On November 14th the Winnebago County Board of Supervisors voted 24-12 to support a resolution sponsored by supervisor Donna Lohry and urging repeal of one of the most badly written revisions of state statutes ever passed in the history of the state of Wisconsin. I did not blog about this earlier because I did not see the board's actual discussion of the resolution until Tuesday night, when it was replayed on cable access channel 10 in Oshkosh.
I learned by watching the discussion, and then verified by looking at the statute, that citizen petitions can be filed only to DECREASE the size of county boards. This would mean, for example, that if a county board was reduced from 38 to 19 (or any other number--the statute allows for setting the number arbitrarily), and proceeds to spend more money and become more tools of special interests as smaller boards tend to do, the citizens would have no power to INCREASE the board size after the next census. The Wisconsin legislature and Governor Doyle should be ashamed of themselves for passing and signing such a discriminatory revision of the statutes. Persons who support increasing the size of the board ought to have just as much right as the cutters to petition the government and get a referendum on the ballot.
Supervisor Lohry deserves much credit for arguing persuasively that since this badly written, almost embarrassing tarnish on the state statutes originated in Winnebago County (it was sponsored by soon to be former State Rep. Gregg Underheim), it should be the responsibility of Winnebago County fix it. To reduce the board size on the strength of sham legislation is to make a mockery out of representative democracy.
Supervisor Bill Wingren, one of the supporters of cutting the board who has yet to offer a compelling argument for doing so, kept repeating the line "everyone deserves to be heard." Well Bill, that's not true under the Underheim legislation, because according to it those people who might someday like to see an increase in the board size via referendum cannot be heard.
I don't expect the state legislature to fix the statute on the basis of a 24-12 vote in Winnebago County, but I do believe the statute will be revisited when those counties that have voted to reduce their size by half or more discover that they have become more expensive and less efficient.
One of the saddest part of this entire board size affair is that the local corporate press--enemies of county government--have practiced journalistic and editorial negligence in refusing to examine the Underheim statute in any critical manner. They've also not taken the responsibility to inform the public of the truth about smaller county boards in the real world.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I hate to be the bearer of bad news but some of those who signed the petition did so NOT because they wanted the board reduced to 19. Some signed to have the right to vote on the question. That does not guarantee they would vote in favor of cutting anything.
I was one of the volunteers who got signatures and I signed the petition. However, while I feel that a cut should be made, I do NOT feel that nineteen is the appropriate number. I circulated and signed the petition because I whole-heartedly believe that people have the right to vote when they feel the government in place is not representing them.
There were people who wanted a cut of some kind that were shut out by representatives that put forth a vote designed to be a token cut to circumvent citizen participation in government. There were also people who did not want a cut at all and their representative voted for the resolutions to cut the board. I feel that many who signed the petition merely wanted to have their voice heard via the ballot box. With all due respect, Mr. Underheim, please don't assume you know the intent of the public until there is a vote, or you have talked to each and every one of us.
Personally, I think writing a piece of legislation that is only one-sided is a bit questionable. What happens if the census shows that the population has significantly increased. What part of your "tool" allows us to guarantee everyone is equally represented should we feel an increase in county board members is necessary?
I agree that the petition was legally presented and I wish the CUT committee luck in court. I would still like my chance to vote on the issue.
Post a Comment