|
|
Post by cruzrt on Nov 9, 2006 19:21:15 GMT -5
When does Morin have to resign as Mayor? The Dems. better not try the BOE trick of 'sharing' the chairperson slot. They are already 'sharing' the Deputy mayor spot.
|
|
|
|
Post by morganika on Nov 9, 2006 22:00:21 GMT -5
I believe John Cascio had the next highest number of votes, wouldn't it be him? Personally, I think he'd be perfect. I think we are probably stuck with Russ till like January. I hope he does not try to pull any fast ones before then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr.Ken Sokolowski on Nov 10, 2006 7:58:00 GMT -5
Correct me if I am wrong, but the current Chair of the Town Council does not have to resign until just before he is sworn in as a State Rep. Having said that it may be helpful to his party to make the local transition (selection of a new Council Chair) sooner than later.
I don't believe there is anything in the Town Charter that requires the highest vote-getter to be crowned Chair of the Council; it is local tradition. Nor, is there any language which even suggests that the second highest vote getter in a local election should be elevated to that position on the resignation or removal of the Chair. It is entirely up to a simple majority vote of the remaining Council members. Something like our own little Electoral College.
The chances of Cascio (former Democrat, now Republican) being elected Chair of the Council are slim to none.
At this moment, my guess is that the new Chair of the Council will be Christine Fortunato (though not without some politicking behind the scenes, never to be seen by the public, for Andrew Adil).
The rest of us will just have to wait and see.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldetowne on Nov 10, 2006 8:54:23 GMT -5
You are correct. The "custom" is for the majority to select its highest vote getter as the mayor. There have been a few times when the majority did not do so (Frank Morris vs. Jack Logan). There also has been at least one instance when it was a member of the minority party who was in fact the highest vote getter (Dan Camilliere in 1989). It's up to the Democratic Council members to decide.
|
|
|
|
Post by SyZyGy on Nov 10, 2006 22:19:00 GMT -5
In this post W.J. Clintonian era, is having an 'affair' a good reason to exclude a potential candidate from advancing politically? What about the use of recreational 'chemicals?'
|
|
|
|
Post by standish on Nov 12, 2006 19:15:36 GMT -5
Why do you ask... anyone in mind?
For me, it depends upon whether the behaviors are past or current, singularly ancient or serially ongoing, remorseful or recalcitrant, and, what behavioral changes have transpired in the interim. For others, I am unable to answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by BobBowers on Nov 13, 2006 0:05:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by standish on Nov 13, 2006 7:42:01 GMT -5
I answered a rhetorical question in a hypothetical fashion. I cannot speak for what may have prompted the original inquiry. I suggest you ask Syzygy, as I did.
|
|
