East Bethel Denies Third Unanimous Commission Recommendation

The East Bethel City Council denied a unanimous recommendation from the Planning Commission to install Wanda McLaurin during its March 13 meeting. The council sent the matter back to planning for further consideration.

Council Member Jim Smith motioned to deny the recommendation, saying that he would like the commission to interview more people. Mayor Tim Harrington pointed out that only two people interviewed for the position, with Smith replying that the other applicant, Joe Reiter, had his support. Harrington questioned why Smith wasn’t satisfied with McLaurin’s qualifications.

“...(McLaurin) has been on two boards for the city, including planning, and she’s worked for two Fortune 500 companies,” Harrington replied. “You’re always asking for somebody good, and that’s somebody good right there.”

Harrington’s comment comes after the City Council rejected two other unanimous recommendations for commission appointments, including a reappointment of Karen Krepis for the Planning Commission and Jessica Oman for the Economic Development Authority. In the case of the EDA, the council voted outside of a formal written policy to install Suzanne Erkel without board recommendation.

In all three cases, Smith, along with Council Members Tim Miller and Kevin Lewis voted to deny the recommendation. Harrington and Council Member Brian Mundle voted to approve.

Commission member speaks up

Prior to the vote, during the public comment portion of the meeting, Planning Member Glenn Terry got up to speak about the recommendation.

“There has been an antagonistic attitude toward commission members by (Council Member) Kevin Lewis,” Terry said. “He has been unnecessarily alienating us in refusing unanimous votes to recommend candidates... and there was a lot of disrespect shown in the last (Feb. 28 planning) meeting.”

Terry stated that Lewis, who acts as council liaison to the Planning Commission, got up to leave the Feb. 28 Planning Commission’s meeting after the commission voted to recommend McLaurin, before he could give his regular council report. He called this a “disrespectful attitude” and asked if someone else could take his place if Lewis won’t “fulfill his duty.”

“I shouldn’t have to (report),” Lewis replied. “You can watch the movies of what we’re doing. Council reports made sense 10 years ago, but now we have a media center working to put it on YouTube.”

Lewis further said that he had been feeling nauseous and that’s why he got up to leave.

Terry then asked if it was possible to change the way commission members are removed in East Bethel. As it currently stands, East Bethel requires a simple council majority to remove a commissioner. Terry proposed that they change it to a unanimous vote. Lewis denied the possibility, saying Terry wanted a “super majority.”

Terry responded that he wanted to avoid those with agendas from being able to exercise their power on commission members, using the case of Jim Smith’s 2021 removal from the Planning Commission as an example. Smith was removed from planning, along with then-Council Members Suzanne Erkel and Shelly Beck receiving a censure for an unauthorized inspection of a local business that was contracted with the city. He showed concern that something similar could occur with the current council.

“So, you have stated that you have a 3-2 majority on this Council,” Terry said, referring to Lewis, Miller and Smith.

“Well it doesn’t matter if I state it or not, it’s just a simple fact,” Lewis replied.

Questions about commission member participating in public hearings

When going over the meetings from the Feb. 27 council meeting wherein a public hearing for an ordinance change was held, Council Member Miller asked City Administrator Jack Davis about his announcement of a potential commission quorum.

The public hearing drew multiple members of the Planning Commission and Economic Development Authority, and Davis stated that though a quorum may be present, the members would only be acting as private citizens and not commission or board members.

“There were notes posted out on our board that said if there is more than a quorum, these people are here as private citizens and cannot conduct any business, associate with each other or act as a representative of the board,” Davis clarified. The notes were posted the day of the meeting.

Miller then directed his attention to City Attorney Eric Larson, asking questions concerning open meeting law.

“When you have a public meeting, like our City Council ones, a quorum existed in that room that night and was called out that night by (Davis) before we started,” Miller said. “Even after that was said, that quorum went on to openly discuss city business, council business, and even went as far as asking for a reinstatement (of denied applicant Karen Krepis). Is that a violation of open meeting laws?”

Larson responded in the negative, saying he did not see any open meeting law violations and echoed Davis’s comment that they were acting as private citizens.

“Obviously, if there are residents who wish to appear in their individual resident capacity, they have the right by Constitution as well as statute to have their views heard in that capacity,” Nelson said. “They can do so and are not prohibited by any quorum, because the idea of a quorum is that with public business, the public is informed.”

Miller went on to question if a committee met together by chance and ended up talking about city business if that would be a violation. Nelson confirmed that they should not be talking about city business outside of duly noted meetings, but the Feb. 27 City Council meeting was a duly noted meeting.

“I don’t understand the difference,” Miller said. “It was a public meeting for us, not the Planning commission.”

Nelson responded that despite any citizen’s commission member status, there is a right as a citizen to bring up any issue to their respective city councils.

“They have a First Amendment right to talk about whatever they want before this body,” Nelson said. “They cannot be muzzled or chained or limited with respect to their subject matter.”

Miller replied that he did not talk about taking away First Amendment rights, and he agreed that they should be upheld. He said his main questions lay within the separation between presenting oneself as a private citizen and a commission member.

“If you speak as a private resident, I don’t understand the difference,” Miller said. “You might as well come in and say, I’m on this committee and this is how I feel and I don’t like this or whatever.”

Nelson replied that a commission member is able to do so during City Council meetings.

“Really?” Miller asked. “That’s all I needed to know, thank you.”

SOURCE: Hometown Source