Donate
Subscribe
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2000
1999
2003
January
May
September
|
|
Printer Friendly
May 2003
Not THIS Charter for Belton
By Mike Ferguson
Search for more articles by or about this columnist
Text of the letter to the editor by Mike Ferguson on the Belton City Charter.
As with most any political document, there is both good and bad in the proposed Belton
City Charter that will be voted on February 4th. Tragically, the same cannot be
said about the campaign surrounding this document. The accusations, character
assassination attempts and predictions have hurt our community and have
distracted us from looking at the pros and cons of the Charter itself.
When we vote on February 4th, we should vote on the
document based on what it is and what it is not. Unfortunately, this charter is
basically a blueprint for unlimited city government in Belton and will not
improve the community one bit.
Yes, as its proponents claim, the proposed charter
provides for groups of citizens the ability for initiative, referendum and
recall of elected officials. These are good things, but the inclusion of them
in city government are not the automatic accountability that some claim they
are. Initiative and recall do not even come close to outweighing the negative
aspects of this charter.
The problem with the document is the fact that there
is nothing in it designed to define and protect our individual and property
rights against government. Not one section, not one line, not one word of this
charter addresses individual or property rights of citizens or specific groups
like businesses or churches.
In fact, the charter goes to great lengths to do just
the opposite and make certain that City Hall's power is unlimited. The proposed
charter clearly defines and protects the government's ability to regulate every
aspect of our businesses and lives with no recourse from individuals.
Section 2.1 claims all power for the city that is
defined by state law. That is to be expected and is appropriate. Section 2.2,
however, makes the claim to unlimited authority for the government: "The
powers of the city shall be liberally construed. The specific mention of a
particular power in this Charter shall not be construed as limiting the powers
of the city."
Buried deep within the proposal (in Section 14.1) is
the most far-reaching power grab and most frightening aspect of this
ill-written document. I will allow the document to speak for itself: "The
City Council shall have the power by ordinance to license, tax and regulate all
businesses, occupations, professions, vocations, activities or things
whatsoever..."
Nothing in the proposed charter balances this power
grab to protect citizens, business or churches from abuse of government.
Remember, Section 2.2 demands that the powers of the government are to be
"liberally construed" and the charter insists that City Hall's power
should not be limited. Nothing is written to even acknowledge, let alone
protect, your individual rights, your property rights or the autonomy of
businesses and churches from the government's regulatory power.
This proposed charter creates extensive powers of
government. It makes no attempt to protect your rights from big government. On
the contrary, this proposed charter actually encourages big government.
This charter effort was borne out of anger by a few
and now impacts our entire community. The personal hatred, quests for vengeance
and attempts to assassinate character will continue long after February 4th
regardless of whether or not this proposed charter is approved by voters. We
will have plenty of time to debate the motivations of the primary charter
proponents, which are suspect at best, and sort through all the dishonest
claims and mailings that are circulating through Belton.
Belton should become a charter
city at some point. However, we should take that step for the right reasons and
when we can do so with level heads and emotions driving the effort. The best
thing for Belton right now is for us to go to the polls on Tuesday, February
4th and vote NO on this charter.
|