Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cheverly council reviews charter language to bar running for mayor and council in same election
Summary
Council discussed draft charter language, proposed by the Board of Elections Supervisors, that would make any candidacy for both mayor and council in the same election null and void; members asked the town attorney to clarify how the rule should treat certified ballot candidates, write‑in candidates and substitution before filing deadlines.
Mayor Micah Watson opened discussion of draft language to add a new subsection to C18.2 that would bar an individual from being a candidate for mayor and council member in the same election. The proposed text reads, in part, “under no circumstances may an individual be a candidate for mayor and council member in the same election. An application for candidacy for mayor and council member for an official candidate in the same election shall be null and void.”
The Board of Elections Supervisors, represented in the work session by Robin and Ann Clare, said the new paragraph aims to plug a loophole revealed in the last election by preventing someone already on the ballot from also being certified as a write‑in candidate. “We’re really looking to plug that one scenario,” Robin said.
Council members pressed for legal clarity about several points. Council Member Tanzi and others asked whether an officially filed candidate could later replace or withdraw a prior filing before the formal filing deadline. Council members also asked whether the provision could be read to deny a candidate the ability to change their filing even before ballots are printed.
Town Attorney Jason Deloach told the council that the draft will require precise drafting to reflect the council’s intent and to avoid unintended retroactive effects. The mayor and several council members indicated a policy preference to allow a candidate to withdraw and substitute before the statutory filing deadline; they asked Mr. Deloach to confirm whether that approach is legally feasible and to draft language making that substitution explicit if desired.
Public commenters asked for clarity about how certified write‑in candidates would be treated. In response to public and council input, the mayor said the town will direct the attorney to prepare refined language and, if appropriate, bring a Charter Amendment Resolution for a first reading at an upcoming town meeting.
The council did not adopt final language at the work session; it agreed on a policy direction—allowing substitution before the filing deadline while preventing dual certified candidacies—and asked the attorney to prepare a resolution for a future meeting.
Ending: The council directed town counsel to refine the draft language, confirm legal effect for write‑in and certified candidates, and prepare materials for a first reading on a future meeting agenda.
