4/14 Northfield City Council Work Session
2026 Absentee/Early Voting, Primary Election and General Election Update
- Presentation gives overview of details regarding the running of the 2026 elections (primary and general)
- Northfield is unique because it is early voting site for entire county
- Council votes on whether to align Northfield’s early voting hours with the Rice County early voting hours, as opposed to the City Hall business hours (which would cut down on hours but makes hours less confusing)
- Council unanimously votes to match with Rice County early voting hours to be consistent
- Zweifel notes that she isn’t opposed to extending early voting hours on Tuesday
- Administrator Martig recommends a candidate information meeting to onboard candidates for local elections so they can be effective if they are elected, and asks for feedback
- This would move the onboarding meeting for the candidates in the general to include also candidates running in the primary
- Zweifel recommends highlighting upcoming or in-process big city projects
- Zweifel suggests that it would be helpful if there was a paper and electronic version for the information
- Peterson White asks if the Secretary of State prints a booklet of election regulations and if that information could be added in the onboarding
- Martig confirms that the Secretary of State does give them the booklet, and the city gives more regulations in a manual given to all candidates
- Beumer says that his experience was that the city clerk and administrator were very helpful when he was a candidate. He cautions against adding the onboarding meeting because it may look to some like the city is telling them how they will work on the council. He thinks what was in place is already very helpful.
- Zweifel asks Beumer to clarify why he doesn’t think moving the onboarding meeting time would be helpful
- Beumer responds that the time between filing and the primary was very busy and a blur, and that a meeting in that time would have added to that.
- Sokup says that he thinks one meeting before the primary is fine, and that he would have preferred the information session happen before the primary, and people can then follow up if they have questions.
- Holmes asks what problem would be solved if the onboarding meeting was moved earlier.
- Martig responds that some candidates run without really knowing what the city council does before they run, and that they can get contact information for higher up city officials to ask questions while running. The onboarding meeting would help ease in potential members.
- Holmes suggests coming up with alternative solutions and that a meeting may not be the best solution to the problem.
- Peterson White comments that she didn’t get onboarding when she first ran and that candidates had to inform themselves about the city council. The onboarding meeting gives shared information to all candidates and helps service the voters by allowing the candidates to clarify their positions in the context of city council.
- Peterson White also comments that a meeting with all candidates might be limiting and not requiring them all to sit in a room together would allow for better questions and learning. She also suggests looking into if there’s a better solution than a meeting.
- Beumer comments that opponents have to sit next to each other at many other times as well, but that it did prevent him from asking a few questions during the meeting. He supports the idea of a video presentation made available to all candidates. He says that the best way to learn about local government is attending the meetings.
- Ness supports having the onboarding material available electronically is important, but a face-to-face meeting where the physical information is given to candidates.
- Dahlen hesitates to formalize having the onboarding meeting before the primary, because he doesn’t want candidates to be told how to run their campaign and the onus is on the candidates to learn. Also, most of the information is already available.
- Administrator Martig appreciates the feedback.
Review of 2027-28 Budget Calendar
- Administrator Martig summarizes some of the previous feedback in accelerating public feedback in the budget process and presents the changes that have been proposed since the last meeting.
- Martig also gives an overview of the entire schedule and explains the proposed adjustments.
- Sokup asks if the public comment is more in the style of mailings and social media or more of a town hall event.
- Martig hasn’t decided, but is open to ideas or feedback about the forum for public comment.
- Zweifel notes that if there’s a local option sales tax on the ballot, it’s better to inform the public sooner.
- Sokup agrees and supports a town hall format for comment on the budget, as well as having the town hall between July 14 and August 18.
- Ness likes the budget calendar and supports a tour around town to see how city projects are coming along. He also praises Martig’s work.
- Dahlen suggests that when the information about public comment is distributed, earlier is better so that the public stays informed.
- Beumer supports the budget calendar and agrees with Ness.
- Peterson White agrees with everything that has been said and supports a tour of city project sites.
- Holmes agrees with her colleagues and emphasizes Sokup’s support for a town hall format for public feedback on the budget.
- Martig says that public education on certain things about the budget is helpful and appreciates the feedback.
