Editor’s note: Following questions posed by WhitewaterWise regarding alternatives suggested by members of the city’s Community Development Authority Thursday as it sought to overcome a tie vote when selecting a committee chairperson, Whitewater City Manager John Weidl submitted the following memo, titled: “Review and Clarification on Committee Chairperson Selection Process,” — which was sent Friday via email to members of the city council — for publication. While the committee is a seven-member body, one member was absent Thursday, leaving six members, who consistently divided into the same two groups of three, to make a determination. A story about the meeting will soon be published on WhitewaterWise.

Dear Members of the Common Council,

I am writing to address an incident that occurred during the recent Community Development Authority (CDA) meeting and to provide clarifications on the selection process for committee chairpersons.

At the meeting, a motion was made and voted in favor by one council person and two citizen members to determine the committee chairperson by a coin flip. 

As city manager, I clarified during the meeting that the proposed method of using a coin flip does not conform with city ordinances or state statutes. The same for cutting a deck of cards, which was floated as another alternative to voting.

The president pro tem also pointed out through a point of order that the motion was invalid. Despite these professional interventions, the proposal was pushed forward inappropriately before ultimately failing.

Given the seriousness of this breach in procedure, I sought further opinions from our HR Manager Sara Marquardt and City Attorney Jonathan McDonell. Both have confirmed the necessity of adherence to statutory requirements, do not include provisions for other methodologies such as coin flips, card cutting, or other randomized options. 

– Sara Marquardt, HR manager: “A coin flip seems inconsistent with the transparency and openness requirements especially as it is not based on any sort of open discussion.”

– Jonathan McDonell, city attorney: “There is an implied expectation in 19.88(1) that a vote should be conducted to determine city appointments, except where specifically provided by statute.”

(…) 

This incident underscores the necessity for all members to fully understand and respect the legal and procedural frameworks we are bound to uphold. It is crucial that all decisions align with the established norms to maintain the integrity and transparency of our governmental operations. The other alternative would have been to delay the decision until such time that appropriate attached to research could have been provided which also would have avoided attempting to move forward with the selection of a chairperson in violation of our codes and state statute.

To ensure the highest standards of transparent government, I urge all council persons to model appropriate behavior, rely on professional staff recommendations during committee meetings, and to decisively reject proposals that do not conform with our legal and procedural standards. Effective governance is contingent upon our collective commitment to these principles.

Moving forward, this email and corresponding backup documentation from the HR manager and city attorney will be added to a future staff report to be reviewed and addressed publicly by the common council. This will allow both the governing body and staff to reaffirm together that the appropriate and statutory method to choose committee chairpersons is through a transparent voting process, ensuring our practices are in strict conformity with city ordinances and state statutes.

John Weidl 

City Manager, City of Whitewater