OCR Text |
Show Page 10 The UTAH INDKPENDENT The Paper That Dares To Take A Stand December 7. 1972 procedure funnel by the federal comprised Administrative Procedure Act, the Oregon Administrative Procedure Act, and the proposed charters administrative district setup. Luckily, sixty per cent of Linn's voters reportedly rejected the Metro charter and defeated it. administrative Snub Metro Local Voters By Jo Hindman Tallies show that local oters in eeral instances turned down Metro governance November 7. 1972. county charter proposals in separate states. Missouri and Two Oregon, contained Metro similarities. Further proof that the Metro movement to take over is American government nationwide in scope. of Charter The proposed Jefferson County (Mo.) contained Metro General the ubiquitous Power Grant (GPG) which gives governing bodies the power to do anything they wish except actions specifically forbidden to them by Government law. by and an administrative non-lacounty executive were additional Metro features in the Missouri charter. It was beaten down 18.597 to 16.209 Votes. M. Williams, Robert Mr. of The Charter chairman Box 583. P.O. Challengers. Hillsboro ( Mo.) 63050 stated: We ful w discovered the St. Louis administrative space, both free and paid, for items whose in powers. outdistancing legislative, would favor of the charter. The two local radio stations were, in my opinion, very fair and for this we arc thankful." The chairman offered campaign literature left over. It will be forwarded at , no charge to interested citizens in other areas," he said. (It is well worth obtaining. Ed.) The proposed charter for Linn County (Ore.) exhibited Metro's GPG at its worst, i.e. with all power granted to the governing board, the charter would force the to citizenry block each unsatisfactory board action one by one. But after a required waiting period, the board could proceed with the action. and Permissive regionalism of abolishment short ballot's certain elective offices were other Metro features. Woven together, the various Metro filaments in the document provided for a elective board of county commissioners whose legislative powers would be restricted, but two-head- ed (non-la- w) the be practically unlimited. An unstated number of districts would provide services, but districts" was not defined in the Linn charter. Districts are defined variously in other situations A elsewhere. district is in the federal autonomous" Economic Development Annual Administration (1969 Report, Wash., D.C.) The California Supreme Court in People v. County of El Dorado All districts, (1971) held that including regional agencies ... are excluded from the initiative, referendum and recall provisions." In Those. who go to college and never get out are called professors. -- Anonymous There are but two powers in the world, the . sword and the mind. In the long run the sword is always beaten by the mind. --Napoleon Bonaparte SRJOW TORES - ALL SIZES RECAPS ONE LOW PRICE 2$25 Mounting Exchange Included Carl Racker & Sons WESTERN AUTO 116 W. Gentile :BW Layton, Utah addition to taxes, assessments, special levies to cover operating costs, the Linn charter permitted federal funding. . The districts then came into focus as for administrative receptacles (non-lanational governance which would reach the citizens 376-426- 7 w) metropolitan and local news media were, in most cases, very biased in favor of the charter. A local publisher of three newspapers at one point in the campaign not only refused to print news items in opposition to the charter, he also refused to take paid advertising that was in opposition. However, the he continued throughout campaign to devote considerable Amendments Destroy Utah Constitution DECK THE HALLS of Friends and Relatives with The UTAH A i" i i The I i dialogue received lavish praise, headlines and publicity. Was it honest for the State Bar Association, a Division of the State Supreme Court, to endorse the constitutional amendments without polling its members? Was it honest for the Utah Educational Association to endorse the constitutional amendments without polling its members? THE TRUTH IS: NO SUCH POLLS WERE EVER TAKEN. and the endorsements are not the voices of the associations' total membership. If you are a disbeliever, ask this question of all the lawyers and school teachers vou can find: DID YOU PARTICIPATE IN A POLL TO ENDORSE THE Constitutional Amendments? What must the people do to put a stop to this kind ol chicanery? We must call our Representatives and Senators into special district meetings, and warn them of the action that the people will take any more attemps arc made to amend the constitution by taking away the peoples right to vote for their 'independent State officials. This is the only way we can preserve Utah's government of the people, for the people, and by the people. Great Gift ForChristmas ONLY $5.00 For 52 Issues Send Many Gift Subscriptions i Continued from Page 9 INDEPENDENT mm Independent j A 2459 Major Street, Salt Lake City. Utah 84115 I I i Please include zip code when possible i i I I i i i i i i i i i Name 1 Address 8 i i i I i i i i i i i i I I i i i I i i I I I 10 |