Guest Opinions are presented as a public service, and do not necessarily represent the editorial opinions of the Haines News.
I urge the Borough Assembly to formally reject (Judge Collins’) finding as beyond her authority to make the choice of which ballots to count. — Kyle Ponsford
By Kyle Ponsford, Haines
To: Haines Assembly members and The People of Haines,
November 20, 2009
As a resident and concerned citizen of the Haines Borough, I write this bi-party [sic] letter concerning the events regarding our most recent vote. These events hold the power to literally rule our lives, no longer free to choose our own paths to our pursuit of happiness. Being stripped of two of the three fine points protected by our United States Constitution, I am greatly alarmed!
As free men and women, we the people of the Borough of Haines, have established a form of government in which we vote into office an assembly of six elected citizens, to manage the general workings of our Borough and make decisions on questionable issues when the legal intent of the ordinance is vague. When the assembly cannot come to a decision, the borough code defaults to the state law. These elected citizens, with the council of the borough attorney, made a decision regarding this vote.
It is reasonable and lawful that citizens, who were concerned that the Assembly may have done something illegal, took up a suit which brought this decision before Juneau Superior Court Judge Patricia Collins. It is in the scope of authority as a judge, to determine if the Assembly had done something illegal.
From review of the events and the ruling of the judge, it appears that there were no findings showing that the assembly had broken state law or borough code. The assembly used precedent to ensure the voting process remained consistent in the borough and they made a decision.
Yet, stepping beyond her authority as a judge, Patricia Collins chose to single-handedly alter the course of our Borough by (forcing) her opinion over that of our six elected citizens voted into the office they were exercising. Further, she cited precedent which simply does not apply to these circumstances, as the two questionable ballots neither came from a foreign embassy nor were sent through diplomatic channels. She may not have liked the decision the assembly made, she may even have preferred that they submit [sic] their decision to state law, but none of that is within her scope once it was found that they did not actually break the law.
Did they break the law by not choosing to default to state law over precedent? No. The judge did not reprimand the assembly for illegal activity, and legally her role in this matter ends there. If the citizens of this borough do not like the assembly’s legal decision, they can fix that at the voting booth.
Allowing a judge to tell them how they will run the Borough is unacceptable in a free society. Yet the choice to accept her “recommendation” remains in the hands of the Assembly. We know this decision was but a recommendation because the court had to gain permission from the Assembly to open the questionable votes to be counted. The ruling may have been masked as “Law”, but is not, as the Assembly was not charged with illegal activity.
Therefore I urge the Borough Assembly to formally reject her finding as beyond her authority to make the choice of which ballots to count. IF the Assembly chooses to follow her direction, that is in their power, but not a lawful requirement, nor a wise thing to do, as Patricia Collins was not elected to single-handedly run our Borough.
Citizens of the Haines Borough, whether you like the results of this vote or not, do not allow our right to run our own lives be usurped by a single individual whom we did not elect to run our Borough. Encourage the Assembly to stand on their decision.
Sincerely,
Kyle Ponsford, HC 60 Box 3394, Haines, Alaska 99827
Editor’s Note: Kyle’s letter was edited for spelling and grammar, but not for content.
Filed under: Haines Borough, Mayor / Assembly Tagged: | 1. Haines, borough assembly, election, Hoffman, Lidholm, politics
