Looking for community input on the 11 local ballot questions (Questions A thru K). I've laid below the basics on each, along with my thoughts, but I'd like to hear your thoughts for or against.
Questions A thru D
The first four seem pretty straightforward: Whether or not to allow the city to borrow funds for public needs like building affordable housing, economic development, school infrastructure, and other public infrastructure. On the surface, they all sound pretty decent, and appear to be things Baltimore can use more of. Is there any real reason not to vote for them, aside from the "more city spending leads to higher taxes" line of thought?
Question E - Prohibiting sale, transfer, franchise of underground conduits
Seems straightforward. I'm a fan of public utility ownership and not a huge fan of privatization. You might not be.
Question F - Supplementary Criminal Apprehension and Conviction Fund
Upside seems, more community incentive to turn in criminals. Downside could be higher taxes/burden on the city, risk of corruption or false reports (more money is greater opportunity to do so). Does the program need more money or larger rewards?
Question G - Dante Barksdale Career Technology Apprentice Fund
I'm all for apprenticeships. How much of an impact can this make? The existing fund uses American Rescue Plan funding and apparently dovetails with or supplements the existing MD State program.
Question H - City Police Dept
I feel strongly about this one. The State runs our police, and that heavily limits how much the city can impact our own police department. Do you think approval of this amendment could help more reform push through?
Question I - Inspector General Advisory Board
Basically, as I understand it, the city council would nominate, and then randomly choose 7 members, and then 2 members would be heads of local law schools. Currently, the mayor and other elected officials sit on this board. Seems like small conflict of interest, but would the new situation improve that? I don't know much about how the council would nominate members.
Question J - Department of Accounts Payable
Seems to add another office to increase checks and balances; I find no arguments against.
Question K - 2-term Term Limits for Mayor, Comptroller, Council President, Council Members
Lots of opinions on the pro's and con's with term limits. The pro means we get fresh faces more frequently, and possibly new ideas. The con means a loss of experience, and premature ending of long-term projects if the newly elected officials aren't fans. I personally say let voters determine when to remove someone. Maybe term limits are fine, but not just 2 terms? Thoughts?
​
I used the ballot maker tool at https://www.vote411.org/ballot to research these questions. Some seem obvious, some seem like a tough choice, and some may not be a huge deal. I'd love to hear what everyone thinks; civilized debate is a major part of how we uphold democracy!
SonofDiomedes t1_iudd3c3 wrote
I oppose term limits because we already have them: they're called elections. If people want a lawmaker out, they have the vote.
Applying an artificial cap on elected offices serves only to limit the power of the people to install the leaders they chose, and to thereby weaken the government's ability to serve them. Experience, knowledge, etc. would be gained and tossed with each cycle, depriving the government of a great deal of effectiveness,e tc.
Corporate lobbyist would benefit greatly from a constant churn in the legislature, as their clients are not forced to churn new ones through every couple terms..they can work for decades straight, accumulating influence and power their entire run. It's no wonder then that corporations are often behind efforts like this one to impose term limits. The extreme right Sinclair group would love nothing more than to see our government weakened.
Vote against K