Letter: Trust & Ethics In RPB Selection Process

For the residents who voted in our recent election, particularly those who voted against Richard Valuntas retaining his seat on the Royal Palm Beach Village Council, we are approaching a situation that often gives politics its vile reputation. Mr. Valuntas lost his seat in a fair election, but there is still a vacant seat created by Fred Pinto after his resignation from the council in order to qualify for his run as mayor. This vacancy will be filled by the three remaining council members, and one newly elected member. Coincidentally, the new member, Selena Smith, is the person who defeated Mr. Valuntas.

Three of the four members of the new council have been colleagues and friends with Mr. Valuntas for many years. It would be fair to call it “a good old boys network.” In spite of a failed re-election bid by Mr. Valuntas, the old members of the council may decide to make him a winner, after being a loser. If Mr. Valuntas had any integrity, he would respect the decision of the voters, and quietly withdraw himself as an applicant.

Although the appointment process should be transparent, one wonders about the chances for other legitimate and more qualified applicants, especially if the vetting process is only a formality to a foregone conclusion.

The reasonable solution to this dilemma to avoid any suspicion of back-room politics is to apply a rationale rating criteria for this selection that takes into serious consideration the qualifications of the applicant to serve the village well and puts the residents first. Let’s see how the new mayor and council will conduct themselves.

William Dubinsky, Royal Palm Beach

2 COMMENTS

  1. The people choose and if someone has been rejected by the people the a few, very few, council members should not over rule them. Let Valuntas come back and ask the people and run an election. Both Valuntas and Metula tried to back door their loses – and the council should not be complicit. Whatever you may think Webster has the guts to get out and go to the people – that name was not in the back door process. Congratulations to Jan Rodusky! and to Smith and Swift who supported her.

  2. So by this logic, should anyone who has lost a race in the village never seek to hold office again? This would include the likes of Councilwoman Smith (lost 2012) and Martha Webster (where to begin). The inability of some council members and residents to understand that there was a fair election for seat 3, is disappointing. What seat 4 was, quite simply, was an application process that was completely separate to that previous election. All indications on the Village’s website were that anyone who met certain criteria could apply. There were no conditions that an applicant could only be new to the council or never have lost an election. So why shouldn’t Mr Valuntas have applied? As it turns out, the council members went with Jan Rodusky anyway. So the process worked. But discouraging residents, who genuinely care about the village, from applying because they lost an election doesn’t really hold up well.

Comments are closed.