Agenda - Council - 11/12/2019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Attorney Langel stated that it is not clear. He explained that he would interpret the sentence as stating that the Council could call an advisory election at any time and therefore that question could be added to a general election ballot. He stated that his preference would be to clarify the language to remove "special" from advisory election to provide clarification if that element is going to be kept. He continued to review Chapter 4, moving onto section 4.5 regarding vacancies. He stated that section could be removed entirely and fall back on State law, which would be his preference. He explained that if the additional language is not benefiting the City as a whole, it should not be there, particularly if State law already addresses the process, as it simply creates a logistical mess. He noted that the timelines identified in the Charter conflict with State law, and therefore the City has to default to State law anyway. He recommended removing the section entirely, or at minimum streamlining the section. Chairperson Field asked how defaulting to the State law would affect a vacant seat compared to the current Charter language. City Attorney Langel replied that the timing of when the special election could be held, the notice for the filing period, how those timing periods disagree with State law, and the added primary requirement. City Clerk Thieling noted that the conflicting issues created the timeline the City is currently following to fill a vacancy, which has extended out to eight months. City Administrator Ulrich stated that in his opinion the section that is causing a problem is specifically section 4.5.4. He noted that statutory cities can appoint someone to a vacancy when there is two years or less remaining in the term, while the Charter spells out that an appointment can be made only is there are 365 days or less remaining in the term. He explained that statutory cities can appointment someone, following a series of interviews with the City Council, which eliminates the need for a majority of the special elections. Chairperson Field asked for input on the possibility of removing this section, which would default to State law. He explained that this would allow the City Council to appoint someone to a vacancy if there is two years or less remaining in a term, while the Charter specifies that the appointment can only be made if there are less than 365 days remaining in the term. Commissioner Anderson stated that the dates required, and the current process has caused the Council to have a vacancy for multiple years. She stated that in her opinion there is a need to fill that vacancy quickly and therefore she would favor modifying the situation regarding vacancies to give the Council permission to fill a vacancy. Commissioner Fuhreck stated that eliminating the need for a primary during a special election would assist in streamlining the process but he would want the provision to stand that allows appointments only with 365 days or less remaining in a term. Commissioner Bendtsen stated that he would be in favor of removing any section that is direct conflict with the State law. He stated that he would also support eliminating primary elections and would support appointments being made only with 365 days or less remaining in a term. He Charter Commission/ February 13, 2019 Page 5 of 11