Dear Democrats,

First, I would like to thank all of you who worked so hard for me and saw me as someone who would represent concerns that were important to you. Nancy O'Brien, I can't begin to tell you what high esteem I have for you and Francis. Your ideals and the sharpness of your thinking are my inspiration. The voice of the environment is getting increasingly lost, but you and Francis are out there doing the work that is important to all of us. You represent the kind of Democrats I aspire to be. Meredith Richards, you have been my constant source of emotional support during an up-and-down process that would have been so much lonelier without you. Your dedication to research and your generosity in sharing information give you a strength that I have been lucky to be close to. Kay Slaughter, your realism and your belief in me whether I won or lost have been a touchstone for me in this closing of the campaign. And ! there are so many others, Jennifer Brown, John Conover, Grace Tinsley, Donna Goings, Teresa Price, Ida Lewis, Pam Lancaster, Clive and Wilma Bradbeer, Sandy Snook (we've now started a woman defeated by a Republican club), Paul and Mary Gaston, David and Joyce Repass, Jane Barnes, the Perrys, and Kevin Lynch for being my door-to-door comrade and general bestower of good will and even temperment. I thank you all.

People are writing me from all over the city, expressing their dismay at the loss and wondering why. I have also received heavy criticism on George Loper's site. In response to both types of letters, let me give a few words. I am proud of how I contributed to the joint campaign. I gave 100%.

The main thrust of the complaint on Loper's site is that power has been lost: the Toscano seat has been lost. Let me say something that will be controversial, but accurate. Power within the party had been lost already. This is our opportunity to get it back. Rob Schilling ran an excellent, aggressive and focused campaign. Using a metaphor from ecology, we have been living without an aggressive predator for a long time, and it has damaged us. I recognized early that we were making mistakes. The 100 Committee meeting was an announcement that we weren't going to run an aggressive campaign. The media was even there to relay the announcement. I tried to counteract the annoucement by how I responded: that I was going to work hard.

As co-chair of Recreation Precinct in previous elections I improved voter turnout and our victories were impressive. I had to give up the chairmanship to be a candidate and I had not trained a successor. Successful precinct chairmanship involves an incredible amount of work, and that level needed to be maintained citywide. I know how campaigns should be run, and we didn't do it this time. We cancelled the rally of former councilors, we cancelled a centralized phone bank, we didn't rally other people to go door-to-door besides the candidates. The candidates were discouraged from attending the campaign meetings, and so we lost touch with what was being done or not done. I believed that the system was in place until two weeks before Election Day. Then I discovered problems. One of them was that signs were not reordered, and the signs, though often discounted, provide heavy psychological reinforcement (not to ! mention a reminder to vote).

My own particular problem was that I didn't establish myself fully as an individual separate from Blake. The joint campaign decided that I was not to have my own press releases, and I abided by that though I disagreed with it. I was also encouraged to run everything I said and did through the campaign, which had a stultifying effect on me since I tend to be spontaneous as a communicator. As the mayor, Blake naturally received the majority of the attention when we talked to the press together. I was outspoken at forums, but press coverage was poor. Thank goodness for Maurice Jones for televising the League's forum.

My position on the Meadowcreek Parkway insured that I would not receive certain endorsements, and my opposition to the road had many ramifications in the support and lack of support that I received. My positions on the transfer station, Priority Press preservation, the Jefferson preschool, and other issues were in contrast to the positions of some on council, and the campaign was not united in how much difference I could express. Even when I did have the opportunity to speak in detail in front of the press, I did not receive adequate coverage.

The article on election day in the Daily Progress about single shotting, in which I was yet again not called for comment or retort though Blake and David Toscano were, was of questionable ethics. The article that I had no comment after my defeat was untrue. I did comment to that reporter as I left the gathering: "what you wrote in the paper this morning was unethical." Instead of reporting what I said, he chose to say that I said nothing. He has been casual in his reporting and has changed principles depending on what candidate he was dealing with. With Blake's and my press releases, he would not release them until he had contacted Schilling. I did not have the same luxury. I was always listed third or last in each article. I was the one who first challenged Schilling on the elected school board debate, yet the reporting of it made it look as if Blake was the challenger, and I merely added a footnote! . Bias, though unintentional, is damaging.

I am not saying any of this out of sour grapes, but in the spirit of an assessment we sorely need as a community. To the person who criticised me harshly within 24 hours of my defeat, I say -- when you hold on to power too tightly, you lose power. When you don't support a candidate who gave her all, you start narrowing the fields of candidate possibility. Fear will take over. Get over it -- we need to work with Rob Schilling, and we can make a productive team out of this. There's work for all of us to do. Yesterday I spent the day at the Virginia Commission for the Arts getting grants funding for arts and education programs in the Charlottesville region. Last night I was at the transfer station meeting. I am moving ahead.

Of course I am extremely disappointed. I believe that we are making open space and development mistakes that I could have mitigated. The voice of preservation and appreciating what we already have is not being heard. I believe that the Meadowcreek Parkway is a very big mistake that will have long-term negative consequences for the city and will not help the Park Street neighborhoods for long. I believe that U.Va. is set for an expansion that we are unprepared for. My not getting elected was pivotal for the city, some will say for the better, some for the worse. Probably money is served, but not quality-of-life. The full consequences will not be known for a while. However, I gave it my all, and my capacities have increased ten-fold.

Let's reorganize. We all need each other. That's the big lesson of this campaign.

Sincerely,

Alexandria Searls (electronic mail, May 9, 2002)