Charter Amendments
By
Mayor Tom Eschenberg

Since I proposed the two charter amendments to the Town Council, I feel a responsibility to explain to the citizens of Malabar my reasoning in proposing them.

The first amendment would change the method of filling Council vacancies. The current charter states:
 "If a vacancy occurs on the council or in the office of mayor and there is less than one (1) year before the next regular town election, the council, by a majority vote of the remaining full council shall choose a successor to serve until the election is held to fill the vacancy for the unexpired term."
The problem with this is there would always be less than one year before the next regular town election because we have a council election every year. If a council seat should become vacant at any time, even in the first month or two of the term, the council shall choose a successor. Someone could be appointed by the council to serve a year and a half or more. Since the Mayor has a four year term, the council could appoint someone to serve almost four years if the mayor's office became vacant early in the term.
I believe that the citizens of Malabar would agree with me that any vacancy of a year or more should be should be filled by the voters. That is precisely what this amendment would do. It would change " less than one year before the next regular town election" to "less than one year remaining in the vacant term" If a year or more remains in the vacant term, a special election would be held for the voters to fill the vacancy.

The second amendment would add a section to the charter limiting the town's power of eminent domain. After the Supreme Court decision in Kelo vs New Haven, Conn., there was a public outcry across the country. What the court basically said was that a government could take property by eminent domain and sell it to a private entity to build high scale developments. The court accepted the city of New Haven's argument that it would eliminate blighted areas and increase the tax base so therefore it served a public purpose. At the time I proposed this amendment, I knew that the Florida Legislature would also address this problem. They did. And they passed some legislation to restrict this government abuse. However, due to objections from some larger cities primarily in the southeast, the legislation has some loopholes. Space does not allow me to cover the loopholes in detail. Suffice it to say that this proposed charter amendment is much more restrictive than the state legislation. Basically, if passed, the amendment would prohibit the town from transferring ownership or control of any property taken by eminent domain to any private entity for a period of twenty five years.

If you wish to discuss these amendments in greater detail, please call me at 724-1007.