fbpx

Robert Woody: Why Alachua County should vote NO on at-large districts to ensure fair representation

Letter to the editor

As Alachua County residents head to the polls, an important question sits before us: Should we return to at-large voting, or continue with single-member districts? I believe we must vote NO on this proposal that would switch back to at-large voting, ensuring that we retain single-member districts that keep our county government inclusive, accountable, and genuinely representative.

A diverse county needs localized representation:

Alachua County is wonderfully diverse, from the university-centered neighborhoods of Gainesville to the agricultural communities of Hawthorne and Newberry. Each area holds distinct economic, cultural, and social perspectives that a one-size-fits-all, at-large voting model cannot effectively represent. The current system of single-member districts will ensure that each community elects someone accountable specifically to them, with an understanding of their unique needs. In at-large voting, one ideological group dominates, leaving many communities without a voice on the County Commission.

Addressing representation gaps and protecting minority voices:

The NAACP has stated that at-large voting suppresses minority representation and has actively challenged these systems in court. Our local history supports this concern: candidates of color, when able to run in single-member districts, often receive strong support within their communities, only to lose county-wide races dominated by white liberal voters. This imbalance has led to reduced representation of people of color, an issue that single-member districts help correct by allowing minority voices to be heard in their own districts, free from county-wide political pressures.

More accountability, less entrenchment:

In a single-member district model, commissioners are directly accountable to the voters within their districts. If a commissioner fails to address the needs of their constituents, they can be held to account by that specific community. The myth that single-member districts limit constituent access is simply incorrect. Voters can always approach any commissioner, but now they have the added benefit of a local commissioner committed to representing their district’s interests.

Enhanced diversity and moderation:

As it stands, Alachua County’s commission leans heavily in one ideological direction, even though 42-47% of county voters consistently support more moderate or conservative candidates. Single-member districts open the door for a more balanced commission that truly reflects the full spectrum of Alachua County. They allow candidates from different backgrounds and ideologies to run more affordable, grassroots campaigns within their communities. This not only lowers campaign costs but also fosters greater political diversity and balance on the commission.

Blocking local control and silencing citizens’ voices:

The County Commission has twice blocked residents’ attempts to bring single-member districts to a vote. It was only through state legislative action that citizens finally had the choice. A return to at-large voting would ignore the voices of those who fought for a system that ensures true local representation, leaving our communities vulnerable to the very entrenchment and political dominance that single-member districts aim to prevent.

In sum, single-member districts allow each community within Alachua County to be heard. As citizens, we should embrace a system that prioritizes local representation and prevents ideological monopolies. This election, let’s choose fair representation and vote NO on reverting to at-large voting.

Robert Woody, Gainesville

The opinions expressed by letter or opinion writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of AlachuaChronicle.com. Assertions of facts in letters are similarly the responsibility of the author. Letters may be submitted to info@alachuachronicle.com and are published at the discretion of the editor.

  • The ballot has two sides. Be sure to flip it over and cast your votes on the other side.

  • I appreciate the author taking time to write this opinion. It is a long winded narrative.

    In summary, somebody living in another District should NOT be able vote for a candidate to represent your District.

    Vote No on this referendum. Keep outsiders from choosing your representative.

    • Most Florida counties are at large. We were singled out of them all and targeted for the ballot initiative on this last time by the state legislature because they are Republicans and we are majority Democrats. There is no principle involved, just more partisan politics from our overlords Clemons and Perry. Good riddance to them both.

      • No, we weren’t singled out for that reason. The fact is, local citizens asked it to be put on the ballot because twice, the county refused to do so.

        One of those times, they had the County’s counsel declare the ballot language unacceptable. That would be the same County Commission whose current general counsel couldn’t even check Florida statute before putting non-compliant language on the ballot.

        So, you see, citizens asked the legislative delegation to do what they county commission rightfully should have but refused to do.

  • “The current system of single-member districts will ensure that each community elects someone accountable specifically to them, with an understanding of their unique needs. In at-large voting, one ideological group dominates, leaving many communities without a voice on the County Commission.” Well put.

    Pretty much sums it up and reinforces what many liberals on this particular medium have been shouting about for quite sometime. It ensures a representative elected by a specific district will have their needs as a priority rather than some student in Gainesville. Cornell and Chestnut have no more of a clue as to the needs of Archer and High Springs as Prizzia and Wheeler have about those of Orange Heights and Hawthorne.

    Let your voice be heard by a representative you’ve elected rather than one some fresh new voter has decided is best for you. Vote “No” for at-large districts.

  • I took a religion course at UF taught by Professor Harold Stahmer (now deceased; his wife sometimes speaks at city meetings). One of the main points he emphasized was the idea of marginalized people and not allowing yourself to be marginalized. You are less likely to be marginalized (forgotten about or dismissed as unimportant) if your representative answers to a smaller group that you are part of. For example, if you live downtown, do you really want your representative spending a lot of time worrying about what’s going on in Newberry or High Springs and spending a lot of time talking to those people instead of focusing on your area’s people? Or vice-versa? People in your same area should have needs more similar to yours than someone living way across the county.

    Voters already settled this once. Putting it back on the ballot in defiance of the voters shows really bad character. Using the wrong ballot language shows ineptness (if there is any doubt) and highlights the need to replace them.

    • Peabody, the districts each go down to downtown or close to it, so each district will continue the divide you note where it affects opinion.

      chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.votealachua.com/portals/alachua/documents/maps/County_Commission_Districts.pdf

  • Woody you are so full of it. Every citizen in Alachua County should vote for all commissioners just like they do in every other county. You just want single member districts so the vote can be diluted and the fascist Republican party has a better chance of winning.

    Get it through your head. This is a liberal democratic county and we don’t want fascist republicans in the country government!

    • The Hoe and Elmet Fudd want you to stop with the word “Fascist ” The word is not helping their pointless campaign. Tone it down Liberal you will feel better when you lose. You only want at large because it means that majority chooses it’s elected officials. It means that no area of the county has a say under majority rule. You truly are special. What is more Fascist, Socialist and Marxist than Majority Rule without individual input?

  • “As it stands, Alachua County’s commission leans heavily in one ideological direction, even though 42-47% of county voters consistently support more moderate or conservative candidates. Single-member districts open the door for a more balanced commission that truly reflects the full spectrum of Alachua County.”

    Exactly! I voted NO on returning to At-Large voting.

    Thanks for a great, persuasive letter!

  • “The NAACP has stated that at-large voting suppresses minority representation and has actively challenged these systems in court. …”

    Dude, that was a 2018 national NAACP position and not that of the local NAACP which is in favor of the amendment.

    Too much to ask that you make that clear? Everyone on your side of the issue hides this fact.

    • No, we aren’t hiding it. We’ve been screaming it from the rooftops!

      Yes, it is part of the NAACP’s voting rights resolution, passed in 2018 and listed, to this day, on their website for all to see.

      There are two organizations at work here. One of them, the NAACP is actually important. One of them, the NAACP Alachua County Chapter and it’s Chair, Evelyn Foxx, are shills for the Democrat Party and, for purposes of political expediency and advantage, are taking a position that is opposite of the position that the NAACP and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund has taken for years.

      No advertisement has said that the NAACP Alachua County Branch is for Single-Member Districts. That organization is not the NAACP. We have been quoting very important resolutions and Q&As from the NAACP.

      That they are the parent organization and has stated positions contradictory to the local Alachua County Chapter is politically inconvenient for you and for Evelyn Foxx, but it doesn’t change the fact that the NAACP and NAACP Legal Defense Fund are both vociferously against at-large voting.

      • You call Evelyn Foxx a “shill for the Democrat Party.”

        I have a question about shill identification. If being a shill is Bad, how do you live with yourself? You are a total shill for the Republican Party. Effing total 100%.

        How can you look yourself in the mirror without thinking “there is an evil shill” and contemplating how to rid the world of such an Evil Shill?

    • 😂😂😂😂😂 your local chapter spews the opposite of the national.

  • >