How can constituents get rid of an elected official when they think he is doing a lousy job?

“It ain’t easy,” according to Andy Downs, director of the Mike Downs Center for Indiana Politics at IPFW. “Really, when you think about elected officials, there are very few qualifications to even hold office. And there is precious little that says exactly how an elected official is supposed to execute their duties.”

Last week, Huntertown resident Jacquelyn Tracey presented the Huntertown Town Council with a petition containing 103 signatures that call for the impeachment of Huntertown Clerk-treasurer Dave Rudolph. The residents are seeking to remove Rudolph – who, owing to medical issues, has been unable to work since October – because they think he’s failing to fulfill the duties of the job.

The petition cites a 2011 Indiana State Board of Accounts audit that found several problems with the town’s accounting practices as an example of what they believe is Rudolph’s ineptitude.

Unlike a typical worker, who would quickly be unemployed for not showing up to work or not having the skills needed to get the job done, an elected officials has an enviable level of job security.

According to Indiana law, “all county, city, town, and township officers are liable to impeachment for any misdemeanor in office.” State law implies that the elected official has to commit a criminal act to be impeached.

“I’m not sure simple incompetence is enough to rise to the level of a criminal act,” Downs said. “I think what some of the people of Huntertown want is a recall, but that is not an option. The option exists in several other states, but not here.”

Though the impeachment process is in state law, it seems unlikely the Indiana General Assembly would go through the lengthy and costly process of bringing impeachment charges and then conducting a trial. But another portion of the law allows for any person to submit a written accusation with the circuit court that the elected official is neglecting the duties of office. The court would then conduct a hearing, and the judge has the power to remove an official.

It is clear Rudolph’s absence from work because of his illness is causing the town hardship.

“We always hope someone steps down before that becomes a problem,” Downs said.

But the Huntertown Town Council also deserves some blame. After Rudolph won a contentious election for clerk-treasurer in 2010, a majority of the town council members hastily voted in favor of creating a new utility board. All of the staff who previously reported to the clerk-treasurer now report to the utility board.

The last-minute change was made to protect the jobs of the employees who were close family members of the previous clerk-treasurer. But it also meant that Rudolph had no staff to assist him in completing the many duties of the clerk-treasurer’s office.

And when Rudolph became ill, a majority of the council members balked at allowing Rudolph to appoint a deputy clerk to ensure the office could continue to operate in his absence.

Since November there has been a succession of three deputy clerks. The first two quickly quit. The most recent appointee, Cathy Mittendorf, started Feb. 1.

The voters’ next opportunity to voice their approval or disapproval of the job Rudolph is doing in during the 2014 election. In the meantime, they will continue to pay his $55,000 salary in addition to the extra money the town has to pay the deputy clerk.