Sturgis council approves first reading of major code rewrite after hours-long debate over appointments, mayoral powers and procedures

The Sturgis City Council on a 7–1 vote approved first readings of two ordinances that would amend and restate parts of the city code, prompting hours of discussion on how the city appoints officers, who may be fired and what appeal and succession procedures should look like.

The ordinances—filed as 2024-06 (Title 7 revisions) and 2024-07 (Title 1 and related changes)—were approved on motion by Councilor Kevin with a second from Jim after councilors and staff walked through multiple chapters and suggested edits. “First is great job. We made a lot more headway than we have for the last few meetings on this,” Kevin said during debate, while urging further clarity on several items.

Why it matters: The rewrite touches on who the mayor may appoint, whether officer appointments should be indefinite or aligned to the mayoral term, the role of a city administrator and how appeals, staffing and emergency financial steps are handled. Those rules shape how the city carries out day-to-day operations and who holds ultimate authority in staffing and budget crises.

Key disagreements and clarifications

- Appointment terms and firing authority: Councilors debated removing language that described many officers as serving for an “indefinite term” and whether appointments should be reaffirmed each mayoral term. Attorney Marshall cautioned that state law grants the mayor the authority to discharge certain officers in this form of government, and that contracts cannot fully override that right. Councilors split over whether council approval should be required to terminate officers.

- Private ballot vs. public vote for internal officer elections: A public comment prompted discussion about whether council officer elections should use a private ballot. Councilors generally favored transparency; one councilor proposed replacing “private ballot” language with “public vote.”

- Appeals and the finance office: Draft language routes general appeals to the finance office—analogized to a clerk of courts—rather than to HR. Staff explained the finance office serves as a central, staffed repository for filings; the council agreed to reword references from “finance officer” to “finance office” for clarity.

- City administrator and succession planning: The council debated provisions for an acting city administrator in the event of absence or disability. Some councilors said the mayor should assume duties temporarily; others favored a mandatory designee or team. The attorney suggested making appointment of an acting administrator discretionary but recommended procedures to ensure continuity.

- Budget controls and reporting: Councilors discussed whether overspending restrictions should focus on total budget limits or be applied by line item. Staff and department heads urged flexibility for operational matters, while several councilors pushed for better line-item reporting and monthly financial updates instead of quarterly reports.

Votes taken and next steps

Council approved first readings of both ordinances 2024-06 and 2024-07 with the edits discussed at the meeting; the motion passed on a roll call vote 7–1. The ordinances will return for a second reading after staff incorporate the changes and clean up formatting and grammar.

A staff member, Lisa, summarized a personnel item earlier in the meeting: “Tonight, I have a couple of ambulance employees who are part time that have gone and changed their certification level,” underscoring parallel operational matters the code changes seek to govern.

The council did not adopt final ordinance language at the meeting; second readings and any additional edits will be scheduled once staff prepare the revised text.