Clark County charter foe backer make their case

first_imgWhen it comes to making changes to how Clark County government operates, Nan Henriksen, a proponent of a proposed home rule charter, told The Columbian’s editorial board Tuesday that it was a matter of good government, one that would decrease “cronyism and favoritism.”On the opposite end of the spectrum, Judith Anderson, an opponent of the charter, called it too drastic a change that would “build a firewall” between residents and elected officials.“Our (current) county government is really flexible because it can respond to citizen issues,” Anderson said.Henriksen disputed that point, saying the charter wouldn’t make county government any less flexible but rather delineate roles and boost representation.The proposed charter calls for changing the role and function of the three-member elected county board, limiting its involvement in day-to-day operations and renaming its members councilors. The day-to-day operations would be handed to an unelected county manager.The charter also expands the board from three members to five, and calls for all but one of the councilors to be elected by district in the general election. The fifth councilor, who would act as the chairman of the board, would be elected countywide.The changes address systemic problems that have become a focal point in county government, said Henriksen, who previously served as the chairwoman of the 15-member board of freeholders. She said the freeholders worked hard to ensure they had a fair document to take to voters in November.last_img

Author: admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *