3 ms·

Is it normal for the state legislature to make changes to a city charter? Why Seaford? The title and synopsis are hiding some important info here. - currently

by abeppu 3y ago

Is it normal for the state legislature to make changes to a city charter? Why Seaford? The title and synopsis are hiding some important info here. - currently 'bona fide resident' requires owning property for 6 months - with the changes in the bill, natural persons don't need to own property to be qualified to vote, but corporations do - and non-resident natural persons who own property in the city are also eligible So unfortunately it is _not_ as easy as creating a bunch of shell corporations to create a big external voting block; you also have to be able to buy property for each of them. https://legis.delaware.gov/json/BillDetail/GenerateHtmlDocument?legislationId=130205&legislationTypeId=1&docTypeId=2&legislationName=HB121 https://legis.delaware.gov/json/BillDetail/GenerateHtmlDocum...

singleshot_ 3y ago
To be honest your best bet is probably a whole bunch of general partnerships that are all general partners in a general partnership that owns some land in town. It’s going to cost you a couple bucks to set up a LLC and even more for a corporation but you can form a partnership for free in a bout eight words.
nescioquid 3y ago
Sounds like a cottage industry in the making.
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Is it normal for the state legislature to make changes to a city charter? Why Seaford? Depends on context. New York City, for example, ceded control to Albany after going bankrupt. The same path appears proximate for San Francisco. In this case it looks like enabling legislation. Dover isn’t giving Seaford’s corporations a vote. It’s giving Seaford the right to give corporations a vote.
- abeppu 3y ago
  > In this case it looks like enabling legislation. Dover isn’t giving Seaford’s corporations a vote. It’s giving Seaford the right to give corporations a vote. What leads you to say this? I'm a layperson so I may be missing something, but the language that the bill adds as section 7(A)(2) seems like it is saying (property-owning) corporations are qualified voters, and 7(B) doesn't seem like it gives the city some discretion to decide among qualified voters who can actually register.
tedunangst 3y ago
The city can't change its own charter. It's like a license from the state, granting certain powers to the city. Though usually the state legislature will offer some deference to the city for requested changes. Specifics vary by state.
cowsandmilk 3y ago
> Is it normal for the state legislature to make changes to a city charter? Yes, states almost always dictate how local governments are organized and run. In many states, they’ll have a pre approved list of charters that cab be adopted. For example, https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVII/Chapter43 https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVII/Ch... has the charters that cities and towns in Massachusetts can adopt. That said, Boston doesn’t have the freedom to adopt these forms of government and instead has a charter made up of a bunch of random state statutes. https://www.cityofboston.gov/Images_Documents/2007%20the%20charter%20draft20%20(final%20draft1%20with%20jumps)_tcm3-16428.pdf https://www.cityofboston.gov/Images_Documents/2007%20the%20c... > Why Seaford? The sponsor of the bill is from Seaford. Presumably, he’s doing so at the request of the local government.

by abeppu 3y ago

singleshot_ 3y ago

To be honest your best bet is probably a whole bunch of general partnerships that are all general partners in a general partnership that owns some land in town. It’s going to cost you a couple bucks to set up a LLC and even more for a corporation but you can form a partnership for free in a bout eight words.

nescioquid 3y ago

Sounds like a cottage industry in the making.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> Is it normal for the state legislature to make changes to a city charter? Why Seaford? Depends on context. New York City, for example, ceded control to Albany after going bankrupt. The same path appears proximate for San Francisco. In this case it looks like enabling legislation. Dover isn’t giving Seaford’s corporations a vote. It’s giving Seaford the right to give corporations a vote.

abeppu 3y ago
> In this case it looks like enabling legislation. Dover isn’t giving Seaford’s corporations a vote. It’s giving Seaford the right to give corporations a vote. What leads you to say this? I'm a layperson so I may be missing something, but the language that the bill adds as section 7(A)(2) seems like it is saying (property-owning) corporations are qualified voters, and 7(B) doesn't seem like it gives the city some discretion to decide among qualified voters who can actually register.

tedunangst 3y ago

The city can't change its own charter. It's like a license from the state, granting certain powers to the city. Though usually the state legislature will offer some deference to the city for requested changes. Specifics vary by state.

cowsandmilk 3y ago

> Is it normal for the state legislature to make changes to a city charter? Yes, states almost always dictate how local governments are organized and run. In many states, they’ll have a pre approved list of charters that cab be adopted. For example, https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVII/Chapter43 https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVII/Ch... has the charters that cities and towns in Massachusetts can adopt. That said, Boston doesn’t have the freedom to adopt these forms of government and instead has a charter made up of a bunch of random state statutes. https://www.cityofboston.gov/Images_Documents/2007%20the%20charter%20draft20%20(final%20draft1%20with%20jumps)_tcm3-16428.pdf https://www.cityofboston.gov/Images_Documents/2007%20the%20c... > Why Seaford? The sponsor of the bill is from Seaford. Presumably, he’s doing so at the request of the local government.