File #: 17-854    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Information/Discussion Item Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 5/30/2017 In control: City Council
On agenda: 6/6/2017 Final action:
Title: Discussion of Charter Commissioner Appointment Process.
Attachments: 1. 1 - 2017_04_18 Thompson Order Appointing Members, 2. 2 - 2017_04_26 Chief District Judge Appointment of Charter Commissioners Correspondence, 3. 3 - 2017_05_25 Council Informational Email Regarding Appointments and Charter Commission Action, 4. 4 - 2017_05_12 Charter Commissioner Schotzko Response to David Ludescher
City Council Meeting Date: June 6, 2017

To: Mayor and City Council

From: Ben Martig, City Administrator

Title
Discussion of Charter Commissioner Appointment Process.

Body
Action Requested:
The Northfield City Council

Summary Report:
Please see attached email and related documentation related to recent issues surrounding appointments of Charter Commission members as background.
I have recently had discussions on potential resolution to the issue with Mayor Pownell and subsequently met with Charter Commission Chair Ludescher and Charter Commissioner Heisler this morning (June 2, 2017) on a potential administrative solution going forward related to receiving and submitting eligible applications to the Chief Judge. The conceptual solution is to create a written process that would clarify the taking of names and submission of all eligible applications to the Chief District Judge. There would be no local nominations proposed to with this process to narrow the list for the judge to consider if there were more applications than appointments. Ultimately, the Chief District Judge would decide the appointments at their discretion.
A new Chief District Judge takes office July 1. The intent is to share this process with the Chief District Judge so they are aware of the process once it is codified. In the event that an application is submitted directly to the District Court Judge, the concept is that they would be aware of the prescribed process and guide the applicant through that codified procedure as adopted by the Charter Commission. However, the ultimate authority of the appointment still would lie with the Chief Judge.
As it relates to the immediate issue of appointments, applicant David Roberts has voluntarily withdrawn his application. If this aforementioned written process were agreed upon, the appointments of Colby and Schotzko would be proposed to be recognized by the Charter Commission next meeting.
This proposed solution does not formally addres...

Click here for full text