Op-ed: Democracy's death by a thousand cuts

CLOSE

"The representatives of the people, in a popular assembly, seem sometimes to fancy that they are the people themselves, and betray strong symptoms of impatience and disgust at the least sign of opposition from any other quarter; as if the exercise of such rights… were a breach of their privilege and an outrage to their dignity."

—Alexander Hamilton - The Federalist Papers #71

Our first Treasury Secretary's words seem appropriate now in light of the recent actions by our Board of County Commissioners (BCC).

If summer's attractions have kept you from watching your Washoe County government in action, know that your Citizen Advisory Boards (CABs) have been emasculated by the BCC's actions to shrink their size and limit their action agendas to only "development" (and related) issues. While citizens can, in public comment, speak on any other issue, the CABs cannot now recommend any actions not related to development to address citizens' concerns to the BCC or other county boards, commissions or elected officials. Inconvenient and controversial recommendations to take actions on citizens' issues (inconvenient and controversial to the county staff and commissioners, that is) are no longer welcome CAB agenda items.

Adding to the BCC's "we will suffer no opposition" agenda, the new county sign code, approved on July 7 by the Washoe County Planning Commission (WCPC) and likely to be considered by the BCC at their August 25 meeting, would add to the diminution of citizen input.

The BCC sits as the "appellate" authority over decisions of most subsidiary county boards and commissions, including the Board of Adjustment and the WCPC on sign issues. However, the BCC previously directed staff and the WCPC to amend the sign code to ensure that the BCC would be the one and only authority (judge, jury and executioner) on regional recreation travel and tourism (RRTT) signs, supplanting their own Board of Adjustment and WCPC's advice based on public hearings, evidence and citizen input. The draft sign code does just that.

Aggrieved applicants, or others who disagree with the BCC's decisions on these 45-foot-tall and 450-square-feet-in-size traffic-distracting digital electronic message signs, will now have no administrative appeal, should the BCC approve the draft sign code before them. To contest the approval of such signs, aggrieved parties would now have to go into court and bear the required costs for attorneys and filing fees, something they don't routinely experience in administrative appeals.

So much for transparency in public affairs, the right to petition your government for a redress of grievances, and equal protection of the law.

Let's hope the BCC reconsiders their previous direction on CABs and maintains full, fair and open debate on RRTT signs by first seeking the advice of the Board of Adjustment and/or the Planning Commission.

Thomas G. Daly served as a member of the Southwest Truckee Meadows/Washoe Valley Citizens Advisory Board from 2013-2015.