My preferred Council Appointment process

Digging back into the cobwebs of history, I have researched several other appointment processes (we’ve had five in the past 25 years.) And there seems to have been a system for having eight (8) applicants which worked well. I’ve decided that this is my preferred process, not just because it seems fair, but because it has actually be implemented so no one can accuse me of proposing something untried. As I stated here, I am not happy with the process as it stands on the current Agenda. That’s why I’m proposing the following alternative. If you agree, I hope you will let all the Council know your feelings as soon as possible :

The Suggested Process

There was a first City Council Meeting with interviews of all eight candidates. This process took the majority of the meeting, the balance of time being taken with an Executive Session which pared the list down to three finalists.

The next day, the finalists were informed of the Council’s decision and were invited to provide supplemental materials to bolster their cases before the following City Council Meeting.

At the following City Council Meeting, there was a second round of in-depth finalist interviews where questions were asked based on the applicants’ supplemental materials. Immediately following those interviews, the Council retired to Executive Session to discuss.They then re-appeared and had the final vote.


This seems like a pretty fair process to me because it gives the Council, the Applicants and the public a chance to provide a much fuller picture of the relative merits of each Applicant.

This is such an important decision. I believe the above process provides a much more deliberate way of determining the best person for the job and I strongly urge our Council to adopt it as the method for filling the current Council vacancy.