Why a Representitive Government

A quick bit of background on Fair-Housing in Clinton Township. The Township has been facing the prospect of having 911 homes built because of a Builders-Remedy (a brief discussion of the Fair-Housing Act Link) lawsuit brought by Pulte Homes after the planning board denied Pulte's application to build 911 homes on 292 acres in the township. Although local residents have fought against the development by getting the planning designation of the area changed, fighting to have a creek that runs through the property designated as a class 1 stream and the township spending large amounts of money on professionals, just before the primary, the town council voted to accept a compromise with the builder allowing approximately 350 age restricted units and 90 low income units to be built.

On June 7th the Clinton Township Republican primary for Mayor was held and it centered on whether to make the deal with Pulte homes or to continue fighting Pulte in court. The winner will run un-opposed in November. On the side of settlement was the Mayor Tom Borkowsi and on the other was the head of The Clinton Township Community Coalition, the group fighting the development, Nick Corcodillos. Corcodillos won.

During the campaign Borkowski laid out his reasons for accepting the deal; The township had lost nearly every major court battle to date, 350 age restricted houses would generate $8 Million in tax revenues without the addition of new schools and the 90 low income units would meet the town's affordable housing quota. His bottom line was that this settlement was the least risky avenue because if the town ended up losing in court the full 911 homes could be built.

Nick Corcodillos argued that the deal did not satisfy the COAH obligation. Under the new State environmental regulations, the site changed and could not support the 90 affordable housing units leaving the township open to other Builder-Remedy suits in the future.

How could a voter know what is the right position! The issue is in the courts now and will be for another 3-5 years. Both candidates, I believe, spoke and acted in good faith that their position was right. Corcodillos may have had personal reasons (he lives near the site and has spent years fighting it) to go for an all or nothing approach. But, the average voter could never become knowledgeable enough about all the aspects of this issue in order to cast an intelligent vote.

When the founders created a Representative Republic they did it just for this reason. In the old days much of the population was away from population centers and information sources and was not well informed. What an individual did know was whether the person running for office in their district held views and beliefs similar to his. The founders expected voters to vote on personality and character, not issues. In modern times we believe that we should vote on issues and pundits often comment on how uninformed voters are. I guess we are, but the founders accounted for it.