Ordinance and Licensing Committee forwards draft to full council on changing Waukesha City attorney to appointed post after split debate

The Ordinance and Licensing Committee voted 3–1 on Aug. 25 to forward a draft charter ordinance to the full Common Council that would change the Waukesha City attorney from an elected to an appointed position. The committee’s deliberations included a public comment urging the current system be retained and extended discussion among members and city counsel about safeguards for independence.

Lisa Selb, a public commenter who gave her address as 4334 Madison Street, said the city attorney “should be an elected position,” arguing citizens should be able to choose and remove the officeholder. City Attorney Brian, who summarized memoranda for the committee, said the draft ordinance focuses on preserving the attorney’s independence if the role becomes appointed and that “it’s important to take measures to maintain the independence of the position.”

Supporters of appointment argued that making the post appointive could broaden the pool of qualified candidates by allowing people who do not live inside Waukesha city limits to be considered. Several members asked whether the appointment could include a defined term, such as four years, rather than an indefinite appointment; Brian said a fixed term or an employment-contract approach is legally possible but would require careful drafting of contract terms.

Opponents said appointment risks eroding the office’s independence and diminishes direct voter control. Committee member Joe said the question is “managing risk,” warning that an appointed attorney could face pressure from other officials. Another member, who identified herself as Alicia, said she was reluctant “to take power away from voters” and urged a full-council discussion.

Committee members and counsel also discussed timing and process: counsel noted the charter‑ordinance form at issue does not take effect until 60 days after passage, and that holding three readings and final approval could push close to candidate filing deadlines. Several members recommended that the full Common Council consider the ordinance so all 15 members can weigh the substantive details and potential revisions.

A motion to forward the draft ordinance to the Common Council carried 3–1. The committee’s action sends the draft for full-council consideration, where members said they expect further debate and possible revisions in subsequent readings.