We write as community members to express concerns about the Charter Review Propositions on the upcoming ballot.
We urge you to vote “No” on both propositions 1 and 2, and here is why.
Charter Review Proposition 1 recommends that we switch to countywide elections. Countywide campaigns now cost about $50,000; our present elections by district make campaigning more affordable. How many can afford to run for office if it cost $50,000 to be a viable candidate? The money must be raised somewhere. To move to county wide campaigns could restrict campaigning to those supported by members of well-funded, well-organized special interest groups — and there are many in San Juan County of different persuasions. Many good potential candidates would not be able to run. This has already happened at the state level, and in Congress, where special interests influence legislation that is in their interests and not necessarily those of the people in the district.
We respect the Charter Review Commissioner’s work; but on Charter Review Propositions 1 and 2 we will be voting “No” to keep our elections more representative.
Sincerely,
David Kobrin and Diane Berreth
Countywide campaigns do not cost $50,000. Anyone curious about the matter can check public disclosure records.
David & Diane – Thank you for your thoughts. I’d like to elaborate on Richard Ward’s comment. In one of the last county-wide commissioner elections, one candidate spent $50,000. This was an unusually high amount. According to the Public Disclosure Commission’s records, most candidates running county-wide spent $25,000 to $40,000. Yes, that’s still a lot of money. However, as more than one former county commissioner told the CRC, it means that a candidate must develop a broad base of contributors and supporters from all of the islands, not just rely on a few people on his/her own island. This should increase a candidate’s knowledge of, and connection with, more people in more places in our county, which I think is a very good thing.
Yes, to get elected in a county wide election, it takes a lot of money, sometimes as much as $50,000, as documented in past county wides. Granted! But…… what does that have to do with how much a candidate ia expected to know about the territory he/she represents? My experience in The San Juan Islands indicates that if your experience is on Orcas, Lopez is in another country and San Juan Island is on the other side of the moon – and vice versa. Too much adversity in these islands for county wide elections, at any level
You would think I could at least spell my own name correctly.
One more thought.
Read current issue Time Magazine regarding what it takes to get elected. It’s not if you’re qualified but how much money you can raise.
One only has to look around the players in Washington to see what that gets us
Let’s say a local group gets money from outside SJC to “encourage effective environmental action” in SJC. They naturally give financial support to the candidate(s) they can count on. And why do they get the support they want? Whether it is $30,000, or $50,000 to run no candidate will go into personal debt for this job. So they really need the “thems” don’t they? And the higher the cost the more they really NEED to win. It’s better as is. Vote no on 1 and 2.
I’m with you Charlie. Just imagine all the favors those high-end contributors are buying from the candidate he’s supporting.
Id certainly be fearful that, rather than developing a broad following, all a candidate might need to do is contact the right interest group PAC. I guess I also feel more comfortable evaluating people on the same island in a decision about representation. But I’m still on the metaphorical fence.