1961 -- A lesson in Hickory's History - Hickory’s leadership in the 1960s was definitely not "all of one mind" and they seemed to never hold back in voicing their distinctive opinions. The decision to change the voting structure in Hickory was not changed through Unanimous Consent. The similarity that will be shown is that, like many issues we have seen lately with the current Council, there was no integrity of process. The end justified the means. The system changed through political maneuvering and did not allow the people’s will to even be taken into consideration. If the people are going to have their wishes suppressed to appease the desires of a small minority, then why should anyone expect the governing structure to be successful, when it isn’t going to have the support of a citizenry that they constantly undercut.
1967 - How we got where we are today - The different wards of Hickory have a multitude of socio-economic and cultural differences and this diversity needs to be and should be represented. Just because someone doesn’t represent a notion, idea, and/or mindset you understand doesn’t mean that it is invalid or radical. Different layers of thought lead to more creativity and thus ingenuity and innovation. Most of you will see past the interjection of the "One Man, One vote" issue. That has to do with apportionment and this issue had nothing to do with apportionment. If we were/are all the same, then why even have wards? They knew this. It was about control.
Look at the vote and it relates to much of what we see today. Wards 3, 4, and 5 voted against the At-Large system. That is Kenworth, Ridgeview, and West Hickory. Wards 1, 2, and 6 along with the Mayor voted for the change. That is Historic Hickory, Northeast Hickory, and Viewmont. Do you see the pattern?
The final thought that I would like to leave you with in relation to this article is the travesty that people weren’t allowed to vote on this issue. Representative Poovey wanted to make that happen, but Representative Mullinax talked about Home Rule. This is a technicality of words, because this wasn’t about changing a budget or some other administrative issue. This was about the structure of how people vote being changed by the people who are recipients of those votes. Hickory’s Charter is its Constitution and it should have been representative of the wishes of the different segments of the city. As you can see it wasn’t a cut and dried issue and thus the citizen’s will should have been taken into consideration after debating the issue thoroughly… Hmmm… The more things change. The more they remain the same!!!
The current City Council could do the right thing and schedule this Special Election and let the citizens debate this issue and have the vote and maybe rekindle some interest in Hickory's politics and governance.
Let the People Vote!!!
But if the Council won’t do the right thing, then please
Sign the Petition!!!
The History of At-Large voting in Hickory - The HDR articles and Council Minutes Documents
Hal Row's First Talk - CEG discussion about Ward Specific Voting - The Interview
Help Bring Fair Representation Back to the City of Hickory
3 comments:
I would like to remind Council members, and, in this case, specifically the mayor that we are not Austin, TX. Likewise, we are not Chattanooga, TN, or Greenville, SC, or any of the other places they have traveled to recently to get ideas. WE ARE HICKORY!!! If we wanted what other elected officials have done to their towns we'd either move their, or elect them here.
The truth is this - YOU ran for office. YOU asked us, the citizens, to put our faith and trust in YOU. We did. And now YOU go everywhere else you possibly can to try to bring back ideas that will make YOU appear to be working to ch age things for the better. My question is this, since YOU sought out public office, where are YOUR ideas?
To the mayor - a square peg doesn't fit into a round hole, and Austin, TX reasoning doesn't necessarily fit Hickory's situation.
To our elected officials - please stop LOOKING for ideas/solutions elsewhere, and start LISTENING to the people right here in Hickory. You might just be surprised at just how capable some of us actually are at thinking for ourselves.
I find it telling that the people of the City of Hickory are being forced to follow a process to petition Council for a change that didn’t manifest itself in the same manner. I likewise think, listening to Billy and Joe that it is possible to find common ground on all issues if we are willing to work together to find them, realizing that no one person has the answer to everything.
The fear I have as this process matriculates is that once the matter is on the ballot, it is being decided not on the issues and rhetoric of 1967, but of 2012. Because as the Mayor is rife to point out to anyone that will listen, he is against this issue and he is all in favor of his consensus ideology and keeping a firm grip on the controls. He is also quick to point out how ‘well’ the system currently works under the present configuration. Those of Joe’s age and younger, who don’t remember what was, would have to possess his tenacity to discover the premises by which we have come to the present system we have. Listening to him provide the historical context of what transpired in March of 1967, certainly the words, ‘by hook or by crook’ would appear apt.
The decent thing here would be for council to draft, read, and ultimately adopt an ordinance changing the system back to what it was prior to March 7th, 1967. It wasn’t put on a ballot then for adoption, it shouldn’t require referendum to do so this time. Of course, I did use the words “decent thing” so the stumbling block of process is once again formed into the construction of what’s right. Odd though, don’t you think? How ‘due process’ can be short-cut depending on the issue at hand, as it was in 1967 and yet, as with this petition, a draconian insistence on adherence is the rule of the day. As we cast about with our gaze, we can see that same applicability with other matters as well. I won’t mention them, since they are not relevant to this piece. But they’re very easy to see once your eyes are open.
Realpolitik: The reality is that three precincts basically control elections locally. People complain sometimes about NW Hickory getting their way, but the fact is THEY VOTE. They are going to have to vote to have a more fair and representative system. Will it happen or will they prefer the status quo? That is the question.
Will other precincts wake up and turn out in numbers to wrest more power from the City? I'd like to hope so, but will have to see to believe.
Post a Comment