Mayoral candidates draw contrasts at forum

WASHINGTON — A forum hosted by the Washington Chamber of Commerce Tuesday night for four mayoral candidates saw the campaigners outline their views, answer audience questions and work to distinguish their platforms from one another’s.

The event offered a final chance for the candidates to reach constituents en masse ahead of a special election on April 30, when voters will choose the successor to Jaron Rosien, who recently resigned in the middle of a term that extends through 2025.

Those stakes were not lost on anyone in the room.

“It’s my extreme honor to be here today, to be a bridge between our candidates and the community, and provide an opportunity to learn more about these individuals,” Moderator and Chamber Director Michelle Redlinger said at the start of the night. “On behalf of our members, our board, I thank you guys for taking time out of your evening and joining us tonight.”

While most questions from the chamber revealed common major themes among the platforms, those running for the office showed stark differences in the details of their answers.

Contenders agree on issues, but differ on how to solve them

In opening remarks about their goals for the city, everyone on stage Tuesday night said they wanted to see Washington focus on infrastructure, business development, and open communication between the city and its residents.

Washington’s mayor is rarely a final decision-maker, voting only in the rare case of a tie among council members. Most of the executive official’s power comes instead from informal conversations, running meetings, engaging with the public, vetoing motions, and shaping the agenda.

Some questions about exactly how they’d wield the position to accomplish their goals proved vexing for the candidates.

Ivan Rangel paused in thought for over 15 seconds before replying to a question about what Washington’s next mayor could do to encourage economic development, something the small business owner has emphasized in his platform.

“You could meet with local developers and contractors, and I know the city owns acres of land … and get together and brainstorm what kinds of ideas they have,” he said. “I’m pretty open to work with, and I would make myself available.”

Several of those on the ballot have emphasized the strength of their convictions as they run for the office of mayor. Rob Meyer cited Bible verses at least three times throughout the evening, and Elaine Moore spoke on her enthusiasm advocating for underserved children and animals.

Each person said they wanted to serve as a “voice for the people,” however, in response to a question about how they’d represent the whole community, including those with opposing views and agendas.

  Buy Photo

Millie Youngquist, meanwhile, offered a reality check to her opponents’ answers.

“I agree with what has been said, we need to gather the voices of our community together,” she said. “That is a difficult thing. It has not necessarily happened in the past, it is an idyllic situation … unfortunately, not everyone can be happy all the time. But I do think it’s important to be open to citizens, and I have been answering their questions, trying to come up with a solution.”

On another question about how candidates would solve a hypothetical dispute between neighbors over a fence or barking dog, differences were more evident.

Youngquist and Rangel said they’d try to sit down with the parties to hash things out themselves before bringing the problem to the city. Moore said she’d try something similar, but stick more strictly to municipal guidelines in the process.

“We have codes and we have ordinances, and as far as the fence is concerned, as long as our codes and our ordinances were followed, then that fence is approved,” she said. “If there’s something that we need to look at further down the road, then we can look at that. But once it passes our protocol of getting it inspected by our codes, then there’s nothing we can do about it.”

Meyer, meanwhile, took a different tack in his response.

“I would not advise those two individuals to talk to each other, because obviously there’s a reason they could not come to an agreement in the first place,” he said. “I would go through all the channels, or all of the resources that are available to me to try to redirect that kind of a conflict, whether it be to the police chief, or the ordinances … I would try to attack it from the standpoint of ‘how can we resolve this?’”

Candidates play to their strengths

Despite their similar goals for the city, all four names on the Washington Area Performing Arts and Events Center stage Tuesday night made distinct appeals to voters.

Rangel played up his status as — in his words — the “young buck” of the group, saying his business connections and relative youth, at 37 years old, would offer a perspective otherwise missing from municipal leadership.

“I’m young, full of energy, a local business owner,” he said. “I think that’ll give me an edge over the other candidates, and I’m open to new ideas, wanting to (get) everyone’s input into the community, what their wants are for the community.”

Meyer, while lacking any history of public office, pitched himself as a “natural-born leader,” who could learn on the job.

“I have integrity, drive, determination, a strong willpower, a mindset to work toward the best outcome,” he said. “I want to see how I can grow, better the community for myself, for my family, for you guys … and it’s not just typical leadership, it’s servant leadership; getting your feet wet and your hands dirty, getting involved.”

  Buy Photo

Youngquist, meanwhile, made note of her extensive experience and said she was a “big picture” person.

The candidate mentioned twice her time as Washington’s mayor pro tem over the last year, as well as her lengthy stint as an at-large city council member. She flexed her know-how at a few points, correcting other contenders on factual errors about the mayoral office.

“I’ve got the experience, I’ve done the work,” she said. “I know the job, and I would just ask for your vote to continue with the work that I’ve done … You can’t learn it from a book, you have to have experience doing things, leading a meeting, it’s very difficult.”

Moore offered a similar appeal to voters, pouncing on a question about the candidates’ familiarity with Robert’s Rules of Order with a list of her other leadership positions in the community, like as president of the Kiwanis AM'ers, Treasurer of the Washington County Enrichment Foundation and a board member of PAWS & More.

Combined with her career in banking and service as a current council member, she said she considered herself the most well-rounded candidate on the ballot.

"In banking, as well as the office of mayor, you’re dealing with people from all sorts of socioeconomic backgrounds,“ she said. ”You learn to listen well, evaluate the situation and move forward … as an operations officer, I was given a budget. I was expected to keep my spending within my means of the department. At budget time, I was expected to gather the information on the needs.“

Recent council themes strike a nerve

One submitted question asked about a recent trend of council policies prompted by individual concerns, rather than broader problems for the public.

It’s a complaint residents have made about several issues since Youngquist entered the temporary mayor’s office, including a policy barring out-of-town speakers from the council’s regular public comment period, and a recently stalled effort to regulate trailers parked on residential properties.

Similar concerns were raised about a decision to close a road behind City Hall and to enact public record request fees last year.

While Youngquist has been at the city’s helm for all the policies listed above, she said she tried to avoid such individualized policymaking approaches.

“In general, I feel that rules and ordinances and procedures should be addressed for the overall people, you can’t, like, make little special rules for this and for that, it has to be something that can be applied fairly in all situations,” she said. “We have to think about what could be the consequences if we make an ordinance, what could happen in other situations.”

Meyer criticized the current council’s rhetoric, however.

He said his opponents, all of whom currently serve on the municipal decision-making body, were too quick to isolate individuals as problematic actors.

“One thing that I would probably encourage in a large way, is presentation of the council,” he said. “I’ve been to a couple council meetings, and I’ve heard this verbiage: ‘We’re dealing with you-know-who.’ I don’t feel that that term or those words should be stated from the council platform … It should be about the ‘you-know-what.’ It should be about the circumstances that are being dealt with. Yes, there’s an individual attached to the circumstance, but we don’t need to address the you-know-who.”

  Buy Photo

Rangel’s response offered a contrast. The council member voted in favor of the above-mentioned rule change for public comments, in an effort to cut off criticism from Mike Murphy, a farmer and outspoken critic of the council who lives and works just beyond city limits.

At Tuesday night’s forum, he said he regretted that vote, and pledged to avoid such sweeping tactics in the future.

“I wish I could go back and vote no, instead of yes, because we just basically silenced a community member,” he said. “I think that we shouldn’t make ordinances or motions or anything just to single out an individual. I think, as a council, I believe we failed in doing that.”

Moore disagreed, saying sweeping solutions to isolated problems weren’t common for the city. She later added that she stood by her vote in favor of the new public comment rule.

“The person can still ask to do a special presentation, and be placed on the agenda,” she said. “We did not end their voice, they can still ask to be put on the agenda.”

Some questions remain unanswered

Of the dozens of questions submitted by the public and hashed out by chamber volunteers Tuesday night, many were consolidated into one ask, or dropped due to time constraints. Others were deemed inappropriate for the nonpartisan forum, or were set aside as targeted critiques of specific candidates, according to Redlinger.

The list of handwritten audience submissions included questions about Moore’s knowledge of the court case against recently-resigned Mayor Rosien, and another about the candidates’ thoughts on “separation of church and state,“ likely directed at Meyer, who’s said he’d use the Bible to guide his decisions in office.

A third card, submitted seconds before the audience question period began, asked about the candidates’ thoughts on the national partisan divide between Democrats and Republicans, an issue Redlinger said went beyond the scope of a city’s mayor.

With less than a week before the April 30 election, those unresolved questions remain pressing for some voters.

Also on many minds is the matter of what happens next. Privately, some community members and even city officials say they’re worried about animosity between council members if one of them wins over the others.

  Buy Photo

Every candidate, however, pledged to support whoever wins the plurality of votes on April 30.

“I do believe we have good candidates here with good background,” Moore said. “I believe that my business background gives me a good ability to work through some of the processes that need worked on … and if I don’t do it as mayor, I will continue to do it as a council member.”

Rangel and Meyer both said they expected to run again, in a future regular election, if they lost their current bid for the mayor’s gavel.

"You’ve all seen my signs around town, and they’re not dated,“ Meyer said. ”Should I not be elected, I plan to run again in the next election in 2025.“

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com