Yesterday's election in SRQ
Yesterday we had an election in Sarasota County and in the City of Sarasota.
For the first time we used optical scanning machines rather than touch screen voting. Somehow it felt more satisfying to put pen to paper on the large ballot sheet, rather than touching a computer screen. And now we have a paper trail in the event of disputed votes. Yeah for delayed progress - we were using optical scanners years ago in Massachusetts.
I remember the first time I was able to vote. The voting age was 21 in England at the time, so I would have cast my first ballot in the General Election of March 1966. My constituency, Bristol Central, was solidly Labour, and a Mr. Palmer (Arthur?) won the seat for Labour. The turnout was 69%. We voted on a paper ballot marking it in pencil with a large “X” for our preferred candidate.
I’ve voted in every election since then (including in American primaries) except for the period 1976 - 1984 when I lived in these United States but was not yet a citizen. The day after I became a citizen I registered to vote.
There were no candidates on our ballot yesterday. Instead we were responding (in the City) to 12 referendum questions.
The City and the County voted quite decisively to slow down development. The newspaper this morning described the voters as “angry”, but I disagree.
We voted in favour of a “super-majority ( 4 out of 5 ) votes by County Commissioners to approve certain changes in land use density. Similarly in the City we voted in favour of such a super-majority in order for changes to our Comprehensive Plan to take effect.
We voted in favour of a maximum $200 individual limit for contributions to City Commission candidates, and that those candidates should hand deliver a list of their contributors not later than 5:00 p.m. on the sixth day before elections. A good call for transparency.
We also voted that only natural persons, and not corporations or business entities could make contributions to City Commission candidates. (I voted against this - I don’t mind businesses giving political money, just so long as I know who they are!)
And there was an interesting vote in favour of election practices for City Commissioner elections. We shall henceforth vote for our candidates in order of preference.
That means that if my first choice does not get enough votes to be elected, my vote is transferred to my second choice. Good stuff this - they’ve been doing it in Australia for years!
And then there were two fascinating votes. In the County election we voted to continue an additional 1% in sales tax for the next 15 years. This revenue is devoted to school building and renovation, road improvements, public transit, park, beaches, libraries, and the history shows that it has been used for those purposes and not diverted to other projects.
So in effect, we voted NOT to reduce a tax. Wow!
But we turned down a $16 million City Bond issue to partly finance a new Stadium to be used, amongst others, by the Cincinnati Reds as a Spring Training facility. This proposed bond issue failed by the narrowest of margins (225 votes I believe).
So, were we angry voters yesterday? No, we were thoughtful, and I believe wise!
For the first time we used optical scanning machines rather than touch screen voting. Somehow it felt more satisfying to put pen to paper on the large ballot sheet, rather than touching a computer screen. And now we have a paper trail in the event of disputed votes. Yeah for delayed progress - we were using optical scanners years ago in Massachusetts.
I remember the first time I was able to vote. The voting age was 21 in England at the time, so I would have cast my first ballot in the General Election of March 1966. My constituency, Bristol Central, was solidly Labour, and a Mr. Palmer (Arthur?) won the seat for Labour. The turnout was 69%. We voted on a paper ballot marking it in pencil with a large “X” for our preferred candidate.
I’ve voted in every election since then (including in American primaries) except for the period 1976 - 1984 when I lived in these United States but was not yet a citizen. The day after I became a citizen I registered to vote.
There were no candidates on our ballot yesterday. Instead we were responding (in the City) to 12 referendum questions.
The City and the County voted quite decisively to slow down development. The newspaper this morning described the voters as “angry”, but I disagree.
We voted in favour of a “super-majority ( 4 out of 5 ) votes by County Commissioners to approve certain changes in land use density. Similarly in the City we voted in favour of such a super-majority in order for changes to our Comprehensive Plan to take effect.
We voted in favour of a maximum $200 individual limit for contributions to City Commission candidates, and that those candidates should hand deliver a list of their contributors not later than 5:00 p.m. on the sixth day before elections. A good call for transparency.
We also voted that only natural persons, and not corporations or business entities could make contributions to City Commission candidates. (I voted against this - I don’t mind businesses giving political money, just so long as I know who they are!)
And there was an interesting vote in favour of election practices for City Commissioner elections. We shall henceforth vote for our candidates in order of preference.
That means that if my first choice does not get enough votes to be elected, my vote is transferred to my second choice. Good stuff this - they’ve been doing it in Australia for years!
And then there were two fascinating votes. In the County election we voted to continue an additional 1% in sales tax for the next 15 years. This revenue is devoted to school building and renovation, road improvements, public transit, park, beaches, libraries, and the history shows that it has been used for those purposes and not diverted to other projects.
So in effect, we voted NOT to reduce a tax. Wow!
But we turned down a $16 million City Bond issue to partly finance a new Stadium to be used, amongst others, by the Cincinnati Reds as a Spring Training facility. This proposed bond issue failed by the narrowest of margins (225 votes I believe).
So, were we angry voters yesterday? No, we were thoughtful, and I believe wise!
Comments
Post a Comment