In a somewhat surprising show of consensus, Grand County elected officials came together around a new idea Tuesday, Aug. 18 to amend the county’s current form of government to bring it into compliance with state code amendments made in 2018 and adding questions to the November ballot.
The move, many hope, would allow the county to maintain its commission form of government with amendments required by state law — specifically, HB 224.
Although the name of the county’s legislature is Grand County Council, the county actually functions under a commission form of government; that is, the council collectively holds both legislative and executive powers with no formal separation of powers.
However, an important voice on the matter says this characterization is not legally binding and could present challenges, said Gavin Anderson, Salt Lake County deputy district attorney and consultant on the state’s form of government law. His services were commissioned when the Grand County Change in Government Study Committee spent more than a year hammering out a plan for a new form of government.
Anderson argues that the county’s existing form of government, as described by its statutes, do not conform to the requirement in Utah’s state code that county commissions — of which the Grand County Council is an example — hold both executive and legislative authority in the county.
On the other side of that argument is Grand County Attorney Christina Sloan; she said she was hesitant at first about the idea to amend the county’s current form of government and add ballot questions, an idea that came from Council Member Curtis Wells, but she said that it could work. Wells was instrumental in compelling the county to change its form of government in the first place.
Sloan said her analysis found that the council is within its legal right to clarify in statute the matter of where executive power lies — namely, with the commission — and to change its name to reflect that change.
Sloan said it has only been by tradition that the county has delegated this executive power to the Grand County Council Administrator, but the statute vests that power ultimately in the commission.
“I was really resistant to this idea,” Sloan told the council during the meeting Tuesday, Aug. 18. “I was suspicious of Curtis Wells. I pushed him off, and I just kept thinking that it wasn’t going to work by statute. But he submitted a formal legal review finally because I kept not getting to it, and then I had to look into it, so I’ve now put another maybe 25 hours into the statute. “You have a legal memo in front of you, and it does work,” Sloan told the council.
The council will debate on Friday, Aug. 21, amendments to its current form of government that Sloan says would bring the council into conformity with the requirements of state code.
Such a change would mean that, when voters see a question on the November ballot about the proposal from the Grand County Change of Government Study Committee, a rejection of the plan would approximately mean the status quo is held, non-partisan elections, recall votes and term limits notwithstanding — i.e. council elections would still become partisan, and the council would no longer have term limits and could not be recalled except through judicial channels.
But amending and clarifying the current form of government is not the only item up for debate Friday. Also on the table are two questions proposed for the 2020 ballot that would come into effect if a majority of voters reject the study committee’s plan.
The two questions are about the size they want for their expanded commission form of government — Do you want five or seven members? — and districting — Do you want all members elected at-large, or do you want some districts?
Again: The two questions would only come into effect if voters reject the study committee’s plan, which proposes a five-person council, each member elected at-large, with the executive powers vested in a hired county manager. If a majority of voters approve the plan, it is adopted as written.
Sloan, who at many times in the past has disagreed with Wells on local issues, is not the only such person to support the idea. Grand County Council Chair Mary McGann is also behind the idea.
“I’m excited about it,” McGann told The Times-Independent. She said later, contrasting the commission form with the city’s council form, “When you have an expanded commission — which we really are right now […] — it will prevent some problems like we had with the parking garage, the bike skills park, and things of that nature because people will feel like they’re more involved earlier on in the process.”
The Grand County Democratic Party is backing Wells’s idea.
“The Grand County Democratic Party supports the proposal to amend our current form of government in order to give voters more meaningful choices on the November ballot,” said Kya Marienfeld, vice chair of the local party. “One of the worst aspects of HB224 was that it did not give Grand County’s voters — who are overall very informed and very involved — a true choice about their form of government. The proposal under consideration fixes that problem.
“In this age of increasing polarization in politics, it’s refreshing to be able to join hands across the aisle and support a proposal that puts more power in the hands of Grand County voters.”
The council will reconvene Friday, Aug. 21 to discuss the proposed amendments and clarifications to its current form of government and the two potential ballot questions for the 2020 election, which it must submit to the Lt. Governor’s office by Aug. 31.
"Idea" - Google News
August 21, 2020 at 07:04AM
https://ift.tt/2FBt3Z8
Consensus forms around new local governance idea - The Times-Independent
"Idea" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2VWDFI5
https://ift.tt/3d3vX4n
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Consensus forms around new local governance idea - The Times-Independent"
Post a Comment