NEW PACI have been asked to answer several questions, they are all related. How is the BCC enhanced by the addition of two at large?When I was selected to serve on the CRC, SMD form of government was a problem to me. The SMD form of government in this area had a bad history, if you don't learn from past mistakes you are bound to repeat them. The SMD was voted out in this county because people were upset because they had people voting on things that concerned them, but were not responsible to them. 80% of the commissioners who voted on issues concerning me were not responsible to me. This is not a representative government.Duval county has a combination of at large and SMD and it appears the people feel they are well represented.St John's county went from five at large to five SMD. The people were so unhappy that the next election cycle they back to five at large. 100% of the comm. is responsible to 100%of the people.We faced the same problem here that we faced in the past, so rather then have a re-run we attempted to fix it. We added two at large with a Chair. These are elected by all the people and responsible to all the people. So now you have a local representaive who will take to the BCC issues concerning their district and you have at large reps, which will look at the county as a whole. Some where in the middle, compromise is the art of politics, is where the best solutions which will benefit the county as a whole. That is how SMD is enhanced and will benefit the people of the county. The people under the five /two will have three elected commissioners to call instead of one.The other question there is a difference between copying and using as a model. Related: Rlyons's blog | login or register to post comments | printer friendly version | Tags: local issue
Submitted by OneMann on Fri, 02/15/2008 - 2:20pm.
I appreciate your attempt to answer my question. I guess everything may hinge on an individual's personal perception of "enhance," but I'm still not any closer to understanding how the two at-large commissioners will enhance single-member districts. Michael S. Mann People are talking about ...Here are the recent blog postings with the most comments. |
Who's online
There are currently 1 user and 214 guests online.
Online usersWho's newRecent comments |
Let me get this straight. We had 5 at large Commissioners that the voters in the County did not think represented them. Even though they had 100% of the Commissioners that were responsible to 100% of the voters. But we overwhelmingly voted against that plan because we did not feel they represented us.
So before we could see if the voter liked the plan. The CRC came up with an idea to save us from ourself and decided the best way to do that saving grace was add 2 additional Commissioners to be at large.
Coming out of corruption in the county and people with lack of knowledge and still unsure on how a Charter County was even suppose to be ran barely passed muster.
You are right we have some bad history to learn from in Clay County all while being under an at large Commission of the Board.
So instead of having a re-run of the bad history in Clay County which couldn't have been any worst than the corruption the voters have been subjected to lately under the at large Commission.
We just made a mistake and voted for SMD and they were attempting to save the voters from themselves.
I think I understand this better now. That's why I will vote to remove the 2 at large positions and save the county (taxpayers money) all in one vote.