| Author | Post |
|---|
dwaror
Member
| Joined: | Oct 29th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 12 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Nov 21st, 2006 03:38 am |
|
I believe that the citizens of Oak Ridge should be allowed to vote directly for their own choice of mayor. When you only have five council members, you rarely will represent the majority of the township.
We are a fast growing community and we need a leader who represents the future ideas of the majority of the town. If the majority of the voters who are eligible actually voted, then we could be sure that the mayor is the leader of the entire community, and not the choice of only 2 other council members.
I'm not sure what the correct procedure is to start this process, but it would seem that the current council should initiate an inquiry into examining the will of their constituants.
Quite frankly, does anyone else even care?
|
mstone
Member
| Joined: | Apr 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | Oak Ridge, USA |
| Posts: | 159 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |   |
|
Posted: Nov 21st, 2006 05:46 pm |
|
I'm sure a lot of folks care. I think the challenge is to figure out how to change the current process. If it takes elected officials to make such a change, it'll probably come very, very slowly if at all.
I like our mayor and think he's doing a fine job, but you are correct that the position should be filled by the voters - not the council. In some places, the position is filled by the person getting the most votes in the general election. Of course this only works when the whole council is up for election at the same time.
I take every opportunity to vote for those individuals that hold any office in the town, county, state, etc. That puts me in a group of less than 25% of all those eligible to vote. The rest don't seem to care - or don't believe that a single vote matters. How sad.
|
rasin
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 27th, 2006 07:47 pm |
|
If we voted on who is Mayor I think the process would get a bit more partisan which so far we have avoided unlike a town near by.
For the most part the mayor is a ceremonial title since nothing of much can be done without a majority of the council's vote so I am not too concerned about the process to select the mayor.
One argument in favor of the council voting on who they want to “chair” the council is that they will tend to work together a bit more since it is someone they support. The Mayor does have a bit more pull I guess since he/she is seen as the face of Oak Ridge and does lead the meetings. But again he/she can’t get anything on the agenda unless a majority of the council agrees.
I definitely would be against the dysfunctional form of government that Summerfield has, where the Mayor is pretty much just a title with little if any power. He/she can only vote if there is a tie, something that is unlikely with an odd number of members.
|
mstone
Member
| Joined: | Apr 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | Oak Ridge, USA |
| Posts: | 159 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 27th, 2006 09:01 pm |
|
Very good points, rasin. I must agree that it's difficult to go off on a power binge if your peers select you as the representative. You have to be a consensus builder or you're not going to last long. Anything that avoids partisan politics is the way to go.
|
S. Smith
Moderator
|
Posted: Nov 29th, 2006 04:33 pm |
|
dwaror wrote: I believe that the citizens of Oak Ridge should be allowed to vote directly for their own choice of mayor. When you only have five council members, you rarely will represent the majority of the township.
We are a fast growing community and we need a leader who represents the future ideas of the majority of the town. If the majority of the voters who are eligible actually voted, then we could be sure that the mayor is the leader of the entire community, and not the choice of only 2 other council members.
I'm not sure what the correct procedure is to start this process, but it would seem that the current council should initiate an inquiry into examining the will of their constituants.
Quite frankly, does anyone else even care?
I think there are arguments both for and against both sides of this argument. People in Stokesdale and Summerfield, for various reasons, wanted the right to elect their own mayor.
I personally have not had a problem with the way the mayor in Oak Ridge has been elected so far. I see a flaw in electing the mayor outright. What if you have two people running for mayor, both who have the best interests of the town in mind, have been active in the community, would both be good leaders, etc. Only one of them can get elected. In the way that it's currently done, people get to elect who they want to the council, and since more than one person gets elected at a time, they both might be elected to the council. Then they could both serve the community.
You do run the risk that a majority of council members will "make a deal" and elect who they think is best, perhaps without taking the wishes of a majority of voters into account, but if the people elect all the council members, that still shouldn't be too much of an issue.
It's not that hard to change the process (you can either just ask the council to support a resolution for a mayoral election, and if they don't, you have to get something like a certain percentage of signatures of registered voters based on the number that voted in the last election), but I personally think we have no reason in Oak Ridge to do that so far.
|
dwaror
Member
| Joined: | Oct 29th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 12 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Dec 4th, 2006 03:03 am |
|
I'm quite sure that I don't agree with the opinion that the body of 5 council members are capable of electing the best person for mayor. Mayors should have demonstrated leadership and should have the support of the entire community. In the current system, you certainly run the risk of having a croney selected because they are a "good old boy/girl" that only 2 other council members are required to support.
You may feel that the current council is harmonious because they support the ideas that you agree with. What if you didn't agree with them? Would their harmony still represent the best leadership for the township?
I would suggest that a popularly elected mayor would come much closer to representing the entire community, instead of any special interest group.
I would also suggest that the mayor should be able to vote on every issue.
I will be glad to email the council and suggest that they consider this as a proposal for a future agenda. My guess is that the topic will never be brought up by the council.
|
S. Smith
Moderator
|
Posted: Dec 4th, 2006 11:57 am |
|
You've brought up some excellent points.
One might argue that if the 5 members of the council are elected by the people, that the people do, in a way, elect the mayor.
I definitely would want the mayor to continue to be able to vote, especially since Oak Ridge has a 5-member council. If the mayor were not allowed to vote, the vote could potentially be 2-2 on any issue, meaning the mayor would have to break the tie anyway.
As I said, this can be brought before the council, and they may agree if enough citizens contact them to say they are in support. If they do not initiate the action, it can be done by a citizen, who just has to collect enough signatures of registered voters to have it put on the ballot.
|
mstone
Member
| Joined: | Apr 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | Oak Ridge, USA |
| Posts: | 159 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Dec 4th, 2006 04:41 pm |
|
I'd be suprised if a citizen of OR asked for such a discussion to be held at a town council meeting that they would be turned down. The discussion might not be a big production and it probably wouldn't garner much debate from the audience, but I'll just about bet that it would get its place on an agenda. Just my optimistic 2 cents.
Just out of curiosity (not because I think this particular process needs to be changed) does anyone know how many signatures are needed to get an item put before the voters? Is it a fixed number or is it a percentage of registered voters?
|
Jim Flynt
Member
| Joined: | Jul 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Bermuda Triangle |
| Posts: | 1372 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Dec 4th, 2006 07:01 pm |
|
mstone wrote: Is it a fixed number or is it a percentage of registered voters?
To answer your question, here is the applicable N.C. General Statute which applies and proscribes the method of change through a citizen ballot initiative:
§ 160A‑104. Initiative petitions for charter amendments.
The people may initiate a referendum on proposed charter amendments. An initiative petition shall bear the signatures and resident addresses of a number of qualified voters of the city equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the whole number of voters who are registered to vote in city elections according to the most recent figures certified by the State Board of Elections or 5,000, whichever is less. The petition shall set forth the proposed amendments by describing them briefly but completely and with reference to the pertinent provisions of G.S. 160A‑101, but it need not contain the precise text of the charter amendments necessary to implement the proposed changes. The petition may not propose changes in the alternative, or more than one integrated set of charter amendments. Upon receipt of a valid initiative petition, the council shall call a special election on the question of adopting the charter amendments proposed therein, and shall give public notice thereof in accordance with G.S. 163‑287. The date of the special election shall be fixed at not more than 120 nor fewer than 60 days after receipt of the petition. If a majority of the votes cast in the special election shall be in favor of the proposed changes, the council shall adopt an ordinance amending the charter to put them into effect. Such an ordinance shall not be subject to a referendum petition. No initiative petition may be filed (i) between the time the council initiates proceedings under G.S. 160A‑102 by publishing a notice of hearing on proposed charter amendments and the time proceeding under that section have been carried to a conclusion either through adoption or rejection of a proposed ordinance or lapse of time, nor (ii) within one year and six months following the effective date of an ordinance amending the city charter pursuant to this Article, nor (iii) within one year and six months following the date of any election on charter amendments that were defeated by the voters.
The restrictions imposed by this section on filing initiative petitions shall apply only to petitions concerning the same subject matter. For example, pendency of council action on amendments concerning the method of electing the council shall not preclude an initiative petition on adoption of the council‑manager form of government.
Hope this helps.
Both the Guilford County Board of Elections and the N.C. Institute of Government in Chapel Hill can and will assist you in answering your questions as well as in helping to correctly form a proposed amendment and signature petition.
This is the very same process that we went through over here in Stokesdale and if you will recall, the Stokesdale voters approved a change in our town charter which allows the voters rather than the town council to elect the Mayor, and that ballot intiative passed by a margin of 89% in favor with only 11% of the voters opposed to the change.
Last edited on Dec 4th, 2006 07:06 pm by Jim Flynt
____________________
"Take no prisoners"
|
Hairbrush
Member
| Joined: | Jan 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 120 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Dec 4th, 2006 07:59 pm |
|
| Does the Mayor in Stokesdale have voting rights or does the Mayor only vote in a tie? That is how it is in Summerfield.
|
Jim Flynt
Member
| Joined: | Jul 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Bermuda Triangle |
| Posts: | 1372 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Dec 4th, 2006 08:48 pm |
|
Hairbrush wrote: Does the Mayor in Stokesdale have voting rights or does the Mayor only vote in a tie? That is how it is in Summerfield.
The Mayor in Stokesdale has a vote (unlike Summerfield).
____________________
"Take no prisoners"
|
Current time is 02:42 pm | |
|