OCR Text |
Show THE ZEPHYR/DECEMBER 2004-JANUARY 2005 Liaw Ses THE READERS RESPOND ‘CREDIT WHERE IT’S DUE... ~ Hello all, ; eee : ae : ie In the August/September issue of the Z, Ken Sleight penneda nice tribute:entitled, "AROUND THE BEND AGAIN: Remembering the history of Rainbow Bridge.” Among other sources, he referenced an administrative history of Rainbow Bridge National. Monument. Since I am the author of this admin history, Iam grateful to be included in the bibliography; however, I must correct Ken on two issues related to my volume. First, the correct title is "A Bridge Between Cultures: An Administrative History of Rainbow Bridge National Monument." Second, the volume is sourced with National Park Service as the author. ] am surprised that Ken overlooked my authorship since my name is on the cover. If he doesn’t actually have a.copy and would like one, let me know and Iwill send him one toute suite. T know it may seem like a petty complaint, but two years of my life went into the research and writing of that volume and the Park Service didn't write a word of it :-) Thanks for understanding. i ‘Cheers, David Sproul At least there's always the possibility that if DFTNU voters know you're supporting the hem! Otherwise,.as always, thanks for your voice in the wilderness, and keep up the tree-shakin’; now, more than ever. Joy and - initiatives, they'll instinctively vote agains’ courage, Shipmate. a Bob Lippman Castle Valley representatives.- Editor's Note...Glad we could set the record straight...JS A MOOT POINT ON THE BALLOT INITIATIVES, BUT STILL... : : repression of civil liberties in the guise and lie of “homeland security." EDITOR'S REPLY: It’s a moot point now, but the issue may rise again in coming years, so I'd like to reply to Bob‘s comments. I was a strong proponent of the 1992 change of government ballot initiative and was particularly excited about the idea of district representation. I believed it would give citizens a stronger voice in their government and easier access to its elected leaders. After 11 years, I am extremely disappointed with the results. In fact, it’s an outright joke. That's why I supported the reduction in the nuniber of councilpersons to five and especially a return to at-large voting, in which all citizens of Grand County have an opportunity to vote for all its _ University of Nevada, Las Vegas Jim - electiona gitprop, dialogue and realpolitik ana’ chism-mongering. Get up, stand up, call for ‘material and print another issue, pronto! In the words.of our mutual mentor, gadfly and town Coyote, Abbey, “The best cure for th lls of democracy is more democracy." To the same end, exercising the full freedom of press is the only cure for the growing : : | really hope you are simply raising your sarcasm to new levels ostensibly to outfox what you characterize as the DEADFROMTHENECKUP public, in regard to your position on the form of county government; but if not: For a believer in the last chance for meaningful voting, i.e. locally, you are apparently clinging hopelessly to the past again (but unfortunately this time, to the wrong past, Amigo....) on the matter of the form of county me Grand County has about 9,000 residents. In 2002, less than 50% of all registered voters, or fewer than 3000, participated. In the five district elections, councilpersons were elected with as few as 226 votes. These district representatives have the same power on the council as at-large members, often cast votes that are completely contrary to a majority of residents’ views, and yet they are accountable to only a fraction of the residents of Grand County. Imagine this..at any given time, Grand County voters NEVER have an opportunity to vote for a majority of the council...we can cast votes for only three of the seven. And has district representation Increased voter interest? The number of registered voters participating in general government, whereas at-large voting will always allow urban/business interests and elections lins steadily declined since 1992. And in at least four district elections in the last six years, candidates have run UNOPPOSED because there wasn't even enough interest to draw a second contender. Air election without a contest is hardly my idea of increased democracy. cronyism to dominate political decision making. Sometimes, on a case-by-case basis, this can work to the advantage of conservation, where the urban electorate is conscious and well informed. But if the electorate is DEADFROMTHENECKUP, as you yourself put it, smaller communities - in this case, Castle Valley (and Elgin, Thompson, etc.) - will be shut out of the political process by the "needs" of opinion do not rit along geographical lines...it’s not as if Hecla Subdivision always votes one way and Mountain View Subdivision votes another. As for Castle Valley, its residents should remeniber that their council district also includes parts of Spanish Valley, which is not always assumed to be liberal Green Democrat. And Castle Valley hasn't offered a candidate of its own for government. Districting at least preserves the potential for diversity and representative and demands of urban areas (e.g., water theft, tax base development, road building, mining leases, and the general economic/corporate exploitation of rural areas). If the only hope for democracy, as you state, is with local communities, these communities must become “autonomous”, free to think and act bioregionally and creatively. Re-districting, gerrymandering, and “at-large commission" forms of government are hammers that have been used by the monied forces and screwheads to dismantle democracy and remove conscious or effective office holders all around the West. As far as your “acid test” for a conscious electorate, | happen to remember the names of the county commissioners from the 70's and '80's, and it gives me apoplexy. I was also a bit dismayed We area small county. For the most part, with the exception perhaps of Castle Valley, differences district representation since 1993. [f seems to ime a major concern with some is the fear that the current governing body would have attenipted to subvert the voice of the people had the county chosen to approve the two initiatives. In other words, voters who are already disgusted with the County Council were afraid of crossing theni...cworried that the Council would take advantage of the power they possess and abuse it even more by either ignoring or twisting the election outcome to suit their own special needs. I say...fine. [wish we'd given them the chance . This council majority has already shown its utter contempt for county residents and we still remain a mostly docile bunch. Perhaps it will require extreme contempt by the council to awaken Grand County citizens. We should all remember that we were that other than your last-minute recommendation on the initiatives and your Vote Nihilism campaign, your October/November issue abdicated a great opportunity for some pre- Red River Canoe Co. CANOES Moab Nees eee Specialists GIVE MOAB'S HOMELESS ANIMALS A SECOND CHANCE redrivercanoe.com New for 2003 Raft Trips 800.753.8216 435.259.7722 we le. —\! ANLY _a canoe company l.c. Please join the effort to raise $250,000 and make Moab's first animal shelter ‘paws-ible!’ 2 WE'RE HALF-WAY THERE! For information or to make a donation contact: HUMANE SOCIETY OF MOAB VALLEY ATT: Shelter Fund, Dept Z PO Box 1188 Moab, UT 84532 hsmv@citlink.net 259.HUMANE And remember...NO donation is too small A « I = 7 a We are in great need of mes foster ho dogs & ca for Guided Trips * Paddling Instruction Daily & Multi-day Trips 1371 North Highway 191 Moab UT 84532 Please call today if you can heP: HAPPY HOLIDAYS FROM RED ROCK CANOE... PAGE 29 a SS Red River Adventures RAFTS redriveradventures.com 877.259.4046 435.259.4046 ae |