Open forum: Primary lessons

Nancy Navarro ran an extremely strong campaign with what turned out to be an unpersuasive and in some quarters unpopular message.

Don Praisner, still reeling from his wife’s sudden death and then enlisted to run in order to preserve her legacy, ran a dedicated but low-key campaign that still managed to resonate with voters who followed the issues as much as embraced the name. Anyone who believes that name recognition alone decided this contest is missing some important lessons.

Ms. Navarro, to her credit, had the courage of her convictions to reach out to minorities, the poor and the needy as well as developers, unions and other interest groups. While declaring herself the candidate of ‘‘inclusiveness,” however, she excluded a large constituency of middle-class residents (both whites and blacks) legitimately concerned about crowded classrooms, high taxes and the undue influence of special interests in county politics. Highly educated, well-informed, and deeply committed, these were constituents who were among the most likely to vote in primaries yet felt largely ignored by her; to the extent they came home to the Praisner banner it was not out of lockstep loyalty to a familiar name but out of appreciation and concern for the values and priorities that the name exemplified for a generation.

That the election was close should not be surprising. Not only did Navarro run an energetic and well-financed campaign, but as she correctly perceived, both the demographics and the power centers of the district, like the county generally, are changing. There has emerged a formidable coalition of interests — developers, small businessmen, affordable housing advocates, employee unions, faith-based institutions and newly empowered groups such as Progressive Maryland and Casa that, in varying degrees but for the most part, support a pro-growth, socially conscious, high-tax agenda and can claim four council members who reliably represent their concerns. Navarro, targeting this wide-ranging pool of donors and voters, nearly became a decisive fifth, which would have upset a fragile balance that has four other council members typically on the other side of the growth debate. (One of Marilyn Praisner’s strengths was that although aligned with the slow-growth forces, she was a fiscal conservative but a social progressive, hard to pigeonhole, often in the pragmatic center, and a critical balance wheel for a polarized council.)

The lesson for Navarro — and for other aspirants in the future — is that there has emerged also an increasingly vociferous middle class anxious over the effects of congestion on the county’s roads and streets, proliferating crime, environmental degradation, the threat to established communities from accessory apartments and other relaxation of building codes to accommodate affordable housing needs, and mounting infrastructure requirements and social demands that appear to be overtaking the county’s ability to pay for them. Don Praisner’s triumph, whether it amounts to a validation of the slow-growth, fiscal responsibility mandate or not, clearly tapped into that sentiment.

If present demographic trends continue, future candidates, in District 4 and elsewhere, may be emboldened to adopt Navarro’s strategy. It is true that Praisner’s margin of victory in the District 4 Democratic race can likely be traced to the outpouring of older voters in retirement communities like Leisure World and Riderwood, voters who may be the last of a generation that cherished not only the Praisner name but memories of safer streets, schools without portables and a county government where individual citizens could develop a special intimacy with their legislators. Yet it could be another recipe for failure to tailor strategy to the whims of a shifting population, as the ranks of an aging and diminished middle class are likely to be replenished by minorities moving up and sharing the same middle class hopes and fears about growth, schools, safety and taxes — if indeed programs and services on the order Navarro espoused do not chase them elsewhere and leave the county a haven for only the very wealthy and the poor. That eventuality should be a final cautionary lesson for all candidates and for all concerned about the future well-being of the county.

Stuart Rochester of Burtonsville is chair of the Fairland Master Plan Citizens Advisory Committee.