VACANCY IN THE OFFICES OF MAYOR AND VICE-MAYOR. 11 O.S. 11-111 (1991). THIS PLACES THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR DETERMINING WHETHER THE MAYOR OR VICE-MAYOR IN A STRONG-MAYOR COUNCIL SYSTEM IS A RESIDENT OF THE MUNICIPALITY ON THE COUNCIL. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT THE PROCESS TO REMOVE AN ELECTED MUNICIPAL OFFICIAL FOR CAUSE REQUIRES NOTICE AND A HEARING, WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND. LARSON V. BUNCH, 255 P.2D 486 (OKLA. 1953).
IN CONCLUSION, IT IS THE OPINION OF THE UNDERSIGNED THAT THE EVENTS LISTED IN 51 O.S. 8 COMPRISE THE ANSWER TO YOUR FIRST QUESTION REGARDING VACANCY OF OFFICE IN A STRONG-MAYOR-COUNCIL FORM OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT. YOUR SECOND QUESTION TURNS ON WHETHER THE ELECTED OFFICIAL IS A RESIDENT OF THE MUNICIPALITY. RESIDENCY IS A QUESTION OF FACT WHICH, IN THIS CONTEXT, MUST BE DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL PURSUANT TO 51 O.S. 8. RESIDENCY IS DETERMINED BY LOOKING TO SEVERAL FACTORS, THE MOST IMPORTANT OF WHICH IS THE INTENT MANIFESTED TO REMAIN OR RETURN TO THE ORIGINAL RESIDENCE.
(KAREN L. COLLIER)