Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Yelm council reopens debate on appointment rules, considers ranked-choice and procedural changes
Summary
Council members revisited the appointment/election process Feb. 3, discussing Robert’s Rules, ranked-choice voting, and options such as drawing random candidate order; city clerk Kathy recommended any change from Robert’s Rules be adopted in the handbook and council asked to continue the discussion at an upcoming retreat.
Council members reopened a months‑long discussion at the Feb. 3 study session about how the city conducts appointments and internal votes, including whether to adopt ranked‑choice voting or to amend the procedural handbook.
Council member Hess raised the earlier government‑committee conversation about ranked‑choice voting and asked whether the handbook procedure should be changed. City clerk Kathy told the council that because the handbook references Robert’s Rules, any consistent departure from that procedure should be implemented through a handbook amendment so that future meetings follow the same written standard.
Staff described a low‑cost procedural adjustment some municipalities use to reduce perceived bias in nomination order: have candidates or council members draw a random number to set the order in which nominations or ballots are considered. Supporters said the approach increases impartiality; others said it is unnecessary when nominations are disclosed before voting.
Several council members expressed differing views about transparency and process. Some said announcing interest in a position in study session increases public transparency; others said it can skew outcomes by giving candidates more time to lobby. The group agreed to revisit the topic at the council retreat for additional study-session time and to consider a formal motion if a majority supports a handbook amendment.
Separately, council debated whether to keep the round‑table study‑session format or return to dais seating. Staff proposed purchasing two square tables (estimated ~$700) to improve the room’s appearance for presenters; members were split between returning to a dais to preserve separation between brainstorming sessions and formal meetings and retaining round tables to encourage conversational study sessions. Council asked staff to bring additional logistics and accessibility information (public seating, recording capability) back to the retreat.
The council did not vote on any procedural change during the study session and directed staff to schedule further discussion at retreat and to provide staff recommendations and options for a handbook amendment if desired.
