Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board members spar over mayors authority to appoint city manager, resolution proposed for board role in selection
Summary
A councilmember introduced a resolution to formalize a board role in selecting a permanent city manager after 19 months without one; the mayor said state statute vests appointment power in the mayor and warned he would veto any ordinance altering that process, while the city attorney described the choice as political rather than legal.
Board members debated a proposed resolution to create a board-led screening process for a permanent city manager, with some directors seeking a formal role and the mayor saying state law gives appointment authority to the mayor and that he would veto any ordinance changing that method.
The matter matters because the city has been operating without a permanent city manager for 19 months, directors said, and several board members want a more participatory selection process for the mayors appointment.
Director Wier introduced a resolution asking that three board members review applications and recommend finalists to the full board for consideration; Wier said the board had been given only a single candidate recommendation in recent months and urged a broader process. "We have been 19 months without a city manager," Wier said.
City Attorney Coppetoe explained the controlling statute: the mayor makes the appointment and the board votes to confirm; Coppetoe said a governing body could create additional internal selection steps but that the legal appointment authority remains with the mayor. Coppetoe also warned that prolonged absence of a bonded city manager presents financial and operational risk.
Mayor said he expected the board to receive a candidate by June and that if the resolution passed he would veto it. Several directors asked for the resolution to appear on the June 3 agenda for discussion; the mayor said the item would be moot if the candidate presented in June proceeded to a vote, but he acknowledged the request could be placed on the agenda.
No formal changes to the appointment process were enacted at the agenda-review meeting; the board and mayor agreed to continue discussions and expected a candidate to appear for a June vote, but directors asked for clarity on next steps if the board voted no on the mayor's appointment.
