Westmoreland County Commissioner P. Scott Conner has chosen not to pursue a fellow commissioner's vague offer to support - maybe - a home-rule study referendum.
It was the right move, and for good reason.
If a future home rule study in Westmoreland County is to have any credibility, it must be handled by a nonpartisan commission dedicated to a full and objective vetting of county government - not a cursory review by a commission stacked with statists. That would defeat the whole purpose of a referendum, which proponents hope to secure on the spring ballot by petitioning county voters. (The commission's membership also would be elected.)
Previously, Commissioner Tom Ceraso indicated he would consider supporting Mr. Conner's bid for a referendum as a way to promote debate on the issue. A simple majority vote of the commissioners could add the referendum question to the ballot without need for a petition drive.
But at what priceâ¢
After talking with Conner prior to a commissioners' meeting this month, Mr. Ceraso said he wasn't sure if he would have voted for or against the proposal. Either way, Conner didn't present the opportunity.
Prior to Ceraso's renewed "consideration," he stood firmly against any talk of home rule.
The process, as Conner has outlined, should remain a "people movement" and not become, or be construed as, a political football.
And contrary to the argument that a home-rule study commission could back the county into something it does not want or need, a future commission's recommendations can take any shape - from a top-down reorganization of county government to tweaking the existing structure or leaving it unchanged.
Better for this important issue to remain, from the get-go, in the people's province.
