Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Isanti City council debates changing rules for special mayoral elections
Summary
Councilmembers debated whether to change city code so the council could waive a primary in a mayoral special election, weighing cost, timing and optics; staff said statutory and scheduling constraints make a February date possible but that an August special election with a primary remains likely if more than two candidates file.
Isanti City councilmembers spent the meeting debating whether to change city code to give the council discretion to remove a primary in a special mayoral election should a mayoral vacancy occur.
A councilmember asked staff to consult with the city attorney and draft language that would let the council decide, on a case-by-case basis, whether a special election should include a primary. Supporters of the change argued an earlier special election would save money and give an elected replacement more legitimacy than an appointment. Opponents said altering rules shortly before an election risks bad optics and could look like favoritism.
Staff and the city attorney outlined legal and scheduling constraints. They said special elections cannot be scheduled in certain months and that the city’s election calendar limits available dates; staff noted a February 11 date is one legally and logistically possible but that many practical plans push the event to August if a primary is required. Staff also warned costs are uncertain; members discussed earlier estimates (a full special election was described in the meeting as roughly $25,000, with a lower estimate cited for an earlier date). Staff said they would seek more-precise cost information and return ordinance language and options to the council for formal consideration at a future meeting.
Councilmembers did not take a formal vote on an ordinance change at this session. The working direction to staff was to draft proposed language and bring it back for council debate at the next meeting so the council can consider the trade-offs — cost, timing and public perception — before deciding whether to amend the code.
