49-52
Elections
Cite as N.D. Op. Att'y Gen. 49-52
OPINION
49-52
October 21, 1949 (OPINION)
ELECTIONS
RE: Resignation of Mayor
Your letter of October 19, re the situation in your city resulting
from the resignation of your mayor, has been received and referred to
my desk.
You state that your then mayor resigned on July 5, 1949; that your
next regular city election will be held in April, 1950; that your
city council accepted such resignation; that your council, on July
13th, elected one of your aldermen to act as mayor until the next
regular election. This all complies with the provisions of section
40-0816 N.D.R.C. 1943. You ask two questions:
1. Does Mr. McCullough serve in the dual capacity as Mayor and
as Alderman from the Second Ward? If not, is there a
vacancy in the office of Alderman from the Second Ward and
should this vacancy be filled? How?
2. We have three Wards in Casselton with two Aldermen from
each Ward. If Mr. McCullough is still serving as Alderman
from the Second Ward and has a vote in the Council as such,
how would situation be solved where a tie vote in the
Council occurred, i.e. three Aldermen voting aye on a
proposition and three voting nay. It does not seem
reasonable that Mr. McCullough should have his vote as
Alderman and the the deciding vote as Mayor."
It is our opinion that, under the provisions of said section, the
alderman so elected by the council to act as mayor, Mr. McCullough,
serves in a dual capacity - both as alderman from his ward, and as
mayor. Of course he must act as acting mayor and not as mayor. but
the statute gives him "all the rights and powers of the mayor until
the next election and until a mayor is elected and qualified."
His election by the council to act as mayor did not deprive him of
any of his powers or duties as alderman, and did not cause a vacancy
in the office of alderman.
One of the powers of the mayor is to cast the deciding vote in case
of a tie, and, under the statute, Mr. McCullough has that power as
acting mayor. In voting on any matter before the council, he casts
his vote as alderman, and if a tie results, he, as acting mayor,
breaks the tie by his vote as acting mayor. Whether or not this
seems reasonable is beside the question, since the statute clearly
provides that, besides his power as alderman, he has the additional
powers of mayor.
WALLACE E. WARNER
Attorney General