Madison County supervisors dispute appointment process for county auditor as petition moves toward special election

A public outpouring of concern about the county auditor’s appointment and a petition for a special election dominated the Madison County Board of Supervisors meeting, prompting the board to pause formal reappointment while legal questions are resolved.

Residents repeatedly told the board they were confused and worried about the legality of a recent appointment. Risa Schneider of Winterset said the public notice for the July appointment failed to inform citizens about their right to petition for a special election and argued the appointment should be invalid until the process is properly completed. "The appointment is set for today because there is no auditor," Schneider said, urging a full redo to restore public confidence.

Harry Pettiforn, who read state code sections he cited about an officer’s duty to enforce laws, accused the county attorney of neglecting duties and demanded enforcement. Other commenters, including David Garmledge and Mike Fletcher, alleged obfuscation in the auditing office and raised concerns about potential conflicts tied to campaign relationships.

At the board table, supervisors and county legal counsel debated competing readings of the timeline and notice requirements. The county attorney (identified in the meeting as Steve) advised that an appointment on July 7 could stand if the board reposted a 14-day notice to allow additional write-in signatures and that the signatures should count from the original July 7 date plus the 14-day period. Several supervisors disputed whether a vacancy had been lawfully posted and who authorized that posting, producing conflicting recollections about emails and public notices.

After extended discussion, the board agreed to "table" the reappointment item and to seek further legal clarity rather than proceed with a contested reappointment on the spot. Chair said the board’s practical decision was to leave the current appointee in place for now so essential work—like preparing tax statements—can continue. The board also noted that an objection to the petition for a special election had been filed; under Iowa law the petition remains valid while the objection is reviewed by a three-person panel (typically the county auditor, county treasurer and county attorney) within five working days. Members discussed setting an election date (August 26 was discussed) while the objection is processed.

What the board did not do at this meeting was finalize a reappointment or cancel the petition: it voted instead to clarify the legal position, gather a second legal opinion, and proceed with the objection-review process. The board instructed staff to coordinate with legal counsel and to ensure public notice and timelines are clear before any final appointment is made.

Next steps: the three-person review of the petition objection must occur within the five-day window; the board said it would pursue additional legal advice and follow up at a special meeting if necessary.