Winnebago County board redistricting plan clears first hurdle
In the next step toward reducing its size, the Winnebago County Judiciary and Public Safety Committee has approved a map that redistricts the county with 36 county board supervisors instead of 38. The plan, approved by 4-1 - with member Bill Wingren voted against it - now moves to the full county board for its consideration.
According to the Oshkosh Northwestern, Wingren voted against the plan because he is unsupportive of the board's efforts to "minimally downsize before citizens could request a countywide referendum" to reduce the board size by half. Two weeks ago that citizen group - Citizens United to Transform the Winnebago County Board Committee - filed a lawsuit after the county clerk's office, under recommendation from the county's corporation counsel, refused to accept petitions containing thousands of signatures to place such a referendum on the spring 2007 ballot. The county board knew the petition drive was underway and in September, essentially cut the group off at the pass by voting to reduce itself - something many believe was symbolic only - a mere attempt to stop the citizens from having a voice in their own government. Others, however, believe the supervisors had the best interests of county residents at heart and that citizens are better represented by more supervisors rather than fewer.
Under the proposed map, the following supervisors would challenge each other in the April 2008 election: Steven Arne and Chuck Farrey in the towns of Vinland and Oshkosh; Connie Drexler and Robert Warnke in the city of Oshkosh; Donna Lohry and Claud Thompson in the city of Oshkosh; Jerry Finch and County Board Vice Chairman John Schaidler in the town of Menasha; William Pollnow and Tom Widener in the city of Neenah; and Paul Eisen and Joe Hotynski in the city of Menasha.
Despite the fact that I believe the board size should probably be reduced even further than two members, this redistricted map, if approved by the full board, will prove to bring about some interesting results at election time. After all, some of the supervisors pitted against each other have served for many terms with few to no challengers during their county board careers. I feel certain that with a smaller county board in the works, even if only by two, we will see some spirited debate and people actually having to work at keeping their jobs during election time rather than skating through unchallenged and, therefore, virtually unscathed. It may be even more interesting to see how the supervisors facing automatic challenges in 2008 vote on this plan.
According to the Oshkosh Northwestern, Wingren voted against the plan because he is unsupportive of the board's efforts to "minimally downsize before citizens could request a countywide referendum" to reduce the board size by half. Two weeks ago that citizen group - Citizens United to Transform the Winnebago County Board Committee - filed a lawsuit after the county clerk's office, under recommendation from the county's corporation counsel, refused to accept petitions containing thousands of signatures to place such a referendum on the spring 2007 ballot. The county board knew the petition drive was underway and in September, essentially cut the group off at the pass by voting to reduce itself - something many believe was symbolic only - a mere attempt to stop the citizens from having a voice in their own government. Others, however, believe the supervisors had the best interests of county residents at heart and that citizens are better represented by more supervisors rather than fewer.
Under the proposed map, the following supervisors would challenge each other in the April 2008 election: Steven Arne and Chuck Farrey in the towns of Vinland and Oshkosh; Connie Drexler and Robert Warnke in the city of Oshkosh; Donna Lohry and Claud Thompson in the city of Oshkosh; Jerry Finch and County Board Vice Chairman John Schaidler in the town of Menasha; William Pollnow and Tom Widener in the city of Neenah; and Paul Eisen and Joe Hotynski in the city of Menasha.
Despite the fact that I believe the board size should probably be reduced even further than two members, this redistricted map, if approved by the full board, will prove to bring about some interesting results at election time. After all, some of the supervisors pitted against each other have served for many terms with few to no challengers during their county board careers. I feel certain that with a smaller county board in the works, even if only by two, we will see some spirited debate and people actually having to work at keeping their jobs during election time rather than skating through unchallenged and, therefore, virtually unscathed. It may be even more interesting to see how the supervisors facing automatic challenges in 2008 vote on this plan.
posted by Cheryl Hentz at 12:43 AM
2 Comments:
One citizen at a board meeting a few months ago stood up and stated that the reason his Supervisor in a rural district never faced opposition was because he did a great job and everyone liked him.
I don't think we can assume unopposed supervisors are held unaccountable, or that they are ineffective. In fact, in some cases, it may be the opposite!
Babblemur, that citizen may be right, or it may be just their opinion and not the real reason for their supervisor going unchallenged all these years. We don't know.
Who knows why people don't run for office - especially at the county board level. Could it be because they are not interested in or don't understand county government? Could it be because most of the committees on which supervisors are required to serve meet during daytime hours, making it impossible for many who work a fulltime job to attend? Is it that they don't want to get that involved but aren't necessarily thrilled with what their supervisor is doing? Or maybe they don't even know who their supervisor is. You'd be amazed to know how many people fall into that category. Bottom line, there are any number of reasons why most of the 38 county board supervisors are rarely or ever challenged.
But challenges are good. Don't they weed out those who don't deserve their position while at the same time (hopefully) making the incumbents who are effective and deserving of their job even better? (Although I don't think that works in ALL cases, and one need look not much further than the 53rd Assembly District to see that.) Just because someone was elected or appointed once should not guarantee them a seat for the rest of their natural life.
Post a Comment
<< Home