Preview:

MONTY RUSSELL CRUMP, and GWYN LEACH SOWDERS, Petitioners v. JUNE L. SNEAD, Respondent No. COA98-1424 (Filed 20 July 1999) 1. Constitutional Law--State--change of city council term--office not mandated by constitution--not unconstitutional

The trial court did not err by dismissing a claim that the General Assembly acted unconstitutionally in extending a city council term from two years to four years. The office is not mandated by the North Carolina Constitution and the General Assembly was within its authority in extending the term. 2. Constitutional Law--State--exclusive emolument--extension of city council term

Respondent did not receive an exclusive emolument under Article I, section 32 of the North Carolina Constitution where the General Assembly extended the term of his seat on the Rockingham City Council from two to four years. There was a reasonable basis for the legislature to conclude that the bill served the public interest and did not solely benefit respondent. 3. Constitutional Law--State--extension of city council term--participation in political process

The trial court did not err by concluding that a General Assembly bill extending a city council term from two to four years did not infringe upon petitioners' right to participate in the political process. Petitioners had the privilege of running for office, not the right, and neither petitioners' nor the public's rights were infringed. Appeal by petitioners from judgment entered 16 October 1998 by Judge Sanford L. Steelman, Jr., in Richmond County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 9 June 1999.

Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr. for petitioner-appellants. Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, P.L.L.C., by James R. Morgan, Jr., for respondent-appellee. HUNTER, Judge. The facts as stipulated by the parties show that prior to 26

June 1996, the charter of the City of Rockingham

("Rockingham")

specifically provided for staggered terms in its city council elections, with two candidates being elected for four-year terms and one candidate being elected for a two-year term, every two years. On 14 March 1995, the Rockingham City Council ("city

council") adopted a resolution requesting that the North Carolina General Assembly provide that the one two-year term be changed to a four-year term. The fact that the city council adopted this

resolution was published on the front page of the Richmond County Daily Journal on 15 March 1995. At the 7 November 1995 general election, respondent June L. Snead defeated petitioner Gwyn Leach Sowders for the two-year term on the city council. On 21 June 1996, the General Assembly

enacted Senate Bill 540 ("SB 540"), which deleted the provision in the Rockingham City Charter requiring one seat on the city council to be for a two-year term, essentially making all five seats on the city council four-year terms. retroactively. The provision applied

The retroactive application of SB 540 had the It

effect of extending the term of Snead from two to four years.

was stipulated by the parties that Sowders expressed interest in filing for the former two-year seat in the November 1997 election. On 9 December 1997, the city council went into closed session at the request of Snead to discuss the termination of petitioner Russell Crump. As a result of the meeting, Crump

agreed to resign as city manager of Rockingham in exchange for a lump-sum severance payment.

On 23 December 1997, petitioners Crump and Sowders (hereinafter "petitioners") instituted this action by filing for a declaratory judgment against respondents Rockingham and Snead alleging that SB 540 was unconstitutional and thus respondent Snead was not a lawful member of the city council. On 30 January Both

1998, petitioners dismissed Rockingham as a respondent. parties agreed to the stipulated facts.

On 23 September 1998,

the matter came for hearing before Judge Sanford L. Steelman, Jr., in the Richmond County Superior Court. On 16 October 1998,

Judge Steelman issued a judgment finding SB 540 constitutional and dismissing petitioners' action by concluding that SB 540 did not confer an exclusive emolument upon Snead (hereinafter "respondent") nor did it violate Article I,

Download 98-1424-7.pdf

South Carolina Law