Looks like they may have edited the website. Now there's a line at the bottom that says applications will only be posted after the deadline has passed.
"Copies of applications will be posted to this page in the order received after the application period has closed at 5:00 p.m. on January 18."

TBH, by choosing to go the appointment route, instead of the special election, the City Council has put potential JOB APPLICANTS (at least those with a conscience) in an awkward position. They KNOW that they will have the UNEARNED benefits of incumbency in 2024. Under the circumstances, the honorable action for the selected JOB APPLICANT to take would be to refuse to run for re-election in 2024. And THAT kind of sucks for a good person who wants to serve. That's kind of like a "don't let the door hit you on the way out", isn't it? Thank you for your service!

On the other hand, a candidate with less of a conscience would have no trouble seeking the seat, and then running for re-election in 2024.

Maybe the lack of candidates, er, JOB APPLICANTS, represents the high moral standards of so many in our community? Wouldn't that be lovely?

I won't hide it: I remain outraged that the Council collectively decided that stripping the right of residents to choose who represents us on the Council was reasonable in order to save $2.1 million (for more important "needs" of the community).

Here's a link that summarizes the Jan 5 meeting where this outrageous decision was made, and various comments made by the community:

"Mountain View City Council to appoint a new council member, rather than conduct a special election" - Web Link

They should ask Li Zhang to apply and appoint her.

Just an Observation,

Well, I guess I might as well submit an application.

Given I have 2 business degrees and that my goal is to make sure ALL state and city laws and regulations are complied with for the sole benefit of City Residents. Out of City people simply must not be accommodated by our city council

They require a form 700 financial disclosure to apply. I don't think this is a legal requirement as it is not required to be a candidate, only must be submitted after being elected. This should not be a factor in the selection process. Also, why the requirement for a resume? This is also not a requirement for being a candidate in a regular election.

Just an Observation,

I have no problem with form 700, because I am free of any conflicts of interest. My form will be empty.

@Leslie This seems like a disingenuous attack. I doubt very much the fact that the seat would be appointed is discouraging anyone from applying. And it seems odd to just decide that anyone who disagrees with you and does not have an issue with an appointed position and running later "has no conscience". Saving $2.1 million is a perfectly reasonable consideration. You are free to disagree, but it does not say anything bad about someone applying.

@Greg - Because George Santos

@Scott. AThen why don’t candidates in a regular election have to submit form 700?

I truly believe the council is overstepping their authority in this case. The city clerk even said, “The council opted to require form 700”. They did not state ,”California law requires”.

This is something the Voice staff should look into.

We are living in a time when many Americans are concerned that we are losing democracy. Web Link

I became a fan of Bernie Sanders when he tried to make noise about the TRUTH that many/most politicians these days use their powers to serve their campaign donors (that is, wealthy elites) rather than “we the people”. He asked Janet Yellen, “In your judgment, given the enormous power held by the billionaire class and their political representatives, are we still a capitalist democracy or have we gone over to an oligarchic form of society in which incredible enormous economic and political power now rests with the billionaire class?” She evaded the question by answering that she preferred not to use labels. Web Link

I believe that unfair and unexplainable RHNA density requirements are being imposed on MV because of Google's relationship with the Democratic Party at the State and Federal level. It's an example of the billionaire class and politicians working to help each other. It is OLIGARCHY, not DEMOCRACY.

The elephant in the room is that there are now two different and competing constituencies in MV. Is the City Council supposed to do what is best for the community as a whole, or what is best for Google?

As concerned citizens, we can either remain silent or speak up and speak out. If we remain silent, we will only have ourselves to blame when corporations become our rulers more formally. Hint: our “quality of life” will not be their top priority.

The right to vote for our political leaders is a fundamental RIGHT under a democracy. Denying that right is not a matter that should be taken lightly, it casts doubt on the legitimacy of the new “incumbent”.

What would $2.1 million be better spent on? A pedestrian mall? Seriously? Is democracy honestly worth so little these days?

Just an Observation,

Here is my application for the City Council Position

Web Link

Web Link

Web Link

I will email this with my resume at about 1245 today