Help wanted: City Council candidates who’ll finish the job

Over the past several years, the City Council of Commerce City sometimes has resembled a game of musical chairs. Council members have come and gone all too often, resigning and being replaced by council appointees. Blink, and you’d miss it.

And at least a couple of times, a council replacement actually was chosen by a coin toss after the council had deadlocked on filling a vacancy. Yes, a coin toss.

It’s not exactly what you think of when you hear the word, “leadership.”

One big problem with high turnover is it takes time to learn the job. Rookies have to find their way around City Hall and pick up on all the details of policy making. Many never have held elected office before. Too many rookies means fewer council veterans who know the ropes.

Another problem with high turnover is it leads to inconsistent policy. Newcomers aren’t necessarily committed to the policy initiatives of previous councils — or even understand them.

There’s also the problem of appointees who might not reflect the priorities of the voting public — because of course they weren’t picked by the public. They were picked by the council to fill the vacancy. 

And then there’s the coin toss. How much thought can possibly go into the selection of a council member chosen by chance? This is someone who will be helping enact laws and making other important decisions for the city. It has happened at least twice in the past five years.

In 2018, after Paolo Diaz resigned from the council, Steve Davis was chosen over Charles Dukes by coin toss to represent Ward IV when council members were unable to settle on Diaz’ successor through a vote. Davis lost his bid to retain the Ward IV seat the following year.

Just last October, current council member Craig Kim was selected by another council coin toss to represent an at-large seat following the resignation of Meghan Grimes.

It is always cause for concern when there are unelected council members who took their seats by council appointment — whether council members voted on it or tossed a coin. It’s not clear whom they really represent — the public, or just their fellow council members who appointed them.

Two of the nine members in the current council lineup — Kim and Renée Chacon — were appointed by the council to fill vacancies. Their seats are up for election this fall. Neither so far has formally filed to run for election to their seats on the fall ballot.

Is it too much to ask that council candidates show enough of a commitment to their office and their community to serve out their entire term?