Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council affirms resolution on hiring vote threshold after debate over state law
Summary
The city council voted to pass a reconsideration of Resolution 2024-10-08, a measure clarifying the council’s majority-preference for the city administrator appointment. Debate centered on whether the resolution could be read as conflicting with state law; the motion passed on roll-call and took effect immediately.
The city council on Oct. 22 voted to pass a reconsideration of Resolution 2024-10-08, which affirms the council’s preference that the city administrator appointment be decided by a council majority and outlines the timeline for a mayoral veto and a potential override.
The vote followed an extended discussion about whether the resolution’s language could be construed to supersede state law governing local hiring decisions. Council member (S3) said the prior decision to not extend a previous administrator’s contract had cost the town “100,000 plus dollars,” arguing the council should be able to express how hiring decisions are made. Other council members cautioned that the resolution, as written, could create confusion with state statute and might unintentionally require a supermajority in situations where state code does not. The mayor said the city attorney had reviewed the item and noted the resolution is not enforceable against state law but could guide internal practice.
After discussion, the council took a roll-call vote. Each member — Trevor Durske, Samantha Peterson, Jim Kane, David Fisher and Jay/PJ/EJ Bell — was recorded voting in favor, and the resolution was enacted immediately. The council also discussed working with the selected search firm to ensure the hiring process separates the candidate offer and contract negotiations so council input on hiring can be incorporated earlier.
The immediate effect is to record the council’s preferred internal practice; the mayor and multiple members emphasized the intent is to encourage consensus on hires while recognizing state law ultimately governs enforceability.
