New planning commissioners OK'd, but lawsuit goes on

A four-month drama over the City Council’s appointment of a new planning commission wrapped up Monday with a second vote to name new commissioners, but some former members are still pursuing a lawsuit against the city.

In a series of votes that were almost identical to the council’s first attempt in July, the six commission hopefuls originally named were again successful.

Not among the new appointees are three former planning commissioners who, when they were not named to the panel in July, filed a lawsuit alleging that the City Council violated its procedures for removing commissioners.

In response, the council adopted a series of changes to its municipal and zoning codes that effectively allow the steps it took when a commission is “reconstituted,” as the city says occurred this past summer.

The city disputes the former commissioners’ claim that they were “fired,” saying that the “old” planning commission was dissolved along with the city’s design board, and a new panel was created to conduct the duties of both.

With a new panel created under policies adopted in October, the council took a re-vote Monday on the 16 applicants who sought seats.

Again, current planning commissioner Chris Arras received votes from all members of the council, the only applicant to be unanimously named to the board.

Applicants Melissa Abercrombie, Dennis Elias, Curtis Johansen and Jennifer Pierre received four votes in the first round. In the second round of voting, applicant Marianne Hurley was named to the remaining seat, receiving four votes from a smaller pool of only those who received three votes in the first round.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit — former commissioners Spence F. Burton, Kathleen Miller and Jack Rittenhouse — received three votes each in the first round, from council members Mike Harris, Mike Healy and David Rabbitt.

Those three council members have criticized the council majority’s decision not to re-appoint existing planning commissioners. Healy has called the decision a “power grab” by the council majority, while Councilmember David Glass defended the merger of the two boards as a step to streamline the planning process and improve efficiency.

The issue was again in dispute Monday night.

“I find the whole entire episode really a travesty and irresponsible,” Rabbitt said. “I believe that people who were duly appointed should serve out their terms and they should be thanked for volunteering their time, not tossed out for political purposes.”

Harris took aim at Glass’ previous assertion that the merger of the boards is an “efficiency grab.”

“It was an efficient way to create a lawsuit, it was an efficient way to appoint people that agree with you and shut out diversity of opinion, and it was an efficient way to create uncertainty in our community,” Harris said.

Glass, in response, said Harris and Rabbitt were violating council members’ agreement not to attack each other’s motives, made at a goal-setting session in January.

“You can say all you want that you disagree with decisions that are made up here, but the decisions that are made, from my part, are coming from completely pure attempts to achieve efficiency,” he said. “I deeply am disappointed in the continued attacks on motivation.”

The new planning commissioners are scheduled to be seated at Tuesday’s meeting.

(Contact Corey Young at corey.young@arguscourier.com)