Atkins council narrowly adopts resolution urging supermajority for city administrator appointment after legal concerns raised

Atkins City Council considered and adopted a resolution Oct. 8 expressing council support for a supermajority vote when appointing a city administrator. The measure prompted extended debate over whether such a resolution is legally enforceable or merely a statement of preference.

One council member raised legal concerns, saying that state law generally requires a majority to pass resolutions and warning that requiring a supermajority could create legal complications: "If we're gonna require a super majority for some things, where do we draw the line... I just think we're opening up a can of worms," the member said. Another council member reported consulting the city chairman, Doug Herman, who said he had not seen a formal resolution like this before but characterized it as a nonbinding expression that would not supersede state law.

Supporters argued the resolution is intended to signal to prospective candidates that the council seeks to hire an administrator by broad consensus and to avoid hiring someone without broad council backing. Opponents said they supported working toward unanimous hires but could not support putting a potentially unenforceable rule "on the books." The council voted with Jim Kane and Trevor Dursky voting no and BJ Bell, Samantha Peterson and David Fisher voting aye; the resolution carried 3–2.

The resolution, as discussed in the meeting, does not change ordinance language or statutory hiring requirements; proponents described it as a commitment and message to candidates rather than a binding legal change. Council members said they would continue discussing hiring practices and cautioned staff and candidates about the council’s stated preference.