Toward the end of this year, the N.C. General Assembly will review a proposal from the Chapel Hill Town Council requesting the renewal of its Voter-Owned Elections program.
Unlike the controversial budget decisions of the summer, this choice is obvious: Voter-Owned Elections is a good thing for Chapel Hill voters. The N.C. General Assembly should not be interfering in the voting processes of our local government.
The current program — the only one of its kind in N.C. — stipulates that candidates for the Chapel Hill Town Council cannot accept donations of more than $20 per person in order to receive funding from the town council.
The program is both voluntary and restricted to local elections for Chapel Hill. This makes it difficult for the legislature to justify the discontinuance of Chapel Hill’s program, especially when its proposal for renewal will likely be representative of the will of the people.
The state legislature need not worry about fitting this program into an already-tight budget as it does not and will not cost money to the state. All funding will come from the town council’s budget.
Against common sense, support for the program in the legislature is small, with Republicans representing the opposition to its existence, an opposition that might very well be solely ideological.
Recent statements by state legislators have indicated that the program’s future is in serious doubt.
Refusal to uphold Chapel Hill’s application is wrong because this decision should not be the state legislature’s to make.
Although it is still unclear why exactly the legislature would discontinue Chapel Hill’s program, concern might stem from historical problems with voter-owned election initiatives. Other states that have pursued similar initiatives have run into trouble with the U.S. Supreme Court.
