By Jeff Bossler
A response to Bob Levinson’s letter
As a former Freeholder, I know how much work went into the proposal for our current Charter of which the citizens approved nearly 2 to 1. Unlike many members of the Charter Review Commission (CRC), I had a perfect attendance record throughout the entire process. Including participating in the PAC to educate the public as to what our current charter is, I worked endless hours on 6 committees. There was no room for being a slouch!
The decisions we made had nothing to do with what we “liked” or “felt.” Instead, we did our homework, consulted many certified legal experts, and weighed the pros and cons, and the plusses and minuses of the pros and cons. First and foremost, our focus was on facts first, opinions later. Most of us were non-bias, and had an objective approach. Many of us came into the process thinking one thing, then EDUCATING ourselves on the hard factual data and moved forward for the overall benefit to all. We had an open rules process, where ALL concerns were heard and deliberated through a respectful set of operating rules. No one was left behind. We never summarily shut dissent as did the CRC.
I can understand why Bob thinks us former Freeholders are opposed to the summary execution of the Charter, but this statement rings empty when one can also say the CRC was made up largely of a vocal minority who were dead set against the Charter from the day it was born. In fact, none of these statements are germane to the basic issue at hand.
Five years ago, we abandoned the old BOCC form of County governance because there are real and factual issues with fair and equal representation. Not only are at-large systems in the state of Washington (and other states) destined to become a thing of the past (illegal), but our old BOCC had become extremely out of balance with three grossly unequal districts.
This has nothing to do with “feelings.” It has everything to do with MATH and FACTS. No one in the CRC that I am aware of had ever taken the time to actually see numerically how radically different and dysfunctional our old BOCC voting / districting scheme was. I did. The system the CRC is proposing we go back to is numerically gerrymandered, and residency requirements do not solve this problem.
The return to our old system is being sold to us by the CRC as nothing out of the ordinary…just like any other three-district county in WA. Do the numbers! At our populations now on the three islands, if Lopez supports a candidate for “their” commissioner by 70% while Orcas and San Juan supports the opposition candidate by only 55%, the candidate Lopez voted against wins!!!
HOWEVER…….in an equally districted three-way race, the Lopez choice would win. That’s right; our old system was so bad, that you actually easily come up with a different winner in the same race with the same candidate support.
Nothing…..no feelings, opinions, likes, or don’t likes are valid issues until the issue of equal district representation are addressed! No amount of nostalgia for any number of past Commissioners will ever change the math.
I, Jeff Bossler, was the one who ran the numbers as to how this county could be districted equally. If the common denominator 3 or 5, then we’d have 3 or 5 districts. I challenge anyone to use existing precinct lines and populations within those precincts and adhere to State Law as to how you can divide land masses, and come up with a number OF EQUAL DISTRICTS different from our current 6. Nothing, not opinion, not feelings, not ideas, can trump geography, population distribution, and the law of One Person One Vote.
Inherent in the old BOCC system and within the Pro Proposition 1 and 2 camp is an unrealistic sense of entitlement. Lopez which constitutes only 1/6th of the population thinks it should have 1/3rd of the representation within the legislative branch (BOCC). This is wrong. On the other hand, I’ve had many people come to me saying our County Council and Administrator system doesn’t work because they can’t just call their favorite representative and get something done the way they think it should be done. This is an expectation to have undue influence and is also wrong.
If there are still legitimate problems now that we have equal districting and accurate representation within the legislative body, then the CRC should have looked at ways to improve on what we have, as there are many ways to adjust the existing system within our six equal districts. If we think we can go back to the outdated BOCC system and get away with it for very long, we’re barking up the wrong tree.
Jeff Bossler is a Westsound resident and Former Freeholder served on the following committees:
-Rules – drafted operating rules for the Board of Freeholders
-Outreach and Information – drafted factual non-bias text and information for the public
-Districts- ran all possible scenarios for equal districts
-Initiative and Referendum- researched other WA counties and drafted comparison info
-County Fair Committee- drafted factual text comparing BOCC and Home Rule proposal
– PAC to promote the Charter
Perfect attendance
I served with Jeff on the board of Freeholders as well as on the CRC and I take issue with his characterization both of the CRC process and of our proposed amendments. At it’s first meeting the CRC agreed (unanimously) to abide by Robert’s Rules. Our able chair never “summarily shut dissent” but rather applied the same democratic rules to everyone. The CRC, like the Freeholders, relied on the legal advice of our council, Prosecuting Attorney Randy Gaylord and I am confident that all our recommendations pass legal muster. Countywide voting has also been upheld by the US Supreme Court–specifically in cases with residency districts (such as proposed by Proposition) –see Dusch v. Davis for example. Unfortunately Jeff has conflated residency with representation–the whole point of countywide voting is to have countywide representation (which is why the non-charter counties in Washington that have district primaries still have countywide general elections as per RCW 36.32.050).