By THE JOURNAL NEWS
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original Publication: October 28, 2005)

Sooner or later, if the activists for a "ward" system continue their drive, there will be a referendum in Ramapo. And the people's will be done, in a "Yes" or "No" vote. As it should be.

For the third time now since 2003, town officials have rejected petitions calling for such a vote, citing this technicality or that. Never have the papers been in order, sort of like the assorted characters who wanted to get out of Free France in "Casablanca." It all depends on who has the rubber stamp.

This time, as staff writer James Walsh reports, a single flaw was enough to void petitions calling for a vote on creation of the ward system of government and to increase the size of the Town Board. In two written decisions totaling 10 pages, Town Clerk Christian Sampson determined that all 2,012 signatures were invalid because the preamble to the petitions did not include the date of the election.

The rejection was the third time since 2003 that the proposal by Preserve Ramapo, a group opposing the re-election of the Town Board's incumbents, had failed to get on the ballot.

Council members now run at-large. Under a ward system, they would instead represent specific neighborhoods, or wards. The number of board members would increase from four to six, plus the supervisor. Such a system might more equitably represent all the voters in a township that has increasingly stronger bloc voting from religious groups.

Preserve Ramapo is opposed to the Ramapo Comprehensive Plan for development, specifically its zoning for housing connected to religious schools in single-family neighborhoods. It has advocated the changes in government that the organization believes would improve representation on the Town Board.

Sampson, in his decision, stated that election law requires "that the date of the election be set forth in the preamble to the petition. The date of the election is statutorily mandated to be included in the petition." Well, that's a matter of opinion. As Preserve Ramapo member Michael Parietti notes, it was impossible to cite a specific election date on the petitions because the town could have up to 70 days to put it on a ballot.

The town clerk's rulings were prompted in part by objections filed by three Monsey residents. While Preserve Ramapo has contested at least one similar rejection in court, Chairman Robert Rhode, has said the group is unlikely to appeal this time and will instead focus on the November election.

Among the other defects found by Sampson were 43 duplicate signatures. He also found that 113 printed signatures did not match signatures on file at the county Board of Elections, and that 65 signatures were illegible. His Oct. 7 decisions missed an Oct. 3 Board of Elections deadline to put the referendum on the Nov. 8 ballot.

What is next? Preserve Ramapo hopes to change the people who hold rubber- stamp approval in Ramapo, but failing that, they could bring another initiative on the ward system. Our view is that the people should decide townwide, and that the starting gate should not be blocked by the bureaucratic power of those who may fear a result they would not like.