David Slutzky is running for reelection to the Board of Supervisors, he announced in a press release this evening. Slutzky was elected to represent the Rio District in 2005 with a surprising 58% of the vote over Republican nominee Gary Grant. He’s facing a challenge in the form of Republican Rodney Thomas, who sought the Republican nomination for the same seat in 2005, though lost to Grant that time around. This could shape up to be an interesting race, because many Republicans throughout the county have such a deep antipathy for Slutzky—currently the chair of the BoS—which may result in some decent funding for Thomas from folks who believe that the Democrat’s positions on taxation and property rights are outside of the county mainstream. Though Slutzky’s 2005 margin of victory was surprising, 58% is by no means an overwhelming majority. I expect this to be the most competitive race in the county, and if the issues in this race are taxation and property rights, I think the outcome can be seen as a small referendum on what people think of the BoS’s recent lurch to the left.
The full press release follows.
David Slutzky Announces Reelection Intentions
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA: David Slutzky, local small business owner and Chairman of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday announced his intention to run for reelection this November. Supervisor Slutzky – an Albemarle County resident since 1993 – has represented the Rio Magisterial District on the Board since January of 2006.
“It is my intention to run again this November,” Slutzky said. “I feel like I’ve accomplished a lot in my first term on the Board, however, there’s still a lot that needs to be done. I hope that the voters of the Rio District will continue to support me as I work on the issues that are important to them.”
Slutzky said that he is particularly proud of his leadership with respect to solving local transportation challenges, funding infrastructure, addressing affordable housing needs, and protecting our rural areas. Slutzky has consistently supported economic development and job creation while drawing upon his international experience with environmental issues to the benefit of Albemarle County. He plans to run as a Democrat and is currently unopposed for that party’s nomination.
In addition to serving as Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Slutzky is a part-time professor in the Urban and Environmental Planning Department at UVA and is an owner of E2 Inc., a Charlottesville-based environmental and economic policy firm.
“…which may result in some decent funding for Grant …” I’m confused. Waldo, do you mean Thomas?
Maybe the 2005 vote was a reflection of people’s general dissatisfaction with Bush and thus anything Republican.
This Fall’s election may well be determined by people’s opinion on the Regional Transportation Authority and its financing and the 50-year water supply proposal and its open-ended financing. Nobody has any idea how much it will cost.
Of course, recommending this past budget season starting budget talks with a proposed budget based upon a real estate tax rate of $.90/($100 of value) influences a lot of people, too.
I look forward to learning Thomas’s position on the water plan. I believe there are many ratepayers in his district who will be effected by the cost. Even though I am a city resident I believe the financial and environmental implications of how we proceed are so enormous that it will be an election issue.
Presently I am disappointed by Mr. Slutzky’s lack of interest in learning the cost of restorative dredging and rethinking the plan in light of new water usage data and lack of cost estimates for the pipeline. He may change and realize that this could save his constituents millions of dollars, but I haven’t seen any evidence of that yet.
You’re right, that is what I’ve meant. I’ve corrected that now. Thanks!
Betty, I can’t see how you could square any position Thomas has on the water plan with his pro-development agenda.
After all, the real issue that everyone talks around with the water plan is how we are going to accomodate the water needs of future residents. Someone running on a “land rights”/prodevelopment platform would be misguided to then push for a plan for dredging only. It would effectively be saying that we should have more residents, but there should be no water for them to drink. (As happened in some rural developments like Peacock Hill)
The only way a dredging-only plan works is with water conservation and more limits on growth. You cannot limit growth without angering those in favor of “Property Rights” (aka development).
At least the status quo would try to take measures to reduce future water needs, and IMHO that is the real debate, along with the question of how we choose to grow and the resulting quality of that development.