Last month, tensions were high at the Clearwater City Council meeting when members of the council got into a heated debate over the procedure for running the meeting.

 

There was a split vote and lots of discussion over the proper protocol for addressing questions on the consent agenda.

 

Monday, Feb. 1, those tensions continued. For the second straight meeting, the council got into a debate over courtesy and whether a member of the council should have the right to pull an item from the consent agenda for more discussion.

 

Councilman Chris Ritzer asked to pull the claims/accounts payable item because he had a question about a check. Mayor Pete Edmonson asked to pull the item regarding a step wage increase for maintenance worker James Kirchenbauer for further discussion.

 

A motion to approve the consent agenda minus those two items failed, 3-2 with Councilmen Kris Crandall, Mike Ranum and Rollie Lange voting against.

 

Since the council voted not to approve the consent agenda, Edmonson began going into discussion on each individual item, instead.

 

But Crandall made a motion to approve the entire consent agenda as written. It was seconded by Lange.

 

Edmonson said the council’s process has always been to  pull consent agenda items if there are questions on them.

 

“I understand consent agenda should be less contentious items and they should just go through,” said Crandall.

 

Councilman Rollie Lange said any items that need discussion should bepart of the main agenda, not the consent agenda.

 

“Consent agenda is supposed to be basic business and not for debates or questions at this point,” he said. “That was my contention before.”

 

“You have the obligation to the residents who voted for you to understand what our questions and concerns are,” Edmonson said to Crandall. “We have a council member who has a question on a consent agenda (item). Pull that item and let’s discuss it.”

 

Crandall said he would not  agree to remove the item on the step wage increase.

 

“It’s an employee review and it doesn’t get discussed in an open forum,” he said. “I believe you might be bullying me here. I have a motion on the floor to accept the consent agenda as written.”

 

“And regarding claims and accounts payable, you don’t care that a council member has a question on a check?” asked Edmonson. “It seems to me that you are bullying me - if you want to talk about bullying.”

 

“If I have a question about something on accounts payable, I contact the city administrator and talk to him before the meeting so I don’t take our time up here,” said Crandall.

 

“I recall over and over again we pull items for questions,” said Edmonson.

 

“And that really doesn’t do the public much good if there’s a question on it,” Ritzer said to Crandall.

 

When the council voted, the entire consent agenda passed, 3-2.

 

“Consent agenda is approved, once again with concerns from council members that are disregarded from the other council,” said Edmonson.

 

The debates over meeting procedure continued when Engineer Kevin Bittner’s turn came to give an update on the Northeast Area Street Improvement project.

 

“I’ve been asked to attend, so I’m here,” he said. “As far as anything new to report - nothing new.”

 

Bittner said he has been in contact with RL Larson, the contractor, about the unfinished items.

 

“We’re going to convene in a few weeks before project start-up in March to get all our ducks in a row,” he said. “Whenever the snow is gone we’re going to do another inspection to consider all the things that might have happened over the winter.”

 

After Bittner’s report, Edmonson spoke to the council about the engineer being asked to attend council meetings.

 

“Council see any reasons for him to continue to show up if there’s no items?” he asked.

 

“He doesn’t have to charge us for the visit. It was very nice for me to bounce some items off him,” said Crandall. “I found that comforting. My opinion is, if he wants to come up and offer his expertise, I have no problem with that.”

 

“Do you want to hire Mr. Bittner on retainer and have him here..?” asked Edmondson.

 

“It doesn’t cost us anything to have him here,” said Crandall.

 

“So what purpose did he serve here tonight?” asked Edmonson.

 

“He certainly answered a couple of questions for me that planning and zoning was talking about,” said Crandall.

 

“We’re you able to ask him outside the meeting?” asked Edmonson.

 

 “I don’t see how that’s relevant,” said Crandall.

 

“It’s kind of similar to accounts payable. You can find out outside the meeting,” said Edmonson.

 

Edmonson asked other council members their opinion.

 

“If there’s an item on the agenda that looks like it can use some feedback from the engineer, I think that should be up to Kevin (Kress) to decide,” said Crandall.

 

“I thought so too. But he (Administrator Kevin Kress) continues to invite him when there’s no business to discuss,” said Edmonson. “So clearly, we’ve got an administrator who is looking to council to make those decisions.

 

Councilman Lange interrupted the exchange between Edmonson and Crandall.

 

“Mr. Mayor you’re out of order. You’re making contentions that are not reasonable in a public setting, and I will call for a private meeting at another time to discuss these (matters), but not at this particular meeting,” he said. “I think you (should) stick to the agenda. Personal opinions don’t apply here.”

 

“I think last meeting Mr. Kress commented, and correct me if I’m wrong, that he had been instructed to invite him.” 

 

“We’ll I guess I didn’t feel that way,” said Kress. “I asked if that duty was to be dropped onto me, which is fine. I’m totally fine with asking or telling Kevin (Bittner) to come, but I really didn’t get a response from the council if that was the direction you wanted me to go. If that’s the direction we have right now, I’d like to hear it from everybody so I know moving forward, that it’s up to me to decide if he comes or not.”

 

“I’m for that,” said Crandall.

 

Lange also felt it was up to Kress.

“He’s the city administrator. We hired him to administrate. If he thinks he should be here, it should be his call,” said Lange. “I don’t particularly think he needs to be here for the next month or two. “But that’s my opinion.”

“I don’t think we’re in disagreement here,” said Edmonson.

“I think it would be up to Mr. Bittner and Mr. Kress,” said Councilman Mike Ranum. “Mr. Bittner knows if there’s anything important going on.”

“I’m not sure where the lines of communication crossed, but council wants you to use your own discretion,” Edmonson told Kress.

Kress questioned Lange’s idea to hold a private meeting.

“I want talk about some of the conduct that we’re having,” said Lange. “I think a private meeting would be appropriate to talk about some matters that I think are important to administer the city that need to be clarified.”

Lange said he felt the full city council should be at the meeting.

“I think we need to talk about personal matters,” he said.

“Are you asking that the council meets to discuss the conduct, or are you asking that the city attorney comes?” asked Kress.

Lange said he didn’t feel it was necessary, since the discussion was going to be about conduct. But Kress said it might be better to have the attorney present.

He said he would contact the city attorney about attending a closed meeting on the issue.