|
NEWS News in Brief Beyond the Burg Police Beat Street Beat Under the Microscope OPINIONS Letters to the Editor Staff Editorial VARIETY That Guy – That Girl Horoscopes Comics Confusion Corner Behind Closed Doors SPORTS From the Sidelines Home Field Advantage REVIEWS Film Music Dining Arts On Campus Critical Condition ABOUT US Subscribe Advertise Archive |
Beato loses to Freiling, Haulman, KnudsonIn the 2008 Williamsburg City Council election, incumbent Paul Freiling ’83, Vice Mayor and economics department chairman Clyde Haulman and Judy Knudson prevailed as the winners of the three available seats. Freiling received 1,254 votes (21.9 percent,) Haulman received 1,063 votes (18.6 percent) and Knudson got 1,058 votes, (18.5 percent.) The other three candidates, former Mayor Gil Granger ’57, College student Matt Beato ’09 and Terence Wehle ’77, received 16, 15.6 and 8.5 percent, respectively. Beato’s loss comes after approximately 1,400 students registered to vote in Williamsburg. Beato received a total of 893 votes. Beato said that, despite his loss, he is positive. “I think everybody ran a hard thoughtful race,” he said. “I got along with all the candidates, and I’m glad they treated me like an equal.” 
A campaign supporter stands by a sign reminding students to vote for Matt Beato Tuesday afternoon. Photo by Maral Noori-Moghaddam - The Flat Hat Wehle said he was surprised at Beato’s loss. “I thought Mr. Beato has quite a few … supporters,” he said. Wehle added that he thought his campaign was successful, considering his recent move to politics. “I’m pleased, being a newcomer to the scene. It shows a lot of people concerned about the growth issues. I’m grateful for that support,” he said. “I wish the best of luck to the winners.” The outcome may cast doubt on the ability of students to affect the makeup of the city council. Haulman said that he was pleased at winning re-election, and commended Beato for a good campaign. “Matt ran a really good campaign… he did a really good job,” Haulman said. “The get out the vote effort… really set a standard for Williamsburg.” In Berkeley precinct, where very few students are registered, Beato won 159 votes, or 8.34 percent of the 1,906 votes cast. In Stryker precinct, where all on-campus students are registered, Beato won 673 votes, or 19.22 percent of the 3,501 votes cast. Had Beato received the same percentage in Stryker as he did in Berkeley he would only have received 291 votes there, instead of the 673 he actually received. That implies that approximately 382 votes came from students, which represents less than a 30 percent turnout for Beato among students. The estimates were created due to lack of hard data. Although the Beato campaign was planning a hard count of the number of students who voted, technical difficulties on Tuesday prevented such a count. David Sievers ’07, Beato’s campaign manager, told The Flat Hat that they had counted a minimum of 300 students voting throughout the week. “I think the main things that hurt turnout were exams, the fact that people had left, the fact that publicity right before the last few days was weak, and general student apathy,” David Husband ’09, the Chief of Staff to Student Assembly President Valerie Hopkins ’09, said. “I think more students participate in service trips than voted in this election, which says something about the nature of our college.” Husband said that he thought a “grand strategic plan” based on registering incoming freshman could create a large enough voting base in future elections. Detailed vote results can be found at the Virginia State Board of Elections website. Vote data from the 2006 race is here. |
||
The Flat Hat The Student Newspaper of the College of William and Mary since 1911 |
Seed Newsvine
Well that’s pretty much the worst possible outcome imaginable for students. Now that the City Council can let us vote and still get away with not only re-electing historically anti-student Councilmen but also electing to office a candidate so anti-student she doesn’t even feel the need to be honest or respectful, things are going to go from bad to worse.
— Max Fisher May 6, 08:52 PM #
This sounds about right.
Beato never had much chance with his campaign leadership. I mean, give me a break- you need a professional campaign team (i.e. one with winning experience) – not a bunch of rag tag student assembly members and political junkies.
PLUS- you had a LIMO to drive students around to vote in. And STILL you lost. Obviously the students were not too motivated about their candidate.
Next time, pick someone who is electable.
— Needs Help May 6, 08:58 PM #
I have worked on multiple campaigns. As far as I am concerned, the Beato campaign was excellent, in terms of voter registration, voter outreach, and voter turnout.
They got probably 60% of the students who registered to turnout. That’s impressive, given that its final exam time and that some students have left.
Maybe next time, the city will arrange for the election to be at a more opportune time for student voters, since our votes count just as much as full-time residents.
— Josh '09 May 6, 09:04 PM #
Hey Max, exactly how did City Council “get away with re-electing” anybody? It was the citizens of Williamsburg who rejected your candidate. Welcome to politics.
— Guy May 6, 09:05 PM #
The idea that the elections need to be moved to benefit students, who during exams still have many open hours during the day, is ridiculous. How about the fact that for many non-student voters (who are equal to student voters), Tuesday is a normal working day with much less time to vote and, oftentimes, a lot more on their plate.
— Josh '08 May 6, 09:13 PM #
“They got probably 60% of the students who registered to turnout. “
Josh- sounds like the campaign rested too much on the student vote. Maybe more of an outreach to the non-student community would have helped.
I would call this line of thought (of just trying to mainly get the student vote) irresponsible, not “excellent” whatsoever.
— Needs Help #2 May 6, 09:20 PM #
As long as Judy Knudson works to bring Chipotle to Williamsburg, I am all for her.
There’s nothing students love more than Mexi-Cali cuisine.
— James Damon May 6, 09:20 PM #
All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate which would be oppression.
— Thomas Jefferson May 6, 09:23 PM #
A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public debt. If the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at stake.
— Thomas Jefferson, Class of 1762 May 6, 09:38 PM #
Message to the Beatos and Pilchens of the world:
You lose.
— HA HA HA May 6, 10:11 PM #
Seriously, Max, get a grip. Are you going to permanently reside in the ‘Burg? If so, things that upset you may be different after you move on to life after W&M; you may decide to run for City Council yourself to change the City. If not, then why get so worked up?
— MAL May 6, 10:36 PM #
“Less than a 30% turnout among students”?
As someone who both re-registered for and voted in this election, I can say that registering took more time than voting itself.
For the College’s student body, apathy reigns supreme. We deserve exactly what this latest iteration of the City Council gives us.
If, at this most intimate and local of political levels, educated students fail to engage, I can only imagine how dismal our turnout will be come November.
— Dan Piepenbring May 6, 11:05 PM #
Organizing WM students has always been like herding cats.
Some of Beato’s flyers said, “Is studying more important than the right to vote?” I did warn him that, in their vanity, many students would say, “Yes!”
— Alex Kyrios May 6, 11:19 PM #
Student turnout is inherently difficult to capture in elections. Although Beato lost, he gained more votes than any previous student candidate for City Council did.
Each student candidate has left their successors in a slightly better position. There will almost certainly be another student to run in 2010, and our experience is there for them.
— William Angley May 7, 12:01 AM #
Dan: I would not be so quick to cry “apathy”. I care about voting, I just don’t care about Williamsburg. Instead, I vote in my home county. Isn’t that my choice? Must I vote here? I wouldn’t be too quick to doomsay for November, either. I get to vote in the general election no matter what — I don’t have to give up my status anywhere else.
— CJD May 7, 12:45 AM #
The overwhelming majority of the students who are registered to vote (freshman) had already finished exams and left campus. Most of those left on campus are seniors, who are more interested in graduation than anything else.
— WM Student May 7, 12:50 AM #
““Is studying more important than the right to vote?” I did warn him that, in their vanity, many students would say, “Yes!” “
Is advancing one’s own GPA and securing better chances at getting into a good grad school more important than fighting for the rights in a town none of us are going to be in for more than 4 years? Yeah, I’m going to say “yes”.
— K May 7, 12:50 AM #
CJD,
It’s not so much that people like you chose not to register in Williamsburg. That’s your right. The point is that 1400 students registered here, and 70% didn’t exercise their right to vote. That’s pathetic. If that statistic is correct, then WM students don’t deserve a voice on City Council. Those 70% of registered students have just cut the legs out from under students looking to fight the 3-person rule and other anti-student city policies. Why should city politicians listen to student complaints when we can’t be bothered to vote?
— mark '08 May 7, 01:10 AM #
I have to back up Max here—this election result was terrible for students. Paul Freiling’s okay but Clyde Haulman and Judy Knudson are awful. With the student participation being underwhelming, I can foresee the city council going back to their ways of ignoring students.
— Nick ('09) May 7, 02:32 AM #
Et tu, Nick? Going to live here for the rest of your life? When you do, then run for council. If not, be happy you only have to put up with it for one more year.
— MAL May 7, 05:48 AM #
As a student who registered to vote and cast an absentee ballot before I would have exams and leave, this result is disappointing.
I was hoping we could set a precedent so that even though I won’t be here in 4 years, the students who do choose to come here will have a better experience with the town that I have.
Williamsburg needs to wise up and realize it IS a college town and HAS been a college town for quite some time. Until that changes I plan to keep telling prospective students about the housing rule and Williamsburg’s general control of housing in the community as one of several reasons for not coming here.
— Chris '09 May 7, 08:21 AM #
It is indeed sad that a soon-to-be alum can’t recommend W&M for its fine academic reputation and his (I hope) good experience at the school but will denigrate it for its location.
— MAL May 7, 10:47 AM #
I think the idea of any student not voting “because of exams” is silly. It was possible to cast an absentee ballot for an entire week before the election— is it really that difficult to find a half hour out of a week of finals? (I had them too.)
— A Little Baffled May 7, 10:49 AM #
I do care about the place that is soon to be my alma mater and think that the school will be much healthier with a City Council that is willing to work with students to solve their issues.
— Nick ('09) May 7, 11:00 AM #
Nick: Agreed. In fact, I honestly believe the entire city would be better off with a City Council willing to work with students.
As Gil Granger pointed out to me, the antagonism between students and residents is very recent. He and Beato know it’s possible to mitigate the rights of students with the needs of long-term residents, that the two populations can coexist undivided for the mutual benefit of both, as they did for most of the College’s history.
At a recent meet-and-greet Paul Freiling held with local residents, someone asked about “the new political reality in Williamsburg,” meaning students’ returned power to create representation in government.
But that reality seems to have just been a dream, as 7000 students with the potential to effect progress haven’t done much of anything to change Williamsburg’s divisive, antagonistic political climate. Future candidates will have no compelling reason to account for student voters or to consider student needs, as, clearly, we have no collective intention of requiring representation or fair treatment.
Only in America can a downtrodden population attain equality simply by pushing a button, and only at W&M will the downtrodden choose to stay home instead.
However, the most apathetic class seems to have been my own (2008). Perhaps future classes will learn from our mistakes.
— Max Fisher May 7, 01:46 PM #
Lets see: The Student Assembly allocates god knows how much money (I’ve heard estimates ranging from $8000-$15000) to register students to vote and mobilize them for this election… and comes up short by electing two less than student-friendly candidates in the form of Knudson and Haulman.
I get the feeling Pilchen/Hopkins, or their hand-picked replacement will be pressed hard to get anywhere near 70% in the next student government election.
On a similar note, I’d caution senators who value their seats to renew your efforts at registration next year. Point the finger to student apathy, and you bite the hand that feeds you.
As for me… I’m gladly registered at home, and perfectly fine with Knudson and Freiling on council.
— W&M Observer May 7, 01:49 PM #
A quick thought: My initial reaction that this is “the worst possible outcome for students” may have been unfair to Paul Freiling, who is by no means as antagonistic as the other two winners. Freiling inspired a lot of hope and optimism in some students ready to believe he had evolved in his acknowledgment of student rights. However, even if his recent pro-student appearance is in fact representative of his goals for the next four years, it will be tough for him to convince the new anti-student majority of Haulman, Knudson and Zeidler, all of whom are senior to Freiling.
I have been told that certain senior City Council members can have a tendency to bully younger members. Let’s hope Freiling’s stated goals of furthering student rights remain important to him and that he has the diplomatic skill to carry it out. Freiling was the only candidate to receive strong support from students as well as long-term residents. Long-term residents will have no problem getting the things they want from City Council, but Freiling’s widespread student support in this election carries a mandate I hope he will not forget.
— Max Fisher May 7, 02:47 PM #
I would like to point out that the student-voter turnout for a city council election in May during exam period when most students had already left for the summer was about the same as normal student-voter turnout for a Presidential election.
— Matt Pinsker May 7, 04:14 PM #
haulman is a jerk and williamsburg is a waste-land.
— erm erm May 7, 04:19 PM #
Following city council elections, I feel that the students at the College of William and Mary can claim victory. “Wait a minute” you’re probably saying. “Didn’t student candidate Matt Beato lose his election bid, and anti-student candidate Judy Knudson get elected along with Clyde Haulman?” I have also heard “Wasn’t student voter turnout very low?” It is true we did not get the best result possible from the election, but we are better off than we were before. How is this possible? First off, I would like to point out that as far as the makeup of the council, we are not worse off than we were before. Paul Freiling and Clyde Haulman were already on the council, and Judy Knudson’s views are little different than the view’s of her predecessor. Students did not lose ground any ground, and instead managed to get our issues out into the public forum where they were given serious discussion for the first time, rather than ignored like they were back in the days when students were not allowed to vote in Williamsburg. We finally got a dialogue going on the issues which concern us, such as the 3-person housing rule and Williamsburg nightlife. For the first time ever, the candidates had a debate on our campus that was to benefit student voters. It is very significant that they came to our school to discuss the issues which matter to us. This is the start of a new relationship between the city and students, one which we must keep moving forward in a positive direction. There have been claims that students showed weakness due to low voter turnout. In this election the student-voter turnout (of those registered in Williamsburg) was about 30%. This sounds like a low number, especially considering there were free limo rides to the polls, but most people don’t realize that 25% is the normal student voter turnout in a Presidential election. It is amazing that we were able to beat a Presidential turnout on a (1) City Council election in (2) May during (3) exams when the majority of students had (4) already left Williamsburg for the summer, and (5) this was the 4th election this academic year. (The previous three were state elections, a special election, and the presidential primary.) With those 5 factors going against us, if anything the students did a great job going out and voting. It is unfortunate that Election Day was so late in the academic year, but that was out of our control. What was in our control was the get-out-the-vote effort (GOTV) and that excelled thanks to countless dedicated volunteers and the strong sense of civic responsibility held by the William and Mary student body. Students had everything going against them, and still managed to beat the turnout only reserved for a Presidential election. They should be proud of their accomplishment. The student candidate himself, Matt Beato, can also claim victory. He was the best and most qualified student for the job and ran an excellent campaign staffed by experienced and dedicated students. The campaign did everything right, and no one on campus could have done a better job than Beato in representing our interests. He is one of the College’s finest assets and a good representative of the student body, and like a good ambassador he demonstrated to the City of Williamsburg the willingness and ability of students to be a part of the greater Williamsburg community. He more than held his own against the older and more experienced candidates as he brought our issues to the forefront, while still responsibly handling non-student issues in a way which earned him the respect of the non-student community from which he got half his votes. Sadly, it is an unfortunate fact that many city residents will not vote for any W&M student simply because he or she is a student. This bias is just like any other bias, whether it is racial or religious, where people judged Beato on his demographic rather than his views on the issues and what he stood to bring to the community. This is an unfortunate prejudice we will have to overcome through our continued demonstrations of civic responsibility. Students should not feel discouraged, but proud of what they accomplished on Election Day. Although we did not get the outcome we were hoping for, we should still appreciate what we have accomplished. +400 student voters is just the beginning of us finally starting to show our potential after years of disenfranchisement. To keep moving forward, we will have to continue the progress we have made in the past year, and continue fighting for our right in Williamsburg to be treated as equals by going out and voting.
— Matt Pinsker May 7, 06:36 PM #
better luck next time
— i guess May 7, 06:38 PM #
Why are so many people assuming that all the students who voted, voted for Beato? And in regard to apathy – let’s face it, it’s difficult for students who know they will be in a town for four years, to care a great deal about town politics. City Council is about a lot more than one issue, and frankly Beato practically ran on one issue. Students running for City Council would do well to campaign on more issues then their own.
— Amused May 8, 01:35 AM #
Wow. For you to claim that Beato “practically ran on one issue” shows me that you paid little-to-no attention to this campaign.
— Devan Barber May 8, 09:32 AM #
Hey all,
First, I want to thank everyone for their support. I was extremely pleased to be able to build a coalition of students and non-students that would have been large enough, for example, to win a seat in the 2006 council elections. Obviously, I was extremely disappointed at my loss.
If the Flat Hat’s percentages are correct, that means that a higher percentage of students than non-students turned out in the election, which is certainly impressive for a municipal election.
in re:Amused — What one issue did I practically run on? I don’t even know what you’re talking about. I had to sit in hours of debates and knock hundreds of doors and address dozens of issues. Additionally, the non-student media never painted me as a one-issue candidate (in fact, the Virginia Gazette said I had an “excellent knowledge of complex city issues” and the Daily Press said I had “decided to focus on citywide issues despite my deep knowledge of campus concerns”) but did paint another candidate as one-issue. I’m going to trust the reporters who covered the entire race on this one.
— Matt Beato May 8, 09:58 AM #
Matt,
Congratulations on your run. You did something few people your age would ever attempt, and the level of engagement you displayed was admirable.
Regardless of the result, you should be very proud. This election may not have turned out as planned, but I am willing to bet that you will have a very bright future in the political realm.
— Mike '92 May 8, 10:35 AM #
but did paint another candidate as one-issue. I’m going to trust the reporters who covered the entire race on this one.
Assume Matt is referring to Judy Knudson’s notoriously one-sided campaign platform of completing construction of the Death Star and destroying the rebel alliance.
— Han Solo '08 May 8, 11:40 AM #
Matt, I just want to congratulate you on your effort, I can’t imagine many students putting as much time into this as you did.
— Ben Hurwitz May 8, 01:19 PM #
As an incoming law student to W&M I’ve been idly following the local news, my condolences for the loss Matt, but you are absolutely right about making a strong showing. As an undergrad I was elected twice as the student body president for the University of Illinois, and every few years we also have a student get defeated in local elections. There is one currently running for the state legislature actually. While wins here in Champaign/Urbana are rare for students, we are a 42,000 student campus straddling two towns with the combined population of around 105,000. Even though, were we all to register here (which of course we do not) we would make up more than a third of the combined electorate, student victory in local politics is incredibly difficult, and with the exception of a few local city boards, almost never happens. (the last city council win was about 15 years ago). Plus, as far as I know, we’ve always been allowed to register to vote here.
Looking forward to joining you all in the fall, best of luck Matt with your future endeavors.
— Ryan Ruzic May 8, 02:04 PM #
On the Three Person Rule, who said:
.
1) “There were several houses that I thought might have been appropriate for more than three people. These were buildings with adequate parking and were in suitable neighborhoods. The City should work on special exceptions for such properties on a case-by-case basis.”
2) “I and others suggested that if a property met certain standards such as number of bedrooms, number of baths, common spaces, location, condition, number of parking spaces, etc. we might want to create a permitting process that would allow the property owner to apply for additional occupants.”
3) “We should expect recommendations on flexibility in the rule by the end of 2008.”
.
Those would be newly elected Councilmembers Knudson, Haulman and Freiling respectively. The Three Person Rule has existed unchanged for 17 years, yet the student interest in this race led all six candidates to lend support to logical exceptions to the rule. This in-and-of itself is a victory for students, and a testimony to the great job done by students in shifting the debate for this race.
— Students Still Win May 8, 11:10 PM #
Students Still Win:
There’s a difference between rhetoric and action. While on the Planning Commission, Knudson denied an appeal to allow four people to live in a SIX bedroom house.
— Nick ('09) May 8, 11:42 PM #
Nick (‘09):
There’s also a difference in the public square between a politician who speaks their mind, and one who will say anything to get elected. It should be students’ job in the very near future to hold these candidates to their word.
.
.
Also, Knudson’s decision was while she was on the Board of Zoning Appeals, not the BZA. She made clear at the Wren Hall debate that she would have granted the request if the house hadn’t already been occupied, and Haulman has made clear that he doesn’t think the BZA should be the one making these determinations at all…the Council needs to expand the ordinance.
— Students Still Win May 9, 01:48 PM #
Students Still Win—
I really hope you’re right that the City Council members will back up their words with actions. If they don’t, I hope the students hold them accountable when they are up for re-election in four years. Unfortunately, I’m not optimistic about this.
I also apologize for the error about Knudson’s experience.
— Nick ('09) May 9, 01:57 PM #
This whole business of local politics is lame. Williamsburg is a boring town and probably always will be, despite any half-assed attempts by apathetic students. As for the three student rule, who really cares? Lease an apartment out to three people and have any additional people staying pay to the legal renters. Unless you happen to be making it obvious by partying all the time and being jackasses, which is why the laws exist, it’s rather easy to bypass.
— Daniel May 9, 01:58 PM #
Daniel,
The law doesn’t exist because of parties or jackass behavior. Williamsburg’s noise ordinance (the strictest in Virginia) exists for that.
The people who care are those like me who live in a five bedroom house, but can only legally fill three bedrooms. Personally, I’d rather not be evicted.
— Students Still Win May 9, 02:48 PM #
Daniel,
Students living four people to a five bedroom house have been evicted despite accruing no noise violations, parking violations or any other indication, formal or informal, that they were anything less than perfect neighbors whose only crime was being a student in a Williamsburg community where students aren’t welcome. It is legalized discrimination, always has been, and doesn’t have a damn thing to do with things like noise or parking.
— Max Fisher May 9, 03:50 PM #
“The other three candidates, former Mayor Gil Granger ’57, College student Matt Beato ’09 and Terence Wehle ’77, received 16, 15.6 and 8.5 percent, respectfully.”
For the record, the correct usage is to say “respectively,” not respectfully. It is a damn shame that our W&M journalists could make such a blatant error in an article that had so little substance to begin with.
— mr. grammar May 11, 03:39 AM #