by J. Brooks Terry
Staff Writer
Votes electing the City Council’s next president won’t be counted for several months, but a possible rule change affecting future elections was discussed Wednesday at City Hall.
Introduced by Council member Art Shad, the pending resolution would require a super majority of 13 votes to prevent an incumbent Council vice president from assuming the presidency the following year.
“It’s something that many of the newer Council members feel will alleviate some of the past tensions on the Council,” said Shad. “Establishing a president-designate would allow the vice president to better prepare for a move up, instead of worrying about campaigning all year long.”
Council member Daniel Davis, who is co-sponsoring the bill with Sharon Copeland, agreed.
“It establishes continuity,” he said. “I think it will draw a considerable amount of support from the Council.”
Vice President Elaine Brown, who would not benefit from the rule change, said she looks forward to reviewing the bill further.
“At first blush, it sounds like a good idea,” she said. “With more information I could possibly support it.”
Others aren’t so sure.
Suzanne Jenkins, who previously endorsed the bill, removed her name Wednesday morning after she spoke with the General Counsel’s Office. Jenkins said she didn’t like the long-term impact of the bill.
“I think this could be used the wrong way,” she said. “If you really look at it, you’re putting the fate of the Council in the hands of seven instead of 13. You have to look at it both ways.
“If it passed, the vice president could get the support of seven very quickly and very easily.”
Ironically, Jenkins lost her presidential bid in 2002 while serving as vice president.
“I don’t think it’s a good idea,” she said.
Faye Rustin and Council president Lad Daniels agreed, saying the current rule may not be perfect, but it should stay the way it is.
“This really is the best way,” said Rustin. “People have tried to make similar changes, but it always comes back to a lot can happen in one year.”
“I applaud (Shad’s) intention to smooth the process, but as it is, I wouldn’t support it,” said Daniels. “Ultimately, it shifts the battle to the vice president’s race, instead.
“I think the system should stay the same.”
Pat Lockett-Felder said the bill gives too much power to the vice president.
“If the vice president is, basically, guaranteed to become the president, it won’t work,” she said. “(The bill) needs lot of work before I’ll support it.”
The bill is currently in its second reading.