Bloomington councilors debate shifting administrative duties as hiring committee presents four staffing options

The Bloomington Common Council met in a March 11 special session to review four staffing options from the hiring committee for the council office, including whether to keep the current three-line structure or reallocate administrative duties to other positions. The council did not vote; the hiring committee will meet again Tuesday at 5:00 p.m. to refine job descriptions.

The hiring-committee presenter summarized the options as: 1) retain the status quo with three lines (lead attorney, deputy attorney, legal researcher); 2) convert the legal-researcher line into an administrative position placed in the clerk’s office while keeping two attorney-focused lines; 3) split the third line into two part-time roles with one in the clerk’s office and one in the council office; and 4) redistribute administrative tasks to the deputy attorney. “We have 4 options,” the committee presenter said as background to the discussion.

Council members split along two broad lines: those who warned that placing an administrator under the clerk risks conflicts and a loss of council autonomy, and those who argued separating administrative duties could reduce burden on attorneys and improve capacity. “My main concern is autonomy of the council office, and that I would like to keep our duties in house,” a council member said, arguing for an in-house attorney to direct deputy and researcher roles and an additional assistant to handle day-to-day administration.

Supporters of moving administrative work out of attorneys’ hands said the change could free legal staff to focus on drafting and reviewing legislation and other legal tasks. One council member asked whether Option 2 would retain the legal researcher; the committee clarified that Option 2 would convert that role into an administrative position in the clerk’s office. Another member asked how reporting lines would work if an administrator sat in the clerk’s office and whether that person would serve at the clerk’s pleasure; council members said those operational questions would need to be resolved if the council moved forward with the idea.

Several councilors favored hiring two full-time attorneys, saying workload for legal review is substantial. “We should have two full-time attorneys,” one council member said, noting that legal work had been delayed because of limited attorney hours. Others urged caution about making rapid structural changes before hiring and said that hiring under existing job descriptions and letting the new attorney help define operational needs might be a pragmatic route.

Council members raised statutory and process questions during the discussion. One participant said, “Statute says that we can hire an attorney. According to corporation counsel Margie Rice, it’s silent on hiring an administrator,” and suggested consulting the public access counselor or corporation counsel to clarify whether a nonattorney administrator can be directly employed within the council office. No formal legal determinations were made during the session.

The group agreed to reconvene the hiring committee to draft or revise job descriptions based on these options. The committee chair said that committee members hope to identify a preferred option at the next hiring-committee meeting so the council can review and, if desired, move to adopt job descriptions. The session adjourned without votes or formal action.

Bloomington Common Council staff and council members will continue the process at the next hiring-committee meeting; no recruitment or posting decisions were finalized at the March 11 session.