Now that the filing period has closed for local elections, we have posted the results below. Of note, the following City of Edmonds positions are unopposed: Mayor Dave Earling and City Councilmembers Diana Buckshnis and Tom Mesaros. Of the remaining council races, incumbent Lora Petso is being challenged by Edmonds Planning Board Chair Neil Tibbott; QWest Executive David Teitzel will face Sister City Commissioner Alicia Crank for the position being vacated by Joan Bloom; and newly appointed Councilmember Michael Nelson will run against perennial council candidate and community volunteer Alvin Rutledge.
The Edmonds School Board races have both new and familiar faces. Susan Phillips, who resigned last year for family reasons, is running to regain the District 4 board seat now held April Nowak, who had been appointed to take Phillips’ place. Nowak announced recently she would not run for election. Also filing for the District 4 seat were Michael Arendt and Monica Wheaton.
In District 1, being vacated by current board member Kory DeMun, two newcomers will face off: Bill Willcock and Carin Chase. And in District 3, long-time board member Gary Noble is facing two challengers for his seat: Mark L. Norton and Mary Murphy. District 5 board member Diana White, who is currently serving as school board president, is running unopposed.
Hospital District No. 2 (Verdant Health Commission) Commissioners Fred Langer and Bruce Williams are running unopposed, as are Port of Edmonds Commissioners David Preston and James Orvis.
Here are the Edmonds-specific races. You can find all those running for Snohomish County positions at this link.
CITY OF EDMONDS | |||
MAYOR Nonpartisan Office 4-year term | |||
Dave Earling
|
PO Box 237
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(425) 218-4929
dave_earling@yahoo.com |
5/11/2015 2:04:00 PM |
COUNCIL POSITION #2 Nonpartisan Office 2-year unexpired term | |||
Mike Nelson
|
PO Box 361
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(425) 478-6207
mike@votenelson.org |
5/11/2015 2:59:00 PM |
Alvin Rutledge
|
7101 Lake Ballinger Way
Edmonds WA 98026 |
(425) 776-7130
vote4alrutledge@aol.com |
5/15/2015 4:58:00 PM |
COUNCIL POSITION #4 Nonpartisan Office 4-year term | |||
Diane Buckshnis
|
PO Box 613
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(206) 228-3462
votediane@comcast.net |
5/11/2015 12:49:00 PM |
COUNCIL POSITION #5 Nonpartisan Office 4-year term | |||
Dave Teitzel
|
PO Box 455
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(425) 967-5925
dave@teitzel4council.org |
5/11/2015 11:46:00 AM |
Alicia Crank
|
PO Box 6154
Edmonds WA 98026 |
(650) 814-0438
mizcrank@gmail.com |
5/11/2015 12:35:00 PM |
COUNCIL POSITION #6 Nonpartisan Office 4-year short and full term | |||
Thomas W. Mesaros
|
51 Pine St Apt 211
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(206) 290-9031
mesarost@yahoo.com |
5/11/2015 2:18:00 PM |
COUNCIL POSITION #7 Nonpartisan Office 4-year term | |||
Neil Tibbott
|
PO Box 187
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(425) 493-4791
connect@neiltibbott.com |
5/11/2015 10:41:00 AM |
Lora Petso
|
10616 237th Pl SW
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(206) 542-7421
votepetso@aol.com |
5/14/2015 9:35:00 AM |
EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT 15 | |||
DIRECTOR DISTRICT #1 Nonpartisan Office 4-year term | |||
Bill Willcock
|
918 Sea Vista Pl
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(425) 268-0611
wwillcock@gmail.com |
5/11/2015 9:20:00 PM |
Carin Chase
|
PO Box 1944
Lynnwood WA 98046 |
(425) 312-3056
carinchase@hotmail.com |
5/15/2015 10:25:00 AM |
DIRECTOR DISTRICT #3 Nonpartisan Office 4-year term | |||
Gary Noble
|
1422 172nd Pl SW
Lynnwood WA 98037 |
(425) 745-3205
nobleg@frontier.com |
5/11/2015 9:17:00 AM |
Mark L. Norton
|
3529 158th St SW
Lynnwood WA 98087 |
(425) 760-1053
mlnorton@frontier.com |
5/15/2015 1:21:00 PM |
Mary Murphy
|
18418 12th Ave W
Lynnwood WA 98037 |
(206) 310-4041
jm.murf.95@gmail.com |
5/15/2015 3:39:00 PM |
DIRECTOR DISTRICT #4 Nonpartisan Office 2-year unexpired term | |||
Susan Phillips
|
20424 79th Ave W
Edmonds WA 98026 |
(206) 930-8572
susan4schools@gmail.com |
5/11/2015 4:38:00 PM |
Michael (Mike) Arendt
|
7414 198th St SW
Lynnwood WA 98036 |
(425) 774-2049
arendt1@gmail.com |
5/14/2015 2:16:00 AM |
Monica Wheaton
|
17911 46th Pl W
Lynnwood WA 98037 |
(425) 224-6070
monicawheaton@gmail.com |
5/15/2015 7:18:00 AM |
DIRECTOR DISTRICT #5 Nonpartisan Office 4-year term | |||
Diana White
|
831 Northstream Ln
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(425) 640-2299
diana.white1@comcast.net |
HOSPITAL DISTRICT 2 | Snohomish | ||
COMMISSIONER POSITION #2 Nonpartisan Office 6-year term | |||
Fred Langer
|
1416 8th Pl S
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(206) 459-5714
Fredericklanger@me.com |
5/11/2015 10:02:00 AM |
COMMISSIONER POSITION #5 Nonpartisan Office 6-year term | |||
Bruce Williams
|
23123 83rd Ave W
Edmonds WA 98026 |
(425) 778-2499
jbwilliamsmd@gmail.com |
5/11/2015 9:20:00 AM |
PORT OF EDMONDS | |||
COMMISSIONER DISTRICT 2 Nonpartisan Office 4-year term | |||
David Preston
|
PO Box 1777
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(206) 793-5858
David@insuranceresourceinc.com |
5/11/2015 11:26:00 AM |
COMMISSIONER-AT-LARGE POSITION #4 Nonpartisan Office 4-year term | |||
James W. Orvis
|
23529 93rd Ave W
Edmonds WA 98020 |
(206) 542-7387
orvisjw@comcast.net |
5/11/2015 11:09:00 AM |
Congratulations Mayor Earling and Councilmembers Mesaros and Buckshnis.
Mayer says he has unfinished business maybe so but there’s a real nice paycheck to go with that unfinished business. Another subject I don’t think this paper should be advertising happy hours at bars people leave bars and drive and a lot of the time over the legal limit . Anyways you can’t have it both ways am I Being hard too bad
How absolutely disheartening that in a City of roughly 40,000 residents, 3 of our 6 elected offices will feature incumbents running unopposed. I am thankful for the 9 candidates that are willing to run, but how did we get to the point where only 9 people desire to take the following Oath of Office for the 6 offices?:
I, , do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution and Laws of the United States and the Constitution and Laws of the State of Washington, and that I will faithfully and impartially perform and discharge the duties of the office of for a 4-year term according to law to the best of my ability.
In the oath of office, can we have removed ” to the best of my ability” ? HERE, in my opinion seems to leave a large opening of interpretation of what it can mean to carry out LAWS and the Constitution……laws of the state of Washington, our laws of the United States and our Constitution
I think only a few choosing to run for office in our city says everything……and looking at the past voting by the citizens says everthing also.
You are right Ken, a sad reflection of our citizens apathy here……
Tere & Ken
Both of you had the chance to file for any one of those positions, but instead you continue to throw stones at our elected officials you don’t agree with. In a democracy you can either be a part of the solution or part of the problem.
Fred Gouge
Port of Edmonds Commisioner
District 1
Mr. Gouge, Port of Edmonds Commisioner and businessman
I see….interesting the “throw stones” comment…..regarding questions by citizens to our elected officials and government that are supposed to represent the PEOPLE
Our elected officials work for us, not the other way around…..Interesting how this is missed by some officials……
Our government, by the people and for the people represents the citizens.
Are you implying that there is only one way to participate in the democratic process and that is to run for office???? what does that mean?…..then and ONLY then can a citizen “participate” …..I just have to say WOW!
There are way more ways than that to be part of the solution and not part of the PROBLEM
The most evident way is to exercise ones Freedom Of Speech (a little Constitutional thing here) to bring to the forefront when a government is not functioning for the good of the people and/or representing the will of the people
We have a Constitution……This isnt about a select few
On Mayor Earling: Outstanding job. I place him on my all time best list along with Laura Hall.
On Councilpersons Petso and Buckshnis: Both also outstanding. Together they hung in there despite horrific abuse from a former Mayor because of their efforts to get the city’s budget in proper working order. Lora is simply among the most intelligent and competent Councilpersons I have observed in the past 46 years. Diane disappointed me a couple of times: once when she joined in on the off track attack against Captain and Denise Day (City of Edmonds vs Day) and again with her successful resurrection of the despised, ignored, and unenforcable cat leash law. That is, however, fully offset by her many efforts to improve the city involving the Senior Center, Arts, Dog park, etc.
Michael Nelson may be some new blood that our city can always use. I suspect he will do well.
Ray, any thoughts about who should replace Bloom?
Ken nobody wants to be on city council it takes up a whole lot of time and doesn’t pay anything the mayor makes good money all those city employees who report to the council get a good wedge here’s the council have to make all the decisions for what 100 bucks a week what’s wrong with this picture
Darrol,
No, I have none. I leave it to guys like you who hopefully will promote the candidacy of other highly qualified leaders. As for Joan, she has served, not only as an outstanding Council member, but as an active contributor for many years. She has done way more than her share. So find and encourage a few of the available and talented folks who want to be of service to this wonderful town, and don’t worry about those few running unopposed. It just might be a recognition that they have been doing a darn good job!
It is interesting to note that, what was it 24,25 people applied for a vacant council position when they didn’t have to run a campaign to get the job. I am also disappointed that more people did not run. Competition brings out the best in us.
Ken Reidy would have been a formidable candidate.
Solid points Michael and thank you for the very generous words Dave.
My uncle was a City Council Member for 22 years in Missoula, Montana and Council Member Joan Bloom is my neighbor. As a result, I have a good idea how many hours a week I would have to devote to City Council responsibilities. At the current pay rate for Council Members, it would be extremely challenging to provide for my family if I was on City Council.
So I chose to not file for office and keep the hours I devote to City issues flexible. Sadly, I imagine I am not the only one who made a similar choice. I do find it disheartening that only 9 people filed for 6 offices.
Related to all of this, I support periodic citizen review of our form of City Government. I think it is better to consider this rather than simply assuming the path we are on is the best way to run a City.
I also believe a strong argument can be made that Council Members are vastly underpaid.
Ken, I think it would be nice to have a City Manager and then we can remove the political element. I would say well worth the money for a CITY MANAGER…….and then, we could also pay the City Council what they deserve to be paid!!
It is just shameful how little our City Council members are paid and the tremendous volume of work they do. .
And the checks and balances of the administration, legislative and judicial branches? Akin to eliminating the office of the President. And how is a “manager” who serves at the pleasure of the City Council less political?
Because he or she can be FIRED and he or she serves at the pleasure of the council.
…….This is clearly not akin to eliminating the office of the “president”…….. I am laughing…..and out loud.
regarding politics, the citizens did not just fall off of the turnip truck…..they are much brighter than some assume
A periodic citizen review of our form of government brought up by Mr. Reidy is an excellent idea………and a Code of Ethics………and honesty and fairness and a clear understanding of laws and our Constitution
……..and speaking of checks and balances, we have watched some people working their way to the top sit in our government and ask no questions to keep their personal and political options open……speaking of “checks and balaces”
The council-manager form of government is the most common form of government in the United States. https://icma.org/en/icma/knowledge_network/documents/kn/Document/2705/CouncilManager_Form_of_Government_Frequently_Asked_Questions_brochure
In the council-manager form of government, all power and authority to set policy rests with an elected governing body — in Edmonds case, the members of a city council. The council hires a nonpartisan manager who has authority to run the operations of the city and who must adhere to the ethical standards of a professional organization.
The main difference between what we have now and the council-manager form of government is that you have an educated, highly-trained professional (most city managers have at least a master’s degree in administration) who can obtain non-partisan information and administer the decisions of the elected officials in the most efficient, non-partisan manner using the most up-to-date, best-practice methods.
If anything, this system is more democratic since it based on the vote of several members of a council and not the decisions of only one official who may or may not be objective, educated and professional.
This is in no way intended as a comment on the current mayor. We have had mayors in the past who ran the city like their personal kingdom — making decisions based on whim with no study or discussion. Sometimes with disastrous, expensive results.
Thanks for the helpful information Kurt.
My thought is that it would be prudent to periodically present the advantages and disadvantages of the different forms of City Government to the citizens of Edmonds. An education process could take place, after which the voters could vote on the form of City Government that they believe works best for our City.
I think this approach would be wiser than simply assuming the current form of City Government is still best for the citizens of Edmonds.
All forms of City Government have both good and bad. I simply am concerned about the low number of filings for 6 elected offices under our current form of City Government. This might be a sign that time should be taken to teach our citizens about this so a decision can be made as to what is best for our City.
Our city council has had an inordinate amount of experience appointing new members. While those who have been appointed may be good people, I believe that most citizens who closely follow city council would agree that in most cases the selected applicant was not the most qualified applicant. And how did they do selecting an interim mayor, and city attorney? Makes me concerned that they’d select the best applicant for city manager. I believe that the voters have historically done a better job of selecting mayors.
Here’s a few more things to think about: Replacement with a professional city manager puts management of city staff under control of majority vote of Council rather than a vote of the people in the form of a mayoral executive.
Turns complete control of city over to Council majority, with no check on or balance to that Council power by an independent mayor.
Leads to changes in City Manager position every time a new majority comes into power, supporting even more instability than we’ve already endured. (See Mill Creek, MLT, Shoreline)
Ron, a point I am trying to make is that I do not believe the different forms of City Government are considered very often. I think it would benefit all if a neutral party educated the voters of the pros and cons and let the voters pick what would work best.
As I stated, I think this approach would be wiser than simply assuming the current form of City Government is still best for the citizens of Edmonds.
Ken:
I do not disagree with your proposal; probably just the timing of it. As I commented earlier, this council has demonstrated that they aren’t capable of objectively making personnel selections. Additionally, it is clear that they currently have more to deal with than they can expeditiously get done – often they cannot get through the full agenda for a council meeting, so items have to be deferred to future meetings.
Fortunately there is no urgency to deal with your proposal, because even if the voters decided they want a city manager the earliest that could be implemented is 2020.
Yes, let’ s let our informed, smart and savy VOTERS decide……WE are the government, right?!….WE the people…..
I believe there is in fact an urgency to this idea of having a City Manager rather than a Mayor and it will give all voters and citizens plenty of time to think about this and be well informed and educated about their options of government. Never a bad time to think about what it means to have good government and how we can make government better with different options available.
As Ken and Ron have both eluded, there are pros and cons with both forms of management. I tend to be less supportive of the City Manager form due to some of the same issues raised by Ron – for a City Manager form of government to work, the council has got to be objective. This is a quality that hasn’t always been present in our council.
Tere suggests that we allow informed, smart and savvy voters decide – which means we will have an even lower voter turnout since research (check Pew) suggests that most voters (who actually vote – mid-term elections traditionally have a low turnout because they lack a “wow” factor) tend to vote based on who they like (under 40) or traditional party lines (over 60 generation)…not because they are informed…but rather influenced by a headline or the “cool” factor.
Young voters (20 – 35) are difficult to get to the polls because they don’t feel like they have skin in the game – they marry later, they tend to rent, and have a disinterest in the bickering and polarizing game that politics has turned into – which may be a reason we had so few (like none) throw their hat into the ring for our own elections. They are also in their career building years.
So what’s my point? My point is that people need a reason to care on issues that matter to the majority – economy and safety. My sample data is small (less than 10 people) but the issue of city manager or mayor did not move the needle with this crew. “Who cares? it doesn’t change my taxes, it doesn’t strengthen safety, it doesn’t fill the city coffers.”
People get involved when they feel like they can make a difference, are listened to, and are inspired. People want to contribute and belong to a winning team – most people do not have the time, energy and talent (or desire) to help an organization move from disfunction to efficiency…unless there is adequate compensation.
The past couple years several of our council members have touted that counseling (coaching) on how to get along with each has been of tremendous value to the city – at tax payer expense – they are learning what I was forced to learn in grade school and the military (win the hearts and minds). And for $5 you can pick up a copy of How to Win Friends and Influence People.
The council-manager form of government has a manager who answers to an elected city council, not just one person as we currently have with the “strong-mayor” form of government. It’s incorrect to say a manager doesn’t answer to elected officials.
The objectivity of the elected officials a manager answers to is no different in either the council-manager or strong mayor form of government. The difference is that you have a highly-trained, educated, ideally objective person obtaining information and administering the decisions of an elected city council. It absolutely does turn control of the city over to seven elected officials, not just one — that’s one of the benefits of the council-manager system.
A city manager is ethically bound to administer their duties dispassionately and without an agenda. There would likely be less turnover in the position than there would be in having a mayor who is up for election every four years.
This isnt a football game, sport or militay operation, usual political/business rhetoric with supposed facts with the data and how people think…….I believe there are plenty of people that care about how and WHO their government works FOR….People do care….Its our government that has tunnel vision and I am not referring to our City Council.
“Not moving the needle with this crew” I think says everything…….You are right, the needle doesnt MOVE and thats part of the problem. I believe that means it is time for a change and to look at other options. My research indicates that a select few have operated the same way in this city for a very long time…..and the select few always all sound the same
This isnt about winning some game or war…….its about equal representation and working for the people. Its about a government that actually listens and wants to KNOW what the people want. It is about following laws and our Constitution and having an open and transparent government…….One needs to question why some do not wish to have that!
…….one does wonder…….
Kurt – it would be interesting to see this form of leadership – it follows more of a corporate structure of leadership if I’m understanding this correctly.
Tere – I clearly did not communicate my point in a way you understood it. There are reasons why people vote, there are reasons why people get involved – and there is data to show what the psyche is behind those reasons. I wasn’t talking about winning a game or winning a war. BTW, to state “it is time for change” requires people to get involved – which means it has to inspire them to action. Just because you say “I believe” doesn’t mean it is true.
I think the Mayor got about 70% of the vote in his last election, clearly he moved the needle. People paid attention and went to the polls in record numbers. It appears to me that the people in Edmonds who exercise their constitutional right to vote are very involved.
Dave – I agree. The Mayor pulled great support and will likely do the same again in this election.
And just for clarity, when I spoke of moving the needle, it was in reference to whether or not we have a city manager or a mayor.