Interesting Reasons for Supporting All At-Large

Frequent contributor Dave Churchman submitted this.  With the issue of redistricting needing to be addressed this year, some on the council may push for an all at-large system.  This idea has been brought up twice in the past, and shot down by citizens.  Below are his thoughts:

At Large verses District representation

Whenever there is a discussion on redistricting in Puyallup, nerves get tested and blood pressures go up.  Last time it came up two years ago, it was simply a mean convenient distasteful ploy by Turner and Brouillet to boot Deputy Mayor George Dill off the council. Thankfully, the public smelled a rat and embarrassed a majority of the council to shelve the plan.

Now the council is bringing the matter back on the basis that redistricting is mandated by the new census results. 

Sadly, George is now gone, but you can expect some dirty politics by the gang of four on the council to manipulate electoral boundaries for their own benefit or as a legacy for their hand picked successors.  Or they may go for all At Large favored by Turner and her igneous pet rock.  

I am going against the trend and stating my support for all At Large representation on the council. Why? Having lived in District 2 for the past 35 years, I can honestly say that as a District 2 resident, District 2 council members have not represented this District well. Turner and the Brouillets have dominated District 2 in the past two decades and have simply been a disgrace. The outlook for the future looking at the sole candidate running for office does not give much hope for improvement. 

District 3 has hardly fared any better in recent times with Deal, and now Boyle. 

So, I would relish the concept of good qualified candidates who currently live in other Districts representing my community’s concerns. Over the past year, surprisingly, I have found more in common with Don Malloy in District 3 (taxes, public safety, fireworks, veteran’s issues etc).   

In summary, an all At Large council is fine by me. Candidates hate it as it is harder work and more expensive. The cherry on the cake is the opportunity for my neighbors and myself to vote Boyle off the council in 2013.

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under Council Meetings, Letters

4 responses to “Interesting Reasons for Supporting All At-Large

  1. Steven Shores

    Dave, you can still have a great enfluence on ousting any candidate outside your own district. Or, to say it another way, you can still have a great enfluence on getting candidates outside your won district elected by helping with their campaign in any way you can. And there are many ways to help. District I residents have done that in the past and will be doing it again this election. A total at-large council will do nothing but ensure only the well known or heavily funded will win. That’s not a choice to me. We should redraw the lines based on the census and be done with it. Eliminating local representation is not being asked for by citizens. It’s not an issue being debated by the masses. Here’s the self-serving pattern of the issue and its motion makers/seconders.
    • 3/6/06 – K. Turner/M. Brouillet 1st reading – pass 5-1
    • March – June 2006 – Citizens revolt and a single citizen personally gathers 1,700 signatures against.
    • 6/5/06 – 2nd reading – fail 0-5
    • 4/21/09 – K. Turner/T. Brouillet 1st reading – pass 4-3
    • 5/5/09 – Citizens revolt after a meeting at library, 27 citizens speak against. None in favor. T. Brouillet/G. Dill amend ordinance to a reasonable district map – pass 7-0
    • 7/28/09 – K. Turner/T. Brouillet move to put on ballot – fail 3-4

  2. Robert Lord

    I could not disagree more with Mr. Churchman’s assessment and reasons for caving into the manipulative impulses of Turner and her hand maidens.

    Yes! districts 2 and 3 have not had representatives who act like representatives in the recent past but the same could be said for district 1 until the citizens woke up and fought hard to elect a representative who had more in mind than personal and special interests.

    Don’t give up just yet, districts 2 and 3. You must fight harder and smarter to overcome the corruption that has griped this city for so long.

    • Dave Churchman

      Bob;
      District 2 is in trouble, deep trouble. Unless something happens in the next 10 days at the Auditor’s Office, we will be automatically exchanging Turner’s “glove puppet” for a Boyle “ditto-head”.
      Dave

  3. Robert Lord

    Dave,
    I can just hear Turner and her hand maidens cackling after reading these comments and using them to justify their agenda to attempt to change our system of representative government to the all-at-large format.

    With patience and determination the citizens of this city can overcome these self indulgent non-representatives. They may, as you say, attempt to substitute one glove puppet with a bobble-head but the citizens will see through their sham politics just as they did during the fiasco in 2009.

    Patience, patience.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s