Paul Walton maintains that he is still the mayor of Hull, while council members John Barber and Mike McElroy say that Walton forfeited his position when he qualified to seek a U.S. Congressional seat in 2022.
A judge didn’t rule on who is right or wrong last week. Instead, Northern Judicial Circuit Judge Jeffrey Malcom enforced a compromise of sorts, ruling that Walton, Barber and McElroy must sit together and all three sign any necessary checks so that the City of Hull can stay afloat financially until a special election is held in March to fill the mayor’s post and two open council seats.
Attorneys for both Walton and the council members appeared before Malcom Jan. 5 in the county superior courtroom, arguing over Walton’s legitimacy as the town’s mayor. Malcom issued a restraining order in November preventing Walton from taking any actions as Hull’s mayor until a determination of his legitimacy could be made.
Malcom ruled last week that the restraining order would be amended to allow for the town’s bills to be paid until the special election is held.
At issue is the length of Walton’s term. When is it actually supposed to end? Both sides made their cases before Malcom on when the term is lawfully over. Both arguments are tied to different city charters. The complicating factor is the city’s move to staggered terms in odd numbered years.
Walton’s attorney, Willie Woodruff, requested a jury trial to sort out the matter, but that wasn’t granted. Woodruff maintained that Walton’s term ended in 2021 and that Walton was just holding onto the seat until the next election was held. He said he was still mayor for 2022, but that was because the city charter stipulated that an elected official in the city holds the seat until a new person is elected and seated. Since no election was held, Walton was still mayor, but Woodruff said Walton was not disqualified from the mayor’s post when he ran for Congress, because the term had actually ended in 2021. He was simply acting as a placeholder in the role until the next election was held.
Dale Perry, who represents Barber and McElroy, said Walton was trying to “have his cake and eat it, too.” He questioned why no election was held and said no one can simply hold onto a role as a city’s chief administrator because they fail to make sure an election is held for their own seat. Perry said Walton’s term was slated to end in 2023 and that Walton lawfully lost his seat when he qualified to run for Congress last spring. Perry said Walton had made questionable credit card purchases and shouldn’t be allowed to oversee city finances. Woodruff adamantly objected to this assertion, saying such accusations shouldn’t be made without the introduction of witnesses and evidence.
No dates were set for when the three will sit down to sign checks, and no determination was made at the hearing on when the mayor’s term that will be elected in March will end.
Meanwhile, the city remains in a state of paralysis, with the council unable to set a 2023 budget or even hold a meeting due to the lack of a quorum.
(1) comment
This is more complicated than i thought. Seems it's not clear what was right and what was wrong. The judge's decision seems fair enough given the conflicting rules.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.