Judge voids Virginia Beach district-based election system, but not results
Attorneys said Monday's summary judgement, means that the '10-1' system used in the past two local election cycles is not permitted unless and until the state legislature passes legislation that amends the city charter to that effect. However, the ruling applies only to future elections — the results of the previous two elections that used the 10-1 system are upheld. The next City Council elections are in the fall of 2026.
Circuit Judge Randall D. Smith issued the ruling from the bench.
Former council member Linwood Branch and other residents initially brought the suit last summer, saying the city had illegally removed the three at-large seats.
'We're very pleased with today's ruling,' said Brandan Goodwin, the attorney representing Branch and the other plaintiffs. 'We think the judge got it absolutely right when he found that City Council did not have the authority to abolish those at-large seats.'
The City Council adopted an ordinance in 2023 instituting the '10-1' election system in conjunction with the city's 10-year redistricting measure, which meant that Virginia Beach residents across 10 districts vote for a City Council member only in the district they live in, plus the mayor. But the city's charter provides for a 7-3-1 system, where residents vote for a council member in one of seven districts where they reside, plus three at-large members and the mayor. The General Assembly passed legislation in 2021 that requires, in localities with district-based election residency requirements, for members to be elected by voters who live in the district and not by voters from the locality at large. But subsequent attempts to change the city's charter have failed.
The city's position is that there are not redistricting maps to be drawn that result in seven districts and comply with the state and federal Voting Rights Act, and Virginia Beach will continue to defend the 10-1 system until voters say otherwise.
'The current reality is that all the council members are determined duly elected, so this only has impact on the future,' said Chris Boynton, Virginia Beach's deputy city attorney. '(The ruling) is a disappointment certainly, but it doesn't change the immediate reality, which is everybody's looking to the referendum to see where this goes next.'
In the meantime, Virginia Beach voters will have the opportunity to weigh in on how their elections should be conducted in November. A referendum on the ballot will pose the question: 'Should the method of city council elections set forth in the Virginia Beach City Charter be changed from a modified 7-3-1 system to a 10-1 system?'
If the answer is yes, the Virginia Beach City Council can ask the state legislature — again — to pass legislation that would modify the charter to reflect the change. Because Virginia is a Dillon Rule state, the city cannot by itself amend the charter. Gov. Glenn Youngkin has historically vetoed similar legislation, citing the ongoing litigation.
The voting system shake up came after a federal judge ruled in 2021 that the city's at-large voting system violated the federal 1965 Voting Rights Act because it 'denies Hispanics, African Americans and Asians equal access to the electoral and political process.' With the referendum on the horizon, that judge has indicated he could reopen the case.
Kate Seltzer, kate.seltzer@virginiamedia.com, (757)713-7881
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lawmakers move forward on bill banning common grocery store item: 'They add unnecessary costs'
Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek signed a bill into law banning thick, reusable plastic bags from being used at grocery stores, restaurants, and retail outlets, The Oregonian reported. State Sen. Janeen Sollman, a Democrat from Hillsboro and the bill's chief sponsor, explained that "wasteful disposable plastics like thick plastic checkout bags aren't just annoying for consumers, they add unnecessary costs to our Oregon businesses, and are contributing to an ever increasing pile of plastic trash that is harming the environment and public health." Plastic bags are, indeed, harmful to the environment. After typically being used just once, they end up in landfills, where they can take up to 1,000 years to break down. The intention behind the thicker reusable bags was to steer consumers toward using them multiple times, thus eliminating more single-use plastic bags, but few people reuse them. Critics of plastic bag bans are concerned that they may lead to an increase in the purchase and usage of other types of plastic bags, but studies have shown that bans are effective in cutting down the overall usage of plastic bags. The manufacturing of plastic bags contributes to planet-warming pollution, so demand for them increases the problem that bans are trying to solve. When plastic bags are not disposed of properly, they often end up in bodies of water or caught in tree branches, posing a threat to wildlife and causing additional harm to the environment. The Ocean Conservancy reported that plastic bags are the most common form of single-use plastics found by International Coastal Cleanup volunteers. In addition to the plastic bags harming marine life, microplastics that result from the bags breaking down can be ingested by marine animals, compounding the threat. The Oregon ban is part of efforts by individual states to reduce the environmental impact of plastic bags. California has banned all plastic grocery bags to encourage the use of paper bags or reusable bags. Twelve states have some form of statewide ban on plastic bags. Charging money for them is one deterrent that has reduced usage in the United Kingdom. The growing awareness of the negative effects of plastic bags on ecosystems has inspired individuals and governments to take action. By opting for reusable bags when we shop and helping spread the word about the harm single-use plastic bags bring to the environment, we can be part of the solution. Should the government ban gas stoves? Yes Only in new buildings Only in restaurants No way Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gov. Stein signs P.A.V.E. Act into law, paving the way for transit transformation in Mecklenburg County
MECKLENBURG COUNTY, N.C. (QUEEN CITY NEWS) — Governor Stein officially signed six new bills into law on Tuesday morning, including one that could reshape transportation in Mecklenburg County for years to come. One of the most talked-about measures is , short for Public Access to Valuable Equity. This legislation opens the door for a November ballot referendum, where Mecklenburg County voters will decide whether to approve a one-cent local sales tax to invest in a more modern, accessible, and sustainable transportation system. MORE: NC Gov. Stein hosts news conference to sign 6 bills into law 'Today is a game-changer for our region,' Shannon Binns, Executive Director of Sustain Charlotte, said in a written statement. 'For years, we've dreamed of giving residents the chance to fund more frequent buses and trains, safer bike lanes, sidewalks, and safer streets for all. With Governor Stein's signature, that dream moves from the advocacy stage to the ballot box. When Mecklenburg County prospers with better mobility, every family, no matter their zip code or income, gains access to opportunity, cleaner air, and a higher quality of life.' 'This is more than a transportation bill, it's a generational opportunity to shape how ourregion grows and connects,' Shelly Cayette-Weston, President of Business Operations forCharlotte Hornets/Hornets Sports and Entertainment said in a written statement. 'This is a powerful example of how local and state leaders can work together to create bold solutions.' The P.A.V.E. Act gives Mecklenburg County the authority to: Put a one-cent sales tax proposal before voters this November Use funds to improve roads, expand public transit, and enhance bike/pedestrian infrastructure Tackle traffic congestion while reducing air pollution from vehicles It also makes changes to local tax laws, including updates to the county's 'U-Drive-It' vehicle tax and existing transportation-related sales tax rules, to support this effort. MORE: After Mecklenburg County's transportation bill passes Senate, do Charlotte residents support the tax hike? The measure was and earned bipartisan support in the General Assembly before arriving on Governor Stein's desk. If voters say yes this fall, the new tax could generate hundreds of millions of dollars for projects aimed at: Expanding bus and light rail service Building sidewalks and protected bike lanes Supporting Vision Zero initiatives to make streets safer Reducing tailpipe emissions, the leading source of local climate pollution For Mecklenburg County residents, that means shorter commutes, cleaner air, and more transportation options, especially in underserved neighborhoods. MORE: Officials detail plans to improve Mecklenburg County bus stops, but they need a one-cent sales tax to do it Now that the P.A.V.E. Act is law, it's up to the Mecklenburg Board of County Commissioners to place the referendum on the November 2025 ballot. If they do, voters will have the final say on whether to approve the sales tax and launch what advocates call a 'transformational investment.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump slams Elon Musk as megabill drops AI protections and hits snags in Senate
President Trump slammed Elon Musk's subsidies, and Republican senators struck down a plan to shield artificial intelligence from state regulations. These two middle-of-the-night developments on Tuesday reinforced a growing schism between Trump and Silicon Valley supporters over his "big, beautiful bill." The first development came at 12:44 a.m. ET, when Trump responded to Tesla (TSLA) CEO Musk's ongoing critiques of the package, focusing on the government grants that Musk's companies receive. "Without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa," wrote the president in a Truth Social post, adding, "perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this?" The president was referring to the government efficiency group that Musk ran until recently. The president's missive came after Trump's signature legislation underwent key changes in recent days that set off many in the tech industry, Musk most of all, with new measures to tax green energy companies and further support for fossil fuels, as well as a growing price tag. The divide between many in Silicon Valley and the "big, beautiful bill" has been evident for over a month. It appeared set to deepen further when, a few hours later, a closely watched artificial intelligence provision was stripped from the bill itself. This plan, which had many Silicon Valley supporters, was meant to shield the quickly growing AI industry from state and local regulations. But the idea now appears to be dead after Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee turned against a compromise plan Monday evening and stripped it from the bill. It wasn't close in the end, with the Senate voting 99-1 to adopt Blackburn's subsequent amendment in a count that wrapped up a little after 4:00 a.m. ET. Trump's overall package also appears to be teetering Tuesday morning after a series of overnight developments saw two key Republican senators — Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine — uncommitted to vote yes. Those two senators could join two Republicans already committed to voting no, which would be enough to sink the package. The drama between the president and the world's richest man has been up and down for weeks, but it escalated Monday afternoon when Musk offered new electoral threats against Republicans. Musk had already amplified Democrats' critiques and talked about the need for a new political party. He offered a striking promise Monday afternoon that lawmakers who vote for the bill "will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth." Musk, of course, was the biggest donor during the 2024 campaign, spending at least $288 million, most of which was offered in support of Trump. Trump reiterated his critiques of Musk Tuesday morning, speaking to reporters and saying of Musk's objection to losing EV subsidies, "Elon can lose a lot more than that." The president also called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) a "monster that might have to go back and eat Elon." And when asked by a reporter if he would consider deporting Musk, he demurred: "We'll have to take a look." What is unclear for the days ahead is how much the Trump-Musk fight will impact the actual chances of the bill's passage, with Senate amendment votes ongoing. Musk is clearly focused on a debate likely coming later this week, when the House is set to take up the amended measure if it passes. The House is where a vocal bloc of fiscal conservatives — who often vote as part of the "Freedom Caucus" — warily supported a previous version of the bill, saying a previous smaller price tag was too big. Musk even tagged some of these House Republican lawmakers in some of his latest posts, which continued throughout the night with dozens of messages. Musk also responded to Trump's comments about his subsidies by saying his companies like Tesla and SpaceX ( would be fine and that oil and gas subsidies should be removed as well. The back-and-forth over AI also came to a head overnight after the House passed a plan in May that included a complete ban on state regulations of AI for a decade. The little-noticed measure gained wider attention in the weeks that followed, with many of Trump's most loyal supporters opposing it. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene even admitted that she hadn't been aware of the provision when she voted yes. The Georgia lawmaker then announced her opposition and plans to vote no if this "violation of state rights" stayed in the bill. Trump himself doesn't appear to have taken a position on the measure, but it had the backing of his Silicon Valley-aligned aides, most notably the vocal support of AI and crypto czar (and longtime venture capitalist) David Sacks. But Republican opposition grew, and Sen. Blackburn of Tennessee became a leading voice of opposition in the Senate. She entered into negotiations over the issue and appeared to have found a compromise in recent days around the idea that instead of a decade-long ban, the provision would be amended to be a "temporary pause" of five years. States would be strongly discouraged from regulating AI, as lawmakers linked it to access to millions of dollars in AI infrastructure and deployment funding. But even that wasn't enough. Blackburn renounced the compromise, said a moratorium "could allow Big Tech to continue to exploit kids, creators, and conservatives," and teamed with a top Democrat to strike the provision entirely. Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (a former Trump press secretary) congratulated Blackburn on the move in a post the senator quickly reposted. "This is how you take on big tech!" Sanders wrote. This story has been updated with additional developments. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices Sign in to access your portfolio
