Taking Measure: Ballot Initiative Endorsements

Support is so broad for the first measure that we consider that our endorsement will hardly be surprising; we sort of love this. However, the second measure has proven divisive, even among constituencies that usually get along. Without further ado…

Measure 2-106
Establish Benton County Extension and 4-H Service District

Absolutely Yes. This measure would create a service district to fund research, management, and education that support our local farm and forest economy. Even though this measure will cost the average homeowner $26 a year, we like the benefits for local small farmers and foresters, and funding for primary and secondary educational opportunities—there is something for everybody in this proposal. We dig the partnership with OSU. Our only wish would be for some set funding allocations, but given the baked-in public process and County Commission governance, count us in.

Measure 2-108
Charter Amendment Restricting Sale of Parks and Natural Areas

No. This measure would disallow the City Council selling park land without voter approval, which may sound like a good thing, except they would not be allowed to add new facilities to these properties, either—think public meeting spaces or classrooms. Add two decades of city councilors declining to make such sales, based on their hearing of public sentiment, and we accept Mayor Traber’s argument that there are simpler solutions. If this measure had been narrower, our thinking may have been different.

Be Sociable, Share!

1 thought on “Taking Measure: Ballot Initiative Endorsements

  1. No solution proposed by Mayor Traber binds future councils. Currently a resolution exists that says parks shall not be sold. However, the city attorney has pointed out to the council that they can ignore the resolution. The only thing that binds future councils is a charter amendment. That is why the vote on annexation requirement is in the charter and not the municipal code.

Comments are closed.