Full text is here.

This would allow the County Council to establish additional qualifications for certain elected positions. (For instance, requiring that a Sheriff have law enforcement experience.)

I fundamentally think that any position that really and truly requires very specific qualifications should be an appointed position, not an elected position. If however a position is made an election position, regardless of the job description, then the voters should have full and total authority to vote in whoever they want. (I’d even disagree with age and citizenship requirements and such… if it is an elected position, let the voters decide… let them vote for a ripe watermelon if they really want to for that matter.)

Voters may sometimes be stupid, but the nature of a democracy is that if the voters want something, they get it… and often it is exactly what they deserve when they make a stupid choice. But the whole point is that it is the choice of the electorate. And MOST of the time, they make decent decisions.

This change is unnecessary and stupid. And it is only even being considered because there are elected positions that should not be elected positions in the first place.

My vote:

NO

Full text here.

Basically adds disability and sexual orientation to the list of things that the County can’t discriminate against in hiring or contracting.

I am generally opposed to laws that in any way whatsoever restrict who PRIVATE entities can hire or why they can hire them. That includes non-discrimination laws. I think private entities should be able to do whatever the hell they want, and if they make decisions in ways other than merit alone, they will suffer the economic consequences of that stupid choice.

However, this is GOVERNMENTAL hiring and contracting. I very much think the government should be required to not discriminate on irrelevant attributes. If I was doing such, I would not give a list of things you can’t discriminate on, I would instead require that ONLY attributes directly relevant to the candidate (or contractor’s) ability to accomplish the tasks required of them for the position / assignment could be taken into account. (Of course, this would prohibit any and all forms of affirmative action as well, which would be a good thing.) This does not go that far.

But I guess as long as you are going to have things on a list, it is OK for these things to be on the list too.

My vote:

YES