Former mayors speak out

As former mayors of Nacogdoches, we endorse all 10 proposed amendments to the Nacogdoches city charter. We believe that all of the changes are beneficial and will help clarify language in the current city charter as well as provide more input by local citizens.

The charter committee was appointed by the diversified members of the city commission and was composed of people of different ages, professions and ethnicity who were approved by the people asking for amendments to the charter, specifically addressing the issue of Proposition 10.

We agree with the majority of the charter committee — eight of the nine members voted for the amendment — that if an ordinance passed by the city commission is in such disfavor, then asking for 2,500 signatures to overrule the council is not unreasonable. As pointed out by the editor of The Daily Sentinel in an editorial, that is just 25 people getting 100 signatures each to bring any issue to a vote of the people. We believe that if fewer signatures are required, it would an invitation to chaotic civil government. Those opposing the 2,500 signature requirement have proposed as few as 40 signatures to call an election. This is not democratic representative government; it is rule by a very small clique.

There are only five members on the city commission, and they face re-election every two years. If the people disagree with their decisions, they can remove those commissioners by a majority vote. That is the way real democracy works.

We urge the citizens of the community that we love so well to please go to the polls and vote "YES" on all 10 proposed amendments.

A.L. Mangham Jr., mayor 1975 to 1987

Judy McDonald, mayor 1987-1995

James Raney, mayor 1995-1997

Roy Blake Jr., mayor 2001-2003

Bob Dunn, mayor 2004-2007

Vote 'no' on Prop. 10

When the Coalition for Public Referendum recognized that initiative and referendum should be added to the Nacogdoches city Charter, the group began gathering signatures for a petition for a proposed amendment addressing initiative and referendum. When the city indicated a willingness to work with CPR and appointed a charter review committee that would consider I&R, CPR agreed to suspend collecting signatures, and withdrew its petition, and began to work with the city to develop an I&R proposal together.

As the only member of the CPR who was appointed to the nine-member charter review committee, I proposed to the committee a petition signature requirement of 20 to 30 percent of the registered voters who voted in the last municipal election. The majority of home rule cities in Texas with I&R use a percentage of voters who voted in the last municipal election, and not a percentage of registered voters. The model amendment for I&R that the charter review committee worked from was provided by city manager Jim Jeffers, and was published by the National Civic League. It recommended "charter drafters to decide upon a reasonable threshold for the city, chosen from a range equal to or greater than five percent but less than or equal to 10 percent of registered voters to vote in the last city election. The percentage should be neither too easy or too burdensome."

The suggestion that gathering 2,500 signatures is easy is simply not the case. Try it. Although many people strongly agree with the issue for collecting signatures, they will not consent to signing the petition for fear of repercussions to their business, association with the group pushing the I&R, simply do not want their information on a petition and etc.

It is also unreasonable to assume that gathering 2,500 signatures is easy, when only 6 times in 20 years have that many people voted in an election, and only three times have 15 percent of the registered voters voted. Does it really make sense that Proposition 10 could pass with only a few hundred signatures? How can it be said that "every little petty interest group" would try to petition an issue to be placed on the ballot, when only a very small percentage of the voters ever vote on any issue?

A recent editorial in The Daily Sentinel indicated that any ordinance in question would be suspended in the time between signatures being gathered and the next election date. However, according to City Attorney Rob Atherton, the suspension of the ordinance does not take place until the petition is completed with signatures and is filed with the city secretary. This is standard procedure with virtually every city that has a provision for I&R in its charter. Also, once certified as a sufficient petition, the city commission has the option of adopting the proposed ordinance, or repealing the existing ordinance, thereby negating the need for a city election.

In my opinion, there are two other troubling issues about Proposition 10. First, it does not allow "resolutions" to be subject to referendum. Resolutions can result in actions by the city commission that effect everyone. With Proposition 10, the voters will have no way to petition the city commission to rescind an unpopular resolution, even if the majority of the registered voters do not agree. Resolutions provide an avenue for commissioners to completely bypass citizens' concerns. Many home rule cities in Texas with &R make resolutions subject to referendums.

The second glaring deficiency in Proposition 10 is that it allows the city commission to arbitrarily, after a two-year period, amend or entirely rescind a successful petitioned I&R measure that has been passed by a majority of the voters. Think about that. Citizens are successful in obtaining 2,500 signatures of registered voters on a petition. The measure is placed on a ballot and passes by a majority of the citizens. Then two years later, by the vote of only four city commissioners, it can be completely revoked. Any change to a successful petitioned I&R measure should be taken back to the citizens for a vote and not changed at the whim of the city commission.

Yes, indeed, we need initiative and referendum in our charter. But it needs to be one that is meaningful, and not just a window dressing. If Proposition 10 passes, Nacogdoches citizens' voices will be silenced.

I urge you to vote "no" on Proposition 10.

Jackie Warthan

jackiewarthan@gmail.com

Vot 'yes' on Prop. 10

The Charter Review Committee (composed of Jack Ledbetter, Jimmy Partin, Mike Bay, Judy McDonald, Jackie Warthan, Steve Bartlett, Patrick Sanders, Jack McCullough, and me) addressed many issues regarding possible charter amendments to the Nacogdoches Charter. The committee discussed, voted on, and recommended to the city council 10 changes.

As The Daily Sentinel has reported and endorsed Proposals 1 through 9 as housekeeping changes, clarifications or alignments with recent enacted state laws, voters in the city of Nacogdoches should vote yes on each.

Proposal 10 has generated the most discussion. The review committee analyzed, discussed and considered many options regarding "initiative and referendum." The committee voted 8-1 in favor of the proposal that is now before the voters. The adoption of the proposal will allow direct participation by bringing to the attention of Nacogdoches citizens and the city council major issues not being addressed by city government or issues with a strong concern by the residents for a need for change in legislative actions taken by the council.

The opposition to Proposal 10 is the number of signatures required and the basis of calculating the number for a petition to be considered. The committee looked at all possible percentages ranging from 5 percent to 25 percent calculated on different bases —registered voters or number of voters in the previous election. After many differing opinions and scenarios, the 15 percent of registered votes was accepted; again by an 8-1 vote. The committee strongly felt they did not want knee-jerk reactions to ordinances or frivolous calls for elections on minor issues that a smaller percentage or number of voters in last city election.

If an issue is of significant concern with broad-based consequences, 2,500 signatures is a reasonable and attainable number — 100 people getting 25 signatures, or 50 people getting 50 signatures, or 25 people getting 100 signatures.

Adoption of "initiative and referendum" is not a solution to citizen apathy. Residents of our city should be involved by attending city council meetings public hearings, visiting with their representative on the council, and voting in each election. The goal of those opposing Proposal 10 is to create a system where as few as 40 people could conceivably call an election. That is not representative democracy, but rather, frivolous agitators desiring self-interest solutions.

The majority of the committee joins me in asking you to vote "yes" on Proposal 10. Both representative democracy and participatory democracy can be accommodated. Do not be manipulated by a few in number. This election is about Nacogdoches government and should be the concern of the voters in the city.

Leon C. Hallman

Chairman,

Nacogdoches Charter Review Committee