Committee Recommends Term Limits, Seven-Member City Council

By Woody Jenkins, Editor, Central City News

CENTRAL — The Mayor’s Committee on Term Limits and Council Districts Sunday voted to recommend term limits for Central’s city officials and a new seven-member City Council with five members elected from single-member districts and two Councilmen elected at-large citywide.

Committee chairman Wayne Messina said the committee’s recommendations will be sent to the City Council.  He hopes the Council will be able to put the plan before Central voters in the fall.

The committee’s plan would provide term limits for city officials as follows:

• Mayor, three four-year terms

• Police chief, three four-year terms

• City Council, two four-year terms

The term limits would begin with newly-elected officials who take office in July 2014 and be prospective in their application.  So the years of service by current city officials would not count toward the limits.

The committee debated the question of the size of the next City Council and how members of that body would be elected.  The committee considered five possibilities:

• A five-member City Council, elected at-large citywide, as the present Council is elected

• A five-member City Council, elected by divisions, which would be designated seats, each elected citywide, with a Division A, B, C, D, and E

• A five-member City Council elected from five single-member districts

• A seven-member City Council elected from seven single-member districts, and

• A seven-member City Council, with five members elected from single-member districts and two members elected at-large citywide.

Russell Starns told the committee the best option was a five-member City Council elected from single-member districts.  However, most committee members disagreed.

In the end, four of the seven committee members — Jr. Shelton, Charles Lee Hinton, Angela Summerville, and Vince Dileo — supported a seven-member Council with five elected from districts and two at-large.  Two committee members — Joan Lansing and Mike Mannino — supported a seven-member Council with all elected from single-member districts.  Only one committee member — Brian Fife — supported a five-member Council with all five elected from single-member districts.  No one on the committee favored the current five-member at-large Council or the idea of electing a five-member Council by divisions.

One criticism of the current five-member Council is that it is too small to have a functioning committee system.

Messina did not vote on the final recommendations, but he said he supports the majority’s decision.  Starns argued that having a seven-member City Council would be too expensive. However, Messina contended that the cost would be little different from the present system but would provide broader representation.

Messina said, “I have spoken to mayors and councilmen from all over the state, and many have told me that a combination of single-member districts and at-large seats is the best.  It allows each area of the city to be represented but it also allows some members to have a citywide perspective.  Sometimes very talented people live in the same area of the city.  If we go solely with districts, we would be deprived of the opportunity to have their service.”

Messina said he hopes the Council will consider the committee’s recommendations at the Council’s first meeting in May.  He said that he would like the propositions to be on the election ballot on Oct. 22, if that is permitted by state law.

States, counties, and cities across the country are considering reapportionment because of the 2010 census.  Central could continue its current system of at-large voting by taking no action. However, if it adopts any kind of districting plan, those districts would have to be in accordance with the latest census numbers.

If Mayor Mac Watts were to veto a reapportionment plan adopted by the City Council, the current system of at-large voting would continue in effect unless the Council overrode his veto.

After approval by the City Council, the proposals would have to be submitted to the U. S. Justice Department for review under the federal Voting Rights Act.  Central has the option of getting out from under scrutiny by the Justice Department if it can show that its elections have been conducted in a non-discriminatory manner.