Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Isanti council divided over appointment vs. special election as city code and optics weigh in
Summary
Councilors debated whether to appoint a successor or hold a special election if a sitting official resigns, noting city code requires appointment for vacancies with under two years remaining and that changing the code to skip a primary would require an ordinance and tight posting timelines to hit a February election.
Isanti City Councilors debated whether to appoint a replacement or hold a special election if a sitting member resigns after the November election, focusing on city code rules, cost and optics.
Staff outlined the procedural choices: if no changes are made, a vacancy could trigger a primary and a later special election, with an example special-election cost cited at about $25,000. Staff offered an example option to remove the primary and hold a February 11 special election at roughly half the cost, but councilors noted any change to skip a primary would likely require an ordinance and attorney review.
Council members split on principles and optics. One councilor argued appointments save money and are appropriate for short remaining terms, noting “if it's a short term 6 month, appointing somebody is 1 thing.” Another response emphasized voter choice: “The people that I talk to think that they should get to pick who that mayor is,” a resident commenter said, arguing the community should decide its mayor rather than have an appointment.
Members raised concerns about changing city code for a single case. Several said an across-the-board code change could create poor optics and public suspicion. Others stressed transparency and that a special election gives residents input despite higher cost.
Council discussed technical specifics of thresholds that trigger a primary and the timing mechanics for a special election. Staff said candidate filing in the example would occur Dec. 3–Dec. 17, and that the statutory/clerk timeline from filing close to election requires roughly 56 days; staff warned that the calendar is tight to hold a February election if a primary were required. A staff member recommended drafting an ordinance this week and posting it for the required 10 days if the council wants to alter the primary requirement for a potential February election.
No ordinance was approved on the spot. Council directed staff to consult the city attorney about whether the council could exercise case-by-case discretion or whether a code change is required, and staff was asked to prepare draft ordinance language and timelines to bring to the next council meeting for consideration.
