[BwayDems] Ballot Measures on Election Day - No on #1, Yes on #2 and Yes on #3

[Daniel Marks Cohen]

I have posted a new piece on Medium about the upcoming ballot proposals we will be voting on next Election Day, if you live in New York State, vote NO on #1 (the ConCon) and YES on #2 and YES #3.  https://medium.com/@DMarksCohen/for-the-3-ballot-proposals-on-election-day-vote-no-yes-yes-2d8adc63349c
While most of the attention has been (rightfully) focused onthe Constitutional Convention referendum on the ballot this November, and Iurge you to vote NO on Proposal #1,the ConCon, there are two other initiatives on the ballot, and I wanted to takea moment to provide a brief summary of them, and encourage you to vote YES on Proposal #2 and YES on Proposal #3.

 Proposal #1 – Constitutional ConventionQuestion – wouldcall for a constitutional convention to explore proposals for changes to the state constitution. Every two decades New York voters have areferendum on whether to revise the New York State Constitution. If a majority of voters approve the Constitutional Convention(“ConCon”) in 2017, then delegates are chosen by voters next November (in2018). The delegates meet in Albany in April 2019 at a convention to debatemodifying the Constitution. Changes approved by a majority of the delegates aresubmitted to the voters, a majority in favor would ratify those changes. Theproblem is the process, with no restrictions on who runs to serve as adelegate, no limits on changes proposed, and no protections for priorlegislative victories. A ConCon would send corporate lobbyists surging into thestate, eager to make changes for their patrons. Rather than creating new warsto wage, let us confront the challenges we face today. If we take back theState Senate, the changes nonprofit groups seek could be attained through theregular legislative process, than through a ConCon free-for-all, and withoutrisking rights we have fought for decades to attain and preserve. With much injeopardy, the temptation to vote for the ConCon must be tempered by the largerissues we are tackling now, vote NO on Proposal #1.

 Proposal#2 PensionForfeiture for Convicted Officials Amendment - would allow judges to reduce or revoke the state pension ofa public officer convicted of a felony.CapitalRegion newspaper the Daily Gazette reports that eachlegislative house in Albany overwhelmingly voted for the bill, the second timethe full legislature has approved it, which is the final step before theproposed amendment goes before voters this fall. Notably, under the proposal, aconvicted official would not automatically lose his/her pension, but could inan ensuing court review. Lawmakers took the extraordinary step after theconvictions of more than two dozen of their colleagues over the last decade onprimarily corruption charges — including the former leaders of the Assembly andSenate in 2015. Despite being convicted, ex-lawmakers still qualify forlucrative state pensions. Ex-NY State Senate leader Dean Skelos, the RockvilleCentre lawmaker convicted along with his son, is slated to receive $95,000annually, for example. The corruption conviction was recently overturned but isdue to be retried by law enforcement officials next year. Vote YES on Proposal#2.

 
Proposal#3 - Forest Preserve Land Bank Amendment - would create a 250-acre landbank, which would allow local governments to requestforest preserve land for projects in exchange for the state acquiring 250 acresfor the forest preserves. The nonprofit environmentaladvocate Adirondack Wild reports that lawmakers authorized a publicvote on a constitutional amendment to create a 250-acre land bank for theAdirondack and Catskill parks. By voting yes, voters will make it easier forcommunities to make infrastructure improvements in the most sensitive areas ofthe parks while ensuring the preservation of state land. Under the current law,each time a community wants to smooth out a dangerous curve on a road or abridge, build a safe bike path near a highway, put up equipment to expand thecoverage of broadband communication, drill a well on public land or installsewer lines in the environmentally protected Forest Preserve, someone has topropose an amendment to the state constitution in order for the action to moveforward. In exchange for doing work on one piece of land in the ForestPreserve, the law requires the state to swap that piece of property withanother piece of land, which is then set aside for preservation, therebyensuring the perpetuation of forever-wild land. Many of these projects aredesigned to improve public safety and quality of life. Bike paths shouldn’t beon highways; they should be safely off to the side. Evening out curves on roadsand on approaches to bridges will lessen the chance of accidents. Culverts helpprevent flooding and damage to nearby property. Expanded broadband access helpsin both emergency communication and economic development. But for each suchproject, the law requires that the state constitution be amended. The amendmentprocess requires approval by two successive state Legislatures and a publicvote, which can stretch the approval process out over a minimum of two or threeyears, often longer. Under this legislation, that process would be streamlinedwith the creation of a land bank. Under strict guidelines to protect theenvironment — such as limiting the size of new projects and weighing theirimpact on surrounding wildlife — these small but necessary projects could goforward without a separate constitutional amendment for each. To fulfill therequirement that developed land be swapped for some undeveloped land, theproject developers will just tap into the 250 acres set aside in the land bank.As the 250 acres are used, the project sponsors will be required to pay into aForest Preserve expansion account, with the money being used to purchaseadditional land in the Forest Preserve. To ensure that the projects themselvesmeet environmental standards, the state Department of EnvironmentalConservation (DEC) would have approval authority over each project. This wholenew process will significantly reduce the time and expense needed for simplebut necessary improvements. Every notable environmental group in the state issupporting this proposal. Supporters include the Adirondack Council, theAdirondack Mountain Club, Protect the Adirondacks! Adirondack Wild, the NatureConservancy, Adirondack Common Ground Alliance, the Citizens Campaign for theEnvironment, the Catskill Center for Conservation and Design, EnvironmentalAdvocates, Scenic Hudson, the Catskill Mountainkeeper and the New York Leagueof Conservation Voters. This will make the park safer and more enjoyable, itwill protect the Adirondack and Catskill experience, and it will save taxpayerstime and money through greater efficiency of the approval process. Vote YES on Proposal #3.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist8.pair.net/mailman/private/bwdupdates/attachments/20171102/7154095b/attachment.html>