You may or may not have noticed several letters in the Recorder about the Charter’s 7-7 Citizens Initiative. And, like many, you probably aren’t quite understanding what it’s all about.
Here’s the scoop.
First, the difference between the citizens initiative (7-7) and citizens referendum (7-8):
The citizens referendum (7-8) is a petition process that challenges a City Council vote and brings it to the voters. This is what voters voted on last November (Question 1) when the committee wanted to make a citizens referendum harder by increasing the number of signatures required. The voters voted to keep 7-8 as it was because they didn’t want the signature requirement increased, making it harder for citizens to have a role in the democratic process.
The citizens initiative (7-7) is a petition that allows citizens to bring forward something the council hasn’t voted on. Therefore, it doesn’t challenge the council’s vote, it is merely a proposal.
Second, the problem and what the citizens are requesting:
The problem is that with the way the 7-7 (citizens initiative) presently reads, the number of signatures required is very high, requires two separate gatherings of signatures and takes over a year. But, most importantly, it does not reflect what voters asked for at the ballot last November, which was to not have it be harder for their voices to be heard. Citizens want to be part of our democracy government and are requesting that the council put it on their April agenda and come up with language that makes 7-7 and 7-8 similar in process and signatures, so it is easier for voters to understand and participate in our democratic government.
I listened to the (lack of) discussion during the Feb. 9 Appointments and Ordinances Committee meeting about Charter 7-7 and I found Councilor Daniel Guin to be very condescending.
He references 7-8, which was Question 1 on last November’s ballot and states, “One of the impressions is that the public wanted to leave it the way it was … This was a divided topic, the public spoke … and I believe our best course would be is ‘to listen’ and leave 7-7 with no change.”
In regard to Question 1, I think we all know that people didn’t vote for “no change” because they actually wanted “no change.”Voters voted no on Question 1 because they were against making it harder for citizens to have a voice. Also, the referendum process (7-8) wasn’t “broken,” so it didn’t need fixing. However, the 7-7 is broken and does need fixing.
The fact that there was no discussion and that it took them less than three minutes to come to a conclusion is ridiculous. There really is no reason to discourage citizens initiatives. Is there really any harm in a citizen having an idea or proposal they want to bring forth in front of the council? We are a community and should be working together as such, instead of making it impossible for citizens to have their voices heard.
How you can help:
Email the City Council and tell them to put Charter 7-7 on the agenda for their April meeting and to streamline the process for 7-7 and 7-8 by making the requirements the same for both.
Dawn Morin lives in Greenfield.