Councilwoman Stephanie Hale asked the City Council on Oct. 21 to place an item on a future agenda to discuss Proposition C, a ballot measure that would amend Section 2.03 of the city’s Home Rule Charter to disqualify candidates who had previously been removed by the council for misconduct.

Hale told the council she had asked for context from the charter review committee and received insufficient explanation for why the provision was proposed. “This proposition appears to be personal in its attempt to disqualify a candidate,” she said, adding that the language’s use of the term “misconduct” is broad and could be applied unevenly. “For example, I could essentially move to remove a candidate today who interrupted a citizen speaking. That was misconduct.”

Several council members and other speakers debated whether the charter proposal could be enforced and how it would affect future elections. City Attorney Berman advised the council that charter changes approved by voters generally would not affect the current election and that questions of candidate eligibility under the charter likely fall to the filing authority (the city secretary) and, ultimately, to courts or administrative bodies if contested.

Councilman Harry Garrett and other speakers defended prior council removal votes as the result of a formal process. Garrett said earlier removals followed a trial or hearing and were not ad hoc. “Upon all of the facts that were gathered, the council then rendered a vote,” he said, noting past removals had multiple votes in favor.

Hale described videos and public comments she said were evidence of hostile campaigning and urged the council to consider how a charter amendment could be used. She asked that the proposition and related procedural safeguards be placed on the next agenda for discussion and possible action. The motion to add Proposition C to a future meeting agenda passed 4-2: Hale, Bruton, Binford and one other councilmember voted yes; two voted no.

Council members clarified that even if voters approve a charter change it would not retroactively affect the current election: a provision approved by voters would apply to future elections. City staff said the city secretary is the filing authority and that the council’s power to police candidate filings is limited.

No ordinance or charter language was changed at the meeting; council direction was limited to scheduling further discussion and possible action at an upcoming meeting.