Monthly Archive for November, 2006

Page 4 of 5

Fire Knocks Out ABC 16

In a note on their website, ABC 16 says they’ve had a fire:

ABC16 is temporarily off the air, due to an electrical fire. Viewers with digital receivers should re-scan for channels and will find abc programming on digital 16.2.

Presumably it was a very small electrical fire, since CBS 19 and Fox 27 remain on the air. Hopefully nobody was hurt.

Webb, Goode Win Election

The results are in from last night’s midterm elections, and the big news is that Democrats have taken back the House of Representatives and seem quite likely to take back the U.S. Senate. The votes are still being counted in Montana and, yes, Virginia, though past voting data for the remaining precincts make it extremely likely the Democrats will win in both states, since they’re currently ahead by a margin difficult to overcome.

Here in Virginia we’ve elected Jim Webb by a 0.3% margin, passed Amendment 1 (the “marriage” amendment) with 57% support, and reelected every single incumbent congressman, including our representative, Virgil Goode.

Here in Albemarle Webb defeated Sen. George Allen 57/42, Al Weed defeated Goode 54/45, and Amendment 1 was defeated with just 41% of the vote. In Charlottesville the gap was even larger: Webb got 77%, Weed got 75%, and Amendment 1 got just 23% of the vote. From a quick review of statewide voting data it looks like Charlottesville defeated Amendment 1 by the largest margin in the entire state, and would certainly be in the top 5 in the percentage of support for Webb.

Council Passes Anti-Amendment 1 Resolution

City Council unanimously passed a resolution opposing Amendment 1 this evening. That’s the so-called “gay marriage” amendment that voters will be asked to consider on tomorrow’s ballot. Every councilor spoke against the amendment, with their reasons for opposition ranging from fairness to the over-broad language of the bill. Councilor Kevin Lynch asked that it be opposed because it would harm the legal status of his relationship with his long-time girlfriend — the amendment’s over-broad language would affect unmarried couples gay and straight alike.

Streaming Video of City Council Meetings

City Council now has streaming video of Council meetings, according to an extremely brief press release on the city’s website. I’m watching it now, as Council debates a resolution in opposition to the proposed constitutional amendment regulating marriage. The volume is really low, but the video is clear and sufficiently large. It’s great for those of us who don’t have cable but still want to watch meetings from the comfort of our homes. Here’s hoping they end up archiving the video so that it’ll be possible to link to past meetings, excerpt video or audio for reproducing elsewhere, etc.

Election Tomorrow: Know the Amendments

Y’all know there’s an election tomorrow, y’all know you’re picking sides in the U.S. Senate race, between Republican George Allen and Democrat Jim Webb. But don’t forget that there are three proposed amendments to the state constitution.

Amendment 1 has gotten lots of attention — that’s the proposal to prevent two people (of any sex) from forming a contract that provides any of the privileges of marriage. Its advocates say that it would bar gay marriage, although it’s already illegal. Its opponents (including me) say that it’s a terribly-written bill that’s way too far-reaching, and will create huge hassles for folks like you and me who are looking to start a business, buy real estate, create a living will, or engage any many other routine legal transactions.

Amendment 2 would permit churches to incorporate. Currently the state constitution bars church incorporation, but the courts have ruled that unconstitutional. The goal is to make the constitution (code law) match the courts’ interpretation of it (case law). If anybody objects to this, I don’t know who they are.

Amendment 3 would allow localities to partially exempt real estate value from taxation for the purpose of rehabilitation or conservation. The amendment itself would do nothing — it would only give localities the power to provide tax breaks to encourage development if they decided to do so. Again, if anybody objects to this, I don’t know who they are.

Bob Gibson explains these in more detail in today’s Progress.

Sideblog