I'm from Massachusetts, where the dem legislature routinely laughs at initiative petitions.
BINDING petitions! On Mar 10, 1:19 pm, Jonathan Ashley <[email protected]> wrote: > Don't you just love it when government officials listen to the people.<g> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > * > Texas City Ignores Anti-Camera Voter Petition* > /Port Lavaca, Texas attempts to avoid voter referendum on red light > camera program./ > > Port Lavaca Mayor Jack WhitlowOfficials in Port Lavaca, Texas decided > yesterday that they would ignore an initiative petition calling for the > 12,000 residents to decide the fate of the red light cameras in a May > election (view petition <http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/33/3367.asp>). > Signatures on the petition were certified as valid shortly after being > submitted in January and a special city council meeting was scheduled to > place the measure on the ballot, but the city decided against holding > the vote. The group Port Lavaca Citizens Against Red Light Cameras > <http://www.facebook.com/#%21/group.php?gid=352118962300> believes the > city is violating the law. > > "We complied with all requirements of the city charter regarding charter > amendments," initiative organizer Dwayne Buehring told TheNewspaper. "We > turned these in three months ago. Apparently, it was an orchestrated > effort on their part to put it off until the last minute so we had no > recourse to get it on the May ballot." > > Monday is the deadline for an item to be part of the May elections. > Under Texas and municipal law, the council vote to place a charter > amendment before voters is considered a ministerial duty not subject to > the discretion of individual council members. > > "The council shall submit a proposed charter amendment to the voters for > their approval at an election if the submission is supported by a > petition signed by a number of qualified voters of the municipality > equal to at least five percent of the number of qualified voters," > Section 14.17 of Port Lavaca's city charter states. > > Mayor Jack Whitlow explained that he pulled the item on the advice of > the city attorney who argued that "health and safety" matters are not > subject to the initiative process. Whitlow also cited a lawsuit filed > against the city by a front group for Redflex Traffic Systems, the > Australian company in charge of the camera program. Whitlow suggested > the vote might be delayed until November. > > "It makes the whole deal look shady," Buehring said. "They know that > these cameras will be overturned, and they're scared of that. They'll be > put in the same place as Houston. So they're just going to run and hide, > violate the charter and violate the law. It's been very clear they love > the money." > > Red light cameras and speed cameras have been put to a public vote on > fifteen occasions, including votes in Houston, College Station and > Baytown. Automated enforcement has never survived a vote > <http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/27/2769.asp>. > -- > "Why is it so hard to understand that the reason the first ten > Amendments --- commonly known as the Bill of Rights --- are trampled > underfoot by politicos and bureaucrats is that the Founding Fathers > neglected to provide a suitably harsh penalty for it?" --- L. Neil Smith > > Learn How To Protect Your Identity And Prevent Identity Theft > <http://8f7ab0ybg8rx5p6mloffi9yw8t.hop.clickbank.net/> -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
