A reader suggested that the recall should go forward because the Assembly was to appoint AND THEN hold a special election. An appointment could have been made for a 45-60 day period - enough time to set up a special election. (Bear in mind that an appointment for any reason whatsoever is only good until the next regular election, so the maximum time any appointee can serve is a year.)
What's the lesson in this debacle? I think the lesson is that an Assembly must uncover what they are able to do according to law before any action is taken. In this case, the Assembly seemed to get hung up on the "who" instead of the "what."
Hind sight is always more accurate than foresight. Far be it for me to say what I would have done. But I think the community is seriously signaling to its elected officials: stick to the law. If you are not sure what the law is ask and ask again. The recall, regardless of its "success" or "failure" is a clear warning that the public is going to hold its representatives accountable. That, I think, is a good thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment