This is pretty much the same op-ed that the Journal Sentinel has been publishing from opponents of the County Board reform bill – AB85 – just with different authors.
As I've pointed out when previous versions of this op-ed have run, while there's a lot of heat and flash in the words, there isn't a whole lot of substance. It's surprising to me that despite given several chances to do so, no one has been able to articulate why their rhetoric about power grabs, plutocrats and local control has any merit.
If I were given the opportunity to have the editorial page in the State's largest newspaper to myself for a day, I sure wouldn't waste it with a bunch of recycled terms and fired up phrases. I'd use it to make the rational argument as to why people should believe my position is the correct one.
Instead, we get predictable throw away lines like, "unilaterally taking power away from the people and handing it over to a favored few." I'd be more curious to know why the Supervisors think that limiting the number of days they can delay a department head being confirmed is "taking the voice away from the "people"".
Or on what basis they have to throw out the scare line about public parks being sold off to the highest bidder… Do the Supervisors – who's oversight is so critical – have such a limited grasp of County Park deed restrictions that they really think public park land could be sold to private interests?