The search for a seventh Sedona City Council member took a step forward as it seeks to fill a seat recently vacated by Councilman Bill Chisholm.
During the council’s Tuesday. Feb. 23, meeting, council members discussed the process to fill the vacancy and how quickly they hope to do so. As of Wednesday, Feb. 24, City Clerk Susan Irvine confirmed that no complete applications for the position had been received.
The deadline to submit applications is Thursday, March 4. Council will review applications in executive session on Tuesday, March 9, and then will make a schedule for the int e rvi ews . Interviews will be in open session with council
discussion and deliberation in executive session. Irvine said any dates other than March 9 are still undecided.
This is not a new process for some on council. Other members who have stepped down in recent years include Angela LeFevre and Vice Mayor Mark DiNunzio in 2016, Joe Vernier in 2018 and Janice Hudson in 2020. Chisholm’s term ends in 2022.
“Historically, council has opted to solicit applicants and to review those applicants as a body and not make any statements on preferred criteria going in,” City Manager Justin Clifton said.
Possible criteria considerations by council, put together by Clifton, may include:
■ Experience: Council may wish to give preference to any candidates that have previously served on Council or have other relevant city experience. This could minimize the learning curve and better ensure productive participation. Alternatively, inexperience is sometimes seen as an advantage as it often brings new perspective and fresh ideas.
■ Intent to run: While no candidate is ever assured of winning a competitive election, Council may wish to give preference to those candidates who intend to run over those who do not. The logic is that candidates that express intent to run have greater probability of longer-term continuity and contribution than those who are intent not to seek election.
■ Missing Representation: Some councils/boards find the appointment process as a unique opportunity to bring on a member that brings a perspective different from the other seated members. This different perspective can be based on representing a demographic group such as age, gender and ethnicity. This also includes affiliation in terms of business, environment and parents, or skillsets in finance or policy making, etc.
■ Replacement: This idea suggests that preferred candidates are those that most closely replace the qualities lost in the council member whose seat is being filled. The logic is that the previously elected candidate reflects the will of the voters and taking this approach is the most consistent with honoring that mandate.
■ Previous Candidacy: This idea suggests that candidates who previously ran for office but didn’t get elected should be considered above those who have never expressed interest.
The logic is that these candidates have some verifiable public support and have done more to pursue a position than candidates who have not participated in elections. Then again, it can be argued that candidates who did not win a seat were “rejected” by voters, making an appointment contrary to the will of the voters.
The appointee will serve out the rest of Chisholm’s term until 2022.
“I want to encourage everyone, who is interested, to apply,” Councilwoman Holli Ploog said. “We do benefit from different points of view and we benefit from diversity on our council. If we have criteria and people don’t think they meet that criteria, I don’t want to discourage them from applying.”
