GUNTERSVILLE — After considering potential legal issues, the City of Guntersville is moving forward with a mayoral runoff election later this month.
The race between incumbent Leigh Dollar and challenger Jeff McLaughlin ended in a tie after seven provisional ballots were counted last Friday. Each candidate earned 1,065 votes.
The city council then voted to hold a runoff on September 23. However, it reconvened on Tuesday to address some potential legal issues given the ambiguity of state law and the uniqueness of the situation.
SEE: Tied: Guntersville mayoral race goes to runoff as candidates receive even number of votes
Mayor Pro Tem Randy Whitaker led the meeting after Mayor Dollar recused herself.
McLaughlin opened the meeting by proposing what he called a "fair and common-sense compromise," suggesting that he and Dollar split the term, with each serving two years.
"We can go through a bunch of legal wrangling, interpreting statutes that ought to be clearer and that are not as clear as we would like," he outlined. "We can spend a lot of money to litigate this and many more months."
McLaughlin said the last mayor's race was dragged out for "almost two years" and cost the city "six figures." His proposal would save the City the cost of another election and potential legal bills, he argued.
"What if we came together for the good of the City and reached an agreement that reflects the will of the voters?" he asked.
He said the council could appoint him as mayor if Dollar agreed to resign by Nov. 1, 2027 — two years into the next term. He said he would be the only one to take a risk in this "handshake deal," relying on the council and Dollar to keep their word.
The council proceeded without considering McLaughlin's proposal.
City attorney Jim Beard advised the council on its options based on his interpretation of state law. He said that, after consulting with other lawyers and state officials, he believed the statute dealing with ties in municipal elections, as outlined in the Alabama Code 11-46-55, had a "hole" that did not authorize a runoff election between two municipal candidates. However, it didn't prohibit one. He said there were other cases where the council simply decided the candidate, but the code didn't authorize that either.
"There's essentially no mechanism to declare a winner in a tie vote in a municipal election between just two people," Beard said. "Going from there, the council may decide to act however it may wish."
Beard outlined three potential options for the council moving forward:
- Do nothing and proceed with the scheduled runoff election on September 23.
- Have the council vote to decide the winner.
- Cancel the runoff and appoint the next mayor after the current term runs out.
Councilman Rich Russell stated that a bill, HB144, passed by the state legislature in 2022, allowed the probate judge to "decide the winner by lot," thereby eliminating the need for a runoff. However, that bill ended with a pocket veto after Gov. Kay Ivey failed to sign it before the end of the session.
Russell said, based on his reading, the law did not prohibit a runoff. Beard agreed, reiterating that it did not specifically authorize one either.
Russell said moving forward with the runoff was the most "fair and equitable" option so as not to "disenfranchise" the voters.
After further discussion, the council voted unanimously to move forward with the runoff election.
To connect with the story's author or comment, email [email protected] or find him on X and Facebook.
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
