There may, or may not, be more than one way to skin a cat. But it seems that there’s no shortage of ways for a city council to change its figurative garb as it seeks to expand, or diversify, its own composition.
Burlington’s municipal leaders touched on some of these options during the city council’s retreat on Thursday. Yet, the conversation that day barely scraped the surface of what’s possible under state law if it’s the pleasure of the council’s majority.
Any change to the size or composition of the city council will require an amendment to Burlington’s city charter. Under state law this can be accomplished, most simply, through an ordinance passed by the council.
If the council chooses to go this route, it must first adopt a resolution of intent that spells out the proposed change to the charter. It must conduct a public hearing within 45 days of the resolution – at which point, it has 60 days to adopt the ordinance itself.
State law allows the council to make this ordinance contingent on the approval of the city’s voters, who would go to the polls in a special election that takes place at least 70 days after the ordinance is passed.
During Thursday’s retreat, Burlington’s mayor pro tem Bob Ward suggested the council should hold this special election if it decides to amend the charter to expand, or otherwise alter, its membership.
“I’m in favor of it going to a referendum whatever’s decided,” Ward told the rest of the council. “I think that this is such a critical decision that it needs to go to the voters.”
The rest of the council seemed to support Ward’s preference for a referendum to ratify any change to the charter.
But even if the council should forgo a special election, the local electorate can force a referendum if they circulate a petition that obtains signatures from at least 10 percent of the city’s voters. This petition must be presented to the city clerk within 30 days of the city’s publication of a notice about the council’s adoption of an ordinance revising the charter.
The city’s voters can use a similar process to push through a charter amendment even without the council’s cooperation. As with a referendum, this ballot initiative requires a petition signed by 10 percent of the city’s registered voters, and if the proposed amendment is approved at the polls, the council is obligated to adopt an ordinance to ratify the results.
None of these options requires any special permission from the General Assembly, and they can be used to change everything from the council’s membership to the name of a city or its form of government.
In Burlington’s case, the city council has given serious consideration to just two potential charter amendments.
One possibility, which is favored by most of the council, would increase the council’s membership from five seats to seven.
The other option, which has been championed by mayor Beth Kennett and councilman Ian Baltutis, would have at least some of the council’s regular members elected by districts or wards.
State law offers four ways for the council to introduce districts or wards to the city. In each case, the process begins with the creation of a new city map that carves up its territory into “single-member electoral districts” with roughly the same number of residents in each. These boundaries may be redrawn if the city absorbs new territory or if there’s a population imbalance among districts, particularly after a federal census.
State law gives the council the sole authority to redraw district boundaries, although it allows residents to circulate an initiative petition to force redistricting to take place.
In its simplest form, a district model would involve the election of one representative who resides in each district by voters from that same district.
Alternately, the council could adopt a model where each district is represented by someone who resides in that district but is elected by voters from the entire city.
A third option is for the city to hold a nonpartisan primary where the voters of each district select two candidates who live in their district to square off in the general election, where all of the city’s voters will weigh in on their selection.
State law does not require any at-large representatives under a district model, although it stipulates that they comprise “no more than half the city council.” Under most district models, these at-large representatives, if they exist, may reside anywhere in the city and are elected by the city’s voters en masse.
The only instance, other than fully at-large elections, where state statute requires at-large representatives is in a “ward system.” Under this model, the city must be divided in districts that comprise “one half the number of council seats.” The council is then split up into “ward” seats, which comprise half of its membership, and “at-large” seats which make up the other half. Under this system, candidates for both ward and at-large seats “shall reside in and represent the districts according to the apportionment plan…but all candidates for ‘at-large’ seats shall be nominated and elected by all the qualified voters of the city” while only those who live in the district may weigh in on their ward representatives.
The applicable statute says nothing about the mayor’s role in a ward system, or even if the mayor’s seat is considered when the council is divvied up between ward and at-large representatives. Nor is this omission the only source of confusion in the state law pertaining to wards.
In the spring of 2021, Robert Joyce with the NC School of Government gave Burlington’s city council a primer on city charter amendments that included a caveat about the state statute which governs election by wards.
“This is rather confusing statutory language,” states this disclaimer, which appeared in the written materials that accompanied Joyce’s presentation to the council. “In reality, you have two council seats for each electoral district, one of which is designated a ‘ward seat’ while the other is designated an ‘at-large seat.” The difference in the two designated seats is how they are nominated an[d] who votes on each type [of] council seat.”
