The Fourth Corner
Featured Story In
Help us continue the Fourth Corner
Here is Ms. Smith's Announcement

Dear Whatcom County Resident,
 
I am announcing my campaign as a write-in candidate for Bellingham City Council At-Large position. You may wonder why I would do this and if there is a chance that such a campaign can be successful.
 
To think that three positions are unopposed in this year’s election was most distressing to me. I could not do anything about two of the races but I can do something about the At-Large position. With help from several friends I have developed a thoughtful, unique, and cost-effective campaign in order to bring another view to Bellingham City Council. I belive that my professional experience and my community involvement have prepared me for this opportunity and responsibility.
 
My focus is on three major points having to do with the financial stability of the City:
•          The City needs to spend only what it can afford.
•          The City needs to partner with existing businesses to generate living-wage jobs.
•          The City needs to assist in developing the Georgia-Pacific site into an exciting and unique area.
 
All campaigns need volunteers and funds. This campaign is no exception. Click Here for opportunitties to let me know how you can assist in the condensed effort to have at least one member of Council with a more pragmatic approach.
 
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
 
Sincerely,
 
 
Orphalee Smith, Candidate
Bellingham City Council-at-Large

ORPHALEE SMITH RUNS FOR CITY COUNCIL AS A WRITE-IN CLICK HERE FOR HER WEB SITE AND FURTHER DETAILS.
December 5, 2009
SUGGESTIONS FOR A PROCESS TO FILL COUNCIL VACANCY

Many Whatcom County citizens are concerned about an apparent lack of transparency surrounding procedures for filling the Council seat vacated by Councilmember Bob Kelly. Little exists in the way of written guidance to consistently assist Council in evaluating and choosing a candidate to fill this important position. The electorate normally has weeks to accomplish the task. Of even greater concern, fair and consistent procedures for nominating and voting on a prospective councilmember do not exist, and therefore cannot be explained to the public. Under the unusual circumstances set in motion after 1:00 a.m. on November 25, the vague language “as (Council) deems appropriate” found in County Charter Section 4.50 needs to be publically addressed with detail specific to filling Mr. Kelly’s position, and setting forth an explicit, understandable process. This needs to happen before Council convenes proceedings to discuss filling the vacant seat on December 8.

In the interest of suggesting ways to implement a more fair, open and transparent (to the public) process, I offer the following for your consideration:

First, the volume of applications poses a practical problem given the time
frame the council has set to take action.  There are already at least ten applicants, and there could easily be as many as twenty before the deadline of Monday afternoon expires. A flood is likely at the end from those wishing to avoid media attention in the interim. While some who have already applied are well-known players (Pros, McShane as examples), many are relative if not total unknowns, politically speaking.  And some of them have impressive resumes,
like Dr. Thorndike, who I had never heard of before.

Then after the deadline to apply has passed, the council will have only ONE day to review the many applications, and then perform whatever due diligence (investigation, interviewing, or whatever) that each deems appropriate to fulfill their obligations under the Charter and WC Code. Keep in mind also that they have many other items on their agenda for the evening.

This set of circumstances strongly suggests that the selection be delayed, preferably that the council meeting be adjourned and carried over until next year, or perhaps a special session later this year if the existing council is intent on keeping the vacancy determination in the hands of the six members who are seated currently. Whenever the council takes action, the process by which applicants will be nominated and voted on should be determined, and made public, BEFORE the selection process begins.

2. All votes for nominees to fill the vacancy should be by roll call vote. What will be the roll call vote sequence? By what means is the order in which roll call votes are taken determined?  We saw how important a question that can be during the final UGA vote on 11/24, where Councilmember Brenner went before Councilmember Kelly; if Kelly had had to vote before Brenner, the final result might have been different.  The main point is that the voting order should be clearly specified in advance, and based upon some explicit criteria (seniority, alphabetical, whatever), not just left to the whim of the chair or clerk. Whatever sequence is established, it should be consistent for all roll call votes on all matters relating to the selection process.

3. All nominations should be made before ANY votes on nominees are taken.  The worst case scenario would be if each applicant that is nominated is voted on right after the nomination, and if that person gets four votes, the game is over, before the remaining applicants have any chance at it. Consider that they might have been nominated and then received four or even more votes had they had the chance to be voted on at all.

Whether nominations should be permitted of persons who have not submitted an application is presumably up to the council, but it should be made clear in the procedures established to conduct the appointment whether those nominations will be accepted - again, well PRIOR to the beginning of the selection process.

4.  Suggested nomination and selection procedure, in sequence:
Complete all nominations before any voting takes place.  Each council member shall be permitted to nominate as many of the applicants as she or he wishes.  Either each council member can nominate in a batch, or they can take turns nominating one applicant at a time, at the chair's discretion.  Nominations remain open until no council member has further nominations to make.

Once nominations are closed, the council would conduct a first round 'straw vote' on each nominee.  Each council member can vote for as many nominees as they wish.  The clerk of the council would tally the votes garnered by each nominee.  Those nominees who each receive the highest number of votes (whatever that number is, presumably 3 or 4 or 5 votes each) would remain on the list for further consideration, while those who receive less than the top vote count are dropped. If only one nominee receives the highest number of votes, with that number being equal to or greater than four votes, the process is completed and that nominee fills the vacancy.

Assuming there is more than one nominee receiving the highest number of votes, then, after any further council member discussion, regarding the qualifications and background of those remaining nominees or other relevant matters, is entertained, a second round of straw votes would take place.  Each council member can vote for as many nominees as she or he wishes, as with the first round of straw votes. The clerk of the council would tally the votes garnered by each nominee. Those nominees who each receive the highest vote total would remain for consideration in the third and final voting round. If only one nominee
receives four or more votes and four is the highest number of votes, the process is completed and that nominee fills the vacancy.

Assuming there is more than one nominee who has garnered the highest number of votes in the second round of straw voting, then, after any further discussion, the third and final round of voting would take place, in which each council member would have only one vote. The person receiving at least four votes would fill the vacancy.

If the council cannot reach at least four votes on one nominee after the third round of voting, then the decision would be passed along to the Exec, per the Code.

Example:  Applicants named A, B, C, W, X, Y, and Z are nominated.  On the first round of voting, nominees B, C, X, Y, and Z each receive 4 votes, which is the highest vote total of any of the nominees.  Hence, nominees A and W are dropped from consideration.  During the second round of voting, nominees C, X, and Z each receives 5 votes, while nominees B and Y receive fewer and thus are dropped.  On the third round of voting, where each council member can only vote once, nominee X receives four votes, and thus fills the vacancy.  Or, if none of the remaining nominees receives four votes, the appointment passes on to the
Exec.

It will no doubt be objected that this system appears complicated. Einstein has been quoted as saying that everything should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.  Whatever complexity the proposed process may have is a small price to pay for a fair and transparent vacancy selection.  Perhaps more important, the proposal is vastly simpler and quicker to administer than what is likely if a free-for-all with no rules established up front is permitted by default.

Respectfully submitted,

Chet Dow
5491 Woodfern Way
P O Box 30354
Bellingham, WA 98228-2354
(360) 592-4345
e-mail: cdow1@cablespeed.com

The following are links to Bellingham Herald News and Blog Stories concerning the Appointment of Ward Nelson to fill out the term of Bob Kelly on the County Council