News : City Council Moves to Reconsider Elwick Appointment

Thursday night, December 26, the Vinton City Council held a 10 minute meeting which can be seen here covering a variety of topics.

Hessenius added a new item to the agenda as number seven on the agenda for the evening. This is addressed in the final paragraph of this article.

Near the top of the discussion was the appointment of Andrew Elwick to the City Council.

Darran Sellers addressed the council during the Citizen's Input section and read the following considering the appointment of Andrew Elwick to fill the seat of his father Ron Elwick, making the case that this also would be an illegal appointment because of the way that it was handled and again under the Nepotism law.

"Re: Remonstrances to the December 12th and December 19th Council meetings

Dear Mr. Ward:

I have been closely following the appointment of Andrew Elwick to the council vacancy. I, as well as many other citizens, believe there were a number of improprieties performed by the board in the December 12th council meeting. These improprieties came to light after revelations announced during the December 19th meeting.

1. Andrew Elwick's appointment on December 12th was done as a secret ballot. Secret ballots are forbidden by Iowa Code, Chapter 21. In a Mitchell County District Court case on this issue, McKinley vs. the St. Ansgar City Council, a city council contended that a secret ballot was merely "preferential." The secret vote narrowed a field of candidates to five who were then approved unanimously by the council members. But a judge ruled that the procedure violated Chapter 21.3.

2. The Council voted on this matter without a motion and the votes were not done in a "yes" "no" fashion as required in Rule 11 of Resolution No. 1-84-4.

3. What was the official vote concerning Andrew Elwick's choice over Mark Noe? City Ordinance 5.06, Paragraph 3 states: "Minutes. Minutes shall be kept of all meetings showing the date, time and place, the members present, and the action taken at each meeting. The minutes shall show the results of each vote taken and information sufficient to indicate the vote of each member present. The vote of each member present shall be made public at the open session. The minutes shall be public records open to public inspection".

4. Once again, what was the official vote concerning Andrew Elwick's over Mark Noe? City Ordinance 17.3, Paragraph 1 states: "Action by Council. Passage of an ordinance, amendment, or resolution requires a majority vote of all of the members of the Council. Passage of a motion requires a majority vote of a quorum of the Council. A resolution must be passed to spend public funds in excess of $100,000.00 on a public improvement project, or to accept public improvements and facilities upon their completion. Each Council member's vote on a measure must be recorded. A measure that fails to receive sufficient votes for passage shall be considered defeated."

5. If the City recognizes an abstention as a "yes" vote, how is a council member with a clearly defined nepotism conflict of interest supposed to vote so as not to violate Iowa's nepotism law (Iowa Code 71.1)?

6. In light of the City Attorney's discovery that an abstention is considered a yes vote, would he still direct Ron Elwick to abstain from voting on all matters in which he has a conflict of interest as defined in Iowa Code 71.1? Given the rules of procedure adopted by the City, in order for the Council to be in compliance with Iowa code, mustn't the City Attorney instruct Ron Elwick to vote "no".

7. The agenda item to approve the appointment of Andrew Elwick must be removed from the December 26th agenda because he was selected illegally. Another meeting must be scheduled where the process of choosing between Mark Noe and Andrew Elwick is done within the laws of Iowa and city procedures. That being: following an approved motion of the council, a simple yes-no vote, with all votes made orally and properly recorded in the minutes.

Thank you,

Darran K. Sellers"

The above letter was delivered to City Administrator Christ Ward, on Tuesday, but not relayed to the council, Ward said because there was no way to contact Sellers. 

On December 30, 6:00 p.m. a special meeting of the council was set for the Vinton City Council.

A motion was made, to reconsider the appointment of Mike Elwick to the VMEU (Vinton Municipal Electric Utilities) board at the December 30th meeting, and request that a vote to approve the appointment be placed on the agenda of the special council meeting. This can be done according to Robert's Rules of Order, as long as a member of the prevailing side (the majority that won the vote) requests it. The motion was made by Nathan Edwards second by Ron Hessenius. The council voted to address this, again the county attorney instructed Ron Elwick to abstain, which was established to be a "yes" vote, even though he originally voted yes anyway.

---

Editor's Note: 

Degrees of "affinity" have been addressed in the Nepotism discussion. The following chart was submitted by Mr. Sellers as part of the discussion which explains how affinity works in relationship to the Nepotism Law.