Letter to the Editor - Recall - 10/28/2011

Details

Published on Friday, 28 October 2011 14:17

Dear Editor:

Few would disagree with the theory of recalling elected officials as a means retaining control over those who are not representing the best interests of their constituents.  Interesting, justification for recall varies broadly between elected municipal officials, and those holding state positions.

Recalls of state officials are usually for "cause," and are often quite serious, criminally based, and are specific.

The basis for recall of state officials from Alaska and Georgia are listed below and are representative.  Of the nineteen states that have laws for recall, all require "specific" cause.

Alaska:  Lack of fitness, incompetence, neglect of duties or corruption. (AS§15.45.510)

Georgia:  Act of malfeasance or misconduct while in office; violation of oath of office; failure to perform duties prescribed by law; willfully misused, converted, or misappropriated, without authority, public property or public funds entrusted to or associated with the elective office to which the official has been elected or appointed.  Discretionary performance of a lawful act or a prescribed duty shall not constitute a ground for recall of an elected public official. (Ga. Code §21-4-3(7) and 21-4-4c)

In contrast, grounds for recalling local elected officials are diverse.   Of the 29 states that have enacted laws for municipal elected officials, most don't require any specific grounds for recall.  Only 11 of the 29 states require grounds similar to those described above for alaska and Georgia, which require a "cause" for recall.

Two elected officials from Elk City were recently subjects of the first step in the recall process:  the petition.  One of these officials was newly elected.  Though that effort failed, it was disturbing for me to watch, because neither official had done anything specific or untoward, except to have voted in a way that was disagreeable to a group of detractors.

Our goal for Elk City should be to elect good officials and give them a chance to govern until the next election.

The threat of recall based on differences on issues ultimately lessens the independence of elected officials, and can lead to abuses by special interest groups or activists.

I would hope that our citizenry lean toward the guidelines requiring specificity of cause, and avoid using discretionary performance of a  lawful act or a prescribed duty as grounds for recall.

None of us will agree on every issue, nor should that be the expectation.  Our mayor and commissioners should do dither best and always do what they believe is right for Elk City.  There should be tolerance for differing opinions.  Run for office if you believe you can do it better.  The pay is not too good, though.

Tom M. Johnson
Commissioner, Ward Two