Candidate Evaluation Process

The Municipal League of King County is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to promote good government that is open, effective, and accountable. Since 1911, the League has provided nonpartisan evaluations of candidates in Seattle and King County to ensure the quality of elected officials and to help voters make informed choices at the polls.

The Municipal League is the only local organization that rates candidates without regard to political platform. We recognize our responsibility to both voters and candidates, and make every effort to operate this program as thoroughly and fairly as possible.

CRITERIA

Each candidate is rated according to four criteria:

• Involvement: What has the candidate done previously in family, neighborhood, community, volunteer work, employment or public life to suggest readiness to accomplish challenging objectives? How do these activities demonstrate readiness for the challenges unique to the office sought?
• Effectiveness: Has the candidate demonstrated promise to be productive in the office sought? Has the candidate shown the ability to work with other people?
• Character: Do the candidate's personal traits show the ability to take on the responsibilities of campaigning for and holding the public office she or he is seeking? Is the candidate a leader, participant or observer?  Is the candidate trustworthy, reliable and consistent?
• Knowledge: Has the candidate demonstrated the willingness and ability to learn and adapt? Does the candidate understand the duties and challenges of the office sought? Does the candidate have a firm grasp of the issues important to his or her constituency and their potential effects?

In evaluating incumbents, the Candidate Evaluation Committee considers established records of performance both in and out of office. Non-incumbents are rated for potential effectiveness based upon past performance on the job, in civic and/or volunteer activities, and in previous offices held, if applicable. Background and reference checks are made on all candidates.

RATINGS

Candidates receive one of five ratings: Outstanding, Very Good, Good, Adequate, and Not Qualified.

The ratings, based on the four criteria above, are a consensus of the Committee's findings and are approved by the League's Board of Trustees.

CANDIDATE EVALUATION COMMITTEE

Since 1911, the candidate evaluation program has operated on the premise that groups of informed citizens are able to put aside personal and political beliefs while evaluating candidates' abilities to serve in elected office.

Committee Makeup
The Candidate Evaluation Committee (CEC) is composed of geographically based subcommittees of concerned citizen volunteers who meet throughout the summer to research, interview, and rate King County candidates.

Volunteer evaluators are recruited via notices in local newspapers and mailings to groups and individuals from communities throughout King County. The Municipal League makes every attempt to draw from diverse populations, and to compose balanced committees of men and women of varied backgrounds, ages, ethnicities, occupations, and political affiliations.

Applicants for positions on the Candidate Evaluation Committee must be willing and able to examine candidates without prejudice, and must agree to refrain from publicly supporting any candidate eligible for League rating. Prospective volunteers complete applications, then undergo screening interviews which probe for issue bias, independent thought, ability to work within the committee process, and willingness to attend evening interviews throughout the summer. Inevitably, some qualified applicants must be denied positions on the committee in order to maintain a balance of demographic and political leanings.

Each evaluator signs an affirmation in which s/he pledges to be impartial, to avoid active support of any candidate eligible for rating, to advise the CEC Chair of any apparent conflict of interest, and to commit to attending committee interviews. Selected volunteers are assigned to one of the geographic subcommittees.

Evaluators are required to attend CEC training on relevant issues facing elected officials and on the CEC process itself. Process training focuses on candidate investigation procedures and the rules governing the interview process. The overriding rule: leave biases at the door.

THE EVALUATION PROCESS

Investigation
When a candidate files to run for office, s/he is sent a Municipal League questionnaire that solicits background information, campaign materials, personal and professional references, and, when applicable, history in office. Candidates may supply as much information as they wish. Upon receipt of the questionnaire, the League assigns the candidate to a committee member - a Candidate Investigator (CI) - who researches the candidate's background and contacts references provided by the candidate, then seeks out secondary references such as Municipal League members and other individuals who have knowledge of the candidate. The CI then presents to the committee a summary of confidential information regarding the candidate's involvement, effectiveness, character and knowledge.

Conflicts of Interest
Any CEC member or Board member having an actual or apparent conflict of interest regarding a specific candidate must recuse him or herself from consideration of that candidate, which entails leaving the room during the interview and not participating in any discussions or votes. Recusal applies both to the specific candidate and to any other candidate in the same race.

The Candidate Interview
A candidate interviews with the regional subcommittee assigned to his/her race. During the interview, committee members ask questions to assess the candidate's knowledge, involvement, character and effectiveness. A selection of core questions assures that all candidates are subject to similar queries. Following the interview, committee members have a brief, confidential discussion about the interview and the candidate, but do not discuss their anticipated rating. They then cast votes by confidential ballot.

Each candidate is considered on his/her merits, not in comparison with opponents.

Every year, some candidates prove either unable or unwilling to interview. The League endeavors to rate all candidates, regardless of whether or not they appear for an interview. The CI investigates the candidate as usual via questionnaire (if available), primary and secondary reference checks, media and Internet references, and history in office (if applicable). If a committee determines that it does not have sufficient information to render a fair rating, the League will issue a rating of "Insufficient Information".

Municipal League rules require that all incumbents be rated regardless of whether or not they appear for an interview.

It should be noted that the Municipal League strongly urges all candidates to participate in the Candidate Evaluation Committee process. However, the inability or unwillingness of any candidate to participate will not, in and of itself, have an adverse effect on that candidate's rating.

Board Involvement
League Board members must be trained in CEC process and attend full evenings of CEC interviews in order to vote at Final Review (see below). Board members must give CIs their input on candidates according to the four criteria, and must recuse themselves from discussion/ voting when there is an apparent conflict of interest. The Board member's role at committee meetings is to observe the process, not to engage in committee discussion or influence the ratings.

Final Review
To ensure balance and fairness, the CEC subcommittees meet in Committee Final Review to go over their ratings prior to submitting them to the Board. This is the first time that committee members see the aggregation of their individual ratings, and they use the opportunity to look for discrepancies and make appropriate adjustments. Committee Review proceedings follow specific rules to protect the integrity of the CEC process.

Following their Committee Review, each subcommittee meets with the Municipal League Board of Trustees to review the candidates and their recommended ratings. Again, the rules spell out in detail the process that must be followed. The final ratings, as published, are voted by the Board in these review sessions.

Financial sponsorship of The Municipal League of King County supports good government and does not imply endorsement of any candidate or slate of candidates.

Back to Candidate Evaluations home page