Council keeps vacancy timeline, asks staff to prepare candidate questions ahead of June 10 presentations

The Green Bay Common Council on May 20 voted to keep the statutory vacancy timeline in place for a recent alder resignation and directed city staff to prepare suggested questions and process details so applicants can present at the June 10 council meeting.

The action follows the resignation of an alder whose letter was signed at the May 6 council meeting and whose resignation was effective May 16. Clerk Jeffreys said the city published official notice the day after the May 6 meeting and that the public application window will remain open for 30 days.

At the center of the debate were competing priorities: some council members urged a fast appointment so the affected district would not go unrepresented and committee business could be fully staffed; others sought additional time to vet applicants and to prepare a consistent set of questions for all candidates. Attorney Kochar (city legal counsel) advised the council on the controlling law and ordinance.

Kochar told council that the ordinance the city adopted (section 2-82) lays out the appointment process and that under state law the council also has other options (special election, leaving the seat vacant) if it chooses to change the ordinance. She explained that a candidate requires a majority vote to be appointed and that the council’s existing ordinance directs that qualified applicants be allowed time to present at the next regular council meeting before an appointment vote.

Clerk Jeffreys confirmed timing details cited during the meeting: the official vacancy notice was published on May 7 and applicants must submit forms (including nomination papers with 20 qualified district signatures) by the posted deadline; the clerk verifies signatures upon receipt. Council members asked that staff assemble suggested questions and prepare a process outline for the personnel committee so that the presentations at the June 10 meeting can proceed in an orderly and consistent way.

The council approved the amended personnel-item motion directing staff to seek input on the application process and finalize a set of suggested questions; the motion to approve the vacancy item as amended was made by Alder Proffitt and seconded by Alder DeLay. The amendment preserves the ordinance timeline for candidate presentations and appointment while providing a clearer process for interviewer questions and candidate materials.

Council members also discussed past communications about the resignation: while the resignation letter bore an effective date of May 16, the mayor and staff had treated the vacancy as known on May 6 and published notice promptly to start the 30-day application period. Several members said they wanted to avoid legal challenges and to ensure the city met the 14-day posting and 30-day application requirements established by state law and local ordinance.