Frank Stanford's comment
Aug 31, 2009
THE CITY OF VICTORIA REALLY SHOULD BE SCHEDULING A REFERENDUM ON ITS PLANS TO BORROW 63 MILLION DOLLARS FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE JOHNSON STREET BRIDGE.
WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH THE PROPOSED SPENDING OR NOT, THE PROCESS THAT IS UNFOLDING IS FLAWED.
THE COUNTER-PETITION WORKS WELL IN CASES WHERE A REFERENDUM IS IMPRACTICAL...IF IT'S A NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMUNITY CENTRE PROJECT THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE THE ENTIRE CITY FOR INSTANCE.
IT OUGHT NOT TO BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF MANIPULATING AN OUTCOME.
TOO OFTEN CITY COUNCILS...AND YES IT HAS BEEN DONE BY COUNCILS (PLURAL) OUTSIDE OF VICTORIA, USE THE COUNTER-PETITION WHEN THEY DEEM AN ISSUE TO BE "TOO IMPORTANT" TO RISK A NEGATIVE ANSWER. THAT'S CONTRARY TO THE SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY. IT DISRESPECTS THE PRINCIPLE THAT THE ELECTORATE IS ALWAYS RIGHT.
TOO OFTEN THE SPIN IS THAT IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO SIGN THE PETITION AGAINST THE PROJECT IN QUESTION, BECAUSE BY SO DOING THE RATEPAYER IS COMPELLING THE CITY TO THE EXPENSE OF AN UNNECESSARY REFERENDUM. THAT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE. THE TRUTH IS THAT IF TEN PER CENT OF VOTERS DO ACTUALLY SIGN THE COUNTER-PETITION THE ELECTORATE HAS SAID "NO" TO THE PROJECT. THE REFERENDUM THEN BECOMES CITY HALL'S SECOND CHANCE TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR SPENDING THAT HAS BEEN REJECTED ONCE.
ON AN ITEM AS IMPORTANT AS THE JOHNSON STREET BRIDGE, CITY HALL SHOULD SEEK A CLEAR YES-OR-NO, BY REFERENDUM, RATHER THAN A "MAYBE" OR A "NOT-YET" BY COUNTER-PETITION.
THIS IS FRANK STANFORD
------
