||| FROM GORDY PETERSEN |||
Opposition Statement to League of Women Voters
Thank you for this opportunity to share my perspective on the proposed Charter Amendments. My name is Gordy Petersen and I’m from San Juan Island. I was an original Freeholder and chair of the first Charter Review Commission.
If you recall, The Freeholders began with a plan to add a county manager with a 6-member Council. When the first CRC reviewed this Charter structure, we found problems and thought some changes would help and the Amendments passed by a large margin. It was crucial that the past work by Freeholders and CRC was officially endorsed by both political parties. Structural issues for better government should not be partisan. These proposals you will see tonight are very partisan. This CRC didn’t find structural problems that most people could agree upon, So they decided to institute divisive partisan policies.
Freeholders and first CRC went out of our way to be non-partisan. We wanted the county to run smoothly no matter who was elected to lead it. The Charter is a guide for county government structure not a place for partisan politics.
This Charter Review Commission, had other ideas. Big bold ideas to elect a climate Czar who had oversight power over our county Council and other departments.
According to Kevin Ranker, we are the 2nd most progressive county in the United States and we would elect a cow painted blue if we called it a Climate Czar. Well, their bold ideas ran into legal obstacles and became the weak propositions you see before you.
The Climate Czar position became another toothless advisory board. The Justice and Equity position became just another oversight group. This Charter Review Commission didn’t find problems to fix so instead they concentrated their energy into policy propositions that have no place in a structural document.
The Municipal Research Council has a manual that is designed for use throughout the State of Washington to help Charter Review Commissioners do their work. They advise that: “CRC’s should conduct their affairs to win the respect of local voters.” The main problem I see is that this CRC, lacks respect
No respect for the elected County Council. This Commission thinks they are not doing enough to protect the environment and need another oversight committee to dictate climate policy.
No respect for the County manager who they think can’t manage employees without prejudice and discrimination and needs a board to oversee every decision.
No respect for the prosecuting Attorney who they believe doesn’t know his job. This CRC got tired of his advice so they tried to hire outside council. This move was not legal nor was it respectful.
And no respect for the people who will elect a blue cow if Kevin Ranker tells them to. I think voters in San Juan County are smarter than this. They need to be respected.
This Review Commission settled on more committees to help solve problems that don’t exist. The voters are always the best oversight group. We should reject all of these proposals.
Thank you.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
Is it true that Kevin Ranker stated that our citizens would vote for a blue cow if the CRC called it a Climate Czar?
Is it true that the CRC, which has a limited term that ends when it delivers its proposals to Council, continues to meet?
I agree that the exercise far exceeded the intent of the Charter and seems to have produced performative rather than actual progress.