Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Proposed Charter Changes Hit Snag At State Level

   If proposed changes to the City of Lawrenceburg charter are to become effective, the Private Act must pass a roll call vote from the state legislative bodies.

   Action on the private act was deferred through the Tennessee General Assembly when it came up for a vote on Monday.

   Members of the Lawrenceburg Board of Mayor and Commissioners voted unanimously during their February 14, 2008, meeting to approve a number of proposed changes in order to “tweak” the city’s charter. Most of the changes proposed were done so, they said, as a means of saving money for the city.

   Should the charter changes be adopted, the title of the board would be changed from the “Lawrenceburg Board of Mayor and Commissioners” to “Lawrenceburg Board of Mayor and Council.”

   One cost saving measure would do away with runoff elections within the city. The charter currently requires that a candidate gain “50% plus one vote” in order to be elected. This leads to numerous runoff elections being held. The board proposes changing the document to require only a majority vote.

   Commissioners hope to change city elections, currently held in April, to coincide with County General Elections, which are held “the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.” In order to achieve this, the terms of commission members elected in 2005 (as well as the newly-appointed Ronald Fox) would be extended until 2010, while terms of those elected in 2007 would be extended until 2012. The move would effectively add an additional sixteen months to the term of each commissioner.

   During the February meeting, Williams pointed out that making this change would save the city $10,000 to $12,000 for each election, currently held every two years. Oftentimes, he explained, city elections see only an 8% to 9% voter turnout. The move, he explained, might also boost the number of city voters who participate in elections.

   Commissioners amended the proposed resolution before voting, establishing a date on which board members will take office. When elected in November, council members would take office the following December 1.

   The proposal would reduce the requirement of “2/3 vote of the board,” to “a majority” in order to terminate the employment of a city administrator. It also includes a provision to allow the board to appoint someone other than the mayor to serve as interim city administrator in the event that the position becomes vacant.

   The document addresses the currently unfilled position of city recorder, and clarifies votes cast by non-resident property owners, limiting the number of property owners voting per piece of property to two.

   Once approved by the Lawrenceburg Commission, the Private Act was forwarded for consideration by the Tennessee General Assembly. It must gain approval through both the Tennessee House of Representatives and Senate.

   If the document were to gain approval on the state level, it would be returned to the City of Lawrenceburg. Leaders would then be required to advertise the proposal in local newspapers for two weeks. (Yet another cost-saving measure included allows for the advertisement to inform citizens that copies of the charter and proposed changes are available through the office of the city administrator and the public library. Under the current charter the entire charter, which is approximately thirty-five pages in length, must be advertised. Betz pointed out, “This would probably cost the city $6,000 to $7,000 just to advertise…I believe this allows plenty of public notice and access without that type of expense.”)

   With the advertising requirement met, the commission would hold a public hearing regarding the proposed changes. Afterward, state law requires that the document be approved a second time by the city commission by a 2/3 majority vote.

   When the Private Act was brought up for a vote through the General Assembly on Monday, an objection was raised and the vote was postponed. The act has been moved to the assembly’s Regular Calendar. When it comes up for a vote once again, the measure must now be approved through roll call vote.

.

.