In April of this year, the City Council unanimously approved Ordinance 1166 which sets up a referendum for the public to vote at this upcoming August 4 election to amend the City Charter relative to the East Ridge municipal judge position. It is significant that the City Council unanimously approved this Ordinance this past April because a Charter amendment is warranted to improve the Court’s overall operations.
Importantly, the Council does not always vote unanimously so the fact that it did in this situation speaks volumes about why the Council considers approval of the referendum to be so critical.
Specifically, the referendum regarding the municipal judge relates to two issues: (1) clarifying a textual error and (2) permitting the judge to simultaneously hold two part-time municipal judge positions in different cities. I will address each of these in turn.
Clarifying Textual Error: In 2020, East Ridge citizens overwhelming voted to amend the Charter to broaden the residency requirement for the East Ridge City Judge to Hamilton County. The reason the 2020 referendum passed so overwhelmingly is that there are very few if any, attorneys that reside in East Ridge, and expanding the residency requirement to Hamilton County increases the talent pool from which to select a municipal judge – particularly one with judicial experience. It was later discovered that there is a discrepancy in a sentence of Section 6-B(1) of the Charter that needs to be clarified and must be placed on the upcoming ballot for referendum. Thus, I fully support this Charter change to complete what the citizens overwhelming approved in 2020.
Dually Held Municipal Judge Positions: The citizens will also vote on August 4 as to whether the City Charter should be amended to allow the municipal judge to simultaneously hold a part-time dual judge position in another municipality within Hamilton County. The Charter currently prohibits the municipal judge from holding any other elected office. If the referendum is approved, the Charter amendment will be modified to clarify that the municipal judge may not hold any other nonjudicial elected offices which, in turn, would allow the municipal judge to simultaneously hold two part-time municipal positions in different cities. I support this Charter amendment because I believe the City deserves to have the opportunity to select the most experienced and qualified judicial applicant which is vital to the judicial position and best serves the citizens of East Ridge.
Contrary to what may have been circulated around the community, the Tennessee Constitution does not prohibit municipal judges from holding simultaneous part-time dual judge positions in different cities. Additionally, the Code of Judicial Conduct for Tennessee does not prohibit this either. Prior to the Council’s decision to place this matter for a referendum during the August election, the City administration and City Attorney thoroughly researched the legality of this charter amendment. The research confirmed that the amendment is constitutional and actually places the City Charter more in line with the Constitution and Judicial Canons.
I urge the voters to approve the proposed amendments to the City Charter regarding the municipal judge. The Citizens of East Ridge deserve to have the best selection pool of experienced judges which currently is significantly restricted. Indeed, I am not aware of any attorneys that are residents of the City that are running for the municipal judge position. Further, a judge that holds multiple part-time municipal judge positions within Hamilton County only strengthens the understanding and knowledge that this judicial position warrants which will only result in better operations and decisions of the City Court.
_ Andrea “Aundie” Witt, East Ridge City Councilwoman
