Talk in my neighborhood this weekend has centered on bizarre text in our Knox County Charter describing candidate qualifications following reapportionment. The text appears to exempt all candidates in district-level commission and school board races from a requirement to have lived for one year in the district they hope to represent. An even broader (and more bizarre) interpretation of the text is possible, namely one that would exempt all candidates in these district-level races from any requirement to live in that district at all.

We’re especially concerned that, if not corrected, this instruction will guide district-level elections in 2012 and 2014, too, following another round of reapportionment in 2011.

We’ve therefore drafted a letter to the Knox County Commission, copied below, urging their prompt revision of two Charter passages. Voters would need to approve the revisions on the 2012 ballot. To add your signature to our request, please e-mail me at dennishepherd@comcast.net, indicating your full name and physical address. In this way, your anonymity at KnoxViews, if applicable, will remain protected. Of course, it would also be helpful if you chose to write your own letter.

Our letter will go out via e-mail at 6:00 AM tomorrow (Monday) and be read at Public Forum during tomorrow’s Commission meeting.

continued...

Dear Knox County Commissioners,

We write to ask that Commission clarify ambiguous language in the Knox County Charter which describes qualification of candidates for Commission and Board of Education following reapportionment of districts. We ask that you place the clarification on the county’s 2012 general election ballot for approval by voters, and that you include in the clarification language causing it to be effective concurrent with the 2012 general election.

The subject Charter instruction requiring your attention presently reads as follows:

Article II, Section 2.03, Item C. No person shall be eligible to serve as a member of the Commission unless that person shall have attained the age of eighteen (18) and is a resident of, and a registered voter in, the district from which such person seeks election on the date he/she filed his/her nominating petition and has been a resident of both the County and the district for one (1) year prior to such person's election; provided, however, that the district residency requirement shall not apply in the first general election at which Commission seats appear on the ballot following any reapportionment or redistricting of Commission districts.

Article VI, Section 6.01, Item E. No person shall be eligible to serve as a member of the Board of Education unless that person shall have attained the age of eighteen (18) and is a resident of, and a registered voter in, the district from which such person seeks election on the date he/she filed his/her nominating petition and has been a resident of both the County and the district for one (1) year prior to such person's election; provided, however, that the district residency requirement shall not apply in the first general election at which a seat on the Board of Education appears on the ballot following a reapportionment of the Board districts.

Two interpretations of the exemption described in these passages seem possible: That, following reapportionment, ALL candidates for Commission and Board of Education seats are exempted from the one year length of district residency requirement, or that, following reapportionment, ALL candidates for these seats are exempted from any district residency requirement whatsoever. Absolutely no rationale exists for either instruction, though, given how broad and arbitrary it is.

Conversely, a clear rationale exists to exempt from just the one year length of district residency requirement only a LIMITED CLASS of candidates for Commission or Board of Education, namely only those candidates whose districts are altered in reapportionment. While fairness dictates that these candidates be exempted from just the one year length of residency requirement, both that requirement and the district residency requirement more generally should apply to all other candidates.

Further, no rationale exists for exempting ANY candidate from even the one year length of residency requirement in any election taking place more than one year after reapportionment.

Obviously, voters want their district representative to reside in their district. Previous balloting indicates that a majority of voters wants their representative to have resided in their district for some length of time, as well. Voters were offered ballot measures in 2004 to remove the Charter’s one year length of residency requirement for Commission and Board of Education candidates. They soundly rejected both measures by a wide margin, however, and affirmed the importance they attach to candidates’ length of residency in their respective communities.

Meanwhile, another reapportionment of Commission and Board of Education districts will occur in 2011, following release of the 2010 Census. In 2012, the first general election following the reapportionment at which Board of Education seats appear on the ballot will take place for districts 2, 3, 5, and 8. In 2014, the first general election following reapportionment at which Commission seats appear on the ballot will take place for districts 3 and 7, as well as for the at-large seats.

We, the undersigned, therefore ask that Commissioners clarify the ambiguous language found in Section 2.03 and Section 6.01 of the Charter to ensure that fairness and reason will guide the elections in 2012 and 2014.

Sincerely,

Judy Barnette (4th Commission District)
Steve Drevik (4th Commission District)
Chuck Jensen (6th Commission District)
Laura Killion (6th Commission District)
Judy Poulson (6th Commission District)
C. Daniel Rader (2nd District)
Kenneth R. Redmond (6th Commission District)
Dennis A. Shepherd (6th Commission District)
Tamara G. Shepherd (6th Commission District)
Pamela G. Strickland (2nd Commission District)
Faith Tapp (6th Commission District)
Sylvia Woods (9th Commission District)

Edit: A couple more signatures Monday morning...