CNC Nominating Process: Tradition vs. Practice

(This is an opinion piece from Joanne Wallenstein) Some residents who follow Scarsdale Village affairs were surprised when the nominations for Village Trustee were announced last week. More surprising than who was nominated was who was not.

For the second year in a row, a Village Trustee who had served a first two-year term was not re-nominated to serve a second term. This year, Deb Pekarek, who appeared to have done a good job in her first two years, was not re-nominated for a second term. Deb was generally well liked, came well prepared to meetings, was diligent in her responsibilities as liaison to village committees and organizations and listened and responded to resident's concerns.

So why was she not re-nominated? The answer lies in the non-partisan process itself. In an explanation of the process on the Scarsdale Citizens' Non-Partisan Party website, it says, "By tradition, but not in the Resolution, is the practice of re-nominating a Village Trustee (but not the Mayor) who has served only one term, and to re-nominate the Village Justice (whose term is four years) regardless of the number of terms he or she has served."

Discussing the nominating committee's voting process the Non-Partisan Resolution says, "The election for each open office or position will be conducted separately, without reference to the name of the current occupant of an office or position, by separate successive vote for each open office or position until a person is selected for such office or position." The proceedings are run by representatives from the Scarsdale Forum and SNAP who are non-voting members and barred from expressing opinions on the candidates.

What does this language mean? Though there is a tradition to re-nominate standing trustees, there is no rule to guarantee it. Nowhere in the resolution or in the voting process is a standing trustee given preference. Even in voting for trustees, the names of all possible candidates are included on the ballot, and the committee votes without regard to who was formerly a trustee. There is no process by which an existing trustee is favored over a new candidate.

In recent years it has become hard to find candidates to run for the Citizen's Nominating Committee itself. These nominators are selected in contested elections and its tough to find people willing to place their names on the ballot for a general election. The Procedure Committee has to cast a wide net to find nominators and often begs people to run. Perhaps some who served on the nominating committee this year are not aware of some of the issues before the Village Board or how the trustees conducted themselves?

In the past it has also been difficult to find qualified candidates willing to take on the job of Village Trustee. It is a time consuming and complex job that is performed for free. So in the absence of new nominees it became the expectation that, barring malfeasance, a standing trustee who had served two years would be nominated to serve another two.

But apparently this year was different. The committee recruited several worthy candidates with good professional backgrounds and a history of service to the Village who were willing to throw their names into the hat. It appears that the CNC did their job, almost too well this year, and were able to attract some outstanding candidates who may have impressed the committee at their interviews. Their credentials were weighed against the existing trustees who were up for re-nomination.

What goes on in the deliberation process is confidential, so only the committee members know what went into their decisions. But we all can see the outcome.

The nominators evaluated their options, cast their votes and selected those who they found most fit for the job.

It's unfortunate that Pekarek, who did a good job for her first term, will be denied a second term. But on the other hand, the process worked as it was intended to, and the Village has two new trustees at their service.

Rather than viewing the vote as a miscarriage of justice, perhaps we should all express our gratitude to Deb Pekarek for two good years of service and accept the will of the committee that was in put in place through a fair process. Some fear that the committee's failure to re-nominate a standing trustee will deter others from running in the future—but that's an issue we will all have to face down the line.

For now we should be thankful that qualified residents have stepped up to deal with important issues before the Village, such as an expensive overhaul to the library, the need for historic preservation laws and consideration of thorny land use issues. There's work to be done, and fortunately we have qualified people to do it.