A UUCC Member’s Perspective on Ballot Questions
Fellow Members and Friends,
State Question 1 is a state constitutional amendment that allows the state legislature to increase, decrease or add to items submitted by the governor in the budget bill beginning in FY2024 (after Hogan leaves office) as long as they don’t increase the total amount requested by the governor.
I’m voting for this, but would have loved it a whole lot more if they hadn’t delayed the effective date until after Hogan leaves office. If this bill had applied to Hogan and what he regularly does with the budget bill, it would have been a great public service. At least, it provides a future legislature with a level playing field.
State Question 2 just asks us whether we favor permitting sports betting to provide funds for education.
I expect that bit about saying where the money would go will get it a favorable vote from the voters. However, I remember the games the state played with the previous lottery question and I’ll either vote against this one or skip it. I’m all for aiding public schools, but oppose diverting revenue derived from such gimmicks to aid any other person or thing.
County Question A amends the charter to remove specific dates that could cause problems with early candidate filing deadlines in 2022 and allows the Council to set the dates for drawing the new Council districts that would be required after the census.
Unless we want to take a chance that there will be no conflict with the filing deadlines, an affirmative vote on this is essential. Candidates need to know what the shape of their district will look like. (I can get more specific about the legislation on which this question is based.)
County Question B amends the charter to limit the terms of members of most county boards to three years (rather than five).
Apparently, the county is having problems getting some board vacancies filled because too many people don’t want to commit to serving as long as five years. (This doesn’t change the two-term limit on board service.)
This is fine with me. As one who was a prime pusher in the distant past in getting that two-term limit on board service, I’m pleased that they left that alone. Previous to that, some people were serving on county boards for over 15 or 20 years and seemed like they owned the board and controlled a lot of the related action by the county.
County Question C amends the charter to add many categories about which the county cannot legally discriminate in employment.
I’ll vote for it. I believe this essentially mirrors what the county anti-discrimination law already says.