I agree that is an obnoxious feature. While there is some merit to having a more balanced board instead of loading it with members of the governor's party - there is no justification for alternating the chairmanship in such an unfair manner.
Perhaps the chair should alternate annually with the first term going to the governor's party and alternating each year until a new governor is elected.
It might also be more 'fair' if the "eqaual representation" provisions didn't become effective until after this governor's current term.
The balanced board approach has merit....but the timing is certainly suspsect!
An "evenly balanced board" will deadlock on crucial votes ... especially on our local county BOE and probably at the state level. What's the remedy for deadlock? Paralysis? As in no approved Early Voting plan, which is exactly what the Republicans are ultimately trying to destroy.
I agree that is an obnoxious feature. While there is some merit to having a more balanced board instead of loading it with members of the governor's party - there is no justification for alternating the chairmanship in such an unfair manner.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the chair should alternate annually with the first term going to the governor's party and alternating each year until a new governor is elected.
It might also be more 'fair' if the "eqaual representation" provisions didn't become effective until after this governor's current term.
The balanced board approach has merit....but the timing is certainly suspsect!
An "evenly balanced board" will deadlock on crucial votes ... especially on our local county BOE and probably at the state level. What's the remedy for deadlock? Paralysis? As in no approved Early Voting plan, which is exactly what the Republicans are ultimately trying to destroy.
ReplyDelete