HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 RESIG OF CITY CLERK 08-21-95MEMORANDUM
TO:
William A. Huston, City Manager
City of Tustin
FROM: City Attorney
DATE:
RE:
August 14, 1995
Resignation of the City Clerk
The resignation of the City Clerk, Mary Wynn, was effective August 7, 1995, when
her letter was received by the City. Within 30 days of August 7, 1995, the City Council
must fill the position by appointment or call a special election. If the Council fills the
position by appointment, the successor serves until the expiration of Mary's term, which will
be in March of 1996. If a special election is called, it cannot be held until at least 114 days
after the call for the special election by the City Coucil. Assuming such a call was made
on August 21st, the special election could not be held this November because such a date
would not be "at least 114 days" after the call. The next regularly scheduled election would
be in March of 1996, which is the end of Mary's term. Accordingly, it would not be feasible
to fill the position by special election. Whoever is appointed must be a resident and an
elector of the City. This is a legal requirement for the holding of the elective office of City
Clerk.
In the future the City Council may also wish to consider letting the voters decide if
the office of City Clerk should be an appointive office. If the voters approved the measure,
the City Council could then appoint the City Clerk and they would have the flexibility as to
whether the City Clerk should be a resident elector of Tustin. There is no such legal
requirement for an appointive City Clerk. This can be do'ne by the City Council approving
a simple ballot question that would be operative upon approval of the voters at the next
regularly scheduled election that is at least 88 days from the date of City Council approval
of the ballot measure. In this case, such a measure could not be voted upon until March
of 1996. This could create an awkward situation for the City in that candidates would be
running for City Clerk, while voters would be considering whether to eliminate the elective
office! If the Council wished to explore this option we would need to examine the applicable
law more closely to verify that approval by the voters would be effective to prevent the top
vote getter from assuming office. The code section is not crystal clear on this particular
LOIS E. JEFFR¢__~ ~' /'/ Q
1100-00011
16790_1