By Jason Arndt
Staff Writer
After two failed votes, the structure of Burlington Common Council will stay the stay the same, at least in foreseeable future.
The Charter Ordinance proposal, which needs six votes to pass, called for a mixed council of one representative for each aldermanic district and another four elected to at-large positions. The current arrangement has two aldermen representing each of four separate districts.
If the ordinance had passed, officials up for re-election in May 2019 would have had to file for at-large positions.
Council members and other city officials began discussing the Charter Ordinance in February, when they reportedly were concerned about lack of candidates to fill specific districts.
Most recently, the proposed ordinance was discussed at the May 16 Committee of the Whole meeting, when District 2 Alderman Bob Grandi voiced opposition to at-large seats.
At that meeting, Grandi said the ordinance did not address the primary concern, which is lack of citizen engagement.
Before the vote at Tuesday’s Common Council meeting, Grandi reiterated opposition, outlining two key areas.
“There were two reasons given why we want have this in 2019,” Grandi said. “One reason was we didn’t want to have this in 2018 with the mayoral election.”
“The second was that we wanted to have a chance to evaluate our citizen involvement,” he said. “So, my question is, why are we voting on this tonight?”
Two aldermen, however, reportedly received favorable feedback from constituents.
District 2 Alderwoman Ruth Dawidziak reached out to the community on social media about the ordinance change.
“I have had no negative feedback from it.” Dawidziak said.
Meanwhile, District 4 Alderman Todd Baumann agreed, adding responses have been “positive.”
Despite insight from the two other representatives, Grandi made a motion to table the item, pending further community insight.
Common Council members voted 5-2 against tabling the item, with Grandi and District 1 Alderman Susan Kott as two supporters of the motion.
Following the failed motion, the Charter Ordinance also saw similar results, which failed at 5-2.
-
-
-
-
-