The Citizens Petition Initiative is broken
Bloggers: The premise is this: The Citizens Petition Initiative of the Clay County Charter is broken. Members of the 2005-2006 CHarter Review Commission wanted to amend it during the Charter Review Session but yielded to those loud voices of CTLAC. We decided to pick a fewer number of fights to fight so we could focus on what was important to us: the 5+2. Whether another amendment would have passed or not is not relavent. What is relavent is what is happening this election cycle. Catching up this weekend on my reading I came across this letter to the editor published in Clay Today on Thursday: "...This group (Citizens for Term Limits and Accountability) portends to have the citizens best interest at heart. And they are the first to complain when they think taxpayer money is being wasted. However, there is a major hypocrisy at work here." And then the author goes on to explain: "Case in point: Check the treasury reports for this group. You will not see expenses related to verifying petition signatures. The reason you will not see those expenses is because the political action committee files waivers so they do not have to pay them. The Supervisor of Elections submits a request to the Board of County Commissioners asking to be reimbursed for those fees." The point the author made was this: "Bottomline: Taxpayers are paying for a small group of people constantly changing our charter - the most sacred document in our county. When they make mistakes, like when they had to void 5,100 signature petitions because they failed to follow the rules as defined by Florida Statutes, we pay. We all pay the legal expenses the Supervisor of Elections incurs in order to clean up their business. And now we will pay for their do-over amendment." Wow! This demonstrates the kind of abuse our charter has been under. I hope in two years when the BCC convenes another Charter Review Session, this is one of the provisions that is thoroughly reviewed, debated and discussed because we (taxpayers) do not deserve to be paying for their mistakes nor their activities. Bottomline. Karen Lake Related: Key2life's blog | login or register to post comments | printer friendly version | Tags: charter | citizens | CTLAC
Submitted by Angela on Mon, 04/21/2008 - 9:05pm.
Why is the citizens petition initiative broken? I would like to see proof of that as well. Regardless of what petitions citizens work on, and get on the ballot. It still has to meet the approval of the voters. NOTHING becomes the law unless the ELECTORS vote it into law, which is the way it should be. This is true even if the Commissioners, CRC, or citizens put the initiative on the ballot. Taxpayers pay for what the Commissioners place on the ballot, the taxpayers pay for what the CRC places on the ballot. Yet people want to complain and say that citizens initiatives should not be given the same treatment and call that hypocrisy. Speaking of hypocrisy, how much taxdollars did the Chairman of the CRC Mr. Cummings spend on taking a speaker (lady) to dinner and flowers that we paid the bill? Please! Did he take the other speakers to dinner and flowers too? Submitted by clayvoter on Mon, 04/21/2008 - 9:41pm.
Or should I say WHOA Angela?????? Back the bus up for me.....taking a speaker to dinner? flowers? Pul-leese tell me you are jokin' Submitted by Angela on Mon, 04/21/2008 - 9:54pm.
No joke! Gift Basket that sounds so nice. I'm paying for this item. Please! From: wtcummings@comcast.net [wtcummings@comcast.net]Sent: Mon 1/30/2006 9:22 AMTo: Don MooreCc: Commissioners; Fritz Behring; Mark H. Scruby; Mike PriceSubject: Re: CRC expense reimbursement Annie,Please put the following agenda item on the upcoming 2/2 CRC mtg:"Motion to approve reimbursement by BCC to Travis Cummings for dinner and gift basket for guest speaker Ginger Delegal on 1/18/06."If you could please have the total $$ amt for each receipt for the CRC in their decision making process, that would be great. There should not be any other expenses related to Ginger's trip. Any expenses related to her presentation and travel were paid for by the Fla Assoc of Counties.Thanks,Travis
Submitted by finder on Tue, 04/22/2008 - 6:17am.
Is the system 'broken' or just open to abuse by unscrupulous individuals? We decided to pick a fewer number of fights to fight so we could focus on what was important to us: the 5+2. My underline emphasis. Let's take a look at that statement. Specifically let's look at my emphasis on the 'US'! Notice it doesn't say 'to the county' or 'to the citizens' or 'to a better government'. It says to 'US' and I don't believe that was a typo. I think it means exactly what it says. That 'US' is NOT a collective us the voters/citizens of Clay County. I think the 'US' is the backers of the new petition by CPVR that wants to force a 2/3 majority to get rid of an elected position. If you think that this is not just a way to protect their +2, there are some people in NY that have a famous bridge for sale. Actually, I'm not sure if it is really even the +2 so much as it is the +1 (elected Chair). As Jerry Maguire said: 'Show me the money!' Now let's go back to the 'broken' part. In order to prove their point it seems as if they are willing to throw the entire ballot process into total chaos by presenting a number of conflicting petitions. If a group deciding that what they want is more important than what is good for all and finding a way to achieve it, means broken I'm using the wrong dictionary. To me it means open to abuse by people that are intent on accomplishing their own goals whatever it takes. And that cannot be good for us. And my us is a collective us. The hardworking, taxpaying, plain folks that just want to live their lives in a nice place with a government that does what it should to make that happen without breaking the bank. It shouldn't be a place for some to get rich at the tax payer's expense and send us to court to figure out which petition carries more weight just because they can. Mike Heemer http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice in Nov.
Submitted by Marsha on Tue, 04/22/2008 - 7:01am.
Mike, While you're focusing on "a" word consult Mr Webster for his definition of Premise (as a transitive verb) vs Premeditation. You will find that Premeditation is a more accurate word. You could also say that the Premise is based upon a premeditated manipulation of the system. In turn that gives a result based upon a pre-conceived goal. "Lets break the system and then go "oh look the system is broken" I don't see the Voters rights being protected. What I see is an attempt to "vacate" the voters rights. We're also electing a President on the Nov ballot, will our votes for that also be tied up or tossed out by this conspiracy? Victory at any cost, the end justifies the means. It's not a mantra I would be proud to represent. I'm with you, the only protection I see this working for is the unopposed Chairmans race. Maybe they should call themselves "Citizens Protecting the Vote for Rob" http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for Choice 7 Commissioners or 5 People are talking about ...Here are the recent blog postings with the most comments. |
Who's online
There are currently 1 user and 76 guests online.
Online usersRecent comments |
1. Where is your proof that the CITIZENS INITIATIVE IN CLAY COUNTY IS BROKEN?
2. Tax payers money paid the expenses of the Charter Review Commission you served on. So what's the difference? Have not heard of any laws being violated since both were legitimate expense under current law.
3. The mistakes made with the petitions were two-fold and not by just the CTLAC. You need to get your facts straight before posting instead of trying to sway public opinion to your way of thinking.