Kontos Column: Beware the referendum, yet understand the tool

By Dan Kontos

There have lately been a lot of discussions, columns, and articles regarding referendums (or referenda if you prefer). This tool allows the voters a unique opportunity to have direct input into how our local governments do their jobs, so I think it’s worth our time to take a bit of a closer look at this political instrument.

A referendum (from the Latin ad referendum, meaning “for bringing it back”) is essentially a vote by the people, and the majority vote wins. Democracy in action. Each ballot is equally weighted, whether the elector is well educated on the topic or randomly makes a selection on the day they show at the polls. You can see the potential problem with this, can’t you?

Remember first that we do not live in a democracy, and thank goodness for that. Pure democracies inevitably devolve into the tyranny of the majority over the minority by the slimmest of numerical margins. We live in a republic, or representative democracy if you really must. A republic is a form of democracy, in a similar way that a Macintosh is a form of an apple, or a Ford is a form of automobile.

In this light, referendums are a vestige of our democratic moorings and are used by both local governments and the citizens for various ends. 

The government uses them to either obtain something that is out of reach for them; and thus, requires the approval of the voters to get it. It can be for additional funding, usually in the form of higher taxes, such as in the 2018 proposals by the Stevens Point School District, or the upcoming proposal to raise county taxes by over $4.1 million annually for the next 20 years to keep the health care center afloat.

They can also be used to obtain additional authority. This is best exemplified by the approval of optional powers police and fire commissions. 

In both forms, the legal constraints placed on our local elected officeholders require them to come to the ultimate governmental authority, the voters, and seek their approval. These engineered bypasses on the limits of power have their places in order to keep our local authorities in check, yet still provide what may be needed under unforeseen circumstances.

A referendum can also be advisory in nature. These non-binding referendums can be used to obtain a sense of the community, and serve as a voter preference survey theoretically leaving the final decision to the elected officials. In their truest form, they are a way for citizens to formally register their opinions with local officials. An example of this is the Portage County 2021 question on clean water.

However, they can also be used by politicians to skirt hard choices, instead, falling back on the will of the electorate to explain their position. When “properly” crafted, the outcomes are practically inevitable. A prime illustration is the 2016 referendum on a new courthouse and jail facility. There the incurably risk-averse county leadership at the time floated this question for the express purpose of avoiding the predicted backlash, in my humble opinion. After all, who can go against the will of the people?

Citizens can also initiate their own referendum questions through the vehicle of direct legislation. Here the people bypass an intransigent or hesitant governmental body and directly propose a question to their fellow citizens. A current and obvious example is the referendum question initiative regarding the expenditure of transportation funds in the City of Stevens Point.

Here, disgruntled citizens who oppose the current conceptual design for the Business 51 rebuild, seek to constrain the city in their efforts essentially by imposing a requirement for a further binding referendum each time $1 million dollars are spent on public roadway or transportation projects.

This Hail Mary to stop the current Business 51 project comes with unintended consequences, for sure. Not only will it impose additional steps for future projects that will add to any project costs, but it will also shift planning timetables back to accommodate the two times a year that referendums are typically considered.

Proponents should also be under no illusion that a victory here is fleeting, and that the City Council should be expected to overturn any such constraint after the two-year moratorium has run its course. The battle can be renewed, but with a bit of shrewd planning and an understanding of statutory timing by the city, keeping this effort up in perpetuity will require a herculean effort. Democracy is messy.

Finally, always be wary of the news and noise that precedes a referendum. Proponents and opponents alike will be pitching their respective preferences, feeding the natural desire of the responsible electorate to educate themselves on a topic beforehand.

Look to the data for yourself. Rely appropriately on local media who neutrally present the facts, not their implied preferences. Study the opinions from others who are well-read on the subject, but discount appropriately (but not completely) the assertions from elected officials with a vested interest in the outcome, overt and unsupported opinions, factual and logical errors, reliance on emotion, false choices, and anything that contains hyperbole. 

A recent column by Stevens Point Councilwoman Mykerrah Zarazua is a fine example. In her piece, she incorrectly claims that the proposed referendum would likely prevent the purchase of new fire apparatus. She sounds the alarm that the proposal represents “a thinly-veiled attempt to upend how local government operates.” She then further opines that “referendums play an important role in local government,” while ending her column with a warning that the Founding Fathers did not embrace direct, populist democracy.

Her premise very well may be correct, but the effect is counterproductive. The red flags generated by this exaggerated and inconsistent editorial undercuts her point and distracts from what would otherwise may a good read. That’s a shame, but not unique.

So, as more referendums come our way, watch carefully what you read and hear, be your own final judge, ask questions, and responsibly get out and cast your vote. We are not very often asked by the government for our views, so take advantage of it.

So, with that, let’s meet in the opinion section to talk about all of it, boldly, unafraid, and with a healthy respect for each other. Until then, God bless.

Dan Kontos is a paid columnist for the Metro Wire. He chooses his own topics and his opinions do not necessarily represent the staff of the Metro Wire. He lives with his family in Whiting. 

We are seeking a liberal columnist. Anyone with interest should email [email protected].