It puzzles me that "unanimous selection" by the Commission continues to be emphasized.  It was made clear by the recent shake-up on the Commission that a unanimous decision was the only one that COULD result in a selection, or am I misunderstanding?  It is the dysfunction of the Commission appointed by the mayor, in the past, and his inability to find others to serve on the board in a timely manner that brought the Commission to this point.  So "unanimous" fails to mean what it would have meant in other circumstances.  

In this instance, "unanimous" means all who could approve, did so.  But if even one had not approved, there wouldn't have been a selection, if I understand correctly.