| Home Page |
Prince
William
Citizens for Balanced Growth Balancing residential growth with traffic, tax, local economic, school, and quality-of-life issues |
 |
|
 |
|||
| Criteria Used to Rate Supervisors: The
table below is based on supervisors' voting records,
public
statements, and other political activity related to balanced growth
issues. Numerous newspaper articles, e-mails from
supervisors, and other information on this website document the
supervisors' positions. (Click
this link for more information on supervisors' positions.)
The information is also based on county residents' perceptions of the
effects of supervisors' tax and land use decisions on quality of life
in the county, as reported in the 2005, 2006, and 2007 county surveys
of residents. (Click
this link for more information on the county surveys.) The table below applies only to supervisors' positions and votes on balanced growth issues and are in no way an attempt to evaluate their records in any other way. (PWCBG does not formally endorse any supervisors or supervisor candidates.) The two formal development proposals referred to in the table headings below, and on which there were actual votes by the Board of County Supervisors (Brentswood 2005-2006 and Cherry Hill 2001 -- columns 3 and 5, respectively) were, in our judgement, foundational balanced growth votes that revealed a great deal about the attitudes of the supervisors. (Following Supervisor Hilda Barg's retirement at the end of 2007, the only supervisors still on the Board who took part in the 2001 Cherry Hill vote are Supervisors Caddigan and Jenkins.) Relative to the last column to the right, we indeed believe that residential developer campaign contributions influence politicians' behavior in the long run and are thus germane to a discussion of balanced growth issues. If that were not true, why would donors contribute? On the other hand, we consider it even more important to judge the politican's actual political behavior. Link to previous supervisor report cards: Nov 2007 |
|
