Guest Editorial by Karl Uppiano
On Tuesday, July 21, The Whatcom County Council will be holding a hearing on an Ordinance proposing an amendment to the Whatcom County Charter to require a supermajority of either the entire Charter Review Commission or the County Council to propose Charter amendments (AB2015-216) (pdf)
This may be in response to Proposition 2 & Proposition 3, which would put limits on the County Council in certain narrow situations.
- Proposition 2, Shall Charter Section 8.20 be amended to prohibit the County Council from proposing Charter amendments on matters that have been approved by a 2/3 majority of voters?
- Proposition 3, Shall Charter Section 8.23 be amended to prohibit the County Council from proposing any Charter amendment to Charter sections 2.12 or 2.13?
Should the County Council propose amendments that would override an amendment approved by a 2/3 voter majority, without a unanimous vote? Should the County Council propose amendments that change the very way they themselves are elected, without a unanimous vote?
A Charter Review Commission is convened once per decade, or more frequently if the County Council requests it. The council has never requested it. The Charter Review Commission doesn't have an opportunity to make policy every other week.
The proposed council amendment would relegate most charter review amendments to the trivial, like Proposition 4, Shall the Charter, in Article 5.40 and Article 5.60, be amended to increase the "concise statement" limit from 20 words to 40 words?
Is this really what we want? After all, proposed amendments go on the ballot, for the voters to decide.
The proposed council amendment would relegate most charter review amendments to the trivial, like Proposition 4, Shall the Charter, in Article 5.40 and Article 5.60, be amended to increase the "concise statement" limit from 20 words to 40 words?
Is this really what we want? After all, proposed amendments go on the ballot, for the voters to decide.
At the end of the day proposed amendments are put to the voters to decide, correct?
ReplyDeleteIs there some feeling that the Charter Review Commission cannot come to a 2/3 majority? Would that have been the case in this last commission and if so then should voters be wary of the proposed amendments? Was there some serious partisanship happening on this last commission?
I must admit that I get the sense that there is a feeling amongst some of those on this last commission and/or those closely following the commission that their job is to protect the voters from the county council and that has me concerned and leery of the motivation for the proposed amendments.
What seems to come out of the commission this last time is to ask the voters if they would like to reduce the accountability that council members have to the county as a whole and to also reduce the ability of the county council to propose changes to the voters, supposedly all in the name of better representation. In addition, the council wants to put to the voters if they want the county to have more equitable districting as well as if the voters would like to see the 10 year charter review commission required to come up with a 2/3 majority in order to propose amendments in hopes that this lessens the potential impact of hyper partisanship amongst the commissioners.
It seems to me that some feel there should be outrage towards the audacity of the council to propose amendments to the voters, and, as a whatcom county voter, I find this ludicrous. The PAC called DOVE makes some compelling arguments as to why district only voting (as proposed by the commission) is for everyone...more green campaigns, smaller barrier to entry etc... But then they go on to basically say the voters are too stupid to understand the difference between district only voting and having 5 districts so voters should be angry at the council. What a crock and rather insulting! 5 districts makes the arguments for district only voting even stronger so why is there fear to have that put to the voters?
Anyways, I appreciate all the effort here to make this information available...it has been very enlightening and interesting. As a whatcom county voter though, I am extremely wary of the motivation for what came out of the commission. It is very clear that the last time voters were asked to change the way the council is elected it was a conservative power grab and I wonder if this is the same thing. If you add up all the dots...the outrage over council proposed amendments, the way the commission ended, the arguments for district only voting coupled with the arguments against 5 districts... something seems to really stink. I believe the voters will be able to sort it out though and I am happy that we voters have the opportunity to make these decisions and not let some small group of people try to "save us from ourselves".
I have always said, the voter has the last word. When the parade of anti-coal zealots were campaigning against local representation by district, it was I who responded in open session that the Charter Review Commission was able to do no more than put the question to the voters, and to let the CRC do its work. That is still the case.
DeleteThe district only voting issue seems to be a magnet for partisan interest. Progressives seem to think it's a conservative power grab (or a coal power grab), and the conservatives think they'll lose any future hope of survival if they don't get DOV. So pick your narrative. I don't see one, myself. The Charter Review Commission was elected by district, and ten years ago, they were majority progressive. This year, they were majority conservative.
The council has been elected countywide for a few election cycles, and they have been conservative and progressive as well. I think it is well-nigh impossible for a conservative to win in district 1 without countywide support, and it is very difficult for conservatives to win in districts 2 & 3 with countywide voting. So it depends on the candidate, the motivation of the electorate, and the issues.