In November, Lynnwood voters will be the final judge: Should the city switch to a city-manager form of government or keep the post of elected full-time mayor?
Even the City Council wasn’t unanimous on the issue, wit
h two members, Ted Hikel and Mark Smith, during a City Council meeting this week, voting against putting the question to voters.
And one member who favored a vote, Kimberly Cole, said she hasn’t decided how she will vote on the ballot measure.
The choice comes down to how to select the city’s chief administrator.
In Washington, under a mayor-council form of government, which Lynnwood has now, the mayor is elected by voters to manage the city full time, while the part-time council’s role is legislative. Under the city-manager form of government, the council hires an executive to run the city. (Typically, cities with hired managers also have an elected or council-appointed mayor who serves as a leader of the council.)
The issue arose last October when a citizen’s group, People for a Better Lynnwood, first proposed switching from a mayor-council form of government to a council-manager form.
In November, Councilman Jim Smith proposed it as well.
But with the city in a multimillion-dollar budget crisis, the council decided to delay the topic until the budget problem was resolved, Cole said.
With petitions again circulating to put the issue to a public vote, the council voted 5-2 on Monday to put the measure on the ballot.
The cost of the election to the city depends on how many other items are on the ballot. A November general election is the most cost-efficient way to allow voters to decide, Cole said, while a primary election would cost more.
Even putting it on the November ballot could cost at least $16,000, Hikel said. “This is tax money we’re talking about.”
Hikel has other concerns, too, calling the move “a rush to judgment.” The council has until August to choose November ballot measures, he said.
He said that some of those backing the change were the same people who originally backed a recall of Mayor Don Gough.
“When they couldn’t do that, it was, ‘Well, let’s change the form of government,’” Hikel said.
Gough could not be reached for comment.
The mayor has been embroiled in controversies over the budget that forced the city to raise a number of taxes and fees.
And in August, five female employees signed a letter saying that Gough subjected them to “hostile and harassment-based working environments.”
A consultant’s report recently concluded that while Gough had a stormy relationship with one of those employees, Emily Yim, his former director of Neighborhoods and Community Affairs, overall his actions did not constitute vindictive behavior.
Hikel said the city could end up having to pay a city manager a salary of $150,000 plus benefits, while Gough is paid $97,000.
Both the council-manager and mayor-council forms of government have their good and bad points, he said. “I believe the people in the city need to have a discussion about those points before they decide whether to change.”
Cole said that having a city manager would enable the search for someone to run the city to extend beyond the city limits. Mayoral and City Council candidates must live within the city’s boundaries.
“I think a professional city manger could serve the voters well,” she said. “But I also think there are benefits for someone being local and voters having a say in who that person is.
“I think it’s a good question for voters.”
Sharon Salyer: 425-339-3486 or salyer@heraldnet.com
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
