Sick-leave ballot question should be written by the local stakeholders

Pick one: “Yes” or “No.” That’s it. That’s all the input Albuquerque voters will get on the proposed sick-leave ordinance appearing on this year’s municipal-election ballot.

Why would OLÉ (Organizers in the Land of Enchantment) — formerly known as ACORN before this progressive group went bankrupt for misleading voters in the late 2000s — be against an Albuquerque City Council alternative sick-leave ballot question that ensured a public process of citizen input and involvement?

Probably for the same reasons the group fought to keep the full text of the proposed ordinance off the ballot. Is it because members don’t think the average voter will understand the hidden mandates and legal penalties in their seven-page ordinance and, therefore, will vote to pass it without reading it? Or is it because the organizers are well aware that no city council would ever enact this extreme and onerous proposal drafted by out-of-state attorneys?

The City Council passed, in a 7-1 vote, an advisory question to go on the ballot in October: “Shall the governing body of the city of Albuquerque promptly enact a sick leave ordinance in a manner that promotes public participation, public hearings, transparency and fairness so that a wise and workable sick leave policy is adopted and effective no later than Jan. 1, 2019?”

Our 30-plus-member coalition of business and trade groups thinks paid sick leave should be a business decision, not a local government mandate. But where mandates are the will of the voters, we would much rather have all stakeholders work in a transparent, public process toward a fair, workable law. Who wouldn’t?

OLÉ, that’s who. Although OLÉ purports to be in favor of a sick-leave law, the organization went to court to have this advisory question, which simply invited the public to help write the best law possible if a law is what the public wants, stricken from the ballot.