Candidates, councilors and their supporters chafed during the Park City election season at suggestions they’d teamed up or otherwise formed into two distinct factions. So we’ll go to simple observation here: No candidates, councilors or their supporters at the Election Night parties along Ma in Street at Alpine Distillery for Diego Zegarra or Red Banjo for Tana Toly and Ryan Dickey went to the Election Night party at Flanagan’s for Jeremy Rubell and Jack Rubin. And vice versa. Well, except for me. I went to all of them, easy walks of one another, enjoyed everyone I met at each, and continue to think the world of all who are serving, who ran and won, and who ran and lost this time or quit the race early. This is wholly irrespective of what anyone at any of these functions thinks of me. I’m with Anthony Hopkins here: “My philosophy is it’s none of my business what people say of me and think of me.” Others have said this. The Rev. Terri Cole-Whittaker made it the title of one of her books. I didn’t mind the spouse that night who yelled at me over a letter to the editor, the lady who trained her smart phone spotlight on me while recording a conversation I was having, the consultant who wanted to argue arcane points of advisory committee minutes a decade or so old. That’s just part of the job, and I tend to find these conversations invigorating anyway. They also are essential, and not only for me, editor of the local paper. I think the world of these public servants and this set of candidates for public service. But I don’t agree with them spending the evening in their own corners (though OK, I’ll concede a half-point for a congratulatory text or phone call). I’ll go so far as to declare this a problem for Park City at a time when we need all hands on deck, together, regardless of whether they agree with or like each other as I like them. I bring this up now because the City Council is about to appoint a new member to fill Ryan Dickey’s council seat as he becomes mayor. One cohort, clique, bloc, side, team, faction swept the election, if you look at it this way, and the fact is inescapable however much they themselves may protest, and they have. But you could tell by who showed up at whose campaign events, who shared resources and consultants, what they said or didn’t say about each other. This was beyond obvious well before snubbing each other on Election Night. It’s understandable and in line with our human nature even though the, dare I say, platonic ideal of nonpartisan office works against the concept of teaming up or campaigning that may punch below the belt. Some councilors remain unaffiliated for this very reason, and others might surprise you with how they are registered to vote in blue-red contests. Just don’t expect partisans to steer clear, leopards simply being what they are. I made a couple of early guesses last summer about who would be appointed, depending on outcomes, being cynical and observing the decidedly team nature of this election. It was more than I usually see at the small-town level, which tends more toward herds of cats. As more the lone, if amiable, wolf in such things, I personally favor independence paired with a trait that would inspire someone to go to all the Election Night parties on Main Street, say. Someone who brings something a board or council doesn’t already have — an expertise, particular experience, a less-heard constituency, different thinking, maybe in this case the ability to bridge gaps between positions and factions, a wry sense of humor if nothing else. An appointment should be like a sports draft. What does the council most need? Who among the applicants would best fit that need? The council will deliberate entirely out loud in public, with no access to a closed session, which surely will bring some discomfort and delicacy in word choices, along with perhaps more insight into the councilors’ thinking than we ordinarily get. I believe the just-right choice should be unanimous, though I’m cynical enough to confess I would be very surprised. Very happily surprised, actually. Still, the council should work hard to get there for the community’s sake, if not one team or the other’s, even as I’m pooh-poohed for noting Election Night’s estrangement. In short, who can they best trust collectively to listen, do their homework, ask the tough questions, work well with everyone, and vote wisely? Do the councilors recognize this? We’ll have a pretty good clue if they choose their appointee together as one team. Don Rogers is the editor and publisher of The Park Record. He can be reached at [email protected] or (970) 376-0745. The post Journalism Matters: Maybe Park City needs a relationship councilor appeared first on Park Record. ...read more read less