We’ve been through this before with the 2011 solid waste ballot measure. We had option A: the county. Option B was privatization with county control. We didn’t have an option C, which could have been privatization with local control and local management; or voting for a taxing district that privatized while ensuring local control and protection of self-haul.

Now, I believe that we have this same type of flawed thinking again in the Charter Review Committee’s proposition 1. Option C should have offered the public either five or six council members part-time, with everyone able to vote for all council members. That would have won overwhelmingly, and given the public what we want. Another option C that many would support, including myself, is a one-person-one-vote for a council member for each major island, and two county-wide. Why weren’t we offered these options?

I remember what it was like with only three  commissioners, and a lot of damage was done, especially to wetlands and Urban Growth Areas. Our voices went unheeded. I’m uncomfortable with going back to that much power in only a few individuals’ hands. I also want to know the councilors from each district – and vote for them all; and encourage the public to get to know them too. They work for us all. Eastsound is unincorporated, but I think it needs to have its own council member who will listen to and represent Eastsound residents’ views and wishes.

Why did the charter review committee not think of more creative solutions than this either-or conundrum – neither of which gives the public a real voice or choice? I am disappointed.

Sadie Bailey

Eastsound