Does a Mississippi resident's pre-annexation time count toward the 2-year residency requirement to run for municipal office?

Plain-English summary

Section 23-15-300(1) requires a candidate for municipal, county, or county district office to be "a resident of the municipality, county, county district or other territory that he or she seeks to represent in such office for two (2) years immediately preceding the day of election." Two years of residency. Cleanly enforced under most circumstances. But what happens when the boundary lines change?

The Columbus city attorney asked the AG two boundary-change questions:

1. Annexation. If the City of Columbus prevails in pending annexation litigation, does a county resident's residency in the area being annexed count toward the 2-year city-residency requirement? In other words, does the clock restart when the area becomes part of the city?

2. Redistricting. If ward lines change before the next election, does the 1991 Sautermeister AG opinion still apply?

Both answers, with the caveat that the Columbus special charter might say something different on these issues:

1. Annexation does not restart the residency clock. Continuous, uninterrupted residency in the annexed area counts toward the city-residency requirement. The 2023 Blackwell AG opinion already confirmed: "an individual's continuous and uninterrupted residency in territory that is annexed by a municipality should be considered residency within the municipality when determining whether the individual meets the residency duration requirement in Section 23-15-300(1)."

2. Redistricting does not restart the clock for residents whose residency is continuous and uninterrupted. Sautermeister (1991) is still good law. A candidate whose residency stays put while the lines move around can apply the previous period of residency to the period in the newly-drawn district.

There is a wrinkle from Sautermeister: if a candidate is "redistricted out" of his old district and then moves back into the new boundary of his former district, the previous residency does not count. So if you were drawn out of Ward 3, and then you moved your residence so you are now in Ward 3 again, you have to start the 2-year clock from your move-in date. But if you stayed put and the lines moved without you, you keep your residency time.

A separate carve-out for offices that require only county residency (county supervisor, constable): if redistricting and a residency change both happened on or before the date the party executive committee or election commission meets to determine candidate qualifications, the candidate can meet residency for those offices.

The AG also flagged that Columbus is a special charter city. The AG cannot interpret special charters by official opinion. So if the Columbus charter speaks to either annexation residency or redistricting residency, the charter controls, and the AG's analysis applies only to the extent the charter is silent.

What this means for you

Candidates whose area was annexed into a Mississippi city

For a candidate whose home was annexed into the city, the opinion concludes that, assuming the city's special charter is silent, continuous and uninterrupted residency in the annexed area counts as residency within the city for the two-year requirement in Section 23-15-300(1). The opinion does not treat annexation as restarting the clock.

Candidates whose ward changed through redistricting

For a candidate whose ward lines changed, the opinion holds that, assuming the charter is silent, an individual whose residency is continuous and uninterrupted may apply the previous period of residency in the former district to the period in the newly created district to satisfy Section 23-15-300(1). It treats Sautermeister (1991) as still controlling.

Candidates who were "redistricted out" then moved back

The opinion restates Sautermeister's second scenario: a candidate who is redistricted out of the former district and then moves back into an area within the new configuration of that district cannot use the previous period of residency. The opinion notes one exception: for an office requiring only that the person be a qualified elector of the county and a resident of the district (such as county supervisor or constable), the residency requirement can be met if the redistricting and the change in residency occurred on or before the date the party executive committee, or the election commission for independent candidates, meets to determine candidate qualifications.

City attorneys for special charter municipalities

The opinion stresses that it does not interpret special charters by official opinion. If the city's special charter speaks to these issues, the charter controls (citing the Gaylor and Lowe opinions), and the AG's state-law analysis applies only insofar as the charter is silent. The opinion expressly limited itself to the two questions that did not require interpreting the Columbus charter.

Common questions

Does annexation restart the two-year residency clock for running for city office?
No. The opinion concludes that continuous and uninterrupted residency in territory annexed by the city counts as residency within the city for Section 23-15-300(1), assuming the special charter is silent.

If my ward lines changed but I did not move, does my prior residency count?
Yes. The opinion, following Sautermeister, holds that a candidate whose residency is continuous and uninterrupted may apply the previous period of residency in the former district toward the residency requirement in the newly created district.

What if I was redistricted out and then moved back into my old district's new boundaries?
The opinion says you cannot use your previous period of residency in that case. It notes an exception for offices requiring only county-elector and district residency (county supervisor, constable), where residency can be met if the redistricting and the change of residence both occurred on or before the date qualifications are determined.

Why didn't the AG answer the questions about the Columbus charter?
The opinion explains the office does not interpret special charters by official opinion, so it limited itself to the two questions that turned on state law, and noted that a conflicting special charter provision would control.

Background and statutory framework

Section 23-15-300(1) is the operative statute:

Any candidate for any municipal, county or county district office shall be a resident of the municipality, county, county district or other territory that he or she seeks to represent in such office for two (2) years immediately preceding the day of election.

The 1991 Sautermeister opinion addressed redistricting residency in two scenarios:

1. Lines move, candidate stays put: "[A] candidate whose residency is continuous and uninterrupted may apply his previous period of residency in his former district to the period he has resided in the newly created district to satisfy the residency requirements for holding office from such district."

2. Candidate redistricted out, then moves back into the new boundary of his former district: "[H]e cannot utilize his previous period of residency for the purpose of satisfying residency requirements." Exception for county-residency-only offices: "if the office sought requires only that the individual be a qualified elector of the county and a resident of the district, such as that required for county supervisors and constables, an individual could meet the residency requirements if the redistricting and the change in residency occurred on or before the date the party executive committee, or the election commission for independent candidates, meet to determine candidate qualifications."

The 2023 Blackwell opinion extended the Sautermeister logic to annexation: continuous residency in territory annexed by a municipality counts toward the residency requirement.

The 2024 Turnage opinion confirms both Blackwell and Sautermeister remain the AG's position, subject to special charter overrides.

Citations

• Miss. Code Ann. § 23-15-300(1)
• MS AG Op., Sautermeister (Apr. 30, 1991)
• MS AG Op., Blackwell (Apr. 26, 2023)
• MS AG Op., Gaylor (Dec. 15, 2006)
• MS AG Op., Lowe (Nov. 3, 2000)

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/divisions/opinions-and-policy/recent-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/J.Turnage-July-30-2024-Residency-Requirements-for-Municipal-Office.pdf

Original opinion text

July 30, 2024
Jeffrey J. Turnage, Esq.
Attorney, City of Columbus
Post Office Box 1366
Columbus, Mississippi 39703-1366
Re: Residency Requirements for Municipal Office

Dear Mr. Turnage:
The Office of the Attorney General has received your request for an official opinion.

Questions Presented
1) If the City of Columbus ("City") prevails in its annexation case before the next election, does a county resident's period of residency outside the City (which is then annexed into the City) count toward his or her residency for purposes of qualifying to run for office?
2) If the ward lines change before the election as a result of redistricting, does MS AG Op., Sautermeister (Apr. 30, 1991) still apply?

Brief Response
1) Assuming the City's special charter is silent on this question, a county resident's continued and uninterrupted period of residency in an area that is annexed by the City should be considered residency within the City for the purposes of determining whether the requirements in Mississippi Code Annotated Section 23-15-300(1) have been met.
2) Assuming the City's special charter is silent on this question, consistent with our opinion in Sautermeister, if the City's ward lines change prior to the election, an individual whose residency is continuous and uninterrupted may apply his or her previous period of residency in his or her former district to the period he or she has resided in the newly created district to satisfy the residency requirements in Section 23-15-300(1).

In your request, you ask several questions regarding potential conflicts between the City's special charter and Mississippi law. However, we do not interpret special charters by official opinion. MS AG Op., Lowe at *1 (Nov. 3, 2000). Thus, this opinion is limited to your two questions that do not require an interpretation of the City's charter.

Applicable Law and Discussion
As an initial matter, if the City's special charter speaks to these issues, then the charter controls. See MS AG Op., Gaylor at 1 (Dec. 15, 2006) ("[W]here the provisions of a special charter conflict with general law[,] . . . the specific provisions of a municipal special charter will take precedence over the provisions of general municipal law."); MS AG Op., Lowe at 1 ("[P]rovisions of a private or special charter that are contrary to general statutory provisions are viewed by this office as exceptions to the statutory provisions except where the general statutes expressly provide otherwise.") However, because this office cannot interpret special charters, this opinion is limited to interpretation of state law.

Pursuant to Section 23-15-300(1), "[a]ny candidate for any municipal, county or county district office shall be a resident of the municipality, county, county district or other territory that he or she seeks to represent in such office for two (2) years immediately preceding the day of election." We have previously opined that "an individual's continuous and uninterrupted residency in territory that is annexed by a municipality should be considered residency within the municipality when determining whether the individual meets the residency duration requirement in Section 23-15-300(1)." MS AG Op., Blackwell at *2 (Apr. 26, 2023) (citing MS AG Op., Sautermeister (Apr. 30, 1991)).

In Sautermeister, we were asked about the effect of redistricting in two different situations: one in which the potential candidate's residency remained the same and only the district lines changed, causing him to reside in a newly created district, and another in which the candidate was redistricted out of his former district and he moved back into an area within the new lines of his former district. With regard to the first situation, we opined "that a candidate whose residency is continuous and uninterrupted may apply his previous period of residency in his former district to the period he has resided in the newly created district to satisfy the residency requirements for holding office from such district." Sautermeister at *2. As to the second situation, we stated:

It is the opinion of this office that where a candidate is "redistricted" out of his old district and he moves back into an area or location within the new configuration of his former district, he cannot utilize his previous period of residency for the purpose of satisfying residency requirements. On the other hand, if the office sought requires only that the individual be a qualified elector of the county and a resident of the district, such as that required for county supervisors and constables, an individual could meet the residency requirements if the redistricting and the change in residency occurred on or before the date the party executive committee, or the election commission for independent candidates, meet to determine candidate qualifications.

Id. The above cited sections of Blackwell and Sautermeister remain the opinion of this office.

If this office may be of any further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,
LYNN FITCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL
By: /s/ Beebe Garrard
Beebe Garrard
Special Assistant Attorney General