That is how much a special election would cost to fill Hill’s seat after he was elected to the state Assembly.

Instead of a special election, it looks as if the remainder of the board is interested in moving forward with an appointment process that would include public interviews. Being that the county and all other municipalities are suffering from increased expenses and decreasing revenue, it makes sense that the board would be interested in making an appointment and saving the cost of such an election. But Hill’s seat does not expire until 2010, and whoever is appointed will have just under two years in office before facing an election — all but ensuring a victory in 2010.

While the appointment interviews will be conducted in public, the presentations and public comment period will be brief. Candidates are allowed a 15-minute presentation followed by 10 minutes of public testimony.

Some could contend there would be more applicants since candidates would be spared the cost of a countywide election, but there is little chance for a large-scale discussion of the issues the county is currently facing. The county’s budget and overall economic situation is one item that should be discussed in the course of an election in addition to the current jail population and facilities, the way that the county Medical Center is financed, health care for the indigent and a host of other social issues that not only run the gamut but need sharp inspection and focus. And such issues cannot be fully addressed and explored deeply in less than a half hour. Certainly, a few months to campaign in front of the public eye would not only enliven debate on these and other issues, but carry the possibility of opening up new  schools of thought. With the county experiencing a state of transition and budget difficulties, a renewal of ideas can only foster better overall governance.

There is an issue of cost — particularly when the county is facing budget trouble. But considering the county’s budget is approximately $1.8 billion, the special election would only cost one-tenth of 1 percent of the total budget. That is a cost the county can afford to absorb. In addition, there may be a chance the state will call a June special election and the county cost would dramatically decrease. In the meantime, the board can function just fine with four members. If that is a concern, the board can move forward in the interview process and appoint someone who promises not to run in the next countywide election — sparing the cost of a special election.

It has been more than 10 years since the county has had a seriously contested election for the Board of Supervisors. In 1998, the board selected Rose Jacobs Gibson to complete the last two years of the term of Ruben Barrales when he was appointed as deputy assistant to the president and director of Intergovermental Affairs in the White House by President George W. Bush. In 2004, Adrienne Tissier filled outgoing supervisor Mike Nevin’s seat without opposition. In subsequent years, board races only face token opposition. Some may argue that is a result of the fact that supervisors, while they represent a certain district and must live in that district, are elected by the entire county. That means anyone running for a seat must raise substantial money to compete with an incumbent. In recent years, a race without an incumbent has been rare. Until supervisorial races are district-wide and not county-wide, that will surely not change.

Today, the county faces a true opportunity to have a dialogue about the role of the county’s largest governing board, the issues it faces and what may solve those complicated issues. By opening up this seat to an election, whatever the cost, democracy will be truly served and voters will have a chance to weigh in on the person who will fill an important leadership role for what could be more than a decade.