City of Madison Considers Opposition to Open and Clean Government

Read that headline again. Believe it or not, I'm not trying to make Madison's City Commission look bad. I'm just highlighting the trickery politicians engage in as they name their laws.

"Open and Clean Government Act"—that's what the supporters of Initiated Measure 10 (IM10) want us to call their proposal. Like "No Child Left Behind," the supporters' name for IM10 is meant to stave off debate. Argue against IM10, pass a resolution against it (as the Madison City Commission will likely do Monday night), and supporters can say something like my headline about you: "Did you hear so-and-so is against Open and Clean Government?"

Therefore, as the election approaches, an editorial note: I will try to refer to this measure by the neutral name "Initiated Measure 10," not the propagandizing name promulgated by its supporters.

Now I'm actually not ready cast my vote one way or the other on IM10. The law appears to have good intentions, and it includes a provision for creating a searchable online database of all state government contracts. However, I've heard some strong arguments from friends against the consequences of the law (stifling of free speech, restriction of political activity by any state employee, including myself). So I have some reading and thinking to do before I make up my mind.

The City of Madison isn't waiting, though. On the agenda for Monday's meeting [PDF alert!] is Resolution 2683, stating our city commission's official opposition to IM10. As a public service, I'll spare you the need to download the city's clunky PDF file and take you directly to page 31 of the agenda packet. Of course, you can also obtain the text from the South Dakota Municipal League, which drafted the reoslution and is urging all member councils to adopt it:

RESOLUTION NO. 2683

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF MADISON

WHEREAS, Initiated Measure would prohibit any city from paying dues to any association that lobbies;

WHEREAS, it is far more efficient and cost effective to join together with our fellow cities through the SD Municipal League for coordinated communication with the Legislature than to have each city stand alone;

WHEREAS, the costs to the taxpayers of having each city monitor, report, and travel to Pierre to participate in the Legislative Session would be much greater than any dues to the SD Municipal League;

WHEREAS, coordinated communication with Legislators leads to more efficiency in the Legislative process and has saved millions of dollars in taxpayer funds;

WHEREAS, restricting the ability of South Dakotans to support candidates and communicate with their elected public officials is a violation of their right to freedom of speech;

WHEREAS, the measure will be challenged in court and will most likely be foudn to be unconstitutional, costing millions of dollars in taxpayer money;

WHEREAS, Initiated Measure #10 does not limit State government-paid lobbyists, out-of-state lobbyists, or corporate lobbyists, but only stifles coordinated voices for local control;

WHEREAS, the City of Madison finds municipal officials throughout South Dakota are dedicated, honest and ethical people with the best interests of their cities in mind and that cities take great pride in providing open, honest government to our citizens;

WHEREAS, the thousands and thousands of South Dakotans who do business with the State, Cities, Counties, and other governmental entities should not be penalized for providing such services;

WHEREAS, civic groups who work to better their community, and often require local funding to provide their services should not be prohibited from communicating their needs to local public servants;

WHEREAS, the forces supporting Initiated Measure #10 will not reveal the source of their funding, leaving the reasonable assumption that out of state special interests are once again attempting to hijack the South Dakota ballot and abuse our initiative process;

THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED that the Board of Commissioners of the City of madison strongly opposes Initiated Measure #10 and urges the citizens of South Dakota to vote "NO" on the measure.

The clause about our "dedicated, honest and ethical" elected officials doesn't strike me as the strongest argument to make. "Keep an eye on us" is a much better mantra for government than "Trust us."

The arguments about wasting tax dollars and the unchecked power of out-of-state and corporate lobbyists do deserve some attention. If this law results in increased costs for local government and more power for big money, then maybe it needs to be reworked before we accept it.

Of course, if the likelihood of an expensive court challenge is reason to oppose a law, then I hope our city commissioners will follow up with a similar resolution to oppose the unconstitutional IM11 (but don't hold your breath).