Fast forward to February of 2011. Now, I have generally avoided local subjects so far (because I know more about federal and state ones), but there is a controversy, now in the courts, about whether or not to allow a proposed sale of Gracedale to go to referendum. Without diving into the numbers, which I have not done my homework on yet, both sides disagree on whether the Gracedale Nursing home, owned and operated by the county, has been profitable, or is a money pit killing the county's finances, and insuring future tax increases. For me, I'm a bit torn on this. On the one hand, I'd rather not stick the people with tax increases for something that doesn't absolutely have to be done by the county government. My overriding view though is, having a county that provides a service like the nursing home improves our quality of life here, provides our seniors with a peace of mind about their futures, and probably in better economic times provides us with additional revenue, not losses. Did the county probably sign a contract with AFSCME that got more expensive than they thought at the time, and got them beyond their means? Yeah probably. Is selling the place any better economics than it is policy? No it's not, as you get the one time cash-infusion, watered down by the many costs associated with sale, that ultimately doesn't take you very far in balancing your long term books. I simply didn't believe any benefits from the sale outweighed the detriments of this policy, so I signed the petition myself when offered the opportunity to do so. The petition said let the voters have their say in a referendum. I think that's completely fair.
So did a Northampton County Judge, over the objections of Northampton County Councilman Ron Angle and fellow blogger Bernie O'Hare. Now I like Bernie, so I'm going to just say that he disagrees with me, but I'm going to focus on Mr. Angle for a minute. Mr. Angle says he doesn't believe these petitions have enough valid signatures, or that the referendum is legal under the county's "Home Rule Charter." Fair enough. He has now lost these arguments at both the county board of elections, and in the court room, yet he continues to appeal. The will of the people was good enough to put Ron Angle in the majority on the council in 2009, and in fact made him President of Council. He seems completely occupied by trying to not face that majority rule now. Could it be because he is on the 2011 ballot himself, and does not want a larger scale turnout than we saw in 2009? You'd have to ask him, not me.
Generally, i'm not crazy about referendums. Most of the time, I don't believe all voters take enough time to know nuance on issues, causing some to vote on generalities and alternate realities. I fear that referendums lead us all down California's road- voters voting for every program they like, and against every tax to pay for it. This is a case that seems tailor made for referendum though to me. Simply put, we're in hard times: do you think this service is something the county should spend on, and yes tax on, or not? Very straight forward. In a county that is actually in fairly good financial shape, I think that is a fair, straight forward question of governmental values to ask voters, that requires not deep nuanced understanding, but a gut check of the community's values. I say let the voters decide.
Oh, and with the dive into local issues, I've added three blogs based in Eastern Pennsylvania to my blog roll. Bernie O'Hare's own Lehigh Valley Ramblings is one. A former intern of mine named Mike's "What Is Right?" blog on political activism, from a GLBT point of view is another. A few skilled progressive policy folks I know, and their blog "Lehigh Valley Independent," is the third. Check them out.
No comments:
Post a Comment