Williamsport Assistant Mayor Anthony T. Drury, left, and Councilwoman Joan E. Knode (File photos) |
In Williamsport, two elected officials who challenged a town zoning decision in court also were part of a recent closed session to discuss other potential lawsuits.
Assistant Mayor Anthony T. Drury and Councilwoman Joan E. Knode were among 45 petitioners who filed an administrative appeal in court in 2008.
The petitioners challenged a decision by the Williamsport Board of Zoning Appeals granting a special exception for a proposed Sheetz store.
They lost their challenge in Washington County Circuit Court and with the Maryland Court of Special Appeals. And the Maryland Court of Appeals, the state's top court, declined to hear the case.
This month, the Williamsport Town Council went into executive session to discuss "potential litigation" in the case, although the supposed threat of a lawsuit appeared to be nothing more than a rumor, according to Mayor James G. McCleaf II.
Drury was a councilman at the time the formal appeal was filed. Knode was elected to the town council in 2009.
Both were part of this month's executive session discussion about potential lawsuits involving the proposal.
Edward Kuczynski, the town's attorney, said Drury's and Knode's dual roles — as petitioners and elected officials — were not a conflict of interest. Once the court challenge concluded, there was no danger of overlap with their official town government roles, he said.
Drury's and Knode's roles in the original challenge weren't mentioned when the council voted to go into executive session.
Drury voted against holding the private meeting, while Knode voted in favor of it.
During subsequent interviews, both said they didn't see a conflict in being part of an executive session to discuss potential litigation after having sued over the same case.
Drury said he challenged the zoning board's decision as a private citizen, and there was never any discussion about a possible conflict.
"All I can say is that I was never told that I couldn't be on that lawsuit," he said.
Knode said she also wasn't told she couldn't sit in on the executive session, after having been a party in the court challenge.
"It hasn't come up yet," she said last week. "I guess we'll cross that bridge when it does."
William C. Wantz, an attorney who represented the petitioners, agreed that it would be difficult to find a conflict once proceedings in the case are complete.
Another petitioner, Washington County Commissioner Jeff Cline, also was on the town council when the challenge was filed, but no longer is.
"In these small towns, just about anything could overlap as a conflict ...," Cline said last week. "You have to depend on someone's integrity."
Knode said she didn't know she officially was a petitioner in the case. She only knew that she was asked to sign something opposing the zoning board's ruling.
William T. Clipper of Burkittsville, Md., listed as the lead petitioner in the case, didn't return a phone message left for him last week.
In Williamsport's code of ethics, a conflict-of-interest section applies mainly to situations in which a town official or employee, or their families, could benefit financially.
Jim Peck, the director of research information for the Maryland Municipal League, said that potential financial benefits are generally the target of most conflict-of-interest policies.
On May 9, McCleaf cast the tie-breaking vote in favor of going into executive session after the council was split 3-3.
Knode and Councilmen Timothy Fraker and James C. Kalbfleisch were in favor of the closed session, which was not on the agenda. Drury and council members Maya Haines and Bill G. Green were opposed.
Fraker asked for an executive session to talk about the Sheetz project. Kuczynski asked if the category was "potential litigation," and Fraker said it was.
Under the Maryland Open Meetings Act, government bodies must conduct business in public. However, they may — but are not required to — hold closed sessions on topics that fit into certain categories of exemption. One category is obtaining legal advice for pending or potential litigation.
Assistant Mayor Anthony T. Drury and Councilwoman Joan E. Knode were among 45 petitioners who filed an administrative appeal in court in 2008.
The petitioners challenged a decision by the Williamsport Board of Zoning Appeals granting a special exception for a proposed Sheetz store.
They lost their challenge in Washington County Circuit Court and with the Maryland Court of Special Appeals. And the Maryland Court of Appeals, the state's top court, declined to hear the case.
This month, the Williamsport Town Council went into executive session to discuss "potential litigation" in the case, although the supposed threat of a lawsuit appeared to be nothing more than a rumor, according to Mayor James G. McCleaf II.
Drury was a councilman at the time the formal appeal was filed. Knode was elected to the town council in 2009.
Both were part of this month's executive session discussion about potential lawsuits involving the proposal.
Edward Kuczynski, the town's attorney, said Drury's and Knode's dual roles — as petitioners and elected officials — were not a conflict of interest. Once the court challenge concluded, there was no danger of overlap with their official town government roles, he said.
Drury's and Knode's roles in the original challenge weren't mentioned when the council voted to go into executive session.
Drury voted against holding the private meeting, while Knode voted in favor of it.
During subsequent interviews, both said they didn't see a conflict in being part of an executive session to discuss potential litigation after having sued over the same case.
Drury said he challenged the zoning board's decision as a private citizen, and there was never any discussion about a possible conflict.
"All I can say is that I was never told that I couldn't be on that lawsuit," he said.
Knode said she also wasn't told she couldn't sit in on the executive session, after having been a party in the court challenge.
"It hasn't come up yet," she said last week. "I guess we'll cross that bridge when it does."
William C. Wantz, an attorney who represented the petitioners, agreed that it would be difficult to find a conflict once proceedings in the case are complete.
Another petitioner, Washington County Commissioner Jeff Cline, also was on the town council when the challenge was filed, but no longer is.
"In these small towns, just about anything could overlap as a conflict ...," Cline said last week. "You have to depend on someone's integrity."
Knode said she didn't know she officially was a petitioner in the case. She only knew that she was asked to sign something opposing the zoning board's ruling.
William T. Clipper of Burkittsville, Md., listed as the lead petitioner in the case, didn't return a phone message left for him last week.
In Williamsport's code of ethics, a conflict-of-interest section applies mainly to situations in which a town official or employee, or their families, could benefit financially.
Jim Peck, the director of research information for the Maryland Municipal League, said that potential financial benefits are generally the target of most conflict-of-interest policies.
On May 9, McCleaf cast the tie-breaking vote in favor of going into executive session after the council was split 3-3.
Knode and Councilmen Timothy Fraker and James C. Kalbfleisch were in favor of the closed session, which was not on the agenda. Drury and council members Maya Haines and Bill G. Green were opposed.
Fraker asked for an executive session to talk about the Sheetz project. Kuczynski asked if the category was "potential litigation," and Fraker said it was.
Under the Maryland Open Meetings Act, government bodies must conduct business in public. However, they may — but are not required to — hold closed sessions on topics that fit into certain categories of exemption. One category is obtaining legal advice for pending or potential litigation.
