- The Enterprise
- The Recorder
In the last year or so, a redistricting committee in our county attempted to address some of the confusion in the current commissioner election process. I recall reading the result of the committee’s survey and concluding the public was ambivalent. There was no strong consensus. You could add any two choices together and conclude that the public didn’t like the third choice.
Recent newspaper articles discuss a current state legislative proposal. However, the articles suggest confusion about what the legislation means and the effects it will have, and adding to the confusion unspecified amendments are under development.
I wonder whether we’re overthinking this. I’m not a lifetime resident; I‘ve only lived here for about 20 years. I’m happy with our local government and the administration of our schools. In my opinion, our shared interests dramatically outweigh our conflicts. I just don’t see significant, divergent strategic interests between Districts 1, 2 and 3.
Our county elections are based on countywide voting. The current system and the pending legislative proposal, if I understand it correctly, don’t guarantee candidates with the most countywide votes will serve as a commissioner. Maybe that should be guaranteed. Maybe the commissioner candidates with the highest number of votes in countywide voting should be elected, regardless of their address. Maybe we should trust the voters.
John Perryman, Huntingtown