Cooper's Vacancy to be Discussed at Next Week's Elk Grove City Council Meeting

November 6, 2014 | With Elk Grove Vice Mayor Jim Cooper's election to the California State Assembly, the Elk Grove City Council...


November 6, 2014 |

With Elk Grove Vice Mayor Jim Cooper's election to the California State Assembly, the Elk Grove City Council will receive a report at their regular meeting next Wednesday on the procedural options available to them to fill the vacancy created by his impending resignation. 

According to the California State Constitution, Cooper must be sworn-in on the first Monday of December, which this year will be December 1 and he must vacate the city's District 1 seat before taking his oath. From the date of Cooper's resignation, the council has 60 days to call for a special election, or make an appointment. 

According to Elk Grove City Clerk Jason Lindgren, if the city council decides to fill the vacancy by appointment, the Government Code is silent on any process requirements. The city is not required to do any special recruiting or vetting process.

When the city council filled the District 4 vacancy in 2013 following Gary Davis' election to mayor, the council decided to invite qualified district residents to submit an application of interest, but was not legally required to do so.  

Lindgren also said should the city council call a special election for the vacancy, it would be consolidated with Sacramento County, and it is anticipated the earliest a special election could be held is in June, 2015. Although no cost has been provided, in 2013 the estimated cost for the District 4 special election was pegged at $500,000. 








Post a Comment

15 comments

Anonymous said...

Appointment is still the best option IMO

Anonymous said...

EGN. Now this is good investigative reporting. Please continue to use this method of quality reporting on all future news pieces.

Anonymous said...

An election is the only way to insure that Elk Grove has a 'democratically' selected government.

Do not be dissuaded by arguments of cost and time frames.

If the citizens of Elk Grove do not have the opportunity to select council members by vote, then we do not have a true 'democracy'.

Democracy 'by appointment' will become the norm, and you know how unpopular the Trigg appointment was.

Insist on an election!

Sarah Johnson said...

After the last appointment fiasco, election is the ONLY way to go. I don't care how much money it costs, we should always elect our leaders.

Anonymous said...

I agree that an election is the only way to go. You do realize that the political process of appointments has never favored the people, but rather the politicians vying for control. You have to look no further than the last appointment to see for yourselves how that works here in EG. I would even go so far as to place my money on that "appointment" already being selected by a winning number of council to further their political agenda. Is that what the people want..Democracy "by appointment?"

Anonymous said...

The developers don't care how you do it, just keep the ball rolling and those votes coming! There's money to be made in this dirt.

Anonymous said...

Why the cry for an election here when the EGUSD will be doing an appointment for Mr. Ly's seat? Is there a difference?

Capt. Benjamin L. Willard said...

If we are to believe the city council will decide next Wednesday to make an appointment for Mr. Cooper's vacancy, the timing will be ironic.

The day earlier politicians on all levels will be praising the sacrifices of American Veterans in the name of preserving the freedoms we enjoy, including the right to vote for our officials. The next day they will spit in the face of our Veterans and start the appointment process.

Freedom, including the right to vote for our officials is not free, nor cheap. Don't disrespect the Veterans.

Anonymous said...

NO ONE COULD HAVE STATED THE OBVIOUS ANY BETTER THAN THE CAPTAIN.
ACCURATE, SUSINCT, AND PASSIONATE.

WE MUST HAVE AN ELECTION!

Anonymous said...

Well first Cooper has to resign. According to the article he doesn't have to resign until December 1st. So there is a possibility that there will not be a vacancy until the December meeting.

Also, we should wait until Steve Ly is sworn in so that he can be part of the process. He earned that right by winning his campaign.

However, the fix is already in, Daren Suen will be appointed by voice vote without even requiring or requesting applications from the public.

People the fix is in. Just look at the connection between Ly, Davis and Suen and you will understand.

Anonymous said...

I totally agree with the Captain and Anon. 9:12.

WE MUST ATTEND OR SEND EMAILS TO OUR ELECTEDS AND INSIST ON AN ELECTION!

Connie said...

Because of all of the rumblings – and how many times have they been correct – if the “fix” is in, then the Council must call for a special election. A “fix” would have the makings of a Brown Act violation and what “appointee” would want their name attached to that?

And really, the argument that it will cost $500,000 no longer holds any water. The Council had no trouble “wasting” $700,000 on the feasibility study for the aquatics centers; only to negate part of the agreement with no repercussions to P3 after they defaulted on the contract.

Unfortunately, I do think the Council will opt for a nomination even going so far as to not call for people to submit their applications if action is not taken by the “people.” There has been such an air of arrogance from the Council of late that they remind me of the Council of circa 2004!

Very said indeed!

Anonymous said...

I nominate LaWanna

Anonymous said...

I found this SacBee article very interesting...why are we being told an election for Coopers replacement would cost the taxpayers $500,000. when this article says the cost is $200,000? That's a hugh difference...

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/foon-rhee/article3727735.html

Anonymous said...

I found this SacBee article very interesting...why are we being told an election for Coopers replacement would cost the taxpayers $500,000. when this article says the cost is $200,000? That's a hugh difference...

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/foon-rhee/article3727735.html

Follow Us

Popular

Archives

Corrections




item