Citizens informed about freeholder process at forum
Citizens informed about freeholder process at forum
Next meeting tonight at Quincy fire hall
MOSES LAKE — The Grant County commissioners held a public forum Monday night, giving voters an opportunity to learn the facts about Proposition No. 1.
The question and answer forum, at the Moses Lake Fire Department, also debunked myths and righted misinformation about the home rule charter process and freeholder election.
Similar forums discussing the proposition are scheduled for tonight in Quincy, at fire hall No. 3, and Wednesday at the Royal City library, both at 7 p.m.
Voter approval of the proposition empowers a board of 21 elected freeholders to prepare and propose a home rule charter for Grant County, which goes before voters in a subsequent election, the commissioners explained during their presentation.
Each voter also participates in the election of seven of the 21 freeholders, depending on which of the three county commissioner districts a voter lives in.
Questions about funding a two- to three-year examination of county government, or costs for potential changes to the system still remain unknown.
Grant County Commission Chairman Richard Stevens said if voters pass the proposition and elect freeholders, they're giving tacit approval to fund the process.
Some people attending the forum said they've heard the negative aspects of the process and potential changes, such as funding. They've yet to hear the positive aspects, they said.
A committee of Grant County residents, "Voters for Council-Manager Form of Grant County Government," led by Moses Lake real estate agent Ralph Kincaid, coordinated a successful petition drive in August to have the freeholder elections in November. To qualify, the committee collected a number of signatures equal to 10 percent of the last general election's voter turnout.
Kincaid, whose committee has since changed its name to "A Citizen Review of County Government," said determining the positive aspects is difficult, because nobody can predict what the freeholders may propose. He said the quality of freeholder candidates should not be underestimated. People must not be afraid of a review, or any proposed changes, since the freeholders' new charter must be approved by the county's voters.
"If it's a bad system they come up with, I'll be the first one to vote against it," Kincaid said.
Kincaid claims a "popular movement" exists favoring elimination of partisan elections for many of the county's supervisors. The movement also favors enlarging the three-member commission to an elected county council of five-to-seven members, Kincaid said.
A political action committee, "Securing A Voice in Elections," or SAVE, dedicated to preserving the right to vote for elected county officials, attended the meeting and expressed their concerns.
Robert Schiffner, an attorney who's donated $2,000 to SAVE, suggested those proposing changes to county government should run for one of its political offices.
"We review (county government) every four years, it's called an election," Schiffner said. "I don't know why we want to give away our vote."
In a rare bit of agreement, both committees said the word "freeholder" is misleading to voters and appears antiquated. The name leads some to misunderstand the freeholders' function.
Freeholders are unpaid volunteers who would work in public meetings reviewing a new form of county government. The freeholders prepare and propose a charter for the county.
They do not decide how Grant County deals with growth management, tax structure, sewer rates and utilities.
Freeholders are not a secret society, as the name may suggest to some.
Seventy-one candidates are running for the 21 freeholder positions, elected from seven sub-districts within each of the three county commissioner districts.
The sub-districts are made up of two or more voter precincts and represent about 3,000 people.
A map of the 21 sub-districts is available on the county's Web site, www.co.grant.wa.us.
Six Washington counties out of 39 have adopted home rule, including: King, in 1968; Clallam, in 1976; Whatcom, in 1978; Pierce, in 1980; Snohomish, in 1980; and San Juan, in 2005. Home rule efforts were rejected by county voters in Spokane in 1997; Skamania in 2001; and Clark in 2002.
Become a Subscriber!
You have read all of your free articles this month. Select a plan below to start your subscription today.
Already a subscriber? Login
