MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF COUNTY OFFICERS DESIGNATED TO FILL A VACANCY ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
SEPTEMBER 25, 2009
(SUBJECT TO APPROVAL ON OCTOBER 20, 2009)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Review/Discussion of the Statutory Role of the Auditor, Recorder, and Treasurer to Fill the Vacancy By Appointment or Call an Election..................................................................................... 1
Review/Discussion of Open Meeting and Open Records Requirements............................... 3
Discussion from the Public................................................................................................... 3
Discussion Regarding Calling an Election or the Decision to Appoint.................................. 3
Discussion Regarding Calling an Election and Setting an Election Date................................ 7
Discussion Regarding Filling the Vacancy by Appointment.................................................. 7
Legal Publication of Notice of Intent to Fill the Vacancy by Appointment........................... 7
Selection Process.................................................................................................................. 7
Additional Questions/Discussion.......................................................................................... 7
Setting Next Meeting Time, Date, and Location.................................................................... 8
The Committee to fill a vacancy on the Board of Supervisors was called to order in Room 214C of the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building at 2:10 p.m. Members present were: County Treasurer Tom Kriz, County Recorder Kim Painter, County Auditor Tom Slockett.
County Auditor Tom Slockett: In the past we've preceded without having a chair. I don’t' know if that is something we want to do or not but is seems to me it has always worked well in the past. We have an agenda here. The first item is to review the statutory role of the Auditor, Recorder, and Treasurer. I have a list of Code sections here that I can pass around and if we proceed through those I think it will answer a lot of the questions and then we can go through the agenda items and pick up anything that hasn't been covered because that will give the statutory authority. You might have to share those, I don't think there are quite enough. (pause) I think there are enough for each person to have their own copy. The first section listed is 39.2, Special Elections. These are all sections from the Code of Iowa. Number two talks about if the elections can be held on the same day. These are in the order of the Code sections, so they are not in any other priority order than are listed. One of the questions that I've had is what about the possibility of having an election at the same time as the City General Elections. That would lower the cost because we are already having an election then. It would only be the additional cost of the non-city or rural, township precincts. But this Code section says that they can be held on the same day if the two elections are not in conflict. I'd like to direct your attention to number 3b. If a special election to fill a vacancy is held in conjunction with the regularly scheduled election, the filing deadlines for the special election shall coincide with the filing deadlines for the regularly scheduled election. The filing deadlines are already past for the candidate filings. The deadline was September 18, 2009. The next section, 47.6.1B at the bottom of the page indicates if the proposed date of the special election coincides with the date of the regularly scheduled election or previously scheduled special election, the notice shall be given no later than 5:00 p.m. on the last day on which nomination papers may be filed with the Commissioner for the regularly scheduled election. So that also indicates it is a conflict to have them on the same day. Then number two below, defines conflict as, after the second comma, when some but not all of the registered voters of any precinct would be entitled to vote in one of the elections and all of the registered voters of the same precinct would be entitled to vote in the other election. So that also defines it as a conflict. Then 69.8 just indicates the statutory authority requiring the Auditor, Treasurer, and Recorder to fill a vacancy on the Board of Supervisors, and we sadly have one today. The next section, 69.12 defines a pending election. This has to do with what the term of any person appointed would be. It would be until the next election or next pending election. Pending election is defined as any election at which there will be on the ballot either the office in which the vacancy exists or any other office to be filled, or any public question to be voted by the voters of the same political subdivision in which the vacancy exists. So for example, if there was an appointment and then next year there was a special County election, then this office would also appear on that ballot. Next, 6914.A 1(a)(1) indicates that this appointment must be filled within 40 days after the vacancy occurs. And the next sentence, if the County Officers designated to fill the vacancy choose to proceed under this paragraph, the Committee shall publish notice according to the requirements of 331.305, which we'll cover later. The next thing of significance is number two in parenthesis. This has to do with what are the limits for when a petition can be filed for an election and that is within 14 days after the appointment is made or within 14 days after the publication of the notice. There really couldn't be a difference if the notice was published legally so I think this is just covering the possibility that the notice is not published or there is no appointment made that would allow 14 more days for a petition to be filed. Then number b(1) which is why the numbering starts over. The notice for a special election is required to be at least 32 days notice, so either the petition would have to be filed 32 days prior to an election being set and the notice from this group, or the three of us can call a special election without a petition. The election couldn't be held less than 32 days after that notice was given. And I don't have the Code section but the election would be required at the earliest practicable time after the notice is received. That date would be set by the three of us, if it were a petition, or if we called an election, we would set the date. Then 69.16A, I'm just calling attention to this because it's been brought up in last appointments. This is not a legal requirement of this Committee, it is not required that gender balance be considered when we make an appointment to this Board but it is a consideration before us and this shows that any appointment to a State board, commission, committee, or council must be made with the requirements of gender balance. And then 331.305 indicates that we can fill the vacancy after a notice is published and it must be filled no earlier than four days after the publication and no later than 20 days after the publication. And then the last Code section is 331.306, indicates that the number of signatures required for a petition, it must be eligible electors of the County. That means you don't have to be registered to vote but you have to be qualified to register to vote so you have to be 18 years of age, and not have been determined by a court to be incompetent of voting. I'm not sure that there is any designation of any person for that. I am not aware of any. And you can't be a convicted felon. The number is equal to 10% of the votes for the office of President or Governor, whichever is applicable at the preceding General Election. So that would refer to the Presidential Election. It is not the number of voters in that election, it is the number of people who voted for the contest of President. So that would be the Republicans, Democrats, the non-party political organizations such as the Greens, the Socialists, the Socialists Worker Party, the write-ins, etc. The total of all of those is 72,989 so the petition requirement would be 7,299 signatures. That's the documentation for the requirements that I just printed for convenience. There may be other Code sections that would also be relevant. That covers the statutory authority for the Auditor, Recorder, and Treasurer. It is a requirement. I don't think I mentioned that some counties have abolished at least one of these offices, and in that case, the County Attorney would also serve on this board, but that does not apply here.
Slockett: We had hoped to have County Attorney Janet Lyness available to discuss this. She wasn't available today but she will be available on Monday. So we are having another meeting on Monday, September 28, 2009 at 2:00 p.m. in the County Attorney's Conference Room. Agendas are posted on our web site for that at www.jcauditor.com. Detailed minutes will be posted and agendas and relevant Code sections are on that web site so if you are interested in this process, it is a good place to look. We will be discussing open meetings and open records requirements with the County Attorney and also on that agenda are some action items. Today there are no action items. We are only discussing the process today and hearing from anyone at the meeting who has something to say. On Monday we'll have discussion/action items for deciding whether to appoint or hold an election and to proceed under either of those options. It won't be required that we decide to do it then, but we will have the option to decide then if we wish to proceed.
Slockett: At this point we have discussion from the public listed in case anyone has something to say at this point. You can also speak later on in the agenda if you like. If there is anyone who has something to say they'd like to say now, before we begin the rest of the discussion, please go ahead. Seeing none, let's go to the next item.
Slockett: Does someone want to start talking about their views on that and how they wish to proceed?
County Recorder Kim Painter: Sure. I would start by saying that my instinctive response in a situation where we have a vacancy that will last approximately 15 months is that is a very long time for which to have three people appoint a person to make major decisions on behalf of the voters of the County. It sounds as though we have heard some reasons, in terms of Code sections, that may put us in that situation anyway, in spite of how I, or perhaps either one of you feel about it. But that was my first response, was that I think a lot of voters in the County would very much like the opportunity to vet these candidates, get a look at their positions, and to make their own choice for a time span of 15 whole months. There are very important issues on the near horizon that this individual will have a prominent voice in. I think we need to carefully at least consider that option and look at that very carefully. I also understand the countervailing feeling that people do not want, especially at this point in time, a lot of money spent on a special election. I am hearing that from people as well. So I look forward to hearing everything we possibly can about both an estimated cost for a special election, and also getting some confirmation from the County Attorney that we will or will not be able to combine this election, would we choose to do that, with the upcoming election in November. It sounds like we can't do that, and like we can't save that money, and I am disappointed to see that. I'd like to have been able to do that. That is my beginning feeling, is that I would prefer an election be available to the people. But, I want to take a look at the cost as well and try to get some feedback as quickly as we can from people and then make that decision as soon as we can, reasonably.
County Treasurer Tom Kriz: I would agree with a lot of what Kim said. I do really want to find out, and I know I'm sure you're office Tom, tracks what it might cost to call a special election.
Slockett: We estimate it would be $75,000 or more for a county-wide election. That is based primarily on the recent Sales Tax Election. We think the turnout would be somewhat similar.
Kriz: That is an important figure as we look at that, because those are all hard tax dollars. Unlike Kim a little bit, while it would have been nice, and it does appear it prohibits us from coupling this with the November election. That's a very short window of only about five weeks even if it could be done and I am not sure that would give people ample time to really study the people that were interested. While I agree Kim, that would be an ideal thing, and we'd only have to expand that election into County areas, that is a fairly short window. So even if that were possible I would have a lot of questions with that. Otherwise I pretty much agree when you said we need to look at the cost, again if that's productive.
Slockett: My comments would be that there are also reasons not to have two elections in a short period of time. There are already campaigns in progress for the June primary and I think that would essentially require two elections for most likely the same candidates. That would be at a cost to the taxpayers. Also there is the notion that you are combining a partisan election with non-partisan elections and that could either be a good thing or a bad thing according to your point of view. The reality is that the political parties will be turning people out if we have partisan candidates, and their nominees on the ballot, and people may be voting in non-partisan elections who normally wouldn't vote and it is possible that the outcome could be changed as a result of that. Again, it's from one person to another to decide whether they think that's a good thing or a bad thing but it certainly is a different situation for the election. I think it's preferable and practicable to give as much notice, Tom alluded to this, for an election as possible. With only 32 days notice, that means that the nomination papers are required to be filed not until 25 days before the election and the ballots couldn't be available until the following week, or possibly the week after that, for the ballots that are printed by a printer. That's a pretty short window for military, and for uniformed and overseas voters. We refer to them as UOCAVA voters, who we're required by law to mail ballots for elections to overseas and military voters as soon as they are available. The deadline is 25 days and ballots probably wouldn't be available for at least 20 days, and mailing them overseas and getting things returned could be a problem. There aren't a large number of these folks who do vote in local elections but some of them do. So that is a negative for the short time frames in a special election. I would lobby, if a special election occurs, that we would look to more than the very minimum time frame to call the election. There is also the consideration, the very real consideration, to the families of, and the employees in my office, that if we did it really quickly, it would be in pretty close proximity to the Thanksgiving holiday. It is just a consideration. I think if there were an election, we just batted around in my office, and we would like to have the December 8, 2009 date looked at as a possibility. That gives some time after the Thanksgiving holidays and before Christmas. There would be the other problem about having it too soon after the November election in that absentee balloting would be in place for both elections at the same time and we've found that is confusing to some voters. They vote in one and think they voted in the other one. Or they vote in the latest one and they think they voted in the earlier one and then they try to vote again. We have had that happen. We have procedures in place to make sure that doesn't happen but there is always the possibility that it could happen. I think more importantly it just shows that if they are too close, there is some confusion in the voters' minds.
Painter: Tom? May I ask, does the December 8 date help that concern of having them too close or is it pretty much too close in your mind.
Slockett: No, I think there is not as much overlap. It depends on when we called it or when a petition was filed within the 14 day window. But as to when the ballots would be available, I think it would pretty much solve the problem. Then the question of appointment is that historically we have appointed pretty much to save the cost of elections. We have had some instances where petitions processes have occurred afterwards. The one that I recall is when Don Sehr was appointed, Betty Ockenfels resigned and Don Sehr was appointed, and then there was an election petitioned and Don won the election in that particular instance. You can make a case the cost of the election could have been avoided because the outcome was the same in that particular election. That is about all I would say. I am in favor of elections, and these are elected offices, and I think it is good to have them filled by election. But the one advantage of appointment is the seat can be filled right away and that could be a problem if there is a tie vote on the Board of Supervisors before someone is appointed. I think there are advantages. There is an election next June so, depending on your point of view, that's a long time for Kim. It's a short time for me, from the way I look at it in terms of the cost of election, having two full blown campaigns twice in that period of time. So I can think of it both ways.
Christopher Voci: The election in June, is that a Primary election?
Slockett: It's the Primary election. Correct.
Deputy Auditor Casie Parkins: Can I ask who you are?
Voci: Christopher Voci.
Kriz: Maybe Tom, you could go around have them give names so Casie would have them.
Slockett: She'll have to remember them. Go ahead, C.J.
Voci: But the Special election can't be on the Primary?
Slockett: Correct.
Voci: So if you do an appointment, it would be 15 months.
Kriz: It would be about 15 months, that's right.
Mike Lehman: Could you recap Carol Thompson's situation? I was thinking there was an election but Carol's appointment still stood too.
Slockett: Yes, that's right. That's another instance where we made an appointment.
Kriz: That was in 1999 I believe.
Slockett: Joe Bolkcom resigned December 31, 1998 and Carol was appointed to fill his seat in January of 1999. Then there was a special election on June 29, 1999. That was the case where there was a state wide special election. It wasn't petitioned for, it was a constitutional amendment and that's why I mentioned the next pending election part of the Code. That was determined to be an election, even though it was a statewide election, it incorporated all the County precincts that would be voted on in a Supervisor election. In that election she appeared on the ballot and she was elected following the appointment in that election.
Lehman: She was appointed to fill basically a three month period. You are talking 15 months here.
Painter: Yes, I have to own up. I was part of that process then as a very new elected official. But my feelings are still really very strong that I would love to be able to see an election, to see the people have that opportunity when we are talking about more than a quarter of a term. It feels a lot different to me than it does if it's three months, or six months. But there are some obstacles and I am curious to see what we hear from the County Attorney next week and go from there to determine what to do.
Lori Cardella: I really appreciate the support there is as far as wanting the people to have the chance to vote. That is what we pay taxes for. That is the primary role of government in our country, is to let we the people vote. Money should never be an issue in my opinion. You can not put a value or a price tag on someone's right to vote in this country. We have seen lots of major decisions can be made in a very short period of time that can affect our future for a very long time. We the people should have that right to vote, always.
Deb Thornton: I would echo Lori's comments on that particularly in terms of the most recent special election which was just held last May for the increase in the sales tax which those proposing that vote, posing that tax increase, the general public assumption was that it was a slam-dunk, it would pass overwhelming county-wide. Certainly I think everyone in this room is aware of the fact that it absolutely did not pass in a slam-dunk manner. It did not pass in most of the County, really only passing in Iowa City, by a very, very small margin. So I would echo even in a quick time frame voters can become very well informed, very quickly with the media and press access that we have today and people can run campaigns very quickly. I would also urge the Committee to do an election not an appointment.
Painter: Having been through the process once before I am not afraid to take the heat in either direction, whether there is an appointment, which is a statutory option open to us for legitimate reasons or for a $75,000 special election. I think I look forward to further discussion on it. But right now I am leaning towards the election. I really appreciate all the work that you and your office did to put together some timetables and to get information we can use as we talk about that option. So thanks Tom and everybody.
Slockett: I think we pretty much covered the bases on the rest of the items on the agenda but let’s just tick through these. We've talked about calling an election, or appointing. We've discussed the election date.
Slockett: We've discussed the option of filling the vacancy.
Slockett: We talked about the requirement for legal publication.
Slockett: We haven't really discussed the selection process, if we made an appointment, what would the process be. I can recap historically what we've done is treated it professionally like an opening or a vacancy in an important position in government or private industry, accepting resumes and then deciding from the resumes which ones to interview, all or part of them. Then, making public an application deadline date and interviewing and making the decision as we would for other positions in the office. It's not required if we do it that way, but I would be in favor of doing it that way personally. I think that worked quite well. The interviews are public, minutes are taken, so it's a very transparent process, it's a public office, so that's the way it works.
Kriz: I agree.
Painter: Me too.
Slockett: If we do it, it looks like we all three would be in favor. We are not voting on anything today, we are just discussing it. If we decided that, we would have to set a due date for the applications. Are there any other comments or questions?
Painter: I have one question and I don't know if we can discuss it today or if we would need to wait until next week, or even if we need to consider it. Is there any information that we could get regarding the bylaws of our political parties in terms of their timelines? I am sure that any of our political parties could hustle and get this done if we went for an election so maybe that's a moot point Tom.
Slockett: It's a matter of law that they, regardless of what their bylaws are and how they proceed, it's a matter of law that they have to provide the name of their selection 25 days before the election. It is the same deadline as the filing deadline for an individual not affiliated with a party or a non-party political organization. Quickly, non-party political organizations can also select by convention. They have the same deadline, 25 days before, as do individuals nominated by petition, 250 signatures would be required and they would need to be turned in 25 days before by 5:00 p.m., it's a Friday before a Tuesday election. In terms of the parties, or the non-party political organizations, they have to have a majority of the precincts in the County represented at the convention by which they make a decision, is the main, legal criteria. There may be bylaws that would apply for particular organizations as well.
Slockett: We have already set our next meeting date for Monday, September 28, 2009, at 2:00 p.m. in the County Attorney's Conference Room. Any more comments or questions before we adjourn?
Voci: There are no other elections scheduled besides the November election and the June election, there is nothing else scheduled?
Slockett: That's correct. There are no special elections scheduled at this point in time, only the regularly scheduled elections.
Voci: So basically this November and June and next November.
Slockett: Correct. Well, that's right, there is no school election next year. It's the first time under new legislation. And no City elections next year unless there are special elections.
Adjourned at 2:50 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By:
On the _______ day of _____________________, 2009
By Casie Parkins, Recording Secretary
Sent to the Committee on September 29, 2009 at 2:30 p.m.