In the 1970’s, when I was in college, there was a television legal drama called Owen Marshall. The show and its lead lawyer character shed the black and white feel of its 1950’s predecessor, “Perry Mason,” but lacked the modern veneer of its 1980’s successor, “L.A. Law.” I watched Owen Marshall every week, and loved every episode.
But after two straight, long days in a courtroom, listening to squabbles about who delivered what document to whom, and which clerk is the right clerk, for the life of me I can’t remember why I liked that show.
Both days I spent in court, trying my lawsuit to let Erie County residents decide if they want to downsize county government, I stole away a few moments to peek in adjacent courtrooms to see what cases were being heard. In one, an elderly African-American couple – the husband’s 90-something, wheelchair-bound mother in tow – were trying to keep the helpless woman in a proper care facility. In another court, a battered wife sought protection from her violent husband.
And there we were, in Part 35 of New York State Supreme Court, me and a gaggle of local government officials, arguing whether the right clerk walked the right document over to the right office. All because two county officials wanted to deny voters their voice.
Today at 3:00 pm, the court will render its decision. I regret that the elections board’s effort to keep the downsizing proposition off the ballot forced me to bring a legal action. But I take pride in doing everything I can to see that a county government downsizing measure reaches voters now.
Our counsel, Tim LoVallo, performed brilliantly in court, and offered a strong legal hook on which the court can hang its hat in siding with the peoples’ right to decide. I hope the court sees the wisdom in this fundamental right – a right on which our citizens’ movement is based.
And I’m grateful as well to each of the local elected officials who joined my lawsuit. Their participation lent additional weight and influence. Though I must say that it was a new experience for me in my reform work to look over my shoulder and see a gaggle of pols standing in support. It was good for the cause, and I hope it continues as we move onto our effort to downsize the Ne York State legislature.
Lost in the drama of the lawsuit and, I suspect, lost on the two elections commissioners who caused this unnecessary legal battle, is this harsh reality: even before the elections commissioners placed yet another obstacle in the path to public referenda, New York already was the most regressive state in the nation in permitting citizens to vote directly on ballot initiatives. Had they paused to think about our state’s already harmful reputation as a denier of citizens’ voting rights, would the two commissioners have perhaps passed on making this already shameful situation a shameless one as well?
October 7, 2010 at 9:19 am |
What struck me was the arrogance of Ralph Mohr when responding to a question from Legislator Laughlan about why he waited so long to announce it would not be on the ballot. The smerk on his face was in contempt of the voters wishes. Maybe we should have Commissioners elected by the people to one year terms.
October 7, 2010 at 9:48 am |
Hello Kevin and staff:
First I want to express my gratitude – again – for your patience and drive in the face of what I believe to be boneheaded stubborness on the part of some villages and municipalities. I can’t believe that logical facts are discarded in favor of maintaining “local” representation. It’s not clear to me that these villages are any better off than the larger governments on which they depend. Oh well, I guess you can’t impose common sense any more than you can legislate morality.
Re the lawsuit: I guess we shouldn’t be be surprised by the mentality that splits hairs and wastes time and money trying to obscure the focus of the downsizing initiative – this is Erie County in NYS, after all. Of course the legislature has to downsize. More people in the room, is no guarantee of better decisions. I hope the court is thinking clearly and recognizes the nonsense for what it is – an attempt to derail a common-sense initiative that will ultimately benefit what remains of New York’s population.
October 7, 2010 at 9:56 am |
This is very disturbing to me as a registered republican/committee member. I can see how people loose their way and give up. The audacity of these two Commissioners is truly a demonstration of poor governance.
Last night I attended a re-org in the Town of Lancaster and saw how Ralph Mohr took control of the party. The Chair had conceded her position and Robert Matthews was nominated as the new Chair. Although we find him to be a young rising political star and feel he may be an asset to our town, it is disturbing to me that Ralph Mohr and his “people” were able to determine the outcome.
The point that Ralph Mohr is so self-serving is very sad. I hope Mr. Gaughen that you win for the people, you have our support.
October 7, 2010 at 10:10 am |
Their definition of job security and mine are two different things. Keep them honest Kevin.
October 7, 2010 at 10:27 am |
Kevin:
I admire your patience and tenacity in staying on top of this issue. What example are we giving our young people when a proposal that allows the people to vote on the future of their government is denied because of petty politics and a lack of common sense. Does it really matter who handed in the paperwork? The answer is no – it is more important what was in the paperwork. Your former teachers, your alma mater, and especially its headmaster are cheering you on.
October 7, 2010 at 7:34 pm |
Kevin Thank You So Much, for standing with all of us. Without you we would not have had a chance to vote on downsizing.
Keep up the good fight, Kevin. God Bless You.