LANGLEY — Faced with a choice of bad timing in August, or bad timing in November, the Langley City Council has decided to grease the skids for an earlier election on whether the city should change its form of government.

A citizen-led petition drive to force a vote that would do away with the position of an elected mayor and have city hall run instead by a city manager was officially approved for the November General Election ballot early last week by the Island County Auditor’s Office.

Faced with the prospect that Langley would have precious little time at the end of this year to set up a city manager-form of government, the city council unanimously approved a move Monday night to send the proposition to voters in August instead.

Council members said the whole question of changing Langley’s government from the “strong mayor form” — the one that’s been in place since the city got its start in 1913 — to the council-manager form was ill-timed. They also said it would create confusion in the minds of voters, since candidates for mayor will also be on the ballot in the November election.

Several on the council said they didn’t like the idea at its core, but acknowledged it was better to have the contentious issue resolved sooner rather than later.

“I personally don’t see the need for changing the form of government,” said Councilman Bob Waterman.

“I think the timing is just terrible,” he said.

“I’m very sad that they have done this to our community,” Councilwoman Rene Neff said, referring to those who had circulated petitions on the proposal.

Even so, she said the “horrible tension” in town would be lessened by having a vote in August instead of November.

Waiting until a November vote would also cause problems inside city hall, no matter what voters decide.

“We’d have to build two separate budgets,” said City Treasurer Debbie Mahler, due to the current timing of the ballot proposition.

To be able to adopt a finished budget by the end of the year, Mahler said Langley would need one budget that paid for a city manager — which may carry a price tag topping more than $100,000 for salary and benefits — and one with the more modest set-up the city currently uses, a model with a full-time elected mayor who is paid roughly $53,000 plus benefits.

Councilman Hal Seligson said the city would have more time to prepare for a changeover if the decision were made during the Primary Election in August. That would include not only recruiting and hiring a city manager to oversee the day-to-day operations of city hall, but also the work that would be needed to revise the city code to reflect the change in Langley’s system of governance.

Throughout the meeting, Langley residents said the change was unneeded and unwanted.

“It isn’t broken and I don’t get why we are trying to fix it,” said Kay Lagerquist.

Tiny Tillman said the change would take away the power of the people and put it in the hands of three council members.

“It just gives too much power to too few,” she said.

Sharon Lundahl, owner of the downtown business Music for the Eyes, said she was circulating a letter around town that people could sign to support the present mayor-council form of government.

The letter outlined the downsides of the change, from less accountability, fewer checks and balances, the higher cost and the difficulty to change back if voters have buyer’s remorse.

Under state law, the letter notes, the city won’t be able to have another vote on changing the city’s model of government for six years.

The push for a change in city government was launched by a clandestine group of Langley residents late last month, including many Edgecliff residents who were angry over the city council’s approval of Langley Passage, a controversial 20-home development in their neighborhood.

Island County Auditor Sheilah Crider certified the petition drive on May 9, and said the election would be held because more than 10 percent of registered voters in town had signed the petition. A total of 77 signatures were submitted, and 72 were ruled valid.

The petitioners included Councilman Robert Gilman, the only council member to sign the petition.

At Monday’s council meeting, some questioned Gilman’s motives in wanting to change the form of Langley’s government. Many have noted that without an elected mayor, the power of the council would expand.

Langley resident David Gignac questioned why Gilman had supported making the Langley mayor’s position full-time, but now wanted to do away with the job.

“What changed for you?” Gignac asked.

Gilman said he wanted someone running city hall who had the professional training, experience and networks to do the job.

That could be done with either a city administrator under the present system, or with a manager under the proposed set-up, he said.

“I’m frankly more interested in being able to get the benefit of that level of training than I am in a specific form,” Gilman said.

Gilman made it clear, however, that he no longer supported a full-time salary for the mayor of Langley — a proposal that he personally spearheaded more than two years ago.

“We just don’t have the budget to pay both a full-time mayor and a professionally trained city administrator,” Gilman said.

“I certainly get that that’s an unpopular idea,” he said, but added his view of city government had changed over the past two years.

“For me, it’s all part of the same trajectory of realizing how complicated and challenging city government has become,” he said.

Gilman said the idea at first was to pick someone locally who “really clearly cares and let them really work on it.” Samuelson fit that bill.

The problems are deep enough now, Gilman said, that someone with a broader view is needed.

“It’s not about personalities,” he added.

Neff, however, quickly recalled a prior conversation with Gilman, one where he complained that the council did not have enough power to control city staff.

“But Robert, one time you told me that you thought the problem with the mayor form of government was the mayor got too close to the staff. And it was hard for the council to affect the staff. You felt that the mayor protected the staff. And that we didn’t have as much control over the staff,” Neff said.

“That’s why you are supporting this,” she said.

“It does relate to staff, in terms of why I’m supporting this,” Gilman admitted.

Someone who comes from the community is not as well-equipped to judge staff performance, he said, and an outsider would be better.

Many said that just wasn’t so.

“I think our current mayor is quite capable and experienced,” Gignac said, adding that the council must have believed Samuelson was capable because council members increased his salary.

Councilwoman Fran Abel said Gilman was wrong to think that just because someone had training that they would be a better manager.

“It’s a false assumption,” she said.

“We all know we’ve had bad principals of high schools, and bad administrators at the colleges. It’s an assumption that you’re making that I don’t hold to be true,” Abel said.

“The mayor comes from within us,” Neff added. “And an administrator, a city manager, comes from outside. That person doesn’t know the community.”

She said Gilman was making the job of running Langley seem more complex than it really is.

“In a big city like Seattle, that’s a different kind of thing. This is a little tiny town,” Neff said. “It’s not that complicated. It just isn’t.”

The Langley council is expected to vote on a resolution that would call for an August vote during its next meeting on May 23. Council members asked city attorney Grant Weed to prepare the resolution, as well as write the language for the ballot and other necessities, within the next week.

The city is also looking for residents who will volunteer to write “pro” and “con” statements for the voter’s guide, and will vote to select members for those committees at the council meeting next week.

Potential volunteers can submit a letter of interest to city hall.