Last Nov. 7, in an historic election, the voters changed their form of county government from a three-member board of commissioners to a five-member council with an appointed, professional county manager.

Change didn't come easily - requiring two referendums, dozens of meetings and 29 months time - and rightfully so. These are weighty matters worthy of careful consideration.

And decisions so derived should not be overturned easily, as House Bill 348, sponsored by Brown, would allow. This is a "do-over" bill, providing for a re-vote, and perhaps a quick and easy repeal of the will of the people, whenever they vote to change their county's form of government.

In June 2004, the Summit County Commission approved a ballot question, and that November the voters favored the formation of a government-change study committee. The committee held dozens of meetings. Public hearings were scheduled, experts were summoned, community forums were staged. And finally, painstakingly, a ballot proposal was drafted.

In a vote that pitted the pro-council suburbanites of the Snyderville Basin against Brown's base, the status quo-seeking rural residents of the county's eastern reaches, the suburbanites barely prevailed, 5,490 to 5,254.

A five-member council, elected at-large, will be seated in 2009 and they will hire a county manager. And there's no way to stop it, unless Brown's insidious bill is approved.

HB 348 wouldn't nullify that vote. But the legislation would allow the losers to vote again without undertaking a second study. As long as the new governing body hasn't already been seated, the question can be placed back on the ballot with a petition signed by a mere 10 percent of a county's voters.

And if it happens in Summit County, and last year's winners become this year's losers, there will never be a council-manager form of government in Summit, or any county. Brown's bill takes the council-manager option off the state's list of alternative forms of government that counties can consider.

Summit County followed the law to the letter and voters made their choice. Brown shouldn't be allowed to change the law just because he didn't like the outcome.