Minutes - Council - 03/08/2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

an investigation, she just asks a lot of questions which is how she learns. She stated when going to the June 14, 2021 City Council, it seemed at that point, a discussion of the Charter Commission slipped from view. She stated she has looked at processes from other cities who post documents about the process for transparency with the public. She stated the document that was provided was more of a checklist and not a policy. She stated what concerned her was that it wasn’t in view of the Council or Charter Commission and that when the ads go out, it looks like it is for a length of time but if it is the case, that first applicant gets on the Charter Commission. Administrative Services Director Lasher replied that is correct, that is how it has been done and was the process handed down to her. She repeated that she would like a solid plan to administer. Councilmember Howell replied the City Clerk administers elections and interviews multiple people to work in the City. Councilmember Howell asserted that Administrative Services Director Lasher sets the processes in place for Boards and Commissions so it is a big leap for her to understand how this could have slipped her purview because Administrative Services Director Lasher has a big job that she is paid well for, has been trusted, and in comparison with other things, this is an easy detail. She stated that when the policy was changed in 2016 it was never brought to the Council or the Charter Commission. She stated it could look like the deck could be stacked by people being elected by getting their application in first with no oversight. She stated the other problem is with other City job postings there isn’t a limit to the number of applicants. She referenced a document where she highlighted a portion of the letter from the judge which read “if Ramsey chose to have a deadline for applications and then found a way to conduct their own due process and make recommendations to the chief judge he would support that process.” She questioned when the policy changed, and this statement from the judge indicating there was a policy, because there was no process in place and hasn’t been since 2016. Administrative Services Director Lasher replied there has never been a process ever for Charter Commission appointments. She stated that the Boards and Commissions policy was updated in 2016 because it never applied to the Charter. She stated this is the first recruitment for the Charter Commission that she led and previously it was always open until filled. She stated she didn’t take something out the policy to avoid a process, there has never been a policy for appointing Charter Commission members. City Administrator Ulrich commented, for the public, that the Charter Commission members are appointed by the judge without any City involvement. He stated that is the case in the other city he had worked for also. He didn’t think that it was unusual State-wide for the judge to do the appointment. He stated the Charter Commission typically meets once or twice a year, and the most recent one focused on the election. He stated, for context, that historically there hasn’t been a lot of interest in the Charter Commission until recently because they meet infrequently and getting applicants has been a struggle. He agreed that the optics maybe aren’t good but accusing staff of doing something inappropriate isn’t correct. Councilmember Howell clarified that it could happen, that isn’t what she felt the City Clerk did but the City Clerk is a professional who leads elections and it is hard to understand how this was missed. She stated to Councilmember Musgrove’s point was that policies haven’t been provided. She felt Staff didn’t work with the Council and gave the example of Staff insisting on pushing out City Council /March 8, 2022 Page 32 of 38