Mar 2010
Council Selection Process Flawed
March/25/2010 11:49
I appreciate the balanced coverage the Grosse Pointe News has provided of the recent political events in Grosse Pointe Shores. The blog that follows these preliminary comments is the unedited text of my letter voicing concerns on the council replacement process that was published in the Grosse Pointe News March 25, 2010 edition.
While Mayor Cooper and the incumbents repeatedly parrot that they are operating transparently, their conduct during the council replacement process proves once again how phony and hollow their promises are.
For another perspective on how the Shores council replacement process may have even breached the legal boundaries set by the Michigan Open Meetings Act, please read the most recent Guest Posting from respected Shores Attorney Alan Broad.
---------------------------------------
To the Editor:
While I was gratified to learn that eleven Shores citizens stepped forth and volunteered to serve as replace city council members, I am truly puzzled by the hasty pace that Mayor Cooper and the council embarked upon to select the replacements for the two resignees, Brian Hunt and Fred Minturn. The course of events in the Shores stands in stark contrast the council replacement process underway in Grosse Pointe Farms, where city leaders declared they were going to wait another month before dealing with their council vacancy, giving time to see that deliberate and due care was taken to make such an important decision.
When Shores council members received the candidate list with their meeting packets on the Friday evening just prior to the Tuesday, March 16th council meeting, it is hard to understand how they were supposed to adequately evaluate and properly vet all eleven candidates whose names they received during such a brief period of time. One would think that before making such a crucial determination, that Mayor Cooper would have asked for a special meeting, in advance of the council vote, where all interested candidates would have been invited to come both to speak and to be questioned by both the remaining council members and the Shores citizens about their qualifications, their vision for the community, and their ability to lead our city forth in a positive fashion.
The fact that the Shores council replacements are necessary due to very unusual and extenuating circumstances would seem to mandate even a greater level of diligence. Two incumbent council members chose to resign in the face of a successful recall petition drive, creating the council vacancies in what appears to be a clear and calculated effort to circumvent the right of the Shores voters to choose their ultimate replacements, should the recall election succeed in May.
At the February Shores council meeting, council member Dan Schulte asked were there not, in a city with over two thousand residents, at least two citizens that the entire council could agree upon in a bridge building, consensus effort to heal the divide, and unify our city. The chorus of chuckling and chortling that this rational suggestion was greeted with by the incumbent council members and their supporters in the audience was truly shocking. Any one who did not attend that council meeting can log on to www.shoresrecall.com, and watch the video clip of incumbent Shores council members openly ridicule Schulte’s proposal.
It would seem that rather than rush to appoint citizens vetted in private , the incumbents would do well to emulate their colleagues in the Farms, slow down the pace, and make the replacement council member selection process more open and transparent. As we head towards the May 4th election, a sincere effort to try and select new council members who are acceptable to both sides may be the incumbent’s last real chance to let citizens know that they have heard the unequivocal message sent by the over 500 Shores voters whose signatures made the recall petition drive an unqualified success.
Sincerely,
Dr. Robert E. Lee
While Mayor Cooper and the incumbents repeatedly parrot that they are operating transparently, their conduct during the council replacement process proves once again how phony and hollow their promises are.
For another perspective on how the Shores council replacement process may have even breached the legal boundaries set by the Michigan Open Meetings Act, please read the most recent Guest Posting from respected Shores Attorney Alan Broad.
---------------------------------------
To the Editor:
While I was gratified to learn that eleven Shores citizens stepped forth and volunteered to serve as replace city council members, I am truly puzzled by the hasty pace that Mayor Cooper and the council embarked upon to select the replacements for the two resignees, Brian Hunt and Fred Minturn. The course of events in the Shores stands in stark contrast the council replacement process underway in Grosse Pointe Farms, where city leaders declared they were going to wait another month before dealing with their council vacancy, giving time to see that deliberate and due care was taken to make such an important decision.
When Shores council members received the candidate list with their meeting packets on the Friday evening just prior to the Tuesday, March 16th council meeting, it is hard to understand how they were supposed to adequately evaluate and properly vet all eleven candidates whose names they received during such a brief period of time. One would think that before making such a crucial determination, that Mayor Cooper would have asked for a special meeting, in advance of the council vote, where all interested candidates would have been invited to come both to speak and to be questioned by both the remaining council members and the Shores citizens about their qualifications, their vision for the community, and their ability to lead our city forth in a positive fashion.
The fact that the Shores council replacements are necessary due to very unusual and extenuating circumstances would seem to mandate even a greater level of diligence. Two incumbent council members chose to resign in the face of a successful recall petition drive, creating the council vacancies in what appears to be a clear and calculated effort to circumvent the right of the Shores voters to choose their ultimate replacements, should the recall election succeed in May.
At the February Shores council meeting, council member Dan Schulte asked were there not, in a city with over two thousand residents, at least two citizens that the entire council could agree upon in a bridge building, consensus effort to heal the divide, and unify our city. The chorus of chuckling and chortling that this rational suggestion was greeted with by the incumbent council members and their supporters in the audience was truly shocking. Any one who did not attend that council meeting can log on to www.shoresrecall.com, and watch the video clip of incumbent Shores council members openly ridicule Schulte’s proposal.
It would seem that rather than rush to appoint citizens vetted in private , the incumbents would do well to emulate their colleagues in the Farms, slow down the pace, and make the replacement council member selection process more open and transparent. As we head towards the May 4th election, a sincere effort to try and select new council members who are acceptable to both sides may be the incumbent’s last real chance to let citizens know that they have heard the unequivocal message sent by the over 500 Shores voters whose signatures made the recall petition drive an unqualified success.
Sincerely,
Dr. Robert E. Lee
One Video Clip is Worth a Thousand Words
March/15/2010 18:55
I have updated the site with a new and telling video clip that may give you some insight in as to how the incumbents plan to replace the two Shores council members who quit, rather than face up to a recall election in May.
Log on to the More Video Clips page and see how the mayor and his incumbents slate ridicule Councilman Dan Schulte when he reaches out and suggests that working to a unanimous consensus on the replacement councilmembers may be a good way to try and bridge the divide.
Is the rude chuckling and the gleeful chortling that you witness consistent with what you expect from your civic officials? Contrary to the position that Mayor Cooper and Councilmember Graziani took at the meeting, Dan’s suggestion that the council work towards unanimity does not violate the city charter, nor does it require that the citizens amend it. A person elected by unanimous vote would still be elected by the majority of the remaining council members, which is what the charter specifies.
I find it amazing that everytime something comes up that the incumbents don’t like, they seem to quote and try to hide behind some alleged charter provision. Dan’s suggestion was a wise one, and if the council wants to do what is best for the community, they should take Dan’s suggestion to heart.
The fact is that two incumbent council members chose to resign in the face of a successful recall petition drive, creating the current council vacancies in what appears to be a clear and calculated effort to circumvent the right of the Shores voters to choose their ultimate replacements, should the recall election succeed in May. When Shores voters are being denied their opportunity to have a say at the polls, one would expect this crucial process to evolve with an appropriate degree of truth, gravitas, and decorum. Once again, the incumbents fall sadly short on their repetitive promise that Shores residents can expect nothing but the best.
Plan to be at the Shores city council meeting at 7PM tomorrow night. Let the incumbents know that these are the people's seats, and that you expect an open, democratic approach that involves citizen input as part of the selection process. It is gratifying to see that the recall campaign has the community energized and that these eleven Shores citizens have stepped forward to volunteer:
- ALAN BROAD
- VITO CUSENZA
- DAVID GALBENSKI
- BRIAN GERAGHTY
- BRYAN LANE
- JANICE PEMBERTON
- JOESPH PUGEL
- WILLIAM RAFFOUL
- RAYMOND RAHI
- RICHARD RUSSELL
- MARK ZYMSLOWSKI
However, you can bet that your last nickel that Mayor Cooper will attempt to preclude anyone who participated in the recall campaign either by circulating or signing petitions from serving as a replacement council member. Just one more reason why he needs to go!
As Dan astutely stated, the reaction of Mayor Cooper and the incumbents tells me everything I need to know. The clip provides dramatic video proof of why, as the banner to this website states "It's time for a change both in our officials and in their attitudes."