EDITORIAL: Debate the merits of consolidation, skip the nitpicking

Indeed, Citizens Opposed to Reorganization in Evansville sought formally to prevent residents of the county from having a say-so in whether or not Evansville and Vanderburgh County should be merged into one. It doesn't figure.

If, as they believe, their victory could be by as much as 3-1 — the same margin that upended Vandigov in 1974 — why would they want to put off a public vote until another year?

But on Aug. 2, CORE raised a series of issues with the Election Board about the process followed to get the consolidation question on the ballot. Some were silly, such as the League of Women Voters — which sought the referendum — having some members who are not residents of Vanderburgh County, and the League's petition not including the date of a referendum (no one could have known at the time that petitions were circulated).

Then, at a hearing this past week before the election board, Bruce Ungethiem, co-chair of CORE, alleged that potentially hundreds of signatures could be found to be invalid for a number of reasons. However, the Election Board determined that the 2006 law which created the process for consolidation was followed, and that the referendum should go forward.

Vanderburgh County Clerk Susan Kirk, a member of the Election Board, said that although she is basically for the CORE group, these challenges to the process should cease. She said questions about signatures on petitions would have to be decided by a judge. And that is a possibility, given that Ungethiem said his group would weigh the possibilities of going to court.

In other words, they might seek to quash the referendum.

That would be genuinely disappointing. The competing campaigns, CORE against and YESforUnification in favor, have some meaty issues about local government to debate in the coming months — questions about government costs, about efficiency, about duplication, about how best to provide leadership, about economic development.