City of Rockdale voters will be asked to add a sentence to one section of the city charter, and remove one to another section on May 4.
The addition would clarify recall procedures for council members, specifying that recalls from voters in one ward can’t cross the boundary line and apply to members on the other ward.
The removal of words from a different section would allow a council member to be appointed to another “city office.”
That proposal came in the wake of an unsuccessful attempt to appoint Mayor John King to the Rockdale Municipal Development District board.
RECALLS—City Secretary Terry Blanchard told The Reporter voters will be asked to add the following words to the charter section dealing with recalls of council members:
“... petition to recall a council member shall only be initiated by a qualified voter who resides in the ward which the council member was elected from and resides.”
“That means a recall petition—seeking to remove a council member from office—on someone in the west ward must come from a voter in the west ward,” she said. “And, of course it means a recall targeting an east ward member must come from someone in the east ward.”
The change is meant to prohibit someone in one ward from initiating a petition to remove someone in the other ward.
Actually the charter already states that in a more vague manner. The proposal is termed a “clarification” more than an actual policy change.
The change would not affect someone filing a mayoral recall. Rockdale’s mayor is elected from both wards.
That’s Proposition 2 on the ballot. A “yes” vote adds the language while a “no” note does not.
It’s not clear if a no-vote would actually change the intent of the charter’s recall section since it already states the recall “...shall apply to the ward from which the council member was elected, rather than the city as a whole.”
CITY OFFICE—Proposition 1 allows a council member to serve on another city office, something that is currently prohibited by the charger.
Because of the current language, Mayor King was unable to serve on the MDD board, even though the council had attempted to appoint him.
The MDD board, while a separate entity, is viewed as coming under the jurisdiction of the council since the city appoints board members.
The proposition would remove the words “other city office” from a charter sentence which begins “No member of the council shall hold...”
A “yes” vote allows the council to appoint one of its members to another city office. A “no” vote leaves the current prohibition in place.
- Log in or Subscribe to post comments.