Board rejects proposed change to member‑qualification language over ‘domicile’ dispute

The Anderson 5 Board of Trustees on Thursday rejected a proposed revision to policy BBB that would add the term "domicile" to clarify residency requirements for single‑member districts.

Supporters of the change said the election commission and assessor use the term "domicile" to determine legal residence and that adding it would prevent candidates or members from representing districts where they do not legally reside. "You can only have one domicile," a board member said during debate, and proponents argued the added language would prevent two board members from appearing to live in a single district.

Opponents responded that the change was unnecessary and raised concerns about re‑litigating a past election and about introducing confusion. One board member moved to keep policy BBB "the same by not including the proposed provisions." The motion was seconded and carried.

Board members called for transparency about any specific allegations; one complained that if allegations were made they should be accompanied by full documentation. The board conducted a separate but related vote on BBVA (board membership election) and ultimately kept existing language in place rather than including the proposed revision.

The board also discussed decorum and the need to avoid prolonged rehashing of past elections while addressing the policy question. The matter closed with the board voting to retain the current wording of policy BBB on second reading.

No formal referral for additional investigation was recorded during the meeting; several board members said they had worked with the district attorney/board counsel on draft language before the meeting.

The board moved on to other items after the vote.