THE CHARTER STUDY #1- MINORITY DECISION

Posting on a weekend  these two blogs which contain material of importance for this town  may be an error in judgment since  readership falls off on those days. I hope   that enough people was take the time to integrate the data in to their own consideration on how to improve Plainfield and send any comments to the Charter Commission.

Yes, I did make a pitch before the members of the Charter Study Commission regarding some of the deficiencies that I feel impact upon the present city charter’s appropriateness in this the 21^st Century. I am flattered that I have a pitch-person in Plaintalker II (Bernice) to pave the way for this exercise.

Although I plan to post various subjects on the Charter regarding problems and changes that I perceive needed not only in the hope that the Commission will consider them, but also that members of the general public might also understand my concerns. 

For it is the public that will have the ultimate say in any changes that may be considered.  The public needs as much information as they can possibly get.

First of all we have to deal with two sets of statistics from Union County Board of Elections one listed as  “Affiliation Statistics” and the other the ”Election History Summary Report of the General Election 11/06/12”.  What is difficult to understand is that the report on the election notes that there were on that date 37700 eligible voters in Plainfield. The Voter Registration Summary which is broken down into party affiliation  lists a total of 22555  of which 12869 are Democrats and can vote in their Primary; 930 Republicans, 6 miscellaneous , and 8750 Unaffiliated  and therefore have no voice in the all important primary election.

For all practical purposes there are 12869 voters that determine Plainfield’s political fate. The difference between the above numbers and 37700 probably represents the results of the drive to register voters before the last election. And only 15363 actually voted.

Don’t you find it disturbing that only 40% of those that could take part in a Presidential election exercised their right and obligation? The other 60% have no bitching rights when things go wrong; they have conceded the right of rule to a minority.  In an off year election the numbers that vote are much lower often reaching between 10% and 15%.

There are several reasons why the number of voters is an issue; one which I will go into later is the political division of the city and the makeup of the council. The other, which people do not think about, is the issue of a recall referendum.

Our Charter calls for a petition signed by 33.3% of the registered voters are required to initiate a recall election. One Third of 37700 are 12567 signatures; that is more than ¾ of those that voted; an unrealistic expectation so for all practical purposes there is no mechanism to recall a sitting official. Even the Faulkner Act’s requirement of 25% of the registered voters would amount to almost 9500 or 62% of those who considered that they should vote.

If we adopted a Faulkner Charter we will be bound by the 25% provision of that act. To have an effective recall mechanism which probably would never be used we must make the minimum number of signatures to be about 25% of the total that voted at the last general election. That would amount to 10% of the registered voters or near 4000 names. This number would be difficult but manageable number to obtain. 

Without a practical goal any recall election will remain a figure of imagination and not a vital part of democracy.

With these figures as a background; tomorrow I shall propose a restructuring of the ward configuration and the Council membership.