After rejecting a peace offering that would have secured them some measure of representation on the redistricting commission, Democrats could only watch as the Harford County Council appointed an all-Republican membership to the group, which will help shape the political boundaries of Harford County for the next decade.
Harford County Council President Billy Boniface, a Republican, extended an offer to the Democratic Central Committee last week whereby the county council would appoint a single Democrat to the redistricting commission, if the Democrats backed off their threats of filing suit and allowed the redistricting process to proceed unimpeded.
When Democrats turned down that offer, the largely Republican county council forged ahead with its nominations as planned and, during its Tuesday night meeting, appointed 3 Republicans – Chris Pate, Jason Gallion, and Ben Lloyd – and no Democrats to the redistricting commission.
Pate and Gallion, both former political candidates, were among the names submitted by the Republican Central Committee. Ben Lloyd, a county employee working in the Division of Agriculture, was the county council pick – nominated by Councilman Chad Shrodes, also a Republican.
Earlier in the day Tuesday, Boniface said that the Democrats were arguing that the office of council president is separate from the county council, because, by eliminating that race from the vote calculation, the numbers are there to require Democratic representation on the commission. But Boniface pointed out there are many references to the seven-member council in the county Charter, and that the president is considered a member of the council.
Boniface told The Dagger that the advice of the law department is that the county council must uphold the county Charter and therefore could not allow Democrats on the redistricting commission based on the election results. However, the Charter also allows one additional appointed member and the offer was made to the Democrats that the council would appoint a Democrat to that position, meaning the composition of the 3-member commission would include 1 Democrat and 2 Republicans and the redistricting process could move forward.
Boniface said that would have resolved the issue without involving the courts, which he said both sides have said they would do depending on how the council made the vote-driven appointments.
The deal was offered last week through Councilman Dion Guthrie, one of two Democrats on the seven-member county council, but Wendy Sawyer, chair of the Democratic Central Committee, rejected it on behalf of the committee as of Thursday or Friday. Boniface then sent a letter to Sawyer, confirming the Democratic Central Committee’s rejection of the deal:
Asked why he thought they would reject such an offer, Boniface speculated, “I think taking the deal meant they [the Democratic Central Committee] were in the wrong”, for failing to run candidates in several races in the November election. Boniface said that the Democrats were looking to boost registration and using the issue to energize their base and “build animosity” toward Republicans.
Regarding the Democrats’ charge that the county Charter should have been changed when council elections were switched from at large to in-district elections, Boniface said, “It was the Democratic Party that drove in-district elections”, noting that the change was petition-driven. “They’re saying the council didn’t do it’s job, but they were the ones driving the process.”
Councilman Dick Slutzky, also a Republican, said during the council meeting that he would be upset if he were a Democrat, because it was due to inept party leadership that they had no representation on the legislative redistricting commission. He said Sawyer could have put her own name on the ballot for $50, and laid the blame squarely at the feet of her and the leadership of Harford County Democrats.
“They’re the ones who dropped the ball,” Slutzky said.
Sawyer was not available for comment after Tuesday night’s meeting. [But here are her comments on why Democrats rejected the offer]
Here is the Charter language in regard to commission membership:
County Code Section 205 – Redistricting procedure – also of interest, section 204
(a) The boundaries of Councilmanic districts shall be established in 1974 and re-established in 1982 and every tenth year thereafter. Whenever district boundaries are to be established or re-established, the Council shall appoint, not later than February 15 of the year prior to the year in which redistricting is to be effective, a commission on redistricting, composed of two members from each political party chosen from a list of five names submitted by the Central Committee of each political party which polled at least fifteen percent of the total vote cast for all candidates for the Council in the immediately preceding regular election. The Council shall appoint one additional member of the Commission. The Commission shall, at its first meeting, select one of its members to serve as chairperson. No person shall be eligible for appointment to the Commission if he/she holds any elected office.
(b) By October 1 of the year prior to the year in which redistricting is to be effective, the Commission shall prepare, publish, and make available a plan of Councilmanic districts and shall present that plan, together with a report explaining it, to the Council. The plan shall provide for Councilmanic districts that are compact, contiguous, and substantially equal in population. No less than fifteen calendar days and no more than thirty calendar days after receiving the plan of the Commission, the Council shall hold a public hearing on the plan. If within seventy calendar days following presentation of the Commission’s plan no other law establishing or re-establishing the boundaries of the Councilmanic districts has been enacted, then the plan, as submitted, shall become law.
Section 204 Election of Council Members
[Amended by Bill No. 80-40; by petition, November 2000]
Six Council Members, at the time of their election, shall each reside in a different one of six Council districts of the County. The seventh member of the Council shall be the President of the Council and may reside anywhere in the County. Each member of the Council required to reside in a Council district shall be nominated and elected by the qualified voters of the Council district in which the member resides; the President shall be nominated and elected by the qualified voters of the entire county. All Council Members shall be nominated and elected at the same time as state officers and in the manner provided by law.
Great job Harford County Republicans! You guys are doing the job you all were elected to perform. Coddling crying, impudent, democrats will only cause you problems. You have followed the County Charter and the guidelines of your respective office.
Did you mean to say: “Great job Harford County COUNCIL” instead? I think the council deserves credit for adhering to the charter, and they are comprised of Democrats and Republicans alike. Not trying to flame anyone here….just thought the council deserved credit for handling this situation properly.
So let me get this straight – the Democrats hold two out of seven County Council seats, received less than 15% percent of the votes in the last election, and the County Charter says that they should not have any appointments to the redistricting committee.
Does this mean that the generous offer of one spot on the committee was not good enough and they think they should get two or more out of the three openings? That makes perfect sense to me! Face it, the Democrats are simply smarter than everyone else, and they deserve the right to impose their will on the rest of us who were just too stupid to vote for them.
Thanks for looking out for us, Dems!
Once again, Phil Dirt misses the point.
What was factually incorrect about my post?
Phil, you are correct. The Dems are just looking to blame others for their inability to find candidates, so they could get the 15% needed. All this is doing is making the Dems look foolish.
So the Democrats rejected a proposal that would have resulted in them being given a seat on a committee where they would be outnumbered 2-1, because they favor getting 2 seats on a committee where they would be outnumbered 3-2? Where’s the logic?
If they sue, they are doing nothing more than waisting their money and the taxpayer money it will cost to defend the County.
The fact of the matter is that 36% of the register Dems voted in the last election not 15%. The difference is that more than 16% of the Dems voted for Reps or others in that election and are recorded as Reps for the purpose of that Committee appointments. Is that fair? Remember in 10 years it could be just the opposite, we need to fix this now so it does not happen again.
Sorry Councilman! The Democrat party is dead and in denial here. Look at the sorry slate the party put up here last year. Your crown jewel was the sorry loser from Darlington. The numbers are exactly what they are and the democrats need to suck it up and accept reality.
By the way, watch what the democrat controlled legislature and the governor do to us at the Peoples Republic level this year. Spendening showed us the light ten years ago and Marty will shove it up Harford’s rear this year.
Yensan – you need to get over the Helton stuff. Time to let go of all the bitterness and accept the fact that you are, at best, a footnote in the history of county. Go find a hobby and feel sorry for yourself privately.
Watcher…what are you watching? Yensan was trying to help you and your friends clean up your act. As long as your local party is known and guided by folks like Helton and Guthrie your problems will remain systemic and your effectiveness and popularity will continue to decline.
Now, much like a eunuch in a Harem, you get to stand around and watch things happen that you know you had nothing to do with.
The law is not always fair or just but it is the law. Yes, fix the County Charter through the proper procedures. Unfortunately dems will have to live with the result of the last election and the composition of the new redistricting committee. If they do it right in the 2020 election they may have more say in the redistricting process.
Dear Councilman Guthrie,
You resort to a ploy which has unfortunately become common place for Democrats. You seek to throw out votes you don’t like & that don’t fit your partisan purposes. You seek to toss the votes for the County Council President. That’s the only way you get to the 16% vote total you cite. Who’s disenfranchising who now?? If you read the law, in this case the county charter, the council president is an equal member of the council with the same voting & membership rights as you & the other 5 council members.
So the song remains the same. Dems avoid responsiblity. Dems lose election. Dems go to court & sue to try toss out votes to overturn the results of an election in their favor. Man, how do you guys look at yourself in the mirror?? If I was a registered Democrat I would be going to court to overturn the election of Wendy Sawyer & the rest of her incompetent crew in favor of some folks that know what they are doing & can recruit a few candidates & knows how to read a county charter. Wendy needs to take off her tin foil hat & stop blaming others for her short comings. But then again how can we expect her to avoid what is second nature to Democrats?? The more she talks the more incompetent she looks. Keep talking Wendy….
Wendy Sawyer explains why Democrats rejected the offer:
“The ‘offer’ everyone is making so much fuss about was not a genuine offer made in good faith It was a ploy Billy used last night for his own partisan purposes.”
Read more:
http://www.daggerpress.com/2011/02/16/the-deal-was-dirty-sawyer-explains-why-democrats-rejected-harford-county-council-redistricting-commission-offer/
After reading the article at the link provided it seems like Billy was “damned if he did, and damned if he didn’t”. What outcome, exactly, was Wendy looking for? If he offered equal representation would that have been enough? How about if he offered to have the Dems comprise ALL of the positions…..would that have sufficed? If he offered nothing, he would be portrayed as unwilling to “reach across the aisle” and work with the Dems. Furthermore, if he legally wasn’t allowed to even make such an offer, then what was the council supposed to do here while the Wendy issued reports to the Dagger regarding the “injustice” perpetrated against the Democratic Party from a charter that was “out of date” as a result of inaction by BOTH Dems and Reps?!?
The more I’m reading here the more I’m sensing that she (or those working with her) are looking for ways to cover up or otherwise distract folks from seeing the incompetence of the Democratic Party in this case.
The outcome Wendy was looking for has been repeated in all these articles over – and – over. She requested at least two Democrats be appointed to the commission. The charter is out of date with the way Harford County now votes for their council. It needs to be updated since we no longer elect CC members at-large, but by district. Mr. Boniface could have made an effort to be open to the other Council members about the deal, but instead decided to be sneaky in the way which he made the offer.
I’m left wondering if she would have extended such an offering if the tables were turned. I’m thinking not….
As for the charter being “out of date”, isn’t that something that BOTH parties need to take responsibility for having let get out of date in the first place? If the answer is “yes”, then I would suggest BOTH parties look to update the charter, through normal “democratic” channels, as opposed to trying to get their way by forcing litigation.
I contend that complacency/incompetence/ignorance on the part of the parties involved doesn’t mean you can just make up your own rules with respect to suggesting that TWO members be appointed from the Democratic Party. I mean, isn’t that suggestion just as “inappropriate” as Mr. Boniface’s offer to appoint one member from the party, since both sides made suggestions for how to handle the issue that fell outside of the requirements of the charter in the first place?
Sarah,
It’s still not clear to me why Wendy turned down the offer of a commission with 2 Republicans and 1 Democrat, in order to demand a commission with 3 Republicans and 2 Democrats. (Which would have violated the charter.)
No matter what, Democrats would have been outnumbered by 1. So now, Wendy has a commission with 3 Republicans and 0 Democrats. Well done.
Councilman Guthrie, this is not the Drive-thru at McDonald’s where you can get whatever you want when you pull up. The process is set in the Charter and only can be changed after it is placed on the ballot. You have two years until the next election and you can put it on the ballot and 2020 until your party can have a seat on the Commission. Who knows by 2020 the Democrat Party may just be a fringe party getting eight to ten percent of the vote. Mr. Guthrie you just keep representing the common people from your Dacha in Joppatowne.
Wendy Sawyer appears to be a lost ball in tall grass.
Has anyone seen Wendy’s broom???