OPINION/LETTERS: Council was wrong to leave voters out of Newport charter decisions
Council was wrong to leave voters out of charter decisions
At its meeting on July 27, the Newport City Council spent a significant portion of its time discussing and voting on the Charter revision proposals of the Charter Review Commission. They ended up approving for the November ballot only five of the 37 proposals, and the approved proposals were largely word-smithing current provisions and having them conform better to actual practices.
The all-volunteer Commission spent countless hours in public hearings and workshops performing a meticulous review of the City Charter to identify changes for consideration by the City’s voters. Their recommendations covered changes to make the Charter easier to understand, to conform better to actual practices, to align better with Rhode Island regulations and to question how the City is governed.
Newport City Charter: 37 changes were proposed to Newport's City Charter. Why voters will see just 5 of them.
The Council chose to set aside all but the most mundane proposals and gave as its reason that presenting most of the proposals to Newport voters would be too confusing for the voters. That statement is condescending and insults the intelligence of Newport voters, implying that they are not smart enough to understand the issues and cannot be trusted to best determine how they should be governed. A couple of examples:
• The Commission wanted to give voters the opportunity of deciding whether the selection of mayor should continue to be made in backroom negotiations among Council members or be made by the voters giving the position to the at-large Councilor who received the most votes in the election.
• The Commission wanted voters to determine whether the Council seats allocated to Wards should remain or all Council seats should be at-large. In the past, justification of Ward seats had been made by arguing that the Ward Councilors could better represent their smaller constituencies. However, a look at a map of the gerrymandered Wards reveals that each contains multiple constituencies including businesses and the full range of high-income residents to low-income residents, with the ranges mirroring that of the city as a whole. The Ward Councilors have to make the same trade-off decisions on issues that affect their multiple constituencies differently as do the at-large Councilors.
Newport voters should email/text/call/write the members of the Newport City Council. Urge them to reconsider their votes on the substantive proposals of the Charter Review Commission and restore the right of voters to have a say in how they are governed.
Ron Becker, Newport
Great to see Psaras legacy live on
Jimmy Psaras was an old endear friend of mine. His loss to the community will be a tremendous one. You did a fabulous job with the article on the Vikings Hoop camp. Josie Chaves has done a tremendous job taking over as camp director but it’s awesome that Julia is able to work both weeks. There are literally thousands of articles that the Daily News has done about Jimmy over the years at his house. Boxes and boxes. The Daily News did Jimmy well during his years of service.
Jim Psaras' legacy: 'It was all about kids': At Viking Hoops camp, Julia Psaras keeps dad's legacy intact
Melissa Turner, Newport
Government needs to do more for those that were stationed at Camp Lejeune
The following is an open letter to Sens. Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse.
I served in the USMC and was stationed at Camp Lejeune.
Claims and awards arising from matters like the Camp Lejeune water contamination issue should be dealt with by a commission established by the U.S. government. Some, even many, may argue that the U.S. government would have a conflict of interests that would result in the disqualification of valid claims and low compensatory awards. But this view should be balanced against requiring us to enroll in and participate in class action lawsuits that favor the strike lawyers pressing the claims and pursuing the awards who savage the claimants' compensatory awards.
Long story short, we get injured twice: first the U.S. government ravages our health and then the flawed claims submission and review process savages our compensatory awards. Surely, you and the U.S. government can and should do better by us.
Geoffrey L. Fiszel, Newport
Believing misses facts
I enjoy watching major league baseball games, and the Washington Nationals, the NATS, are my team. To date they’re in last place in the NL East Division with a record of 35-68 and are beginning a three game series with the high-flying Mets. But I know that the NATS will represent the National League in this year’s World Series. The reason for my absolute confidence on this point is that the NATS actually won 35 of the 68 games people say they lost. I will soon provide proof about those stolen wins. My belief is everything.
Do you find my belief absurd? If so, does this absurdity about baseball mirror that of 2020 election deniers, the millions of Republicans who believe the Biden election victory was stolen from Trump? Of course, I have no proof at all, let alone theories, about the NATS’ baseball loses. Likewise, the election deniers have no proof at all about the “stolen” election, and their theories are hot air. Those who actually believe the BIG LIE have been gulled. Those who spread the BIG LIE are undemocratic liars. To claim that Joe Biden is not our duly-elected president is as foolish as claiming that the earth is flat — absolute and utter nonsense.
As another election cycle begins, every candidate for any state or national office must be asked about the BIG LIE, yea or nay. To vote for any election denier is an act of real ignorance or grave mischief. End of story — and, as of today, it’s the end of Juan Soto as a member of the NATS.
Will Newman, Tiverton
This article originally appeared on Newport Daily News: Newport City Council should let voters decide charter changes: Letters
