If it’s broken, fix it – some modest steps to make
neighborhood councils credible to their stakeholders
By Jim
Smith
The citywide system of
neighborhood councils is broken. Whether or not it was initially designed to be
functional is debatable. It was a sop thrown to the voters by then-Mayor Richard
Riordan, in 1999, to get a new city charter approved that would give the mayor
more power.
At its best, the Neighborhood Councils can
be a radical extension of democracy in a city of four million that is ruled by
only 15 councilmembers and a mayor. At its worst, it is an invitation to the
wealthy and the elite to run 80 local bodies without the usual checks and
balances.
There are some modest steps
that can be taken to get the NCs on the road to more democracy. They
include:
1. Allow only residents
within each neighborhood council to vote. The current rules allow absentee
property owners, workers and casual participants in local organizations to vote.
A person who owns multiple pieces of property in a number of neighborhood
councils can vote - and hold office - in all of them. This violates the
principle of one person - one vote.
2.
Abide by city’s campaign finance reporting rules. Limit contributions to
$100 per person.
3. Make no rule for
the conduct of a neighborhood council election that is more strict than state
and federal election rules.
4. Who are
we voting for? All candidates for Neighborhood Council Board positions and all
appointees to a Land Use and Planning Committee should be required to file a
Statement of Economic Interests with the City Ethics Commission. Form 700
itemizes investments and interest in real property held by the candidate on the
date of declaration of candidacy or appointment, and sources of income received
during the 12 months prior to the date of filing.
Posted: Sat
- October 1, 2005 at 10:20 AM