This is Greg Kimsey's "genius."
I'm wondering: can 100 signatures suspend any part of this charter?
I'm wondering: can 100 signatures suspend any part of this charter?
100 signatures to obstruct county government within days:
In addition to the Voters’ Pamphlet (the extra two campaign pages added by the pro-charter auditor on page 58 & 59) falsely telling voters that they can amend the Charter by initiative petition (Section 7.2.A.6), those pages failed to inform voters about another section that hands control of newly adopted ordinances to a tiny minority so that 0.02% of the population can instantly obstruct county government for the rest of the 435,000 citizens.
In addition to the Voters’ Pamphlet (the extra two campaign pages added by the pro-charter auditor on page 58 & 59) falsely telling voters that they can amend the Charter by initiative petition (Section 7.2.A.6), those pages failed to inform voters about another section that hands control of newly adopted ordinances to a tiny minority so that 0.02% of the population can instantly obstruct county government for the rest of the 435,000 citizens.
It seems that no one noticed a glaring problem with the Charter. It
effectively hands line item veto power to any tiny group to instantly
suspend any portion of most ordinances for at least five months.
Don’t like a newly adopted ordinance? Take direct control to suspend the whole thing or just the portion that you don’t like. Just gather 100 signatures within 10 days to veto it for five months. It provides instant relief by overriding the will of the people and their representatives. And then, just run out the clock.
Had the Charter been in place earlier this year, this new direct democracy by 100 people could have lifted the ban on nude dancing establishments and the ban on marijuana growing, processing, and retailing long enough to establish those activities so they could be grandfathered-in by the time the five months signature gathering time window expired.
Some ordinances are required by state or federal law. No problem. Even though the instant Referendum can’t suspend the whole ordinance, just leave enough in place to meet the minimum requirements of the state or federal law.
That’s not how a referendum is supposed to work. Referendums were not intended as an instantly acting five month line-item veto by a tiny minority.
Rather, referendums are intended to take effect after thousands of people gather signatures to place it on the ballot. If that is successful and the election results show that a majority vote of the people want something repealed, then the proposed changes are then to take effect.
Referendum power starts on page 9 and becomes instantly acting on Section 7.4.B.1 at the top of page 10.
http://clark.wa.gov/freehol…/documents/BOFCharter_052714.pdf
That portion of the Charter is a recipe for anarchy. What were they thinking?
Don’t like a newly adopted ordinance? Take direct control to suspend the whole thing or just the portion that you don’t like. Just gather 100 signatures within 10 days to veto it for five months. It provides instant relief by overriding the will of the people and their representatives. And then, just run out the clock.
Had the Charter been in place earlier this year, this new direct democracy by 100 people could have lifted the ban on nude dancing establishments and the ban on marijuana growing, processing, and retailing long enough to establish those activities so they could be grandfathered-in by the time the five months signature gathering time window expired.
Some ordinances are required by state or federal law. No problem. Even though the instant Referendum can’t suspend the whole ordinance, just leave enough in place to meet the minimum requirements of the state or federal law.
That’s not how a referendum is supposed to work. Referendums were not intended as an instantly acting five month line-item veto by a tiny minority.
Rather, referendums are intended to take effect after thousands of people gather signatures to place it on the ballot. If that is successful and the election results show that a majority vote of the people want something repealed, then the proposed changes are then to take effect.
Referendum power starts on page 9 and becomes instantly acting on Section 7.4.B.1 at the top of page 10.
http://clark.wa.gov/freehol…/documents/BOFCharter_052714.pdf
That portion of the Charter is a recipe for anarchy. What were they thinking?
No comments:
Post a Comment