Politics is so divisive these days, everyone has an opinion – a loudly stated, red-in-the-face opinion.
Oddly, the Jefferson County Council doesn’t have enough of them.
Reporters at Leader World Headquarters avoid opinions in the interest of unbiased stories. But I earn part of my paycheck by doing research, drawing conclusions and writing about them – therein making your day. (Sometimes, maybe? Throw me a bone.)
County Council members have a somewhat similar job description. Taxpayers pay each of them about $11,000 a year to review information, form opinions and vote. They get to skip the writing part.
Too often, council members decline to say “yea” or “nay,” settling on “whatever.”
More officially, it’s called abstaining. At times during his eight-year tenure, former County Executive Ken Waller asked council members to cool it on abstaining. It’s hard to see an impact from that admonition.
A case in point occurred Feb. 11, when the council allocated $43,000 to purchase a 1.05-acre piece of land at 2800 Horrell Lane, next to the High Ridge Civic Center.
The purchase gives the Jefferson County Parks and Recreation Department, which owns and operates the Civic Center, a 4-acre block of property at the site, rather than an “L”-shaped tract.
Parks director Tim Pigg said he’s uncertain how to best use the acquisition, but he wants to develop a plan and then apply for grants to fund it.
The proposal passed with four council members in favor, nobody opposed, and three abstainers – Charles Groeteke (District 4, Barnhart), Jim Terry (District 7, Cedar Hill) and Renee Reuter (District 2, Imperial).
That caught my attention. Nearly half the council sat it out.
Just two weeks earlier, the council had voted 6-0 to allow County Executive Dennis Gannon to enter into a contract to buy the property.
That Jan. 28 vote was part of the “consent agenda,” a list of routine council actions that don’t appear to require discussion – vote yes or no on the bundle.
Except for Groeteke, everybody voted for the whole list, including the park contract. He abstained. He told me it was because of the park deal.
“I just didn’t have enough information at the time,” he said. “It was a tough decision to make, because there were things on the consent agenda I didn’t want to abstain from.”
Terry and Reuter followed Groeteke’s example in the second vote. So they voted for Gannon to enter the deal, but abstained from giving him the money to do it.
Council observers know the trio often votes as a bloc, but Groeteke said he has no idea why the other two eventually lined up with him.
The park deal has turned controversial, at least partly because there were two appraisals on the tract, the first for $30,000, which the seller apparently wouldn’t go for, and the second for $43,000.
I’m not criticizing council members who might object to the higher price, or who want to zero in on a use before buying the tract, or who simply don’t want to spend the money.
I’m unhappy with those abstentions. What’s wrong with voting no?
Several signs indicate this won’t be the last we hear about the park purchase. Former County Council member Don Bickowski spoke against it at the Jan. 28 meeting and former Parks Board member Linda Schroeder followed suit on Feb. 11. The Leader already has received one letter to the editor opposing the deal, with a hint that more would come.
When a storm is brewing, it’s all the more reason for council members to vote how they really, really feel.
Abstentions are meant to allow governmental board members to skip a vote when they have a conflict of interest – like, say, their brother-in-law owns the widget factory that’s up for approval – not to dodge controversy.
Unfortunately, the problem is not confined to the County Council. Abstentions crop up regularly at other meetings Leader reporters cover. Sometimes, the conflict is obvious, and abstaining makes sense. Other times, it’s the heat that’s obvious, and board members run for the kitchen door.
Jefferson County attorney Bob Sweeney has been preaching against unwarranted abstentions for more than a quarter-century. That’s when he started providing legal counsel to government boards.
He currently is the lawyer-on-the-spot for about 10 boards in the county, including the Arnold City Council and the countywide 911 Dispatch.
“You have an obligation as an elected official to do your job,” he said. “I think it (abstaining when there’s no conflict) is very obnoxious. You run for office and then you want to shirk your responsibility.”
Sweeney believes the law backs him up and that officials who continually abstain could be impeached, but he acknowledges he has not represented the County Council and is unfamiliar with its rules.
“But even if you CAN do it, it is a very bad practice,” he said. “It’s the spirit of the thing.”
Sweeney said he delivers a spiel to new governmental clients.
“I tell them, ‘You have to make hard decisions. That’s why you’re here.’”
He said the board members he advises generally abstain from abstaining.
In rare instances, where an “incredibly technical” subject comes up for vote and officials sincerely feel incapable of saying yes or no, Sweeney said they don’t have to abstain.
“Table it,” he said.
And if the county’s charter doesn’t prohibit no-cause abstentions (I searched the document and couldn’t find such a clause), Sweeney has a suggestion:
Add one.
I vote “yea.”
