Tulsa City Councilor Randy Sullivan
Publication Date: 6/24/05
Randy Sullivan was elected as Tulsa's District 7 Councilor in 2002 and re-elected in 2004. Some Tulsans refer to Councilor Sullivan as the geographically challenged councilor, the misplaced councilor, the wandering councilor and even the illegal councilor.
So what's the deal?
Beyond doubt Councilor Randy Sullivan lives in one district and represents another in what would appear a violation of Oklahoma law. It was common knowledge and fully acknowledged by Sullivan that on 1 December, 2003, owing to a pending divorce, he moved from the home he shared with his wife in Tulsa's District 7 and into a condominium located in Tulsa's District 9.
However, things are seldom as simple as they seem.
At first glance there appears to be multiple locations within the Oklahoma Statutes which would indicate that Councilor Sullivan is in violation of the statues and serving illegally.
Title 11 of the Oklahoma Statutes is the governing law applicable to Cities and Towns' in Oklahoma. Title 11, Chapter 1, Article 11 is that portion of the law applicable to the City of Tulsa, which has a 'Strong Mayor-Council Form of Government. Within that Article is Section 11-103 - Qualifications of Governing Body Members which sets out the qualifications for governing body members (councilors) under Tulsa's form of government. This section contains the following text:
The governing body members shall be residents and registered voters of the city. The councilmembers from wards shall be actual residents of their respective wards at the time of their candidacy and election; but removal of a councilmember from one ward to another within the city after his election, or a change in ward boundaries, shall not disqualify him from completing the term for which he was elected.
Councilor Sullivan was both a Tulsa resident and registered voter at the time of his election to a two year term in 2002. Likewise, he met the residency requirement pertaining to the district from which he was elected. Granted, he moved from that district prior to the completion of his term but the statute indicates his doing so shall not disqualify him from completing that term. However this statute, if applicable, would preclude Sullivan from seeking election from the 7th District in 2004. Yet he was re-elected as Tulsa's District 7 Councilor in 2004.
On January 13, 2005, Michael D. Bates via his blog Batesline.com opined that Randy Sullivan is no longer a City Councilor and went on to demonstrate why he felt this would be the case, calling upon Title 51, Section 8 of the Oklahoma Statutes as applicable. That section of the Oklahoma Statutes states in part:
Every office shall become vacant on the happening of any one of the following events before the expiration of the term of such office:
...
Fourth. Ceasing to be a resident of the state, county, township, city or town,
or of any district thereof, in which the duties of his office are to be
exercised or for which he may have been elected or appointed.
...
The fact by reason whereof the vacancy arises shall be determined by the
authority authorized to fill such vacancy.
Evidently Mr. Bates is not as familiar with the Oklahoma Statutes as he would like to believe himself to be. If he were he would have realized that Title 51 applies to officers elected under the provisions of state law and not under the provisions of a city charter. For those cities operating under a charter, the applicable law is the above mentioned Title 11.
An interesting and very applicable part of Title 11 is that found at Chapter 1, Section 13-109 which states:
Whenever a charter is in conflict with any law relating to municipalities in force at the time of the adoption and approval of the charter, the provisions of the charter shall prevail and shall operate as a repeal or suspension of the state law or laws to the extent of any conflict.
Basically that one provision of Title 11 means that a city charter trumps state law relating to municipalities, leaving the charter cities to set their own qualifications for election to public office within the city, PROVIDED, the charter was enacted after the conflicting state law.
The Title 11 provisions listing the qualification for governing body members of Strong Mayor-Councilor Government were enacted in 1977 and amended last in 1978. The Title 51 provisions mentioned by Mr. Bates were enacted in 1910 and last amended in 1981. The current Tulsa City Charter and Strong Mayor-Council Government was approved by Tulsa voters in February, 1989. Therefore in all matters pertaining to municipal elections, the governing body (councilors) and their qualification to seek and hold office the Tulsa City Charter is controlling, not state law.
The question of whether Councilor Sullivan is qualified to serve as the District 7 Councilor must be resolved by examining the Tulsa City Charter. The qualifications for the office of city councilor are spelled out in Tulsa City Charter Article 6, Section 7 as follows:
...
No person shall be eligible to hold the office of Councilor for an election
district unless such person shall have been a qualified elector of the
election district for more than ninety (90) days at the time of filing for
the office of Councilor for that election district.
...
Notice that the above qualification does not use the word 'resident' but rather uses the words 'qualified elector'. This is the key to determining whether Sullivan was qualified to seek the office of District 7 Councilor during the 2004 election and therefore determines if he is or is not legally serving in 2005.
The term 'qualified elector' is mentioned in the Tulsa City Charter as amended. It is found in Article 12, Section 1 which states:
...
The term "qualified elector" as used in this amended Charter shall mean a
registered voter of the City of Tulsa, registered to vote as provided by the
laws of Oklahoma.
...
So there you have the answer.
A critical flaw in the Tulsa City Charter not only means that Randy Sullivan was qualified to seek and hold the office of District 7 Councilor in 2004 but also any voter registered in the City of Tulsa is qualified to seek and hold the office of Councilor in ANY district, no matter in which district they currently reside, provided they have been a 'qualified elector' as defined above for at least 90 days in the district in which they seek election.
Under the current Tulsa City Charter a person could in theory register in all City Council Districts by changing their voter registration 9 times, at 91 day intervals and be qualified to seek and hold office in any of the 9 Districts.
Say what?
Yep, according to the wording of the Tulsa City Charter this is not only possible but completely legal.
Here again is the flawed qualification:
...
No person shall be eligible to hold the office of Councilor for an election
district unless such person shall have been a qualified elector of the
election district for more than ninety (90) days at the time of filing for
the office of Councilor for that election district.
...
It could be repaired with a Charter amendment, which of course would require a vote on the part of Tulsans.
Actually there are two possible fixes:
(1):
No person shall be eligible to hold the office of
Councilor for a Tulsa City Council district unless such person shall have been a
qualified elector of that council district for at least ninety (90)days
immediately prior to the time of filing for the office of Councilor for that
election district.
Or, an even better fix...
(2):
No person shall be eligible to hold the office of
Councilor for a Tulsa City Council district unless such person shall have been a
qualified elector and legal resident of that district for more than
ninety (90) days immediately prior to the filing for the office of Councilor
for that election district.
In the final analysis the framers of the Tulsa City Charter 'blew it' as the charter applies to the qualifications to seek election to and hold the office of City Councilor.
Regardless of the view one holds of Tulsa City Commissioner Randy Sullivan, his politics, his actions or inactions while in office, the fact remains that according to the current Tulsa City Charter he is serving legally.
