The Voters' Decisions

Well said Mike, I think one of the things I like about you for a Candidate for County Commissioner is that you are an "Effective Communicator"  your years in journalism, your integrity and your sense of humor, fairness along with a good dose of common sense are attributes we need in County Goverment.

When I wrote my blog I was remembering what Baxley had once said, something to the effect of respecting peoples opinion against it if it is based upon something real and not rehetoric. I admired that with him being on the CRC and the new PAC created by members of the CRC.  That is how I arrived back to my basic belief of "less goverment not more" and the result is obvious in everything I've written since Sunday. 

I'd said in that blog that I was working on a link to the petition, and when I got it I posted it.....just like I said I would do.  We cannot of course prove that we were not in cahoots with all three lining up one after the other, but the three of us know that was not intentional nor planned.  That's not the first time multiple people have written either blogs or responses all at the same time.

I find it odd, what's going on with all the accusations that have been made at CTLAC for they way they operate.  I wonder if other members of the CRC including Rob Bradley condone this behavior or secretly cringe over it. 

Mike you have my promise that even though I have financially contributed to your Campaign and will continue to support you in other ways even though you will not be my Commissioner I want to see you win the RIGHT way.  I want to see you win by merit and hard work, and not by covert behavior and manipulation. 

We've all been told this is about choice yet what I see are those who would manipulate anything they can to acheive their goals, which takes your real choices away. This is what is wrong with Goverment.  When the issue was brought up that currently there is no choice all that came from the opposing side was a bunch of blogs to push the issue out of view.

I'm willing to live with the results of fair and honest campaigning and petitioning and accepting what the majority wants.......I'm just not willing to sit back and watch anylonger, I will do anything and everything that is honorable and true to help get this petition on the ballot and fight the petition that would lock a BCC Chairman up so tight the County will never be able to get loose from it and thats what appears to be happening.

I said it before and it bears repeating, this sure is an awful big fight for a Chairman that is "Ceremonial".  If 5 grown adults can't achieve some continuity and purpose when they're being paid for it then we need to clean house and get 5 who can.

http://24.23.126.8/ Petition to reduce 7 Commissioners to 5, take one and pass it around.

I don't want to lose sight of the petition drive but I for one would like to hear about why we need a Super Majority to do away with a Public Office?

To me a Majority is just that.....if you have 51% you have a majority and there need not be anything higher required. Why would we want an Amendment that makes it harder to do away with a job that the Citizens no longer want or need? Things they are a changing, I think we need to leave those options open for a SIMPLE Majority.

So here is the opportunity for some discussion.  Someone convince me why the Citizens of Clay County should vote to set themselves up for defeat due to a position that has outlived its usefullness or was designed to promote self serving interests and keeps the rest of us from being able to do anything about it.

http://24.23.126.8/ Petition to give Voters a voice on 7 or 5

Why would we want an Amendment

Exactly, we probably don't want that, but the politicians do.  This is a republic not a democracy, i hear another petition coming. 

The petition for this "Super Majority" already exists although I will admit I've not seen it yet. I have no reason to not believe what Mike Mann is saying and he says it exists.

The insinuation has been made that there is no room for "fair debate" being made so I thought I would give it a shot, invite the CPVR to make their case that this is in the "best interest" of the people.  

To be honest your "republic not democracy" comment confuses me, would you elaborate for this woman old enough to be your Mother?

http://24.23.126.8/

"And to the Republic for which it stands".  We vote in people to make decisons for us but we retain the right tp petition the government.  In a democracy, we would run everything and would probably fall into an anarchy within five years or less.  We haven't always been a republic we were once a confederacy, but the federal government could not tax, so that didn't work. 

As far as 5+2, i see it as, if 45% of voters choose option A and 40% of voters choose option B and 15% choose option C, then option A should win b/c it got the most votes, unfortunately, extreme majorites are needed for amendments just like the federal government, why? i don't know, let me research.

I turned 20, so ooooh! i feel so old now!

Matt Birman

Marsha;

Like you I don't believe in the theory of 'Super' majorities of 2/3. If I think about it for a while I could probably give some good arguments for 60%.

I would love to hear from the CPVR group a logical (or even illogical) reason for wanting to require 66% of the voters to agree to get rid of an elected position. I could more easily understand asking for 66% for ALL Charter changes but not for just one specific situation like this.

The only real reason I can see for this is that they feel there is a good chance that the CTLAC petition is going to make it to the ballot and that the voters will do away with the 2 in the 5+2.

My guess is that they feel that if it does carry a majority it will not carry 66% so they would win if their petition carries 50%+1.

I think there is one other thing the voters really need to look at in this 66% petition.

Let us assume that we keep the 5+2 with one being the Chair. Suppose after a while we find we want to keep the two at-large commissioners but that we don't want to have an elected Chair.

The only way we could get rid of the elected Chair yet keep the at-large position is to have a 66% majority. That sports fans is NOT a good idea in my book.

As I've said before, my gut reaction is that this is underhanded, backdoor, political clap trap. But I'll at least listen to any reasonable explanation.

Link to Roll back BCC from 5+2 TO 5

http://24.23.126.8/

Mike Heemer

This blog has inspired me to do some actual research on the difference, as I have wondered about it for some time - call me lazy.  So I "googled" the subject title and came up with several explanations.  This link is to one of them that made sense to me, so thought I'd share.  http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm.

Super majority requirements for constitutional amendments are rooted in history, as far back as the U.S. Constitution's method prescribed for its own alteration.  Many states, including Florida, follow suit and require super majority to pass amendments.

The theory is based on the concept that the Constitution, and various state versions, should not be changed as easily as simple law.  CTLAC's proposal calls for the Clay County Home Rule Charter to fall in line with that historical concept and the way Florida treats the state constitution, requiring a 60 percent voter approval as the threshold for passage.

Applied equally and to all issues, the extra 10 percent of voter approval certainly won't make it easier for groups like CTLAC or CPVR, or for the County Commission or future Charter Review Commissions to have their proposed amendments succeed on election days.  Harder, yes, but equal for all.

The historical political theory is that those who can convince super majority of voters to support their proposed Charter Amendment will be the ones who've proposed something worthy of changing the Charter.

Requiring an even superior majority and then applying it to a single type of proposed amendment is based on logic that escapes me, and I'd also welcome an explanation from its proponents.  Until then, my gut tells me the same thing your gut tells you, Finder.

Michael S. Mann

michaelsmann@comcast.net

So the CTLAC has gotten an Amendment on the ballot requiring any changes to the Charter to be voted for with a 60% majority?  In doing this they will be making it harder for themselves as well as anyone else to get anymore Amendments passed by the voters.

The CPVR is sending around a petition for a Super Majority, not for all Amendments but just for the one that has to do with elected Officials.......like a Chairman and an at large Commissioner?

Does that about cover it?

Ding Ding Ding

Hmmm.....Round 1 goes to the CTLAC who appear to be trying to protect the integrity of the Charter......while the other protects someones job.

http://24.23.126.8/