1st District chooses 2nd District’s Rep? are you Nuts?
I have touched on this before… BUT that is the reply I get from certain corners of the county. More specifically, members of the county whom are “in the know” on matters related to law and commerce.
Sorry , that needs repeating… More specifically, members of the county whom are “in the know” on matters related to law and commerce.
How may other people do not know this? Who was asleep when the referendum to expand the board from 5 to 7…was floated? Who did not read the fine print? The citizens of the rural areas seem to all be aware.
Districts “nominate” their representatives in the Primary, the entire county votes the nominees into office. District One is approaching 2:1 population advantage over District two, thus they determine who represents District Two, every time.
This is why anyone running for reelection to “serve” District Two will always pander to District One.
I have eliminated this by choosing to run for one term. Really, who wants entrenchment anyhow? FOUR YEARS is plenty….unless you are angling for the Health Care and Pension Benefits for life. We have covered that for ourselves in this family(self-sustainability)(personal responsibility)
I would like to see more people run for office in this county. You need not a Gene in your DNA to qualify. If you can manage your affairs in this world with out supplemental aid and you own property are the essential requirements in my book. You need not be a lawyer or have a PhD. There are plenty of these in government making a mess of things now.
We need more “regular” people in government. People who can allow the citizens to prosper…and represent those citizens for the district there are elected to. I would have said …” for the district they were elected to serve”, but the current, intentional election set up prevents that from being a true statement.
Consider this: Who wags district Two?….now ask…Who wags District One? Now ask, What form of Government is this?
Per State code
§ 153A‑58. Optional structures.
A county may alter the structure of its board of commissioners by adopting one or any combination of the options prescribed by this section.
(3) Mode of election of the board of commissioners:
a. The qualified voters of the entire county shall nominate all candidates for and elect all members of the board.
For options b, c, and d, the county shall be divided into electoral districts, and board members shall be apportioned to the districts so that the quotients obtained by dividing the population of each district by the number of commissioners apportioned to the district are as nearly equal as practicable.
b. The qualified voters of each district shall nominate candidates and elect members who reside in the district for seats apportioned to that district; and the qualified voters of the entire county shall nominate candidates and elect members apportioned to the county at large, if any.
c. The qualified voters of each district shall nominate candidates who reside in the district for seats apportioned to that district, and the qualified voters of the entire county shall nominate candidates for seats apportioned to the county at large, if any; and the qualified voters of the entire county shall elect all the members of the board.
d. Members shall reside in and represent the districts according to the apportionment plan adopted, but the qualified voters of the entire county shall nominate all candidates for and elect all members of the board.
This 3C is our method. It was voted in in the 2006 general election by what I deem slight of wording as I contend the general population did not realize they where to loose control of electing their district representatives in the plan which simply highlighted the expansion of the BOCC from Five to Seven.
Here is more background info including how it may actually be unconstitutional.
NOTE: Strictly as an example… Earl McKee received nearly 20 thousand votes from District One in 2010.
So ask: What will happen on the election day when District One decides they do not want the representative that District Two wants?