REGULAR MINUTES
PERE MARQUETTE DEPOT
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
A meeting of the City Council of the City of Belding, Michigan was convened in open and public session at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, January 20, 2015.
Council Member Scheid delivered the invocation.
The Mayor led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
The City Clerk took the roll call:
Members Present: Council Members Dennis Cooper, Mike Scheid, Jerome Lallo, Tom Jones and Ronald Gunderson.
Members Absent: None.
Approval of Agenda
Council Member Scheid made a motion to approve the agenda as presented, supported by Council Member Cooper.
The question on the motion was called and the result of the voting is as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Cooper, Scheid, Lallo, Jones and Gunderson.
Nays: None.
Public Comments
There were no public comments.
Consent Agenda
A. Approve Independent Bank Checks 63392 to 63488 in the amount of $129,384.14
B. Approve Minutes: Regular scheduled meeting, January 6, 2015
C. Resolution – Declare backhoe as surplus equipment for trade-in to AIS Construction Equipment
D. Resolution – Manage Floodplain Development for the National Flood Insurance Program
Council Member Scheid made a motion to approve the consent agenda, supported by Council Member Lallo.
The question on the motion was called and the result of the voting is as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Cooper, Scheid, Lallo, Jones and Gunderson.
Nays: None.
Following are the resolutions contained in the Consent Agenda.
C. Resolution – Declare backhoe as surplus equipment for trade-in to AIS Construction Equipment
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELDING, MICHIGAN AUTHORIZING THE RELEASE OF SURPLUS CITY EQUIPMENT TO AIS CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
WHEREAS, The City Code of Ordinances mandates through Division 5. Sec. 2-392 that any property the City is to release must be authorized by City Council;
WHEREAS, this equipment must be deemed surplus by the City Council;
WHEREAS, the City has authorized the purchase of a backhoe to replace this piece of equipment due to the performance and safety issues making it surplus equipment;
WHEREAS, AIS Construction Equipment has offered the City a trade in value of $12,000, for its backhoe;
WHEREAS, the AIS Construction Equipment needs formal notification from the City accepting the $12,000 as trade in for the new backhoe;
WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works Director has indicated that at public auction the City would be fortunate to receive a bid of $10,000 for this surplus equipment and would be charged 2% commission on its sale price:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Belding, Michigan, that it authorizes the release of the current backhoe, as surplus property, for a trade in value of $12,000, to AIS Construction Equipment upon receipt of the new backhoe.
D. Resolution – Manage Floodplain Development for the National Flood Insurance Program
MICHIGAN COMMUNITY RESOLUTION TO
MANAGE FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT
FOR THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the community of the City of Belding in Ionia County (check the appropriate box) in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMAs) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) by complying with the program’s applicable statutory and regulatory requirements for the purposes of significantly reducing flood hazards to persons, reducing property damage, and reducing public expenditures, and providing for the availability of flood insurance and federal funds or loans within its community, and
WHEREAS, the NFIP requires that floodplain management regulations must be present and enforced in participating communities, and utilize the following definitions which also apply for the purposes of this resolution:
1. Flood or Flooding means:
a. A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from: 1) the overflow of inland or tidal waters, 2) the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source, 3) mudflows, and
b. The collapse or subsidence of land along the shore of a lake or other body of water as a result of erosion or undermining caused by waves or currents of water exceeding anticipated cyclical levels or suddenly caused by an unusually high water level in a natural body of water, accompanied by a severe storm, or by an unanticipated force of nature, such as flash flood or an abnormal tidal surge, or by some similarly unusual and unforeseeable event which results in flooding, as defined in paragraph (a)(1) of this definition.
2. Flood Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM) means an official map of a community, as may have been issued by the FEMA, where the boundaries of the flood, mudslide (i.e., mudflow) related erosion areas having special hazards have been designated as Zone A, M, and/or E.
3. Floodplain means any land area susceptible to being inundated by water from any source (see definition of flooding).
4. Floodplain management means the operation of an overall program of corrective and preventive measures for reducing flood damage, including but not limited to emergency preparedness plans, flood control works, and floodplain management regulations.
5. Floodplain management regulations means zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes, health regulations, special purpose ordinances (such as a floodplain ordinance, grading ordinance and erosion control ordinance), and other applications of police power that provide standards for the purpose of flood damage prevention and reduction.
6. Structure means a walled and roofed building that is principally above ground, gas or liquid storage facility, as well as a mobile home or manufactured unit.
WHEREAS, the Stille-Derossett-Hale Single State Construction Code Act”, Act No. 230 of the Public Acts of 1972, as amended (construction code act), along with its authorization of the state construction code composed of the Michigan Residential Code and the Michigan Building Code [and its Appendices (specifically Appendix G)] contains floodplain development and management regulations that comply with the FEMA NFIP minimum floodplain management criteria for flood prone areas, as detailed in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR), Section 60.3, and
WHEREAS, by the action dates of this document the community affirms the responsibility to administer, apply, and enforce the provisions of the construction code act and the state construction code, specifically the Michigan Residential Code and the Michigan Building Code, to all construction within its community boundaries, and
NOW THEREFORE, to maintain eligibility and continued participation in the NFIP,
1. The community directs its construction code act designated enforcing agency, the Fire Chief, to administer, apply, and enforce the floodplain management regulations as contained in the state construction code (including Appendix G) and to be consistent with those regulations by:
a. Obtaining, reviewing, and reasonably utilizing flood elevation data available from federal, state, or other sources pending receipt of data from the FEMA to identify the flood hazard area and areas with potential flooding.
b. Ensuring that all permits necessary for development in floodplain areas have been issued, including a floodplain permit, approval, or letter of no authority from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality under the floodplain regulatory provisions of Part 31, "Water Resources Protection," of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended.
c. Reviewing all permit applications to determine whether the proposed building sites will be reasonably safe from flooding. Where it is determined that a proposed building will be located in a flood hazard area or special flood hazard area, the construction code act enforcing agent shall implement the following applicable codes according to their terms:
1. Floodplain management regulation portions and referenced codes and standards of the current Michigan Residential Code.
2. Floodplain management regulation portions and referenced codes and standards of the current Michigan Building Code.
3. Appendix G of the current Michigan Building Code.
d. Reviewing all proposed subdivisions to determine whether such proposals are reasonably safe from flooding and to ensure compliance with all applicable floodplain management regulations.
e. Assisting in the delineation of flood hazard areas; providing information concerning uses and occupancy of the floodplain or flood-related erosion areas, maintaining floodproofing and lowest floor construction records, cooperating with other officials, agencies, and persons for floodplain management.
f. Advising FEMA of any changes in community boundaries, including appropriate maps.
g. Maintaining records of new structures and substantially improved structures concerning any certificates of floodproofing, lowest floor elevation, basements, floodproofing, and elevations to which structures have been floodproofed.
2. The community assures the Federal Insurance Administrator (Administrator) that it intends to review, on an ongoing basis, all amended and revised FHBMs and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and related supporting data and revisions thereof and revisions of 44 CFR, Part 60, Criteria for Land Management and Use, and to make such revisions in its floodplain management regulations as may be necessary to continue to participate in the program.
3. The community further assures the Administrator that it will adopt the current effective FEMA Flood Insurance Study (FIS), FHBMs, and/or the FIRMs by reference within its Floodplain Management Map Adoption Ordinance or similarly binding ordinance documentation.
Reports by Council Liaisons
Council Member Jones stated the Planning Commission meeting was January 27, 2015 at 6:30 p.m.
Council Member Cooper stated he was out of town for the Rec Board meeting and thanked Keven for the synopsis. Discussion was held on the use of Demorest Field by BYBL. He hopes to have continued progress for the youth to have opportunities at a top notch facility. A basket was stolen at SMASH, but there is no information. Swing set quotes are being sought. Council Member Lallo addressed the dog park, which is a tremendous idea. A committee will be formed.
Council Member Scheid stated the Housing Commission met last Thursday. All of the units are filled, but two. Mike and Joel are working hard. They have a renter for another one. Two are leaving because they are going to a care facility. The Housing Commission would like to turn Woodhaven into an assisted living facility. It would be less intrusive to stay where they are at. That is in the future plans. They are getting ready for the 5-Year Plan for HUD. HUD stated they are cutting the budget for this year, but no details are available.
Council Member Lallo stated he attended the Labor Day Committee meeting. They have signed a contract with a new carnival, D & R Shows out of Monroe. They are working on ideas for fundraisers. The website is being updated. They need volunteers and input. The February 4 meeting will be held at the depot.
Mayor Gunderson stated the Rails to Trails Friends will replace the receptacle that was burned. DDA will meet this Thursday at noon. The Library meeting is next Monday at 5 p.m.
Unfinished Business
There was no unfinished business.
New Business
A. Consider approval of Zoning Board of Appeals Applicant Questionaire
Council Member Scheid made a motion to approve the Zoning Board of Appeals Applicant Questionnaire, supported by Council Member Lallo.
Council Member Cooper stated he appreciated the questions, but cannot see that they can force people to fill it out. It can be provided as a tool and they could address the board. Those who want to submit can, but it should not be mandatory.
Gary Knowlton stated he and Meg worked together on this and he prepared it at home and sent it to Meg by email. She added to that. The reason they thought it was important for the questions was to find out why they wanted to serve on this particular board. This board, from a legal point of view, is important, as they have the authority to rewrite city law or exempt people from keeping the mandates of the zoning ordinance. It could get the city in trouble if not handled correctly in regards to the law. The board hears appeals made by management, planning commission, city council, zoning officials, and also can interpret the law. If part of the law is not clear it could possibly go to the ZBA and they could interpret the law and apply it as to the intent of the law. It is important to have feedback from applicants on their intentions and why they wish to be on the board. A couple of questions would measure their level of knowledge of ZBA practices. If followed, this could give information to the city council to make wise decisions in regards to placement on this important board.
Council Member Scheid stated he was all set.
Council Member Lallo stated the ZBA Handbook shows the legislative body must provide funds for ZBA for mileage and training. The council does provide money for the operation of the ZBA. Council should have a tool to see why they wish to be on the ZBA. He appreciates his effort.
Council Member Jones stated he would like questions for all the committees and groups that advise them, not on their political positions, but to get a feel for the people. On this questionnaire, he would just like to use questions 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 and 11. The rest may not be as important. As they fill other vacancies, he would like to do the same thing. He would like to know who is on the committees.
Mayor Gunderson stated he liked the way the questions were put together. They did ask Mr. Knowlton and Meg to come up with questions. There are a total of 11 questions. He thinks the questions are fair. Nothing seems left out.
Ayes: Council Members Scheid, Lallo and Gunderson
Nays: Council Members Cooper and Jones
B. Consider approval and ordaining Ordinance #535, under City Charter 6.4.a. Emergency Provisions – Addressing Floodplain Management Provisions of the State Construction Code
The City Clerk read the preamble to the ordinance.
Council Member Jones moved the adoption of the ordinance and the motion was supported by Council Member Scheid.
ORDINANCE ADDRESSING FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PROVISIONS
OF THE STATE CONSTRUCTION CODE
Community Name: City of Belding, County: Ionia
Ordinance number 535
An ordinance to designate an enforcing agency to discharge the responsibility of the City of Belding located in Ionia County, and to designate regulated flood hazard areas under the provisions of the State Construction Code Act, Act No. 230 of the Public Acts of 1972, as amended.
The City of Belding ordains:
Section 1. AGENCY DESIGNATED. Pursuant to the provisions of the state construction code, in accordance with Section 8b(6) of Act 230, of the Public Acts of 1972, as amended, the Fire Chief of the City of Belding is hereby designated as the enforcing agency to discharge the responsibility of the City of Belding under Act 230, of the Public Acts of 1972, as amended, State of Michigan. The City of Belding assumes responsibility for the administration and enforcement of said Act through out the corporate limits of the community adopting this ordinance.
Section 2. CODE APPENDIX ENFORCED. Pursuant to the provisions of the state construction code, in accordance with Section 8b(6) of Act 230, of the Public Acts of 1972, as amended, Appendix G of the Michigan Building Code shall be enforced by the enforcing agency within the jurisdiction of the community adopting this ordinance.
Section 3. DESIGNATION OF REGULATED FLOOD PRONE HAZARD AREAS. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Study (FIS) Entitled “Ionia County, Michigan (All Jurisdictions)" and dated January 16, 2015 and the Flood Insurance Rate Map(s) (FIRMS) panel number(s) of 26067C; 0026D, 0027D, 0028D, and 0029D and dated January 16, 2015 are adopted by reference for the purposes of administration of the Michigan Construction Code, and declared to be a part of Section 1612.3 of the Michigan Building Code, and to provide the content of the “Flood Hazards” section of Table R301.2(1) of the Michigan Residential Code.
Section 4. REPEALS. All ordinances inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 5. PUBLICATION. This ordinance shall be effective after legal publication and in accordance with the provisions of the Act governing same.
Adopted this 20th day of January, 2015.
This ordinance duly adopted on January 20, 2015 at a regular meeting of the City of Belding City Council and will become effective January 20, 2015.
The question on the ordinance was called and the result of the voting is as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Cooper, Scheid, Lallo, Jones and Gunderson.
Nays: None.
Public Comments
Dennis McKee, Consumers Energy, stated this was a basic communication outreach before work begins in Ionia County. 1.8 million meters will be updated. Now they have to drive up to the meters, but the new meters will send a text message on the usage. This will also notify them of power outages in 2016, even when people are not at home. They will send out mailers and then update them toward the end of spring. They will update the electric technology, and residents do not have to be home. There will be a monthly notice and then a two week notice before work begins. On the big day, they will knock on each door and leave a door hanger. 5,000 meters will be updated in a week. A green hanger will indicate the update has been done. A blue hanger will indicate they could not replace the meter because of a dog. They will leave brochures. They will use cell towers for messages. They can check usages on the internet. There will be better outage management. They will restore service to people more efficiently. The end of the program will occur at the end of 2017. He would be happy to talk to other groups.
Denny Craycraft, 11692 Youngman Rd., stated he would like to give an update on the Veteran’s Park program. The professional begging program is in play. It is in full swing and there is a mountain to climb. There is a tremendous amount of backing. For fundraising, they sold stickers on Wednesday and Saturday at Leppinks for the wall. They sold over 300 stickers in the last two weeks for $7. He will sell at the State Convention in Lansing. He has an appointment up across the straits at the casino. There will be 2,654 names on the wall of Vietnam veterans that died. 79 veterans were in the UP. He is a State Director for the VFW and they set up tournaments up there and he will be talking to the people. On February 21, there will be a cordon bleu dinner at the Greenville Eagles, with funds going to the wall. The VFW Auxiliary Bingo proceeds from the 50/50 will go to the wall. He met with Randy Slater and he helps run the 5K and 10K runs in the summertime and Glow Run. He wants to have a 5K run and walk for funds for the wall, possibly on Memorial Day. There would be a 9:30 a.m. step off heading west. They would go across the bridge, on High Street, Bridge Street, Indian Summer and the walkway back. They would be back by 10:30 a.m. for the Memorial Service. He would like, at the next meeting, to be put on the agenda to talk about this and get permission. He will put down what the route will be and what has to be done to have people at the crossings and coordinate with police, with the grace of city council. They are on the web www.beldingveteranspark.com, as well as on Facebook. They are working with www.gofundme.com He is very proud of the committee and what they are doing with the backing of the community. They have close to $165,000 to raise. It would be a total asset for the community and the veterans.
Katherine Henry, 806 Wildlife Trail, wished to speak about a recent FOIA request by a resident which was sent to Meg. Meg forwarded it to the attorney defending the lawsuit which she filed against the city. He wrote the resident a letter that treated her with a large amount of disrespect, but also admitted to violating the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.2, 1.4, 1.7, 1.8(f) and 1.13. He also violated the Privilege of Confidentiality of Settlement Negotiations by disclosing select portions of her settlement proposal with this resident. He violated the law of settlement privilege but also cherry picked certain provisions to provide a slanted view of the offer made in an attempt to drive a wedge between her and the residents of the City of Belding. She has huge concerns about the ethics of that behavior. She has filed a request with the court to discipline him for the egregious behavior and to prohibit him for any future similar conduct. She asked council members to keep in mind these rules of settlement privilege and the confidentiality of those settlement negotiations. Those rules also apply to them as council members. Please be careful when discussing this lawsuit with others or when taking parts of it out of context in your Facebook postings, because the public is watching and looking at all the information that is out there and not only is it unethical, it is illegal. Just be careful with what you are discussing on the lawsuit. This individual is a resident of the City of Belding. She has nothing to do with her lawsuit. She is not a party to it. She is not assisting Katherine in any way. Katherine is not assisting her in any way. Only just yesterday, she met her for the very first time. In making a simple FOIA request, Attorney Callahan decided to engage in very disrespectful communication with her. She would ask them to consider that.
Craig Crebessa, 8079 Storey Rd., stated he was speaking on behalf of a group, Citizens Holding Belding City Accountable. This group wants the relevant truthful information out to the public in the hopes of creating transparency from our local government. The groups page is 355 members strong and is still growing. It is not a small group, but a part of the majority desiring changes in our local government and its leadership. Over 600 voted Council Cooper on the board to start making those changes to move our community in the right direction. He wanted to review the last meeting regarding the ZBA. Citizens need to know the process and the truth behind it. 1. The board was disbanded because it was lacking one member yet the alternate Mr. Benson was never contacted and that is a fact. 2. The board members were never contacted about being dissolved and had to read about it in the Daily News and that is a fact. 3. Two qualified candidates submitted applications within weeks of being disbanded but the board was never reinstated even though they were told it would be and that is a fact. 4. Since then four other applications have been submitted. Now there are concerns about candidates being qualified. Councilman Lallo, at the last meeting, stated he believes all candidates who have submitted applications are qualified. He still has concerns about each applicant being able to work with Mullendore. No one is questioning the qualifications by any means, but the one concern he has is that he just wants to make sure that everyone is going to be working with the city manager too. Right now a lot of people refuse to communicate back and forth with the city manager. It is no secret how some people feel about our city manager, he just wants to make sure the qualified applicants would at least be open to contact Meg if they have any questions. Mr. Crebessa asked what did Councilman Lallo mean by that? Is that in regards to perhaps Michelle Cooper? Is it because she chaired the board and followed through with her constitutional rights to voice her concerns against the city manager which she did on March 18, 2014. Some of the concerns were her sheer disappointment with the lack of leadership, lack of professional conduct and unethical behavior of the city manager. She went on to share that the city manager was at the firing range with the city police, which is against city policy. She also pointed out that her vehicle was towed from a city parking lot because it was being impounded because of lack of payment. She went on to talk about a lot of things, almost a whole page before the mayor cut her off from her time. Mr. Crebessa asked Mr. Lallo if it was Shelley Gladding that was also on the board? She was part of that board and had concerns with the city manager. It was because of a lack of moving forward to filling a seat on the Planning Commission that a citizen had applied for that, and it was taking months to place, yet the board was being pushed lower toward its number of chairs, even though they had an application from Katherine Henry floating out there somewhere. Mr. Crebessa stated he was trying to understand what Mr. Lallo meant by people going to her. Is this why the ZBA board is not being reinstated because these people came out and spoke against her? Is this why they are creating new evaluation systems for people that are on the boards and are clearly qualified as citizens of the community? Do they understand the City of Belding’s organizational chart? At the top are Belding residents, the next step down would be mayor and city council and from there they put the boards together. The city manager is at the bottom of that list. She oversees the employees and departments. For some reason, she has been put on top and that is what they are concerned about. Why is that? At the last meeting, Gunderson stated he remained concerned with making sure of applicant qualifications, due to the potential liability that would fall on the city if the ZBA were to be sued. Mr. Knowlton brought this up numerous times and this is one of the outs they are using because of reforming this board. Council Member Cooper asked at that last meeting right after that, was the ZBA being sued, and they said no. Had it been sued? They said no. How about starting with the city manager who is being sued for violating citizen’s rights but they are concerned about the hard working, tax paying business owners sitting on the ZBA board to make intelligent decisions that are being spelled out in black and white. These citizens are owed an apology. The applicants do not deserve to be put through this process of questioning when most were on the board as it was. It is completely ludicrous when you compile all the statements from the mayor and city manager and Council Member Lallo. What is concerning is why they continue to support subpar standards from a city manager for a community that you have been elected to lead. They are wasting thousands of taxpayer dollars because the city manager does not like what someone said and feels the need to retaliate against them. When is this going to stop? When are the leaders going to start doing what is best for the community? The majority has been speaking for over a year voicing concerns with the manager. No accountability has taken place for any of her actions. That is not leadership. Leadership is representing the people that voted them into office to work with them and their best interest, not the city manager.
Joe Feuerstein, 901 W. State, stated there are two people on council, Jerry and the Mayor, who are doing the job they are required to do. He cannot say that much for the rest of them. On November 4, Mr. Jones violated the charter, so they can discuss that on what they are going to do. He was required to vote. If he read his charter he was required to vote yes or no. There is another deal, picked out of the charter. The newly elected, he talked to a person and said an official in city hall was a crooked SOB. That is an embarrassment to this council, to all of them. Regarding the assassination of a person’s reputation in this town by certain people that think they can run this town better than how it is being run now, it has caused all this trouble over one thing, Mr. Cooper getting fired as a police officer. This was done in 2001. They can get the story and go right straight through it completely up to date and this is in the future.
City Manager’s Comments
There were no city manager’s comments.
Council Comments
Council Member Lallo stated the question on working with the city manager is legitimate. Council agreed on it and it passed and it was one of the questions in the handout. Working with the city manager is very important to council and it did pass. With the ZBA, when council is responsible for the operating of the ZBA, it is important that council makes sure the right people are in place. He stands by his decision. They had projects in place and didn’t want to delay them. He stands by his decision.
Council Member Jones stated he was not sure how some would take this. He was appointed to this position and thought the town was moving forward. He stated he could use a derogatory, but would just call it politics in this town. They can pretty much recall any elected officials for almost any reason. If you don’t like the part in their hair, or the way they walk or the process they take. He feels they are abusing this process in Belding with the recall. He has known Ron for many years and respects his honesty and decisions. They cannot always agree on what is voted on at the council. He supports Ron as mayor. He was the one that made the motion to make him mayor. He has done a good job in that position. He has only known Jerry a couple years since he was elected to the council. He has been criticized for being too new to Belding. He thinks it is good he is new to Belding because he doesn’t have loyalties or friends in the sense of longtime friendships and brings different perspectives and he has brought some ideas to the Rec Board when he was the liaison there. He and Ron have been very community oriented. Ron has put his heart and soul in the bike trails and other projects around town. Jerry has been very involved. He put Christmas decorations on the Bridge St. bridge, to get some decorations up in town. They both shovel snow at the Veteran’s Memorial. He should have spoken up when Joe was recalled and he apologized to Joe for not doing that. He thinks their heart and soul is in doing what is best for Belding. They will not always like how each other vote. He spent over twelve years on the school board and they were yes men. He doesn’t think they are yes people up here. They all have ideas and want to get Belding rolling and moving ahead as best they can. They all have decisions to make and the council members were voted in for that purpose. Ron, Jerry, Mike and Dennis were elected and he was appointed to fill a vacancy, and they have the best interest of Belding in their heart.
Council Member Cooper stated he would make this relatively short, as there has been continuous turmoil, controversy and discord surrounding their community for far too long and they need to move forward as a city.
Council Member Cooper made a motion to relieve Meg Mullendore from the position of city manager effective immediately, supported by Council Member Scheid.
Council Member Lallo made a motion to postpone the motion because it was not on the agenda and the community was not notified and they have not had the opportunity to speak on this and give their input, and as Council Member Cooper has yet to have an evaluation for the city manager and until that time in April when the evaluation of the city manager comes, when he can evaluate her properly, he would like to postpone the motion until April, supported by Council Member Gunderson.
Mayor Gunderson stated the motion to postpone takes precedence over the motion made by Cooper.
Council Member Cooper stated it was not on the agenda to extend her contract. To reinstate the ZBA was not on the agenda. Many people have spoken and contacted officials and they have all heard it and don’t have to hash it over. As a citizen, he can evaluate her on the body of work. He has had 60 days and does not need an evaluation.
Council Member Lallo stated the city council extended her contract and Mr. Cooper was not involved in that vote. He has not sat in on the evaluation. This was his fifth meeting and how could he properly evaluate somebody with working with the city manager for only five meetings?
Council Member Jones had no comments at this point.
Mayor Gunderson stated he finds it truly amazing that people want transparency. He has heard people call up and complain because the agenda is not there, the agenda is posted late, the agenda gets amended. Now without any proper reason for removing a city manager when he has sat through many DDA meetings, ZBA meetings, Planning Commission meetings and has chaired the city council. Meg, as a city manager, has done nothing illegal. If they had done something illegal, with all the accusations that are out there, then he really truly believes that there would be a lot more going on at the city level than there is now. This goes way back further than even the existing lawsuit. He thinks it is unethical to do it, as he has only been at five meetings. He doesn’t know how he could glean enough information on his own to even understand that. He has come to council meetings without even bringing all his material as far as that part of it and yet he is saying she is not doing her job. There have been no evaluations by him. He has been here through five meetings, he has been through closed sessions with them. They hired Meg at council level for what she has brought to the table. She has done what they asked her to do. She brought her professionalism here. She has got them through situations at the DDA level. She has helped the Library Board out. She has helped the Museum Board when they need help. She has connected with people at city hall. The people that work at city hall would not be around if it was not a place to work that was viable. He doesn’t understand this and why. He has his suspicions. This is total disrespect for this city council. He does not agree with this at all.
The mayor called for a vote on the postponement of the motion until Meg’s evaluation.
Council Member Jones asked when the next evaluation would be scheduled?
Mayor Gunderson stated it would be April, it would be the two year period. It would be her two year original contract date. It would depend on when the meeting would fall. Her contract is not up until 2016. There has already been an extension on her contract.
Council Member Jones stated he understood that. He was wondering would the evaluation be before the last year of her contract?
Mayor Gunderson stated he would have to look at the calendar to see when that would be. He doesn’t remember the exact date of her hire, but it would not be until April, so they are probably looking at April 7, the first meeting of that month.
Ayes: Council Members Lallo and Gunderson
Nays: Council Members Jones, Cooper and Scheid
The motion to postpone the motion failed.
The mayor stated they would return to the original motion that was on the floor.
Council Members Scheid, Lallo and Cooper had no comments.
Council Member Jones stated he would prefer to have an evaluation before this decision was made, but make sure it was done before her last year of the contract started.
Mayor Gunderson stated he is really sad that this town has stooped to this level that people really think this is funny. He was put in this position by 200 votes. He also feels that this should not be going on right now. Mr. Cooper came on the board, he was voted in place and he would commend him for that, but he does not condone what he has done here tonight, by any means. He doesn’t think his motion was supported by all the people that put him in place. He believes this was, for lack of better words, a total, total misunderstanding. He truly hopes the vote does not go through tonight, as the residents of this town need to be represented tonight in the way they truly feel. He cannot believe that they are entertaining this. He can’t believe he can ask for a motion to remove the city manager when the only time a person has actually seen that city manager working is at a city council meeting. He can’t believe that Mr. Cooper can take and actually do this. This simple thought that what she is doing is wrong is totally disbelievable to him.
Ayes: Council Members Cooper, Scheid and Jones
Nays: Council Members Lallo and Gunderson
Council Member Jones stated it was nothing to applaud about, folks. This is serious.
Mayor Gunderson stated on January 28, 2015 there will be a DEQ meeting at 6 p.m. at Orchard Hills regarding the Electrolux property. Everyone is encouraged to voice their concerns. They have extended the no further action status. He worked with them to get DEQ up here. He does not know if Electrolux will be involved or not.
Council Member Jones stated he knows with his deciding vote, some people will be glad with it and others not. As he said earlier, Ron and Jerry have the best interest of the city at heart. He would have preferred to have one more evaluation. He made that known to everybody here. There is nothing to gloat about with dismissing Meg as city manager. His vote was for the best interest of the city, not because he was friends with anybody in particular. He has prided himself on the school board and the decisions he has made here in doing the best he could for those entities. He is saddened with the politics going on in this town. He thought Belding was above that. He has already been asked about running again. It is ridiculous with what goes on in this town at times. He stated he was sorry he had to vote that way, but that is what he felt was in the best interest of the city.
Mayor Gunderson stated he would guarantee them that no one has won and no one has lost. The only person that is really going to be affected by this is whoever they are lucky enough to get back in here.
Adjournment
Council Member Scheid moved to adjourn the meeting, supported by Council Member Lallo.
Ayes: Council Members Cooper, Scheid, Lallo, Jones and Gunderson.
Nays: None.
The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 8:17 p.m.
| | Ronald Gunderson, Mayor |
| Kareen J. Thomas, City Clerk | |
