UPDATE: Election ’07: Langford responds to Cooper filing

10.17.2007 by André Natta · → 12 Comments

Read Offline:

UPDATE: 10:40:04 a.m., The motion for dismissal by Langford is up at NBC13: http://media.mgnetwork.com/vtm/images/langford.pdf . Thanks to Steph for finding that.

UPDATE: 10:25:36 a.m., It appears that Fox 6 has removed the Langford document, FYI.

The folks at Fox 6 have obtained a copy of a motion to dimiss the contest filing of former mayoral candidate Patrick Cooper and have posted it on their site. It’s the latest episode in what appears will be a long three week saga here in Birmingham as Cooper attempts to force a special election.

What do you think; has this gone on for too long or should Cooper continue to push for another visit to the polls for Birmingham’s residents?

Read Offline:

Filed under: Alabama · Birmingham · Citywide · Election '07 · politics

12 comments
blackdog
blackdog

Patrick Cooper is off his rocker. He lost, so why cannot he accept defeat like a gentleman? Patrick you are a poor display of leadership in this community. Go back to praticing law, please; and get out of the way of the community doing something.

blackdog
blackdog

Patrick Cooper is off his rocker. He lost, so why cannot he accept defeat like a gentleman? Patrick you are a poor display of leadership in this community. Go back to praticing law, please; and get out of the way of the community doing something.

southtrek
southtrek

So as I understand then, there is no residency requirement under the Mayor-Council Act. Would the provisions then be intrepreted as operating in conjunction with the Alabama statute or operating without reference to it. The arguement could be made that the conflict provision, Article X would suggest that the statute should be read as working with Alabama law. And since there is no local law thanks to the 1901 Constitution, this would support that arguement as well.

southtrek
southtrek

So as I understand then, there is no residency requirement under the Mayor-Council Act. Would the provisions then be intrepreted as operating in conjunction with the Alabama statute or operating without reference to it. The arguement could be made that the conflict provision, Article X would suggest that the statute should be read as working with Alabama law. And since there is no local law thanks to the 1901 Constitution, this would support that arguement as well.

Zen
Zen

Well the Mayor-Council Act of 1955 lists the eligibility requirements as Langford's group cited in their response. Article X of said act states that in the event of conflict with existing state laws (in 1955 I presume), the Mayor-Council Act supercedes. The Mayor-Council Act was passed by AL Legislature; it is not a local law.

Zen
Zen

Well the Mayor-Council Act of 1955 lists the eligibility requirements as Langford's group cited in their response. Article X of said act states that in the event of conflict with existing state laws (in 1955 I presume), the Mayor-Council Act supercedes. The Mayor-Council Act was passed by AL Legislature; it is not a local law.

southtrek
southtrek

Interesting reading from both parties. Cooper's complaint is pretty compelling and well researched. Langford's response is a bit thin relying solely on the 1965 act as justification. He never addresses the question of residency and offers no other facts to support his claim to office than his voter ID card. The last mention of the fact that voters elected him really should have no bearing, though I fear it will. I think the question will turn on whether the 1965 act carved out an exception to the residency requirements of state law. Without researching it, I doubt it did otherwise counsel for Langford would have mentioned it i their motion.

southtrek
southtrek

Interesting reading from both parties. Cooper's complaint is pretty compelling and well researched. Langford's response is a bit thin relying solely on the 1965 act as justification. He never addresses the question of residency and offers no other facts to support his claim to office than his voter ID card. The last mention of the fact that voters elected him really should have no bearing, though I fear it will. I think the question will turn on whether the 1965 act carved out an exception to the residency requirements of state law. Without researching it, I doubt it did otherwise counsel for Langford would have mentioned it i their motion.

steph
steph

oh no! The link is broken! I even went to the F0x6 site and their link is broken as well. Maybe this document has been removed? I would like to hear his side of the story and decide for myself... but... I, for one, am glad that Cooper is challenging Langford. It certainly sounds like the rental of the loft by Langford was an attempt to deceive. I am glad he got called on it (though I do wish it had come before the election - now it sounds like sore losing). I don't think he's the right guy to move the city forward, either. He's entertaining, and has wild ideas, but he's got to play it straight and fair, and he doesn't seem willing to do that yet. If you are applying to be mayor (or any public servant!) of this city, invest in it. Buy a house. Live here. Spend your time and money here. Don't make it contingent upon winning the election. Jump in with both feet and say, Mayor or not, I care about this city, I want to live here, I want to be part of the Birmingham community, and I want to make it better. We do that, every day. We live here, we face the problems of Birmingham daily, and we stay and fight. We don't need "maybe I'll buy a house here if I get to be the mayor." You're either with us or you're not.

steph
steph

oh no! The link is broken! I even went to the F0x6 site and their link is broken as well. Maybe this document has been removed? I would like to hear his side of the story and decide for myself... but... I, for one, am glad that Cooper is challenging Langford. It certainly sounds like the rental of the loft by Langford was an attempt to deceive. I am glad he got called on it (though I do wish it had come before the election - now it sounds like sore losing). I don't think he's the right guy to move the city forward, either. He's entertaining, and has wild ideas, but he's got to play it straight and fair, and he doesn't seem willing to do that yet. If you are applying to be mayor (or any public servant!) of this city, invest in it. Buy a house. Live here. Spend your time and money here. Don't make it contingent upon winning the election. Jump in with both feet and say, Mayor or not, I care about this city, I want to live here, I want to be part of the Birmingham community, and I want to make it better. We do that, every day. We live here, we face the problems of Birmingham daily, and we stay and fight. We don't need "maybe I'll buy a house here if I get to be the mayor." You're either with us or you're not.