Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dual Office Ordinance 2503 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council introduces ordinance to bar holding multiple public offices simultaneously; public hearing set
Summary
Council moved Ordinance Serial 25-03 to public hearing on Feb. 10, 2025. The proposal would amend municipal code to prohibit holding certain public offices simultaneously; council members discussed prohibitions, candidate filing, and practical reasons for the change.
Get email alerts on the Dual Office Ordinance 2503 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Wasilla City Council on Monday voted to introduce Ordinance Serial 25-03 for public hearing on Feb. 10, 2025. The ordinance would amend municipal code sections that govern qualifications for council members and the mayor to prohibit holding certain public offices at the same time.
Council members said the proposed change is intended to prevent an individual from holding dual elected offices that could create divided loyalties or scheduling conflicts. Supporters noted the change simply codifies longstanding practice in many municipalities. Opponents cautioned that conflict-of-interest laws and the oath of office already provide some prohibitions and questioned whether a new ordinance is necessary.
What the ordinance would do: Sponsors described the ordinance as specifying that a person may not serve in two dually elected offices simultaneously (for example, a city council seat and a borough assembly seat). Council member Crafton said that while recusal could address specific conflicts, holding two offices at once raises practical issues about where an official’s duties lie and how to prioritize overlapping meetings.
Next steps: The ordinance passed on introduction and will be set for public hearing Feb. 10, 2025, at which time the council will receive public testimony and further deliberation. The city attorney will be on hand at the hearing to answer legal questions, the clerk said.
Ending note: Council members agreed that if the code already contains similar restrictions, the public hearing and attorney review will clarify whether the ordinance is necessary or whether existing code language should be updated.

