|
Comment on this article |
Email this Article
|
|
Hidden with code "Submitted as Feature" |
|
Mayor Mobilizes for At-Large Urbana Seats to Weaken Progressive Power |
Current rating: 0 |
by Esther Patt
(No verified email address) |
20 Jul 2004
Modified: 10:57:18 PM |
|
The latest assault on progressives in Urbana is a proposal to change the form of city government by adding to the City Council two members who would be elected at-large, city-wide, rather than from individual districts. |
A proposal by Council Member Milton Otto to place a question on the November ballot asking the voters to create the new at-large seats will be discussed at the July 26 Council committee meeting. The arguments that have been made in support of the proposal are:
- Since students do not vote in large numbers they should not have the same representation as everyone else.
- Since more people in southeast Urbana cast votes in the city elections, people in southeast Urbana should have greater representation in government than people in other areas of the city.
- The new Urbana ward map was drawn to give west Urbana a disproportionate amount of influence in cty government.
The U.S. Constitution requires that districts (or wards) be drawn according to population, based on the most recent census. Representation based on population, not voter turn-out, is a constitutional right. At-large election is a legal way to circumvent this constitutional princple.
The assertion that west Urbana is over-represented is completely false. Forty-three percent of the population of Urbana lives south of University Avenue and west of Race Street. Three of seven council members -- forty-three percent -- live south of University and west of Race.
The little thread that this weak argument hangs on is that a fourth council member, Laura Huth, lives on Race Street rather than farther east in her ward. Her predecessor, Michael Pollock, lives one block east of her, but the at-large advocates never complained during his eight years of service that his place of residence threw democracy askew.
Could it be because Laura Huth is a progressive woman?
The new ward map increases the likelihood that only two council members will live in the west Urbana neighborhood after the spring 2005 election. Based on census population, the new map draws Council Member Danielle Chynoweth into Ward 2 and extends her current Ward 4 east all the way to Anderson Street. The way the map is drawn, four of the seven council members could be living east of Vine Street after the next election.
So what is this really all about? During the re-map earlier this year, Mayor Tod Satterthwaite said he wanted to create more Republican seats on the city council which currently has a poltiical balance of 6 Democrats and 1 Republican. At-large elections increase the likelihood of electing another Republican.
At-large voting would also create a seat for Milton Otto (D-Ward 7) to run from his new address without having to run against Laura Huth. Earlier this year, Otto bought a house two blocks from Huth and asked the city council to change the ward map by splitting Huth's precinct and ward so that Otto would not have to run against her. He had the choice of buying a house in one of two wards -- 7 or 4 where he would face no incumbent. But, he wanted to have his cake and eat it too. When the City
Council refused to change the ward map to accommodate one person, the Mayor suggested changing the entire form of government, just to accommodate one person.
In any city, in any context, at-large elections are not progressive. In this particular case, the idea is especially objectionable. Consider these arguments:
- At-large voting dilutes minority representation.
- At-large voting makes money a key issue in every campaign. This proposal would create two seats that can be bought and creates the need for expensive media campaigns rather than the grassroots, candidate-to-voter campaigns that we have in ward races. Is the cause of good government served when average citizens cannot run for local government because they will have to spend $15,000 and campaign city-wide?
- It is wrong to change a form of government just because of dissatisfaction with who won the last election.
- It is wrong to change a form of government to accommodate the political aspirations of one individual who wants to move out of his ward but doesn't want to run against an incumbent.
Advocates of at-large voting could put the question on the November ballot without support from the City Council if they file petitions for the ballot question no later than August 16. They need to obtain only 432 valid signatures to place this question on the ballot. This would be easy to obtain.
Changing the form of government in response to a political moment is risky business. If the measure is placed on the ballot and passes, the at-large voting system will be with us long after the current office holders have retired. Come to the July 26 City Council meeting to voice your concern.
Let's stop this ill-advised, politically motivated mistake now. Come to council meeting, Monday, July 26th at 7:30 PM at 400 S. Vine Street to voice your opposition. |
This work is in the public domain |
