Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Expansion of My Position on City Elections: Part 1

There were some good discussions Monday Evening at the Salisbury City Council meeting on a wide range of issues. It was also good to finally see an even wider variety of concerned citizens speaking up. One individual, Bob Taylor who is a local attorney, spoke in response to my editorial in Sunday’s Daily Times, though he did not mention me specifically.

Mr. Taylor slightly disagreed with my reason on moving the elections to November, as he felt local candidates will “get lost in the shuffle” as voters juggle national, state, and local issues. Mr. Taylor eluded he would rather have a low voter turnout elect candidates than a larger turnout where all the voters may not have a complete grasp on the important local issues. I’ll touch on that viewpoint later.

Tuesday followed with an article in the Daily Times by Laura D'Alessandro in response to my editorial in Sunday’s paper. It was a very good article with a wide range of viewpoints. Harry Basehart a political science professor from Salisbury University had a similar opinion to Mr. Taylor. Professor Basehart said in the article, “There's no doubt that if we elected the mayor and council members at the same time we have state elections, the turnout would increase but the downside is people will focus on local issues and local candidates, while they're also trying to focus on state candidates and state issues."

I certainly understand where they both are coming and I don’t totally disagree with them. I just felt we needed to bring this issue to the forefront, as this was one of the constant questions citizens were asking me during the campaign. Certainly there are other issues, crime, taxes, the WWTP, among other that are important, as is the important step in how and when we choose the individuals who will be making those decisions.

Now where I disagree with Mr. Taylor and Mr. Basehart is the assumption that voters cannot handle the Municipal elections at the same time as the Gubernatorial elections. I believe the voting population is smarter than most people think. Many abstain from voting but pay attention. Many don’t pay attention and vote. Some vote for a name they recognize, there are those that always vote against incumbents, and you always have Mickey Mouse receiving a few write-ins. That is Democracy.

I believe there are more advantages to moving the election to November. First, it is the traditional time to vote, we are programmed to vote in November. Second, in Salisbury the ones that go south for the winter will not be gone yet. When they return in the spring, many have missed the primary and are not up to speed on all the candidates. Third, the transition of power will not be in the middle of the budget session for a new mayor or council. They will be able to assimilate into their positions better if elected in the fall and avoid a “baptism by fire.”

Hopefully this debate will continue. My next post will be about creating voting districts within the city.

2 comments:

  1. I think it's a good idea myself as the Municipal elections could be held on the off-cycle September/Novembers. This way in most years one would have a predictable political pattern to follow with the exception of Presidential years - although given the trend of the last several Presidential cycles we may be holding a Presidential primary one year out from the Presidential general election.

    I don't think having a spring election has helped turnout in the city so if that was part of the idea in moving the balloting it's a proven failure and can be scrapped.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Many of the points in this argument are so valid. We need to keep pressing these ideas forward.

    ReplyDelete