Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Council Vacancy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Motion to hold election to fill Juno Beach council vacancy fails 2-2; council to revisit Dec. 17
Summary
A motion to place the vacant council seat on the municipal election failed on a 2-2 vote (Mayor Wheeler and Vice Mayor Pro Tem Costa opposed); the council directed staff to collect election-cost estimates and to place nominations/appointment paperwork on the Dec. 17 agenda.
Juno Beach — The town council failed on Friday to approve a plan to fill the recently vacated council seat by holding the regular municipal election, leaving the vacancy for the near term and sending the matter back to staff for more information.
At the start of agenda item 2, town staff reminded the council of the charter options: appointment to serve until the next general election or leaving the seat vacant until that election. Staff warned that an extended appointment can hamper council operations and noted the charter's procedures for filling a vacancy.
Council member Diana moved to place the vacancy on the municipal ballot (March 11) with a second from Council member David. During roll call the mayor recorded votes as Mayor Wheeler — Nay; Vice Mayor Halperin — Aye; Vice Mayor Pro Tem Costa — Nay; and Council member Davis — Aye. The motion failed on a 2-2 tally. The failure removes the option of automatically placing the seat on the regular municipal ballot at this time.
Supporters of holding an election framed the issue as a democratic one. "You can't put a price on democracy," one council member said, arguing that opening the seat to voters preserves public choice. Opponents pointed to cost and timing: staff cited previous election costs (roughly $17,000 in prior cycles) and estimated advertising and special-election expenses in the $20,000–$50,000 range depending on scheduling. Staff indicated the supervisor of elections is willing to work with the town but cannot commit scheduling details until the council provides direction.
After the failed motion, council members asked staff to gather firm pricing and timeline information from the supervisor of elections and to add a Dec. 17 agenda item to allow nominations for appointment if the council chooses that route. Staff also confirmed that any candidate under consideration for appointment must submit the required affidavit of residency and Form 1 financial filings prior to being considered.
With the vote split, the council agreed to revisit the matter on Dec. 17 and to solicit candidate documentation for possible nomination and appointment, recognizing the alternative — leaving the council with four seated members for the coming months — could produce further stalemates on key votes.
