TJOURNAL.COM • Website of The Tri-County Journal & Chattahoochee Chronicle |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Tri-County Journal |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
View a list of archived online articles about Marion County.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coalition responds to judge's directive |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
By RICHARD HARRIS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The February 26 hearing had been held to hear arguments in Commissioner Frank Powell’s request to have the recall effort halted and to not grant the coalition a recall application. In addition to listening to testimony from witnesses who believe Powell deserves to be removed from office due to his performance, the judge also asked questions about the wording of the application. During the hearing the judge had read a statement dealing with it being against the law for people to receive money when signing a petition and asked Coalition Chairman Bryant Vaughn if such statements were included on the petition. Vaughn’s answer was “no.” At the end of the hearing Judge Miller told the coalition’s attorney, Alfonza Whitaker, that he had a week to file something stating how he was going to get around that fact. However, the coalition’s recently filed “Response to Court Directive” indicates that such wording was not required in the application for a recall petition, but only with the actual recall petition, which the coalition has not yet been granted. The response also includes sample copies from the Marion County Board of Elections of both the “application for recall” (which the coalition has completed) and an actual “recall petition” (which the coalition has not yet been granted), as well as the affidavits associated with each. Only the affidavit for the actual recall petition includes such wording. “The Application for Recall form is different from the Recall Petition and the language on each form is placed there by the election commission,” wrote Attorney Whitaker. “An applicant is not allowed to alter the form or attach a separate sheet to it. Everything must be filed in the blanks.” During the February 26 hearing, Judge Miller had also asked Attorney Whitaker to reference any state or federal law that made it illegal for elected officials to whisper during open meetings. Whitaker’s response says that issue is not “clearly defined,” and while he did not reference any specific laws against whispering, he cited several court cases dealing with the Open Meetings Act and its general interpretation. “Since the Act must be broadly construed to effect its remedial and protective purposes, and exception to the Act must be narrowly construed, it stands to reason that whispering among Commissioners violates the Act,” wrote Whitaker. Whitaker also stuck to his guns in an assertion made by the Coalition that the Marion County Commission had failed to follow the letter of the law when closing open meetings to discuss matters in executive session. They had made this argument in the hearing based on that fact that Vaughn requested copies of meeting minutes and was given them, but was not also given a copy of the affidavit the commissioners are required to sign stating the reason for the executive session. During the hearing, the county clerk supplied the court with an affidavit that was questioned and reasoned that Vaughn had only asked for the minutes, and not the affidavit as well. Whitaker, however, wrote in his response that “the affidavits are not a part of the minutes, the proper box is not selected, and they were not properly prepared at the appropriate time.” Whitaker’s official “Response to Court Directive” also repeats the coalition’s request that the judge dismiss Commissioner Powell’s challenge of the sufficiency of the application for recall. “The defendant (the coalition) has established probable cause for the application to proceed,” he said. Judge Miller has not indicated a time frame for making a decision about whether or not to grant Commissioner Powell’s request to have the application for recall thrown out or to find in favor of the coalition and allow the Marion County Board of Elections to grant them an actual recall petition. If the recall petition is granted, the Coalition will receive a petition form and official petition number from the Marion County Board of Elections. According to Elections Supervisor Anthony Dixon, they will then have to collect signatures from 30 percent of the registered voters in the county (1,248) in order to actually force a recall election. The Board of Elections would have 30 days to verify the signatures. If the 1,248 signatures were verified, a special election would then be scheduled within 30 to 45 days. Voters would then vote either “yes” or “no” on whether or not Powell should be removed from office. If more than half of the voters were to vote “yes,” Powell would immediately be removed from his position. The next step would be to have a qualifying period for candidates who want to seek the vacant position, followed by the scheduling of another special election to fill the vacancy created by the recall. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WHY SUBSCRIBE to the NEWSPAPER? • CCHS baseball team reaches final of MCHS tournament * PLUS opinion columns, obituaries, church news, and advertisements! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||