PGI logo cropped.png
Congressional Millionaire’s Club
The Personal Gain Index shines a light on how members of Congress benefit during their tenure.





City of Huntsville Charter Amendments, 10 (November 2009)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

There were ten City of Huntsville Charter Amendments on the November 3 ballot in Walker County for voters in the city of Huntsville.[1]

  • The first proposition sought to amend article VI section 6.01 which would make the regular city general election in November rather than in May as they are now. The measure was approved.
  • Yes: 1,194 (66.1%) Approveda
  • No: 613 (33.9%)
  • The second proposition sought to amend article IV section 4.07 which would allow the City Council to meet at other locations besides City Hall. The measure was defeated.
  • Yes: 891 (49.5%)
  • No: 908 (50.5%)Defeatedd
  • The third proposition sought to amend article IV section 4.13 which would make it so that an ordinance would have to be considered at two council meetings before it would be able t be put to a vote and approved or rejected. The measure was approved.
  • Yes: 1,432 (80%)Approveda
  • No: 358 (20%)
  • The fourth proposition sought to amend article VII section 7.01 which would require at least 1,000 signatures from qualified registered city voters to get a petition passed into a referendum vote. The measure was approved.
  • Yes: 1,106 (63.4%)Approveda
  • No: 638 (36.6%)
  • The fifth proposition sought to amend article VII section 7.02 which would require at least 1,000 signatures from qualified registered city voters to get a referendum vote for an measure passed by council to a city wide vote. The measure was approved.
  • Yes: 1,095 (62.6%)Approveda
  • No: 654 (37.4%)
  • The sixth proposition sought to amend article VII section 7.07 which states that there would need to be at least 1,000 signatures from registered voters in order to initiate a recall election in the city. The measure was approved.
  • Yes: 1,088 (62.1%)Approveda
  • No: 674 (37.9%)
  • The seventh proposition sought to amend article XI section 11.07 by deleting a phrase stating that it was done by choice of the city manager. The measure was approved.
  • Yes: 957 (55.6%)Approveda
  • No: 763 (44.5%)
  • The eighth proposition sought to amend article XI section 11.13 seeks to allow the sale of bonds without a requirement for public or private sale. The measure was approved.
  • Yes: 552 (31.9%)
  • No: 1,176 (68.1%)Defeatedd
  • The ninth proposition sought to amend article XI section 11.17 which would be a new section and would allow for limiting the amount debt by having a public vote if the tax would be increased by .002 percent. The measure was approved.
  • Yes: 1,163 (67,3%)Approveda
  • No: 583 (32.7%)
  • The tenth proposition sought to amend article XII section 12.03 which would be a new section and would make it so that if a tax was reduced by 2/3 or more a council vote would be needed. The measure was approved.[2]
  • Yes: 1,226 (69.5%)Approveda
  • No: 537 (30.5%)

References