elpasospeak

There was some talk around town this weekend about the Sunday (January 13, 2013) headline article in the El Paso Times.

We have an Ad Hoc Charter Advisory Committee.  It is working on potential modifications to the city charter that could be voted on this May.

The article indicated that we may be asked to move city elections from May to November.  Two  reasons for this are obvious.  

• Firstly, conservative voters tend to vote in all elections, even taking the trouble to vote in a May election when few issues are at stake.  November (national) elections tend to draw more voters, including those that are less conservative.  Conservatives tend to get in the way of the progressive agenda that this city council has.
• Secondly, with more citizens voting in a November election it will be more difficult to obtain the signatures of 5% of the voters in the last general election — thus making petitions for recall or initiative more difficult to certify.

The article also indicated that there may be proposed changes to the percentage of voter signatures needed to validate a petition for recall or initiative.  In El Paso a successful petition to recall an elected official or to propose an initiative require the signatures of 5% of the voters in the last general election.  The article predicted that the number will be raised to 10% in both cases, like “other Texas cities”.

What the article did not mention is that the document that was evidently considered at the January 7, 2013 meeting of the Ad Hoc group entitled “Potential Charter Revisions for the May 2013 Ballot” appears to have been drawn up by a law firm (so much for citizen initiatives, these people are being managed to get desired results).  The document does address the above issues.

What the El Paso Times article did not mention speaks volumes:

• The draft document advises the members that in “other Texas cities” where the percentage required to certify an initiative petition is higher than in El Paso, the issue automatically goes to the voters if city council does not approve of the action proposed in the certified petition.   You will recall that we have recently sent up petitions that city council has either denied or taken no action on.  No such democratic provision appears to be in the document.  Here if a first petition is denied by council a second one must be certified and even then council must vote to place the issue on the ballot.
• The current charter requires city council to pass an ordinance (a formal, multi-step process) to lease a public property or grant a temporary use of a street, alley, public way or public property.  The proposed language would allow council to do this temporarily (the document speaks in terms of years) by simple resolution of council.  In other words at any city council meeting.

The document also shows that the Ad Hoc committee is considering other issues including moving some power from the mayor (who is already holds a weak office) to the council and changing some conflict of interest issues that in my opinion should be changed.

Meetings times of this Ad Hoc group are not well known by the citizens.  You should contact the members of the group if you wish to express your opinion.  The membership list can be seen here.

Remember that as another blow to the democratic process, whatever the group comes up with for our consideration must first be approved by city council before it can be voted on by the citizens.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

This entry was posted on Monday, January 14th, 2013 at 7:20 AM and is filed under City government, El Paso Times, Open Government. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.