Measure V: Local Control vs. Expediency
Re “Not So Fast on Measure V,” Editorial, Feb. 24:
Your analysis of Measure V was woefully shortsighted and politically indefensible. You prefer to expound upon Treasurer-Tax Collector John M.W. Moorlach’s dismissive position that Measure V is nothing more than an exercise in political expediency. For some reason, you mention in only cursory fashion the reason it was advanced by a majority of the Board of Supervisors. That is, people in this county should not tolerate someone from Sacramento picking their board member when such issues as an airport, roads and revenue enhancements all involve heated debate. The only way to provide citizens the right to vote is by changing the county to a charter government.
Instead, you think the solution to the problem should be dealt with as part of a larger or thought-out charter initiative. You ignore the fact that there were five public forums, and Supervisor Todd Spitzer did what every elected official should do: provide constituents a greater voice given that he may leave midterm. Did you ever think that the only issue on the table is providing and protecting for 3rd District residents the right to vote? You further ignore the dismal performance of Measure T, which was the last charter initiative you apparently want to resurrect. It was packaged for the public with such a mixed bag of ideas that it was impossible to please everyone. Instead, what is more politically feasible and just plain prudent is building a charter county slowly.
Vote “yes” on Measure V.
Tom Mullen
Citizens for Local Control
*
Measure V allows the citizens of Orange County to vote to fill a vacancy on the Board of Supervisors, nothing more and nothing less. You complain that it does too much. It creates a charter county. You also complain that it does too little. It does not include all the provisions of a charter.
Orange County had a comprehensive charter proposal that voters rejected in 1996. The criticism was that it included too much.
The critics say Measure V is too little, too much. I say Measure V is just right. Let the voters decide.
Mike Whipple
Laguna Niguel
*
It is unfortunate that a good measure is being “spun” as politically expedient. Measure V offers our community the right of a special election when a vacancy occurs on the Board of Supervisors. In order to do that, it is my understanding that the county must change to a charter county. I am in full support of individual’s rights to vote to fill vacancies when they occur.
It is our fundamental right as citizens to choose our own representatives, and it is wholly inappropriate in a county this size that political appointments be made in Sacramento. Let’s stop spinning the issue for once and let each community elect its own representative. Vote “yes” on Measure V.
Manuel J. Ramirez
Cofounder, Hispanic 100,
Past president, Hispanic
Chamber of Commerce
*
It is in the best interest of the county that we maintain local control, and Measure V begins the process with one critical issue, the right of citizens to elect their supervisors. If there is a vacancy, people can become voiceless if the governor drags his feet in filling it. That is unacceptable.
The best path to a charter county is by a careful, step-by-step process until all citizen, business and political groups come to a consensus on policies or reforms. Let’s retain self-determination for Orange County, and Measure V begins the process.
Mimi Walters
Council member,
City of Laguna Niguel