Document Actions
2011 Redmond City Council Candidate Ratings
Redmond Council Ratings
REDMOND CITY COUNCIL RATINGS
| Position |
Candidate |
Rating |
More Info |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Redmond City Council
Position No. 1
|
Hank Myers ~ |
Good |
|
|
Redmond City Council
Position No. 3
|
Hank Margeson ~
|
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Redmond City Council
Position No. 5
|
Tom Flynn |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Redmond City Council
Position No. 5 |
Joel Wright *
|
Adequate |
Questionnaire ; Website |
| Redmond City Council Position No. 7 |
David Carson ^ |
Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Redmond City Council
Position No. 7
|
Sue Stewart |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
About the Municipal League Ratings
The ratings are not endorsements. They assess each candidate's potential to be effective in office and ability to serve the community.
-
Outstanding – Has made numerous outstanding contributions requiring skills related to the office, is a path-finding and respected leader, brings knowledge and creativity to issues facing the office.
-
Very Good – Makes significant contributions, is a skilled builder of consensus, inspires confidence in the way he/she would serve, is thorough and attentive to issues.
-
Good – Has been active and effective in many roles, is capable of moving people to productive action, has strong record of participation in problem solving, shows satisfactory commitment to tackling issues.
-
Adequate – Has a record of participation and interest, is effective on specific issues, has provoked questions about suitability as an office holder, will need significant time/energy to fill gaps in knowledge.
-
Not Qualified – Doesn't appear engaged, has a record that casts doubt on ability to be productive, hasn't demonstrated ability to deal with responsibilities of office, has narrow focus, inflexible attitude or is otherwise troubling.
Symbol Key
~ Incumbent
# Declined to Interview
+ Unable to Interview
% Declined to Participate
^ Unable to Participate
* Unable to Contact
Outstanding – Has made numerous outstanding contributions requiring skills related to the office, is a path-finding and respected leader, brings knowledge and creativity to issues facing the office.
Very Good – Makes significant contributions, is a skilled builder of consensus, inspires confidence in the way he/she would serve, is thorough and attentive to issues.
Good – Has been active and effective in many roles, is capable of moving people to productive action, has strong record of participation in problem solving, shows satisfactory commitment to tackling issues.
Adequate – Has a record of participation and interest, is effective on specific issues, has provoked questions about suitability as an office holder, will need significant time/energy to fill gaps in knowledge.
Not Qualified – Doesn't appear engaged, has a record that casts doubt on ability to be productive, hasn't demonstrated ability to deal with responsibilities of office, has narrow focus, inflexible attitude or is otherwise troubling.
Symbol Key
# Declined to Interview
+ Unable to Interview
% Declined to Participate
^ Unable to Participate
* Unable to Contact
Watch the 2012 Civic Awards thanks to King County TV
