Before we go down the path toward the ill-conceived and hastily prepared 8/8 council downsizing proposal, let me suggest an alternative: submit the recently rejected charter proposal as a home-rule petition. With one minor change. Make the eight ward-tethered councilors elected by ward.
Apart from the glaring error of at-large ward-tethered councilors, the proposed charter is a thoughtful document. The down-sized council is not the only change to the charter in the proposal. The Yes folks should embrace ward representation* as a compromise to get a right-sized council. We’d have a charter proposal that would get enormous support. We could even have a non-binding referendum to test the hypothesis.
There’s a meeting on the 8/8 hack tonight in City Hall at 7:30 PM. Let’s reject the hack and tweak the commission’s good work.
Oh, and fix the $%$& charter objection language.
* Yup, I went there.
@Sean: You’d prefer to see 8 Ward only elected and 4 or 5 elected at-large?
Here’s a link to documents and research prepared by Councilor Rick Lipof and former Alderman Verne Vance on the 8 + 8 proposal. http://amysangiolo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Items-from-Councilor-Lipof-1.pdf
Yes.
8/8 gives voters even less say on who their elected leaders are than our present, imperfect system. So 16/8 is better than 8/8.
Here we go!
One element of the No campaign that I thought was a bit misleading was the sense they tried to project that there was an obvious non-controversial consensus alternative. I think we’re about to see that there are many possible alternatives (8-8, 8-4, 4-8 …) and maybe no obvious non-controversial consensus.
The League of Women Voters “Statement on the Size of the City Council” from March of 2016 stated:
In the two earlier non-binding referendums as well as in the effort to establish the recent Charter Commission, voters overwhelmingly supported the idea of reducing the size of the council. I think many voters voted against the Charter not because they oppose reducing the size of the council, but because they disagreed with the change in composition. Likewise, some folks will oppose 8/8 not because they don’t want to downsize, but because they don’t agree with that change in composition. If only there were a way to reduce the size of the council while maintaining the current ratio of composition…
The 8/4 split Sean proposes would mean that 2/3 of the city council are elected by a tiny percentage of the city’s voters (given ward sizes and turnout in municipal elections). I would oppose it for that reason.
I would also oppose any proposal that equated ward and at large representation or had more ward rep than at large. I personally like 4 district reps, 8 at large (make 4 of them distric bound if you like). The only fair way I see to reduce the council is to do something with the ward councilors. They have value for sure, and maybe the district option would be something to look at…