Westernhorizon, you said:
“…had my way term limits for local officials would not exist to begin with because that's OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS VOTERS!”
I agree wholeheartedly in the principles of liberty yet today such an expectation is idealistic and not reasonable as a method of leadership. As a body, we the people are not educated nor prepared to again assume and exercise their rights and the power to govern themselves. By laziness or their lives too busy to bother, the fact remains that the people have abdicated power.
It is getting better. But until enough of us become engaged in exercise our rights and privileges of liberty, it sadly is necessary that more laws are written by government attempting to limit and control government, this until more citizens become informed voters and the watchful supervisors required by liberty. Term limits are necessary not as a conservative or libertarian principle, but as a stop gap during the time our neighbors and friends awaken to their duty and responsibility.
When you vote November 6th concerning the term-limits for all El Paso County elected officials, regardless of how you vote, all current two-term officials will remain eligible to serve a third term.
Why? The current ballot language states that the law becomes effective for “…any election held after Nov 6, 2012…” therefore pass or fail, your vote will not impact any existing two-term official.
My point is not about term limits, but about a perceived conflict of interest.
The El Paso Board of Commissioners (BOCC) has the power to approve the ballot language and two members will lose their jobs unless the ballot is written to protect them for another four years.
The two members at risk voted to defeat a motion to change the language during the 7/7/11 BOCC meeting. It stated that if passed, the change will apply to “any person who currently holds” office because it is effective “in any election held on or after the November 6th, 2012” election. (Emphasis added.)
May be the two BOCC members had good reasons, but their participation in the vote is a conflict of interest as the vote was whether or not to protect their own jobs. This should be corrected to remove all appearance of impropriety.
(Minutes; agenda item 17: http://bcc2.elpasoco.com/bocc/agendas/2011…. “, “MOTION FAILED (2-3) HISEY, CLARK AND LATHEN OPPOSED”)
I respectfully ask the BOCC revisit and take another vote on the ballot language. I respectfully ask for Commissioner Sallie Clark and Commissioner Dennis Hisey to recuse themselves.
I don’t know either one. As far as I know, both have served well and honorably and are public servants of personal integrity. Therefore, recusing from this BOCC vote is something they should be able to do without hesitation. That said, it will take courage because if the ballot language does change, both will lose their jobs after the election.
As officials in positions of trust, I submit that doing the right thing now will show that trust can be given again.
It’s about doing the right thing and trust.
Because it matters.
All content © Copyright 2017, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation