The residents of King County are entitled to a vote of the people

Reform delayed is reform denied.

More than 74,000 King County voters signed Initiative 25, and it has now qualified for the ballot. A vote on either I-25 itself, or on the charter amendment proposed in I-25, will be held this November.

Every county in Washington state has an elected official who is directly responsible to the voters for the orderly administration of elections. Our polling indicates that a significant majority of King County voters wish to change the charter to have an elected official directly responsible for elections, as well.

In an editorial position, The Seattle Times wants an "orderly transition," insinuating that pushing reform to 2010 is appropriate ["Orderly transition to elections director," Editorial, Aug. 26]. Voters, however, want the King County Elections Department reformed now.

It is perfectly reasonable to vote on the key issue this November and on the initial director of elections this February on the same date as the presidential primary — a key election with substantial voter participation.

An elected director of elections would be empowered to speak out and advocate both to the County Council and the state Legislature for changes in laws that would improve the conduct of elections. They could speak freely — over the heads of the County Council and the county executive, if necessary — and advocate for the resources needed to properly conduct elections. They would answer directly to the people and would not be buried seven layers deep in bureaucracy as they are today. They would be a needed agent of change in a troubled department and would hire expert election supervisors and staff as they create the new department.

The proposal to elect the director of elections for King County did not come out of thin air. Both the Elections Task Force, appointed by the county executive, and the Citizens Elections Oversight Committee (CEOC), appointed by the Metropolitan King County Council, recommended that the county charter be changed to allow the office to be headed by an elected official. These recommendations came after the 2003 and 2004 election difficulties and were strongly endorsed by both committees.

The CEOC report states "Creating an elected auditor is the kind of basic organizational change needed to show voters that King County has thoroughly reformed its elections system. It signals to the public that the problems that occurred in 2004 are being successfully addressed and will not be repeated ... " We have amended the charter to make the office of sheriff an elected rather than appointed position. There is ample precedent that I-25 is prudent and rational reform — the kind of reform that elected officials resist, despite it being the foundation of our democracy.

The King County Charter would not have been established without a vote of the people. Likewise, no amendment to the charter can be adopted without a vote of the people of King County. In any organizational chart you draw for King County government, the box at the top would be labeled "the people of King County," not the executive, not the council, not freeholders, not anyone else.

The current attempt by some county councilmembers to say they "agree with the concept, but not now" is simply a sneaky way of delaying the people's vote. Some councilmembers would have the voters vote on the issue four times!

Reform delayed is reform denied.

The Metropolitan King County Council must put the charter amendment proposed in I-25 on the November ballot for one vote on the merits. Secretary of State Sam Reed and State Auditor Brian Sonntag, both former county auditors themselves, support I-25 and a November election. In addition, many Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians and Greens support I-25 for a November election.

Toby Nixon is a former state representative for the 45th District and chair of Citizens for Accountable Elections, the committee sponsoring I-25. He can be reached at toby@tobynixon.com.