Committee approves forwarding personnel‑code amendments to full Council, including mayor‑term appointments

The Geneva City Committee of the Whole on May 20 voted to advance two proposed amendments to the city code governing appointed municipal officers and employees: (1) changing appointed officials’ terms from annual appointment to a term not to exceed the term of the mayor, and (2) removing several positions from the code to align it with the City of Geneva Personnel Policy Manual.

City staff told the Committee that the personnel rules in the Geneva City Code conflict in several places with the Personnel Policy Manual and that the proposed ordinance would align the code with the manual. Miss Dawkins and city staff explained the recommendation traces to a 2009 staff report and cleanup list; some positions in the code had been identified for reclassification as non‑appointed since 2009 and 2012 but had not been updated in the municipal code.

Committee members split the two issues and debated them separately after Alderman Swanson moved to bifurcate the matters; that motion carried. The Committee then discussed the term‑length change and whether a longer appointment would help recruit and retain department heads.

Supporters of aligning appointment terms with the mayor’s term said the change provides stability and clarity for professional staff. “I think it provides clarity to our professional staff,” Mayor Burns said, noting that removal of an appointee remains possible under state procedures if performance issues arise. Alderman Cosserock and Alderman Kosarag said the change would make Geneva more competitive in recruiting municipal employees.

Opponents framed the annual appointment as an accountability mechanism that allows the Council to publicly reaffirm support each year. Alderman Kilberg said that the annual vote “reinforces to the employee that they’re welcome, they’re appreciated,” and said the existing practice had not produced contested reappointments in his experience.

On the question of appointment length, the Committee recorded a vote advancing the draft amendment to the full Council by a 5‑3 vote. The Committee also voted to remove a list of positions from the code (the code cleanup item) and forwarded that amendment to the full Council after a separate vote in which a majority voted in favor. City staff explained that removal simply reflects that those positions report to department heads (who are appointed) and are handled administratively consistent with the personnel manual.

Staff clarified procedural points: appointed officials can be removed by the mayor under state procedures that require notice and permit a hearing at the employee’s request; staff emphasized those removal procedures would remain unchanged, and that “termination can occur at any time” consistent with statute.

Why this matters: The changes would make the municipal code consistent with the personnel manual, and the term change could affect recruitment and retention for senior staff. Council members who favored the change argued it makes the city more competitive; those opposed said it reduces an annual public opportunity for Council oversight.

Next steps: Both draft ordinance amendments will be placed on a future full City Council agenda for final debate and vote.