Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections And Reapportionment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge opposition to HB 1038; Jacksonville council tables resolution and discusses charter redistricting
Summary
Public commenters and several council members urged opposition to House Bill 1038, calling it a threat to neighborhood representation; the council debated forming a redistricting committee and ultimately tabled a motion to adopt a formal position on the bill while legal concerns were aired.
Residents and council members spent a large portion of the meeting pressing the Jacksonville City Council to oppose House Bill 1038, a state proposal that would change the city’s method of electing council members. Multiple public commenters argued the shift from ward-based seats to a different system would dilute neighborhood and minority representation.
Why it matters: Speakers warned HB 1038 could lessen local accountability and called for the council to pass a unified resolution opposing the measure. Council members and staff cautioned that local action has legal limits: the legislature can alter a municipal charter and state law may preempt local changes, which informed the council’s caution about adopting a hard-line resolution now.
Public comment opened with Marsha Wolfford, who told the council, “I will remind everyone listening today that we already have two at large members of the council and a mayor who are currently elected by the entire city population” and urged the council to “pass a unified resolution and oppose HB 1038.” Milo Walford called the bill “a power grab” and said it amounted to “racial voter suppression,” language echoed by other speakers who said neighborhood voices could be silenced by changes crafted in Raleigh.
Council debate focused on legal exposure and timing. City Council members discussed advice they had received from the city attorney and notes from an election-law expert at the state School of Government. One council member said, “Given the legal advice I have received, I don’t think that’s a wise maneuver,” describing concern that certain resolution language — particularly references to race or history — could increase legal liability under current caselaw.
A motion by Councilwoman Smith to have the council vote in opposition to HB 1038 was seconded and debated. After additional procedural motions and debate about whether to wait for the legislature’s action, the council voted to table further consideration of the filed resolution. The clerk reported a tabling vote with one member recorded as opposed. No formal, final council resolution in support of or opposition to HB 1038 was adopted that night.
What happens next: Councilmembers encouraged continued constituent outreach to state legislators and said the item could be revisited depending on developments at the General Assembly. Separately, Council action earlier in the meeting created a path toward studying charter and ward adjustments by proposing a redistricting committee; that separate process would proceed under the North Carolina statutes cited during discussion.
