Commentary: Although it is expected
that the present seven-ward structure will continue indefinitely,
it was felt desirable to give flexibility to the Commissioners in
the future to change to five (5) or nine (9) members without Charter
amendment. The three-quarters vote requirement assures that such a
change would not be made except with the near unanimous agreement
of the Board. Under Sections 401 and 504 of the Township Code,[2] it is possible to have from five (5) to fifteen (15) Commissioners.
|
Commentary: In its first drafts, the
GSC provided that Commissioners' terms would commence on the
first Monday of December in the year of election, and also that the
Board would organize at that time each year. It was deemed desirable
to minimize the lame duck period, presumably the reason the State
Legislature and school districts organize on the first Monday in December,
and federal terms were moved from March to January. However, unlike
those bodies, the township budgets on a calendar year and (although
this Charter does not require it) presumably will continue to do so.
Budget preparation begins several months before adoption in late December.
Several persons commenting on the earlier drafts felt bringing new
Commissioners into the middle of the budget procedure might cause
difficulty. For these reasons, the Charter provides that the terms
of township officials commence and the Board reorganizes on the first
Monday of January, which is the present procedure under the Township
Code.
| |
| |
Consideration was given to institutionalizing the current
practice of having newly elected Commissioners sit in before their
terms commence. It was decided not to formalize this lcurrent practice,
but its continued utilization is encouraged.
|
Commentary: The Municipal Reapportionment Act of 1974, 53 P.S. § 11601 et seq., presently would require reapportionment after every federal decennial or special census. This would override the proviso in § C305A(4). However, here and in several other provisions, the GSC has drafted what it deems most desirable should state law be changed or repealed. The "determines...is necessary" language of § C305A(3) tracks the state statute, 53 P.S. § 11508.
| |
| |
The requirement that the Board redistrict whenever the most populous ward is one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the population of the least populous ward [see § C305A(2)] is designed to establish a fair minimal standard for redistricting during the period between decennial censuses.
| |
| |
Currently the initial census reports are in census tracts which do not provide sufficient information to redistrict. The time period described in § C305A(4) begins when the township receives the information (usually in blocks) which it must have to redistrict.
| |
| |
The provision in § C305B makes the redistricting effective at the next municipal election following enactment of the redistricting ordinance, thus eliminating the distortion of the popular will and of the one-man, one-vote principle which occurs if the redistricting ordinance is made effective immediately and a Commissioner or Commissioners are appointed, thus resulting in a Board with an excessive number of members and with some constituents represented by two (2) Commissioners, one (1) of whom they elected and one (1) of whom has been appointed.
| |
| |
| |
The provisions of § C305F with regard to the completion of term and the removal of the ward residency requirement in that section and in § C306 are necessary so as to accomplish the completion of term and make it possible for a Commissioner to move from the ward where he lives after redistricting to the ward in which his former constituents live without running afoul either of the continuing residency requirement during incumbency or the one (1) year prior ward residency requirement (see § C306). Should he be elected in such a ward where he does not live, he will of course be required to establish residence in such ward prior to the beginning of his term, and he must maintain such residency throughout that term pursuant to § C306.
| |
| |
?The reason for the special exception from the completion-of-term rule which pertains in the case of a Commissioner who voluntarily seeks a new four-year term while having two (2) years to serve of his preredistricting term and the election machinery pertinent thereto are set forth in the commentary to § C308A(6).
| |
| |
It should be noted that the system for effectuating redistricting avoids the custom of appointment which inevitably further distorts the one-man, one-vote principle which redistricting is designed to implement. As the commentary to § C308A(6) indicates, the GSC is aware that under certain circumstances the redistricting system here adopted will lead to a Board with more or less Commissioners than are currently authorized; the system adopted is designed to limit the circumstances under which this result may occur.
|
Commentary: The two-year residency
requirement is new but deemed appropriate to ensure that the Commissioners
know the township. Under Section 504 of the Township Code,[1] there is presently a one-year ward residency requirement.
It was decided to retain this provision as to wards because of the
same principle justifying the township residency requirement. It was
necessary to remove all ward residence requirements on redistricting.
|
Commentary: This provision follows the general rule that an elected official shall not be permitted to benefit from an increase in compensation for which he or his fellow officials vote unless and until he is reelected. It extends that limitation for a period of one (1) year before the term commences so that compensation to be paid will be known by any person contemplating seeking election to office. "Compensation" is defined in § C201.
|
Because this Charter envisions that the President is
given additional responsibility, it permits the Board to pay him limited
additional compensation. That decision may be made at any time. The
increase would be based on the then-fixed salary for Commissioner.
For example, if the President were then receiving two thousand four
hundred dollars ($2,400.) and the most recently fixed salary was three
thousand dollars ($3,000.), then the President could receive an additional
three hundred dollars ($300.). Receipt of that additional compensation
does not violate the prohibition against change in salary during a
Commissioner's term.
|
Commentary: Criminal activity on the part of a Township Commissioner is the ground for removal from office under three (3) separate provisions. Automatic removal is provided in certain limited situations in § C308A(5)(b), discretionary removal by the Board is provided in a broader range of situations in § C308B, and should the Board not so remove, removal by the voters in the same circumstances is permitted through the use of recall, as provided in § C1413.
| |
| |
A separate framework for removal for criminal activity exists under state statute (65 P.S. § 121) which provides for forfeiture of office upon conviction of the crimes enumerated in §§ C308B and C1413 of this Charter. It presently is unclear as to when in the criminal process such forfeiture occurs and how and by what agency it is declared. Additionally, removal may occur under the Pennsylvania Constitution (Article VI, § 7) which provides for removal of all civil officers on conviction of "misbehavior in office" or any "infamous crime;" here too, the timing and procedure are unclear. The state statute and constitutional provision continue to be applicable to Cheltenham officials.
| |
| |
The provision of § C308A(6) is part of the redistricting system (see the text and commentary at § C305). It provides for a special election to fill a vacancy where a Commissioner, who has two (2) more years to serve of a term at the time of a municipal election in which redistricting becomes effective, decides to seek a four-year term. It was the GSC's view that his continuation on the Commission under such circumstances should depend upon his acceptability to the voters in the new district in which he seeks election. If he is successful in his efforts, he does not need the remaining two-year term since he has a new four-year term; if he is unsuccessful in seeking election, he should not be permitted to serve as a Commissioner for two (2) years after rejection by the voters.
| |
| |
Because the original term of this Commissioner will terminate on the first Monday in January following the municipal election in which he is seeking a four-year term in the new district, a special election will be required to select a person to serve the remaining two (2) years of the original term. The special election will take place at the same November municipal election in which the incumbent Commissioner is seeking a new four-year term. The normal primary machinery cannot be used since the forfeiture of his remaining two-year term is dependent upon his nomination in the primary (see § C305F); accordingly, the nominating procedure employed in a special election, involving nomination by political parties, is utilized.
| |
| |
The proviso clause "where the effect of such termination will be that no incumbent Commissioner shall thereafter be residing in the ward in which the terminated Commissioner resided..." is added so as to avoid the filling of the vacancy where there is no absence of a resident Commissioner, e.g., where two (2) Commissioners reside in what will become the new ward after passage of the redistricting ordinance and one (1) will remain even after the termination of the term of the Commissioner seeking a four-year term pursuant to § C305F.
| |
| |
The GSC recognizes that the redistricting system and
the various procedures are not perfect and may lead to a situation
where there are less or more than the authorized number of Commissioners
for a period of two (2) years. However, the procedure is designed
to limit to the extent reasonably possible the circumstances under
which such a distortion will occur.
| |
| |
The only perfect way to avoid the possibility of an
enlarged or reduced Board of Commissioners for two (2) years would
be to require election of the entire Board in the municipal election
following redistricting, some for terms of two (2) years and some
for terms of four (4) years. Such a scheme was deemed to be unfair
to incumbent Commissioners and a factor which might make more difficult
the recruitment of competent Commissioners in face of the possibility
that their terms might be reduced to two (2) years through no voluntary
act of their own.
|
Commentary: Initially, the GSC considered
requiring vacancies to be filled at the next election, whether primary
or general, and with no interim appointment. While this provides assurance
that the new Commissioner represents his electorate, there could be
Board deadlock with only six (6) members during the interim. The next
draft then provided for appointment until the next election, which
solved the deadlock problem. But several people objected to electing
a Commissioner at a primary or at the presidential or gubernatorial
general elections. It was felt that the local election could be overshadowed
and its results distorted by other events [e.g., where only one (1)
of the political parties had a primary contest]. The GSC was urged
to delay until the next municipal election.
| |
| |
The final text resolves these competing values. The
vacancy is filled within forty-five (45) days after its occurrence,
thus preventing deadlock. It is filled, however, by the party committee
people from that district, thus giving that constituency a say in
naming the replacement, and also avoiding the anomalous situation
of having a Commissioner of one party replaced by someone of a different
party because of the Board's political composition at that time
(the result currently possible under Section 530 of the Township Code[1]).
| |
| |
The Manager is given the administrative responsibility
for arranging the public meeting and placing the advertisement. He
also is responsible for ascertaining the relevant committee people
and presumably will consult them before fixing a meeting date. The
election itself is held by secret ballot. This is closest to the regular
election procedure and is also consistent with the present manner
in which the township's political parties endorse nominees. The
Manager certifies to the Board who has been elected.
|
Commentary: Although it has been traditional
for the oath to be administered at the organization meeting, this
provision does not require the oath to be taken at a particular time
or place. Neither does present law, Township Code, Section 601,[1] but under this Charter failure to take the oath can create a vacancy [see § C308A(4)].
|