The application process is now open for those interested in filling the Position 2 Edmonds City Council seat being vacated by Mike Nelson, who becomes mayor Jan. 1.
The City of Edmonds is a mayor/council form of government with regularly scheduled meetings on Tuesday at 7 p.m. Councilmembers are elected for seven at-large positions and represent all citizens. Councilmembers receive a base salary of $1,333.33 per month and are eligible for benefits.
To be eligible, an applicant must be registered to vote within the city; and must have been an Edmonds resident for one year immediately preceding the appointment.
Application for appointment forms are available online or in hard copy form from the first floor reception desk at City Hall: 121 5th Ave. N., Edmonds. Complete the entire form and submit it no later than 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2019. Candidates may submit a resume and cover letter in addition to the application.
Candidate interviews are tentatively scheduled for the week of Jan. 13-17, 2020. The council will consider nominations the following week. Only those who have submitted a complete application will be eligible for nomination. For additional information, contact Council President Adrienne Fraley-Monillas: Adrienne.monillas@edmondswa.gov.
The form already has some boxes checked?? Easy to understand, “live here”, “registered voter”, “night meetings”, “day meetings” boxes. But this appointment is for a vacant seat with 2 years left. Why would it be a requirement that to apply one must commit to “campaign” for re-election? We did not hold any council person running for the first time to commit to campaigning for a second term. We had 4 council people leave the council this year without living up to that commitment.
I guess council can write its own rules for selecting a replacement but what are the unwritten rules each may have that is not on the form? My guess is some council member do have unwritten ideas of who should be selected. The new council could make history by selecting a woman for the replacement? Is that a built in bias?
It would be interesting to know why it is a condition to be appointed to now agree to “campaigning”?. Just does not seem right.
Good question Darrol, Not meant to require anyone to run in two years!!
Just want to make sure applicants understand that it’s less than a two year appointment and to stay in the seat you need to run for election
In the past it has sometimes been a requirement that candidates seeking an appointment to council state their intention to run in the next election. The rationale for this was to try to weed out potential candidates who were looking only for a “free ride” and not willing to put in work to become a council member.
But what about someone who wants to be appointed, work very hard to gain public approval and then run for a position other than the one they were appointed to? That would set up a race of two people with a track record.
The easiest and most equitable way to fill the position is to appoint the candidate in the election who had the most votes but didn’t win. That reflects the voters and honors their votes.
The form is specifically for Position 2. If you wanted people to know the limit of the term then a better way would have been to put the expiration of the term right in the header of the form. No appointments would ever be for longer than the term of the position. Those recently elected know they have a choice to run again or not. What Council has done with this form is force an applicant to agree to campaign for election in the future or simply submit false information if they would not want to run in the future. The question is simply bias and will exclude people who may be able to serve only for a couple of years.
I personally do not want candidates who can only serve for two years – actually less, because they wouldn’t be appointed until late in January and their term would expire when the election is certified late in November – because they’d be gone just after they got up to speed at being a council member.
I see your point, Ron, but I personally believe that any candidate appointed should be required to confirm they won’t re-run when their term is up. Incumbency is a massive advantage in any election and I don’t believe council members should get appointed into a position where they have a huge reelection advantage when they were not democratially elected to the position. Seattle has this practice and I wholeheartedly agree with it. I have no doubt that well-qualified candidates with familiarity of the council could be placed and be effective for two years.
The date in bold at the top of the form states the application is due by 4:30 pm on Friday , December 30, 2019.
December 30 is on Monday not Friday. MEN article states the application is due by 4:30 pm on Tuesday, December 31. Which is it?
Good question — perhaps Council President Fraley-Monillas will see this and let us know. We reprinted what was issued in the news release.
Looking at the questions one wonders how each of the existing council members would answer?
1. What is your volunteer experience?
2. Have you previously served as an elected officer or do you have experience as an appointed official including boards, commissions, committees, etc in either Edmonds or elsewhere? (please provide details)
3. What are three of your greatest strengths and three greatest weaknesses?
4. What would be your top three priorities for our city?
5. What do you see as yours and the Council’s role in our community?
The other question on the form that will eliminate some otherwise qualified candidates is already filled out on the form. “If selected, would you campaign for election to retain your seat?” And it is already filled out as a yes. It is disappointing that Council included that question.
so sorry for the confusion!!!
It’s due in December 31 at 4:30
Darrol, This is the same application we have used for the last three appointments. Nothing more, nothing less. No plot, nothing nefarious.