Override Frank White, and let voters decide the fate of Jackson County term limits
The Jackson County Legislature has a chance to show its faith in county voters Monday by putting a series of charter changes on the November ballot.
Those changes — including term limits for county officials — were headed to the ballot until last Thursday, when County Executive Frank White vetoed the ballot ordinance.
We trust the electorate more than White does. The legislature should override the veto Monday, and let voters decide.
In his veto message, White said the ballot questions include too many separate issues. “By law,” he wrote, “when issues are referred to voters, they must be submitted separately so that voters may decide each issue upon its own merits.”
That concern is easily dismissed. Charter changes are grouped on the ballot all the time.
In 2010, Jackson County voters considered a different series of charter amendments. Those changes — including restrictions on the power of the executive, ethics reform, changes in discrimination language and organizational adjustments — were all contained in one comprehensive ballot question.
No one objected to combining the issues then. No one should reasonably complain now.
And in this case, there are seven questions on the ballot. That seems a reasonable division of issues into separate categories for voters to consider.
White says he’s upset that parts of the package include raises for elected officials. To get term limits, a voter will also have to approve higher salaries.
There will be plenty of time to debate raises for people at the courthouse. The salary increases may be an argument for opposing the ballot measures. Linking them to term limits may be as well.
But they are not arguments for keeping the plan off the ballot. Voters are quite capable of sorting out the pros and cons of ballot measures, and they should make the decision, not Frank White or a minority of the county’s legislature.
The county executive’s veto also claims the ballot language is confusing, and parts of the proposal are contradictory. Those concerns appear overblown, but if small technical changes are needed Monday to clean up the language, the legislature has the ability to do just that.
Finally, the county executive argues that the term limits in the ballot measures are not enforceable. We don’t agree, but again the language is fixable. The intent of the legislature is clear: Limit the terms of the county executive, the legislators, the prosecutor and the sheriff, beginning next year.
Term limits are one reason White opposes the charter changes. There are other factors: The proposals would transfer control of the jail from the executive to the sheriff, for example. Other provisions would curtail additional executive powers. The county executive would have to be current on tax obligations.
If White, or anyone else, thinks the ballot measures would harm the county, let them make the case. Jackson Countians want and deserve a full examination of how their government is run. That’s what campaigns are for.
White’s veto precludes that discussion and locks in the status quo. That’s why county lawmakers should override his veto — to let the voters decide.