Charlotte holds public forum for District 6 council vacancy; five finalists introduce themselves

Charlotte City Council hosted a public forum on May 13, 2025, to hear from finalists for the vacant District 6 council seat. Five applicants spoke in person and one submitted a prerecorded presentation; city staff told the council they received 12 applications, nine of which were verified as eligible.

The forum brought candidates to the dais for five-minute remarks followed by council questions. Candidates described their ties to District 6 and the experience they would bring if chosen for the interim seat, which the council said it plans to fill by vote on the following Monday.

The deputy city clerk told the council the application deadline was May 13, 2025, at 5:00 p.m., that the city used the North Carolina State Board of Elections website to verify qualifications, and that eligibility requires a candidate to be a registered voter in Mecklenburg County, at least 21 years old, registered with the same political party as the departing member and a resident of District 6. The clerk said the city received 12 applications and verified nine were eligible. The clerk and deputy city attorney identified three applicants as ineligible by those criteria: Grayson Sandlin, Asher D. Welby and LaResha Poor (not eligible under initial verification). The clerk later confirmed that a person who had been judged ineligible earlier showed documentation establishing eligibility and was permitted to speak during the forum.

Candidates and what they said

- Sari Chakra (candidate): Chakra described himself as a first-generation Lebanese American and a District 6 resident who works in stormwater and infrastructure construction. He told the council he has been following council and committee work closely and said, "Yes. I plan to run" in the fall, adding he intends to be transparent about that plan.

- Andy Doolin (candidate, former District 6 council member 2005–2013): Doolin said he does not plan to run in the fall and emphasized his experience with constituent services and neighborhood meetings. "If you let my heart be my speech writer, it always comes out best," he told the council.

- Edwin Peacock (candidate, former council member 2007–2011): Peacock described his long ties to the district and previous council service, said he would not run for the seat in the fall and said he would bring "perspective" and institutional knowledge to the role.

- James Frederick (Fred) Rice (candidate): Rice summarized a long career in banking and health-care practice management and said his experience managing finances and health-care operations would inform his council service.

- Larisha Poor (candidate): Poor identified herself as a District 6 resident who works for Mecklenburg County on a grant-based contract and said she does plan to run in the fall. She described volunteer work in schools on teen-dating-violence awareness and said she would focus on neighborhood quality of life and ensuring residents know how to access city services.

- Andrew Dunn (applicant, not present): The city clerk reported that Andrew Dunn submitted a video presentation that council members could review before the Monday vote.

Council questions and recurring themes

Council members asked candidates about their ability to ramp up quickly, given budget season and near-term decisions expected of any interim appointee. Several council members asked former members Doolin and Peacock how District 6 has changed since their prior service; both pointed to increased development, congestion and the need to understand the city budget and constituent services systems. Candidates without prior council service said they would focus on outreach and listening to neighborhood stakeholders.

Transit and the proposed 1¢ sales-tax measure drew repeated questions. Candidates and council members discussed the history of Charlotte's transit referendums, the need for broad community outreach and the importance of communicating how proposed spending would affect District 6 residents.

Process and next steps

City staff said the council will hold internal discussion and then vote on an interim appointment at the council meeting on the following Monday. The clerk also noted that one applicant who could not attend made a prerecorded submission and that council members would have access to that video. Councilmembers discussed having a brief internal discussion among themselves prior to the Monday vote to allow questions and dialogue.

Why this matters

The interim appointment will represent roughly the city-sized constituency of District 6 for the remainder of the current term and could affect near-term decisions during budget season and in advance of the fall election when candidates told the council many plan to run. Candidates’ statements about ramp-up, constituent services and positions on transit indicate the issues the council and the district consider priorities.

Candidates' public remarks and the clerk's eligibility summary are on the public record; the council scheduled an appointment vote at its next regular meeting.