In 2006, when a home rule charter was first being publicly discussed, squabbles and controversies frequently bogged down the Lancaster County Commissioners, and the moment seemed ripe for a change.
But in the two years between November 2006 — when 51 percent of voters approved a study of home rule — and Tuesday, a lot changed.
And those changes helped spell defeat for the proposed home rule charter, which Lancaster County voters rejected Tuesday by a margin of 63 to 37 percent.
G. Terry Madonna, the director of Franklin & Marshall College's Center for Politics and Public Affairs, said since home rule gained momentum because of controversies with former commissioners, the lack of bickering among the current commissioners made change seem unnecessary.
"The county leaders seem to be harmonious. That is not a recipe for home rule to pass," Madonna said.
The proposed home rule charter would have, among other things, added two county commissioners, shuffled some county offices and created an option for ballot initiatives.
In July, the Republican Committee of Lancaster County came out against the proposed home rule charter, opposition that severely narrowed the proposal's chance of success.
"I think the advocates of home rule had to face a united — for the most part — Republican party and a party apparatus that was not for it. And, they simply couldn't overcome that problem," Madonna said.
Leading up to Tuesday's voting, the local GOP campaigned actively against the plan, warning about high taxes and bigger government with the new charter.
Greg Sahd, who served on the 11-member home rule commission but was among its three members who voted against the group's proposal, said voters recognized the proposal's ramifications.
"The people understood it all too well. It was a proposed government that in the end was not as good as what we have now, in terms of economy and accountability," he said.
Sahd cheered the charter's defeat, saying, "I'm delighted. No question about it we dodged a bullet."
This morning, Tom Baldrige, president of the Lancaster Chamber of Commerce & Industry, reflected on the end of a long process that the business group launched in June 2006 and campaigned for ahead of Tuesday's vote.
"Obviously I'm disappointed. But it is nonetheless clear the voters have spoken, and I think it is now very important to get on with the business of county government and make sure the county is working as effectively and efficiently as possible," he said.
Baldridge said he thought voters were likely confused by the complexity of the charter, opting to vote against it if they didn't understand it.
Home rule allows local governments to craft a government structure different from the one dictated by the state.
In 1972, a home rule commission in Lancaster County wrote a charter that replaced the county's three commissioners with a county executive and a county legislature that included district and at-large representatives. A lawsuit derailed that effort on a technicality.
Madonna was a Lancaster County commissioner as that first home rule commission was being considered. Now, with the defeat of a second attempt, Madonna said home rule isn't likely to get a third chance here.
"With that decisive defeat? I don't think so," he said.
Staff writer Chad Umble can be reached at cumble@LNPnews.com
(79)
