Wednesday, January 5, 2011
State Election Coordinator Says City Council Action Must Precede Charter-Surrender Referendum
Surprise action will mean further delay in scheduling vote. Council source hints at alternative actions to speed election process. Allan Wade says backup petition is already prepared.
Posted by Jackson Baker on Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:01 PM
Giannini indicated that he would elaborate on the ruling at the Election Commission’s scheduled 4:30 meeting Wednesday afternoon. He had previously indicated that, without word from Goins, the Election Commission intended to set February 15 as the date for the surrender referendum.
When and if the referendum, authorized by the MCS board on December 20, goes forward and is passed, merger between MCS and SCS would automatically ensue.
A source on the City Council indicated that a public petition on behalf of the referendum {"which would be a low bar"} could bypass the obstacle presented by Goins' ruling, and that other remedies were available short of direct Council action.
Council attorney Allan Wade confirmed that a petition signed by 25 voting residents of Memphis could accomplish what an official resolution from the Council would to authorize the referendum.
Wade said such a petition had in fact already been prepared as a backup.
In any case, the effect of Goins' ruling will be to further snarl an already unwieldy and uncertain timetable for resolution on the crisis that began gathering after the November 2 election, with an announcement from SCS board chairman David Pickler that he would be pursuing legislation to enable a special school district for Shelby County schools.
MCS board members Martavius Jones and Tomeka Hart responded with a resolution to surrender the MCS charter, and on December 20, the MCS board voted 5-4 to call a charter-surrender referendum.
Ever since, Pickler and other representatives of SCS have sought a means of delaying such a development. They held a Monday press conference predicting chaos if the school systems' merger should go through.
On Tuesday, Memphis Mayor A C Wharton and Shelby County Mayor Mark Luttrell held a press conference to offer their services in easing whatever transition should develop as a result of the referendum.
Comments (20)
Showing 1-20 of 20
like
dislike
Well....hmm...back in august 08 when the Memphis Charter Commission completed it's work there was a similar procedural fracas that was quickly abated. the understanding was that this was purely for the purpose of procedure and the council would take no actions to alter the work of the Commission. It will be interesting to see if the Council takes a similar approach this time, or will some seek to capitalize on this for their own purposes.
Republicans just have to play their games. Every Memphis should now demand the right to vote.
This isn't particularly surprising, because we knew that the state election folks would try something. They dug deep to find this excuse to stall.
Citizens should take charge of this confusion and show elected officials how it's done - let's sign the petition and get the referendum set.
Dug Deep to find it? It's a statute. Is the State official wrong? Because if he's not, its pretty irrelevant that some of us wish he had never found this law. We have to follow the law. Would you rather the vote occur, and the district dissolve, only to have all of that overturned by a court challenge based on this statute?? Because that would really help the kids, and that's what this is all about, right?
The city council now has leverage to get that quart of ice cream from MCS. No "upstanding" politico would allow that small issue of $57 million to get in the way of moving this forward. Would they? :)
Let's assume politics is the only reason the state official went searching for the law. When he finds a law that is spot on point, what relevance do his motivations have? Do we have to follow the law or not?
Interpretation: I read it one way, you read it another, someone else reads it another way.
Well if his reading of the statute is wrong, that's another issue entirely. So how is he wrong? What is your alternate interpretation?
Well, it seems that we only obey those laws or interpretations that fit our agendas.
Per the Appeal, the law cited by Goins is a 1961 law relating to "commissioners." Does the 1966 change from commission to council form of government not come in to play? We don't have commissioners. This probably BS, just curious.
Read the companion article, "Goins' Invoking of Long-Gone 'Board of Commissioners,' etc." Memphis fidelity. It makes this very point.
Memphidelity, rather. My bad. And whaddya mean, "per the Appeal?" Again, see above.
And if you broke that, apologies. Keeping up, not keeping score. Thanks for the good work.
Jack, he is wrong b/c that board no longer exists. The Memphis City Council and that Board are not in any legal sense the same entity. It's completely political, admit it.
Top Commenters
THIS WEEK'S ISSUE
SPECIAL ISSUES
