Senate Bills will (1) allow sheriffs to be elected nonpartisan if county so choses & (2) change probate judges to nonpartisan statewide.
In a 12-10-04 post entitled "Taking nonpartisan elections a step further beyond judges. School board members doable now. Sheriffs? Maybe in the future," I wrote:
I would like to see Georgia law changed so that counties could, through local legislation, have the offices of county commissioners, clerk of the superior court, judge of the probate court, sheriff, probate judge, tax commissioner (some counties have a different office here), coroner, surveyor and whatever else I am overlooking, be added to the offices of judges and school board members that can be elected on a nonpartisan basis.
Do I think, given the GOP's takeover of state government on Nov. 2, that such legislation would have a chance in the upcoming legislative session?
A couple of years ago an attempt was made to get this change through with respect to sheriffs. It had some momentum, but got killed.
Despite have been told flat out by a state legislator this week that this would never happen given the Republican takeover on Nov. 2, don't bet against it. I expect to see legislation introduced and passed that will allow sheriffs to run on a nonpartisan basis.
If this passes, and your county opts for this procedure, as soon as the next election, sheriffs, just as are our State Court, Superior Court, Court of Appeals Judges and Supreme Court Justices (and other judges such as magistrates if this has been done through local legislation), would run on a nonpartisan basis on the primary date.
If this legislations is introduced and becomes law, perhaps it will help provide impetus for allowing other county offices to be on a nonpartisan basis.
Die-hard party members in general seem not to particularly like the idea of anything not be partisan, and I understand such thinking.
I am a strong Party person, but in the local setting, nonpartisan transcends one's party. We are talking about what is best for our whole county -- Democrats, Republicans and Independents. And this is true regardless of the adage that all politics is local.
Stay tuned with respect to the legislation, if any, on sheriffs.
_______________
Senate Bill 80, introduced in the state Senate on January 28, 2005, does what is discussed above with regard to sheriffs. Thus a county, through local legislation, can have its sheriff elected on a nonpartisan basis.
I sure wish the legislature would go ahead and add the other local offices discussed above to this legislation, but it probably won't happen this year.
Senate Bill 32 was introduced on January 24 and goes even further than I proposed above, and in a way that I very much approve. It provides that all probate judges are to be elected on a nonpartisan basis (period; no local leglislation so that some counties could do it this way and others not). I hope this bill becomes law.
I would like to see Georgia law changed so that counties could, through local legislation, have the offices of county commissioners, clerk of the superior court, judge of the probate court, sheriff, probate judge, tax commissioner (some counties have a different office here), coroner, surveyor and whatever else I am overlooking, be added to the offices of judges and school board members that can be elected on a nonpartisan basis.
Do I think, given the GOP's takeover of state government on Nov. 2, that such legislation would have a chance in the upcoming legislative session?
A couple of years ago an attempt was made to get this change through with respect to sheriffs. It had some momentum, but got killed.
Despite have been told flat out by a state legislator this week that this would never happen given the Republican takeover on Nov. 2, don't bet against it. I expect to see legislation introduced and passed that will allow sheriffs to run on a nonpartisan basis.
If this passes, and your county opts for this procedure, as soon as the next election, sheriffs, just as are our State Court, Superior Court, Court of Appeals Judges and Supreme Court Justices (and other judges such as magistrates if this has been done through local legislation), would run on a nonpartisan basis on the primary date.
If this legislations is introduced and becomes law, perhaps it will help provide impetus for allowing other county offices to be on a nonpartisan basis.
Die-hard party members in general seem not to particularly like the idea of anything not be partisan, and I understand such thinking.
I am a strong Party person, but in the local setting, nonpartisan transcends one's party. We are talking about what is best for our whole county -- Democrats, Republicans and Independents. And this is true regardless of the adage that all politics is local.
Stay tuned with respect to the legislation, if any, on sheriffs.
_______________
Senate Bill 80, introduced in the state Senate on January 28, 2005, does what is discussed above with regard to sheriffs. Thus a county, through local legislation, can have its sheriff elected on a nonpartisan basis.
I sure wish the legislature would go ahead and add the other local offices discussed above to this legislation, but it probably won't happen this year.
Senate Bill 32 was introduced on January 24 and goes even further than I proposed above, and in a way that I very much approve. It provides that all probate judges are to be elected on a nonpartisan basis (period; no local leglislation so that some counties could do it this way and others not). I hope this bill becomes law.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 7:30 AM
3 Comments:
I think expanding the number of non-partisan races would probably be a good thing. Jeff Brickman, in Dekalb County, was a good DA (despite being a Republican placed in that office by Governor Perdue). He kept commenting that he wished the office was non-partisan. He may have lost even if the position had been non-partisan, for a number of other reasons. When I think about it, though, I don't think there are a whole lot of reasons why party affiliation should matter for someone like a DA.
I agree Joseph. Our representatives we send to Atlanta and Washington should be partisan. Those on the local level, I can't see it. Regardless of which party is in control for the present. But I do have a problem with, anything other than judges, being a local decision implemented by local legislation.
CORRECTION: Meant to type: But I do NOT have a problem with, anything other than judges, being a local decision implemented by local legislation
Post a Comment
<< Home