Council postpones new candidate questionnaire after debate over scope and timing

The Midwest City Council on April 22 declined to adopt proposed revisions to a candidate questionnaire related to potential conflicts of interest and dual‑office holding, voting to take no action and to return the item for additional review at a future meeting.

City staff explained the proposed changes were prompted by an Attorney General opinion and related case law. The draft expanded the questions from three to six items to capture a wider set of familial and indirect relationships the AG opinion suggests could create conflicts that warrant further investigation.

"Just because someone may answer one of those questions in the affirmative does not mean that there is a conflict of interest," a staff presenter said, noting the questionnaire is intended to identify situations that merit follow‑up, not to automatically disqualify candidates.

Council members voiced competing views: some said the form should be public early to inform prospective candidates and the electorate; others worried the wording was overly broad and could deter participation. Several members suggested consulting peer cities and subject‑matter groups (OMAG, ACOG) and giving council members time to meet the city attorney for clarification.

A motion to take no action and bring the questionnaire back to a later meeting passed; councilmembers asked staff to engage with concerned members and return a revised draft with clearer, more targeted questions and to provide examples or peer templates if available.

Next steps: staff will confer with council members, consult peers, and return a refined draft for council consideration.