the whole campaign was “I’m not George Bush”? And, Obama won in a sense because he had more right to say “I’m not George Bush” than McCain?
Well, I can foresee PWC Supervisors in 2011 running away from the Stewart years of economic malaise and basing their campaign on an “I’m not Corey Stewart” theme (except for Principi who was not in office when the train wreck started). Fairly or not, the Republicans especially, but also John Jenkins, will be forced to give us a darn good reason not to hold them responsible for the economic and quality of life regressions that many already associate with Corey Stewart’s “immigration crackdown” and the lack of leadership he has show in dealing with the problems it created.
Based on returns in the various districts, John Stirrup is the only Supervisor who could hope to squeak by without rejecting Corey Stewart entirely.
So 2011 could easily turn out to be the “I’m not Corey Stewart” election. And for this reason, I agree with everyone on the earlier thread who said the Chairman’s goose is cooked. Imagine if George Bush were somewhere on the same ticket in last Tuesday’s “I’m not George Bush” election? He’d have gotten 20% of the vote.
Interesting dream ShellyB. 2011 seems like a long way off. I have heard rumors that there is going to be quite a bit of redistricting of the magisterial districts. Has anyone else heard anything about this?
I wish the “new day”, we put all of our hope in a politician-folks the best of luck. I’ll admit, even if Obama is the worst thing to happen to this country, at least it’ll be different. At this point, I’ll settle for different.
Slow, I pretty much want to know how they did that hologram.
“New Day” isn’t my kind of music, but I think it is an interesting bit of history and if we put up something that was MY kind of music, you all would be subjected to ” We didn’t Start the Fire” by Billy Joel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR-A4QFHZBA
This one has great pics.
I would like to know how they did the hologram, too.
Will I Am was on Oprah and I found it incredible that he put the It’s A New Day video together in 2 days.
Loved the Billy Joel video and I love that song. It is depressing to remember many of those events. I must be getting old, hopefully wiser, too.
Thanks Moon-howler.
Marie, it seemed like Startrek to me. Beam me up, Scottie. Magic?
Amazing that Will.I.Am compiled that video in 2 days. Truly amazing.
While I appreciate his efforts, the Billy Joel Video will always be one of my faves. Nothing like capturing 40 years of history.
Are there any more of those kinds of songs out there that I have forgotten about?
Shelly B – then the new Republican better hope they don’t get an endorsement from John Stirrup the weekend before the election!!!! LOL LOL…..
MH- I found this in VA Code. If you skip down to paragraph D, it appears that redistricting can only occur after the dicennial census. So if 2007 was the last election than it might happen in time for the 2011 election. Of course in tight budget times and if we are going to shrink local government, it occurs to me that we could dispense with the at large position on the BOCS. That should save some money.
§ 24.2-304.1. At-large and district elections; reapportionment of districts or wards; limits.
A. Except as otherwise specifically limited by general law or special act, the governing body of each county, city, or town may provide by ordinance for the election of its members on any of the following bases: (i) at large from the county, city, or town; (ii) from single-member or multi-member districts or wards, or any combination thereof; or (iii) from any combination of at-large, single-member, and multi-member districts or wards. A change in the basis for electing the members of the governing body shall not constitute a change in the form of county government.
B. If the members are elected from districts or wards and other than entirely at large from the locality, the districts or wards shall be composed of contiguous and compact territory and shall be so constituted as to give, as nearly as is practicable, representation in proportion to the population of the district or ward. In 1971 and every ten years thereafter, the governing body of each such locality shall reapportion the representation among the districts or wards, including, if the governing body deems it appropriate, increasing or diminishing the number of such districts or wards, in order to give, as nearly as is practicable, representation on the basis of population.
C. For the purposes of reapportioning representation in 2001 and every ten years thereafter, the governing body of a county, city, or town shall use the most recent decennial population figures for such county, city, or town from the United States Bureau of the Census, which figures are identical to those from the actual enumeration conducted by the United States Bureau of the Census for the apportionment of representatives in the United States House of Representatives, except that the census data for this apportionment purpose will not include any population figure which is not allocated to specific census blocks within the Commonwealth, even though that population may have been included in the apportionment population figures of the Commonwealth for the purpose of allocating United States House of Representatives seats among the states. In any county, city, or town containing a state adult correctional facility whose inmate population, as determined by the information provided by the Department of Corrections, on the date of the decennial census exceeded twelve percent of the total population of such county, city, or town according to the decennial census, the governing body of such locality may elect to exclude such inmate population for the purposes of the decennial reapportionment.
D. Notwithstanding any other provision of general law or special act, the governing body of a county, city, or town shall not reapportion the representation in the governing body at any time other than that required following the decennial census, except as (i) provided by law upon a change in the boundaries of the county, city, or town which results in an increase or decrease in the population of the county, city, or town of more than one percent, (ii) the result of a court order, (iii) the result of a change in the form of government, or (iv) the result of an increase or decrease in the number of districts or wards other than at-large districts or wards. The foregoing provisions notwithstanding, the governing body subsequent to the decennial redistricting may adjust district or ward boundaries in order that the boundaries might coincide with state legislative or congressional district boundaries; however, no adjustment shall affect more than five percent of the population of a ward or district or 250 persons, whichever is lesser. If districts created by a reapportionment enacted subsequent to a decennial reapportionment are invalid under the provisions of this subsection, the immediately pre-existing districts shall remain in force and effect until validly reapportioned in accordance with law.
The at large position would certainly save some money if PWC did away with it.
The Gainesville district and the Bristow district could also reshuffle and rebalance.
On another note, Barney might be the only ‘person’ in Washington who has any sense. Who could help but cheer Barney for taking a chunk out of that reporter’s finger.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofBLWbspT44
Barney has issued a full apology on his own letterhead.
More indepth story:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAKfEoTcMaY
With the dissolving of the At Large Seat would come $400,000 in discretionary funds. 🙂
Speaking of discretionary funds, why is there not talk of cutting that amount back some? And in addition to that, the funds should proportionate to the population. Let’s face it NOT all districts serve the same number of residents.
Juturna,
Thank for the information. Very informative to say the least.
Juturna,
oops, forgot the “s”. Meant to say THANKS.
Oh Good Grief! Tito the Builder and Joe the Plumber were just on Huckabee on FauxNews channel. Oliver Stone was on earlier. How can this be? Tito and Oliver Stone?
Tito has really found himself a place in the sun hasn’t he? Sorry, he has turned into a political jerk, definitely not a county icon.
Well, we are the home of …………….DONKEY DIVING
I never thought of the idea of abolishing the Chairman-at-Large position. In that case I assume the seven Board members would appoint a chair?
Juturna, email Huckabee and let him know. I will have to say, Tito was a little better behaved tonight than last time I saw him. I can’t recall if they latched him onto Prince William County or not. Huckabee did say he wanted to have Tito and Joe on more to work up the audience (the new fluffers?) and Tito wanted to know how much he was going to get paid. Tito can never compete with the donkey diving though.
Shellyb, yes, we have only had a chair a large positon recently. That would save some money for sure, both in salary and in discretionary funds.
Tito the Builder, Joe the Plumber, I am waiting for them to form a group and sing YMCA. Wouldn’t that be a great group to represent the conservative right wing of the Republican Party. …… .while donkey’s nosedive in the background. 🙂
LOL LOL LOL Oh Juturna! You made me drop my ice bag. What is so funny is after Huckabee talked to those 2 dudes, he went over and played in his band. No donkeys though, I am sorry to report.
I could never vote for Mike Huckabee, but he is a likeable person.
Well, I was thinking of democrats at that point – doing the nosedive.
Yes, he is agreeable and very funny.
Hope you didn’t hit anything with the ice.
ShellyB,
I assume they would appoint a chairman, but I don’t know the answer. They appoint a Vice-Chairman now. So, it seems like the logical choice to appoint a chairman without the at-large position. Although, our county has grown dramatical over the last decade, I don’t feel the population is large enough to support an at-large chairman. If our population were over 500,000 I wouldn’t have a problem with the position. My opinion in this matter would be same the same if Santa Claus were our Chairman.
An appointed Chair might guarantee a more cooperative Board. If I remember correctly, they voted among themselves for the Chair. A question for someone who has followed county politics more closely than I have over the years – what was the reason for changing to an elected At-Large Chair?
LOL at the donkey diving and pearls of wisdom that the Everymen have dropped during their fifteen minutes of fame!!
Chris, what year did we first get an at large chairman?
How is $400k tied to the chair at large? That seems like a lot of money to me.
I vote for getting rid of the Chairman! Surprise surprise (=
Moon,
I’m not sure of the year we got the at large chair. I want to think it may have been under Sir Sean C’s reign of the county.
However, the chair also gets $400,000 in discretionary funds. I must say all citizens/districts are represented by an individual supervisor getting $400,000 each. It just seems like duplicate/wasteful spending. Again, I must repeat the funds should be proportionate to the district based on population. Now, if the chair were willing to kick in $150,000 for the Manassas Senior Day Care Program, I just might feel differently. 😉
Getting rid of the chair may sound like a good idea now because of who is sitting in it.
However, that chair gives our County a specific leader, a representative of our government and for years that chair was occupied by Ms. Kathleen Seefeldt from 1991 to 1999. She was a wonderful representative of Prince William County, well respected, informative and an advocate for everything Prince William.
So lets not kill the chair because of the present occupant, change who is sitting in it if that is the solution.
Lucky,
I’m not ready to “kill” the chair, or anyone else for that matter. However, it seems to me there could still be a chair amongst the sitting supervisors. As I said earlier I wouldn’t care if Santa Claus was the sitting chair, I don’t think our population demands a chair at large. imho
Don’t you think we could have a specific leader amongst the seven district supervisors?
That change was decided 17 years ago. We were certainly a smaller population back in 1991 and yet felt it was a necessary step then.
I think it it helpful to have an elected “chair” by the citizens as opposed to a “designated” chair appointed by the rest of the board. It carries more legitimacy (in my opinion) to the rest of the area.
Lucky,
I don’t think it was necessary step then, and still believe the same to be true today. Also, thanks for solving the question of the day.. when did we get a chair at large.
How about this idea? How about an elected chair by the people of the existing board? I do see your point regarding legitimacy.
An elected chair by the board opens the door for a political appointment, which takes the choice away from the public. Do you think a board full of Democrats will “elect” a Republican? Or vice versa? Let the public decide via an election.
I guess we can respectfully disagree on the necessity of a chair, either elected by the public or the board.
I like the chair because it affords me the opportunity to voice my opinion on two members of the board and which direction I want the chair to go in. I think the more opportunity for citizen imput, especially at the local level, the better.
Lucky,
I think I may not have been clear enough to you in my last post. I meant the citizens vote on chair, of the sitting board members. Anyways, I think we aren’t too far off.
I do see your point that the chair gives you another opportunity to voice your opinion. I feel that ALL members should hear our voices, and I contact them all on major issues/votes. They may not represent my district but a supervisor of the another district’s vote most certainly does effect me and the entire county.
I’m in 100% agreement with regards to citizen input at the local level. I’ve said it many times before, the citizen participation at the local over the last year half is a good thing. Even though I might not agree with all that I hear at least people are making their voices heard.
Ok, Chris, I understand your point now. I contact my board member on a regular basis. I have contacted other board members on specific, county-wide issues. I hope with the recent increase in political activity in the County, people stay interested in the local elections.
Lucky,
I feel confident we will see a larger turn out in 2011 than we did last year, and that’s a good thing. I also think as it grows closer to budget time we will see another increase in citizen involvement, and let’s face it we are facing some rough fiscal times in our county.
I personally would like to see an Independent or two on our BOS, and I would like to see ALL of the supervisors to have some competition. I mean honestly two board members didn’t any competition last year, and I really wouldn’t count that write-in movement against John Jenkins.