Laserfiche WebLink
<br />November 24,2003 <br /> <br />To: The Roseville City Council Members <br /> <br />From: Norman Peterson 11C'f <br />2798 Farrington St <br /> <br />Subject: Filling the Council Vacancy <br /> <br />I offer these views, comments, and/or opinions with respect to filling the Council seat to be vacated <br />by Craig Klausing: <br /> <br />1. I wish somebody would explain why the Council is engaged in an absolute rush to pass a <br />special election ordinance. I see no need for a special election at this time. The current <br />appointment process that is in place has worked extremely well in the past and I see no reason <br />why it shouldn't work well in the future. What is the rush? What is the emergency? <br /> <br />2. I need to tell you that I resent the manner in which the special election ordinance, now under <br />consideration, was put on a fast track for approval. The genesis of this ordinance began at the <br />November 5 Special Council Meeting called to canvass the general election results. In spite of <br />protests by two Council members that this item was not on the agenda and should, therefore, <br />not be discussed at this meeting, a motion was passed by a 3 to 2 vote to direct the City <br />attorney to prepare an ordinance. In my opinion, it is not appropriate for the Council to conduct <br />business and/or approve actions on major items that do not first appear on the council meeting <br />agenda. I strongly believe that such actions by the Council border on being dishonest and <br />decei tful. <br /> <br />3. Some people have argued that the appointment process will give the Mayor two votes in case <br />of a tie vote on the appointment and in effect allow the Mayor to make the final selection. I <br />think this argument is "bogus". I believe that if the Council follows the procedure that has <br />been used in the past, as described by John Goedke, where each candidate is rated from 1 to 5 <br />by each Council member, the likelihood of a tie vote are, for all practical purposes, are <br />nonexistent. <br /> <br />4. I urge the Council to stick with the current appointment process that allows the appointment to <br />be until the regular elections in 2005. If the Council does not choose this option, I urge the <br />appointment be for one year. <br /> <br />5. If the Council decides to hold a special election I urge that it be held in the fall of 2004 along <br />with the scheduled U.S. Presidential election. If there are more than two candidates filing for <br />the seat, provision should be provided to maintain the existing provision to hold a primary <br />election. <br /> <br />6. I do not favor a "caretaker type" of Council member appointment. Such a commitment would <br />not be fair to the appointee. <br /> <br />Copy: City Manager Neal Beets <br />