Council reconsiders revision of elections
By GREG STAHL
Express Staff Writer
The Ketchum City Council on Monday told a throng of
residents it will revisit a recent decision to change the way the city
conducts its city council elections.
More than a dozen Ketchum voters attended the meeting to
protest the council’s Jan. 16 decision requiring candidates to run for
specific council seats rather than for either of two available seats.
Previously, the two candidates who received the most votes were elected to
the two available positions.
Fanning the flames on the issue was the council’s
apparent haste in adopting the measures. Council members voted to waive
the three readings commonly used to adopt or adjust ordinances.
"The basic right to vote is one of the most important
rights we have," Ketchum resident Mickey Garcia told the council.
"I could end up agreeing with your conclusions, but the most
important right we have shouldn’t have gone over so fast."
Some of the objectors expressed displeasure with the newly
adopted rules. Some said they simply feel disenfranchised by the city’s
haste on this and other recent matters.
"The city is taking very lax our interest in what’s
going on," Ketchum resident Robert Renfro said. "To waive the
three readings on any subject should be a matter of urgency."
Ketchum resident Annie Corrock elaborated.
"We don’t feel like we’re being treated very well
as the public," she said. "Either give the three readings or
give good answers to why they’re waived."
State law requires that three readings be given to new or
amended ordinances—one in full and two by title—unless a majority of
the city council votes to bypass them.
The barrage of public comments put Councilman David
Hutchinson, who spurred the council to immediate action on the issue, on
the defensive.
"None of us are here to make your vote mean
less," he said. "Truly, we’re making an attempt to hear
everyone’s perspective on every issue. If someone feels we are taking
your right to vote away, I feel very horrible."
"Come on, give the public a chance," retorted
Ketchum resident Jake Jacoby.
Councilman Maurice Charlat, not present at the Jan. 16
meeting, was also upset with the apparently quick decision.
"I think it’s important that you know I’m not
happy," he told his fellow council members.
He agreed with the public that the council should have
gone to greater efforts to solicit public input on the matter and should
have waited for a full council to discuss such an important issue.
Jacoby and Renfro also pointed out that the city’s
Internet site is far behind and updated infrequently. A look through the
Web site shows that now-resigned housing director Steve Amsbaugh is still
active; that comprehensive plan meetings scheduled last winter are
upcoming; and that the Jan. 16, 2001, city council meeting is upcoming.
Were the site updated, it could help residents know when
important matters are pending, Jacoby and Renfro said.
Ketchum city administrator Jim Jaquet said the city would
look into the Web site issue Tuesday morning in response to the
complaints.
City attorney Margaret Simms said that in order to reverse
the council’s prior decision on city elections, the ordinance adopted
Jan. 16 would have to be repealed.
A public hearing on the matter is scheduled for the
council’s Feb. 20 meeting, which starts at 6 p.m.
