[Vision2020] Term of Office

[Jeff Harkins]

Excellent post by Wayne (Statute 50-704 seems 
appropriate - 
http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=500070004.K). 
And my error - I had not considered that the term 
had a full two years remaining (I don't vote in 
city elections, so did not understand that 
component) and leaped into the crevasse without a parachute.

Wayne's suggestion of heading to District Court 
is probably reasonable and should help settle the 
controversy quickly.  A small subtle point may be 
the notion of certifying the election - which 
probably needs to be done (if not already) before any actions can be taken.


At 03:06 PM 11/14/2005, you wrote:

>Election Debaters,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns 
>= "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
>
>
>
>I stopped by the city library on the way from the post office.
>
>
>
>Donald Huskey cited the below as the applicable law.
>
>
>
>To see quickly if there was any case law on this 
>particular statute, I checked the Annotated 
>Idaho Code.  There was only one annotation and 
>that did not deal with the issue which the city 
>now faces.  No all cases may be referenced by the annotations.
>
>
>
>Unless things have changed, anyone with a UI 
>computer ID can go to the UI Law Library Site 
>and make a careful and complete search with 
>relative ease to see if there are any other 
>cases dealing with IC 50-704.  They can then 
>read, copy, and paste to Vision 2020 all 
>applicable cases.  {Anyone can use the computers 
>in the lobby of the law library for the same purpose.}
>
>
>
>
>
>However, if the city wants to be squeaky clean 
>and aboveboard on this issue, it should ask the 
>district court for a Declaratory Judgment on an expedited basis.
>
>
>
>
>
>Since I am not an attorney, my opinion is not 
>likely to be very persuasive.  That said, maybe 
>we should look carefully at the statute at issue.
>
>
>
>50-704.  VACANCIES -- APPOINTMENT. A vacancy on 
>the council shall be filled by appointment made 
>by the mayor with the consent of the council, 
>which appointee shall serve only until the next 
>general city election, at which such vacancy 
>shall be filled for the balance of the original term.
>
>
>
>It may be helpful to break the statute down:
>
>
>
>[A]  A vacancy on the council shall be filled by 
>appointment made by the mayor with the consent of the council,
>
>
>
>[B]  which appointee shall serve only until the next general city election,
>
>
>
>[C]  at which such vacancy shall be filled for 
>the balance of the original term.
>
>
>
>There does not appear to be any controversy about [A].
>
>
>
>[B] appears to be saying that the appointee 
>serve only until the next general city 
>election.  Perhaps a more exact way of reading this is:
>
>
>
>shall serve only until the {date of the} next general city election,
>
>
>
>This means, in my opinion, that once the 
>election is held, the appointee's term of 
>service has ended.  The use of the word "only" 
>in the context of the statute and particularly 
>in the context of phrase [B] seems determinative to me.
>
>
>
>That being the case then [C] should be read as:
>
>
>
>at which {date of the next general city 
>election} such  the vacancy {for which the 
>appointee was appointed} shall be filled for the 
>balance of the original term {which is the 
>interval between the date of the general 
>election and the date elected officials are normally sworn in}.
>
>
>
>If it was intended for the appointee to fill the 
>entire remaining term of the position to which 
>they were appointed until the seating of those 
>elected in the next city general election, the 
>language of the statute would read:
>
>
>
>which appointee shall serve the remainder of the 
>term of the councilperson whose departure 
>created the vacancy; or if there is a general 
>city election before the end of the vacator's 
>term, shall serve until a new councilperson can 
>be elected and seated in accordance with the 
>other applicable statutes of this section.
>
>
>
>Perhaps the legislative intent of this statute 
>is to install in office as quickly as possible a 
>person who clearly and directly represents the 
>current will of the electorate, not one who 
>serves, once removed by appointment rather than 
>by election, according to the past will of the electorate.
>
>
>
>
>
>My opinion could easily be wrong in this 
>matter.  However, I urge the city to seek a 
>Declaratory Judgment from the district court on 
>an expedited basis.  Perhaps by Monday next, we could have an answer.
>
>
>
>Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
><mailto:deco at moscow.com>deco at moscow.com
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jeff Harkins" <<mailto:jeffh at moscow.com>jeffh at moscow.com>
>To: <<mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com>vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 11:09 AM
>Subject: [Vision2020] Term of Office
>
> > Visionnaires:
> >
> > It seems to me that elections are for "terms of office"
> >
> > I suspect that the state law deals with two issues - filling the
> > remaining term of Hill (to January) and election of the replacement
> > for the new term - (which is seated in Jan),
> >
> > A consistent interpretation  - leading to seating in January
> > seemingly consistent with the will of voters ....
> >
> > Thus voters for Hill get their full term and voters against Ament
> > don't have to endure someone they didn't vote for more than his
> > elected term.  Seems rather straightforward to me.
> >
> > _____________________________________________________
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >               <http://www.fsr.net>http://www.fsr.net
> >          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> >
> >
>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20051114/7e1b8995/attachment-0001.htm