By Thomas Warren III, Editor-in-Chief

On May 1, there will be 16 candidates on the ballot hoping to earn your vote for a seat on the Amarillo City Council. And while we know what the incumbents represent — namely, higher taxes and bigger government — some voters may be unsure about the challengers. After all, they are different races, but are they better? That is a question that is worth exploring.

Personally, I have voted for candidates, both young and old, that I have believed to be best qualified and most in-line with my values in every election. However, in a city election it gets tougher to discern who those candidates might be for you. After all, we essentially get about a month and half to research the candidates once the campaign gears up, then we have to make a choice about where our city goes for the next two years.

While I understand some voters might be so ready for change that they would be willing to vote for a turtle if its name wasn’t Ginger Nelson, I do think voters need to look beyond just the names and the faces on the yard signs to understand the values and the experiences of the candidates to understand if the candidates are truly qualified to lead this community.

There are a few candidates on the ballot this year who, in the eyes of this writer, have no business being anywhere near the City Council dais at City Hall. Part of what got us into the problems we have experienced over the past four years was voters casting ballots for candidates out of touch with taxpayers’ needs and concerns simply because they had the nice, glossy flyers.

I would caution voters to be very careful about that this year. After all, it would be a shame to trade in one Ginger Nelson for another simply because there was a new face on the yard signs.

One of the big things I believe voters must consider is whether the candidates are in-line with the concerns of voters on key issues. Will the candidates work to deliver cuts to wasteful spending, such as taxpayer-funded lobbying? Will the candidates work toward single-member districts and moving our election dates? Or, will the candidates simply be a change in faces that results in more of what we have already experienced over the past four years.

This year, voters must be sure the candidates they elect don’t need on-the-job leadership or business training. Likewise, voters need to ensure their candidates won’t immediately reach for the cookie jar when the taxpayers’ backs are turned.

Personally, I believe certain candidates like mayoral candidate Michael Hunt and businessman Tom Scherlen to be more than qualified to lead our city, based on their backgrounds and experiences. Both men understand leadership, business, and team building. Both men wouldn’t shut down once they were elected, but would understand exactly the direction Amarillo needs to go to deliver the changes needed by our communities.

In my opinion, Michael Hunt and Tom Scherlen would be welcome additions to the City Council.

Meanwhile, some candidates would be disastrous copies of what Amarillo already has, only with a different name and face.

We need change, but the change we need is experienced, qualified change. We don’t need candidates who will take Amarillo further down the road of government mismanagement, or who will require two years of on-the-job training in order to vote on an ordinance without violating Open Meetings Act rules.

As mentioned above, I believe Hunt and Scherlen to be more than qualified to lead this city and would be great replacements for the incumbents who currently hold the seats they are seeking. And there are a number of other candidates who look to be on the right track, as well.

But, once again, I will caution voters to be careful; not all change is created equal. After all, Amarillo Matters and Ginger Nelson were both agents of change in 2017, and you see where that got us.