The Haymarket Town Council voted to allow the next Council to decide if they want to conduct a referendum on changing the length of a legislative terms for its members from two to four years.
Over the past few months, the Town Council had discussed making two changes to the way town elections are conducted. One would provide term limits for Council members; the other would extend their terms from two to four years.
Town Attorney, Martin Crim, explained last week that term limits are unconstitutional according to the state Constitution.
“Term limits are not an option the town can adopt, because the requirement for holding elected office in Virginia is set by the Virginia constitution, and you can’t change the qualifications for office without changing the Constitution,” he said.
Therefore Council members turned their attention to the change they could make: changing term lengths and staggering elections to be held every other year.
“What we’re talking about in this proposed charter amendment is to move from the 2-year terms to 4-year staggered terms and elections,” Crim said, explaining, “Every year you would have three-four seats open for candidates. One time it would be three council members and the next time three council members and the mayor, depending on whether it is a year when the mayor is running.”
While there was no specific objection made to the amendment itself, Vice Mayor Jay Tobias thought it was not the right time to implement the new amendment. First, because their decision would impact the next Council and secondly, because the process of changing the Charter involves oversight and approval from the General Assembly.
The process would have to proceed in three steps. First, Council would vote to approve a referendum on the proposed 4-year staggered terms. Next, the citizens would vote on that referendum. Should citizens approve the referendum, the town charter would be sent to Richmond and the General Assembly could approve or disapprove the change.
However, Tobias said that sending the Charter to Richmond opens the document to the state legislature, who could then require other changes be made to the Charter. Crim confirmed that this is something that has happened to other jurisdictions, such as Front Royal, in the recent past; although other times jurisdictions have no problem.
Tobias cautioned they might be more likely to flag Haymarket, since its government has been in the news lately and not in a positive light.
Tobias said wants to make sure that before the referendum is put to a vote, the citizens understand the risk they are taking by opening their Charter up to possible review.
“I don’t know that we’re doing a sufficient enough job of educating the voters of what opening up the charter to the General Assembly would really do,” Tobias said.
Additionally, he said the Council has not really investigated what the General Assembly is likely to do, and suggested they begin by talking to their Prince William representatives on the General Assembly and see what they advise.
Once the Council has compiled information, Tobias then believes the new Council should educate the public through mailers and other means.
While the motion to put the referendum on the ballot for the May 2014 Town election failed, it could instead be placed upon the November 2014 ballot. However, this would require the new Council to convene in July to begin discussing the matter and bring it to the Prince William County Electoral Board by the first week of August 2014.
Some Council members felt that would not allot the new Council sufficient time to make their decision. However, Tobias said that typically whoever is considering running for Council would already be paying close attention to what is transpiring in current Council meetings.
The vote to table the motion passed unanimously.
Correction: In a previous draft we listed the name of the Haymarket's former Town Attorney.
Support Bristow Beat - Donate Today!