Who Will Fill Sally Clark's City Council Position?

Well, this is interesting (and could have ramifications for the School Board races).

As you may have heard, Sally Clark had decided not to run again for City Council.  But now she has taken a job at UW - some kind of city relations thing - and she's leaving her Council position on April 12.

The City Council will be appointing her successor (just as the School Board does if someone leaves early) by April 27th.  They say they want a "placeholder."

From Publicola (they have a complete calendar of events for this process):

With a wild first-ever district elections election already under way (there are 40 candidates in the mix), the council is going to fill Clark's spot with an appointee who is not currently running for council and who promises not to parlay the gig into a candidacy; in short, it will be a placeholder spot.

Okay, so is that "promise" something anyone could be held to?  Probably not but, on the other hand, there might be people willing to do that kind of caretaker spot.

Here's how it goes:

The council will accept applications, will whittle it down to qualified candidates (it's "not clear," council spokeswoman Dana Slote Robinson says, if a majority of the council members have to agree on that list), and then hold a public hearing process where the contenders have three minutes to present. A simple majority, five council members, would have to agree on the appointee.

As I asked in the Comments about who makes the final Council list:
Will it be like voir dire where they get to blackball people they don't want?

Will they only pick candidates they feel confident will not turn around and run for office, meaning, a REAL caretaker?

And, what do we want in a caretaker councilperson? Would it be different than someone who has the job an entire term? I think so. 
Again, from Publicola: 

Clark is the chair of the human services committee, so the council says the winning candidate has to have professional experience and background in housing and human services issues and must have public service experience. Former council members (Jan Drago?) seem like a likely pick.

Actually, I think Drago could be a good pick (after all, she knows the gig).  BUT, what if some people on the Council see this as an opp to get someone who will side with them until November?

Naturally, this is quite the fun parlor game but it could influence the School Board races.  What if someone who was thinking of the Board wants to try for this spot?  It would be interesting to see the same name on the list of possibles for the City Council, have that person not get the position only to turn around and run for School Board in November?

And what if someone currently or formerly on the Board were to try for the position?  Interesting, no?

Comments

mirmac1 said…
Anyone?! She has been an utter disappointment.

Goes to show just because you are elected for whatever, does not make you an expert on: a) parenting; or b) educating a child.
Anonymous said…
Profoundly disappointed in Ms. Clark. UTTERLY UNRESPONSIVE. She did not deserve to hold public office given how dismissive of the public she is. We really can't do worse unless we get a total whack job in her vacated seat, which is fairly (hopefully!) unlikely.


Next!
Kate Martin said…
I hope they will stipulate that it must be someone who is not going to run for that position in this election season. I sense some mischief could occur there if they usher someone in the way Sally got in.
Kate, my thought exactly.
Anonymous said…
Wow what I could do with this post title!


HaHa
Clearly... said…
...political maneuvering.

It should also be noted that Murray's brand new Department of Education will be combined with those in Health and Human Service Department and Clark is Chair of Human Service Committee.

Implications for SPS??

Gardener said…
Let's see if Murray loyalist Lorena González is that placeholder.

It will make her a shoe-in the upcoming election.

But Gardener, there's the rub. The Council is saying no one who applies should be running. So anyone who applies and possibly gets the seat who then turns around and runs will look pretty bad.
Gardener said…
Publicola reports that the City council won't be appointing anyone who is currently running for the position, and it must be done by April 22nd.

So we are safe from Lorena González for a little while longer.

Talk about a slick campaign role out, check her website:

http://electlorenagonzalez.com/
Gardener said…
Thanks for the correction Melissa, I missed it while alt+tabbing.

Sally Clark is now free to start her new career as a paid lobbyist for the UW, were she can use her relationships with the City and the Council to erode democracy and accountability.

The Lorena González candidacy should send up a red flag to anyone who thinks that the people need to take our city council back from the developers and the super rich. Ed Murray's lawyer is the status quo, Sally Clark 2.0.
I have to say - I wish people would flood the City Council with their self-nominations. It might be interesting to see what rises to the surface (and they have to disclose everyone who applies).
Anonymous said…
Oh my. Lorena is the one with the campaign website boiler about listening to the citizens of Harbor Island. Wrong election girlfriend.

Westside
Anonymous said…
Sally Clark is the perfect choice for this position, because 1) it's a humble (vs highly paid) stepping stone to the Leg, and 2) who better to rep a school than someone who speaks their language: pretend to listen in spite of already signing off on decisions.

Westside
Sensing BS said…
Kate,

There is nothing that would stop an appointed individual for running for office and I suspect the appointed individual will run for office- despite their rhetoric.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Why the Majority of the Board Needs to be Filled with New Faces

Who Is A. J. Crabill (and why should you care)?