During a worksession on Wednesday, January 3, five out of the current six members of the Greenbelt City Council (with Councilmember Rodney Roberts in opposition) came to the consensus not to reopen applications for the vacant council seat (note: no votes can be taken at worksessions). Five days later, council returned to discussing its vacant seat at the January 8 regular meeting and Councilmembers Kristen Weaver and Danielle McKinney broke ranks to request that the application period be extended.
McKinney and Weaver called for reopening applications until January 18 for any potential applicants to submit the required documents, with council then announcing its decision on January 24 in time for a crucial planning retreat scheduled for January 27. Work on the city’s budget will then begin in early February, with Weaver pointing out that their proposal will require only two weeks longer and it will make the whole process fairer.
McKinney explained that the meeting held in Franklin Park to discuss the appointment process had occurred only days after council approved the initial plan. It was, consequently, very sparsely attended, whereas the better-attended meeting in Greenbriar occurred later, so residents had more time to prepare and respond.
Roberts observed that this proposal to extend the application process was important to at least three of the councilmembers and that had council approved his motion to hold a new election to fill the vacancy, staff and the Elections Committee would have taken over at that point relieving council of the decisions.
Councilmember Jenni Pompi stated that while she supported reopening the application process, she also wanted to know what council will do differently to make sure more citizens in Greenbelt apply.
Pope Disagrees
Councilmember Silke Pope, participating online due to illness, held a different opinion entirely. She emphasized that council’s
responsibility was to make this decision as fast as possible, which to her means it should pick the candidate who came eighth in the last election to fill the vacant seventh seat. Pope added that this candidate, Matthew Inzeo, was voted for by over 40 percent of those who participated in the election on November 7. Weaver disputed Pope’s claim that reopening the application process makes council look as if it is trying to control this whole procedure. Jordan described himself as torn between the need to move quickly and the need to be fair and inclusive.
Resident Viewpoints
One likely new applicant will be Kevin Lockhart (known widely as Coach K) from Franklin Park. Greenbelter Leon Schachter, another applicant, stated from the floor that there is someone who appears to be particularly well qualified, so council should stop feeling guilty and choose that applicant. Resident Claudia Jones told council that it should be ashamed of itself for mishandling this issue. Resident Bill Orleans expressed support for reopening the application process, pointing out that the greater problem here with low citizen participation is that councilmembers are all elected at large instead of from districts within the city and the charter needs to be changed to draw more people into the electoral process. Resident Lore Rosenthal stated online that she agrees with Schachter that council should move quickly to choose the one candidate who seems to be obviously best qualified while resident Bob Rudd, also participating online, emphasized instead that the extended process should be open and fair to all. Louise Weissman agreed with Rudd but challenged Weaver in claiming that different communities within the city must produce their own leaders and council cannot do this work for them.
After declaring himself passionate about inclusion, Jordan called for a vote. The motion to reopen the application process for filling the vacancy until January 18 passed 5-1, with only Pope voting no. (Remaining January 8 business will be covered in a separate article.)
Worksession Went the Other Way
At the time of the January 3 worksession on the vacancy, there were five qualified applicants: Amy Knesel, Matthew Inzeo, Leon “Lee” Schachter, James Whipple and Julie Winters. April Tanter had already withdrawn and Whipple has since withdrawn. Lockhart requested to be added to the list of applicants despite having missed the original deadline due, as he claimed, to late-arriving notification.
Correlated Viewpoints
Jordan invited each member of council to speak about reopening applications. At that time, all but one – Roberts – concurred on not reopening. Though acknowledging that perhaps the initial qualification step was too short, council variously blamed the holiday season, insufficient communication to people of different languages and needs, and the poor availability of the News Review in Franklin Park (where it is not allowed to be delivered door to door). Each cited as downsides to accepting more applications as a combination of the possibility of further delays, the strain on council and city staff, the upcoming budget process and the potential legal problems in any selective reopening that favored a particular group or individual. Four of the five councilmembers present (plus Pope by email from Germany) concluded, to quote Weaver, that it’s “too late to go back” and that the pressure of upcoming business was such that they should continue on the current path. Jordan noted that council and the city had used all their standard methods for communicating including in Spanish and English.
Roberts Wants It Fixed
The exception was Roberts, who stated he was “disappointed” that council was “sticking with a bad decision.” He said that when he makes a mistake, he fixes it and he thought council should do the same. He thought a person with Franklin Park’s welfare in mind should be given a chance to participate and that the bottom line should be for council “to do the right thing” even if a delay resulted. He also noted that though the city charter required the vacancy to be filled “as soon as possible” that could mean a month away and still be compliant.
Residents Back Roberts’ View
When the meeting was opened to comments from the floor, five consecutive speakers stood up to agree with Roberts – none to disagree. Applicant Whipple thought there had been no reason to make the deadline so early. Applicant Schachter felt council had done all the groundwork and could easily and legitimately extend the window for a week. Both, despite being applicants themselves, thought council should find a way to allow Lockhart (and perhaps others) to join the pool of applicants, despite lengthening their own odds.
Orleans concurred, stating that council had the power to simply appoint someone and nothing bound them to the current process as it was not prescribed in the city charter. He noted that Lockhart had everything needed for being a suitable replacement for Gordon – pointing out that Lockhart alone is African American, a resident of Franklin Park and has a strong record of working with local youth.
Michael Hartman noted that council has the power to open this up again and that just to say it’s “unfortunate” that this happened is not enough given they have the power to change it.
Coach K Is Ready to Go
Lockhart then spoke, holding up his completed application with, as he pointed out, 50 signatures, the “crazy” financial disclosure and his statement. He felt disappointed council hadn’t changed with the times and insisted that Franklin Park needs to be represented, whether by him or someone else. He said he knows literally hundreds of kids in Franklin Park and that he could do so much for the community to help bring it together. He said he just needs a chance “to get his foot into the door.” Regardless of what happens, he said he will still work with the kids and his presence will still be felt. “Knock! Knock! Let me in,” was Lockhart’s poignant closing request.
Out of numerous additional comments submitted electronically during the meeting only one directly supported continuing with the current process.
Criteria, Question and Voting
The remainder of the worksession was spent in a wide-ranging but ultimately inconclusive discussion of the criteria and the logistics of council’s voting process.
Jordan, Pompi, Weaver and McKinney concurred they should not disclose the interview questions beforehand and on sequestering the applicants while they were interviewed one at a time by council in a session live-streamed to the public.
Council’s view was challenged by applicant Schachter who favored a much shorter list of criteria (Qualifications, Connectivity to Greenbelt and Availability) and a publicly disseminated set of questions that gave the applicants a chance to think before responding. His view was that council was making the process “too complicated.”
After discussing how council would execute the voting process for choosing the councilmember after the interviews, ranked choice voting, suggested by Hartman, seemed to appeal as the optimal method for coming to a fair and reasonably rapid conclusion in which applicants would not know which councilmembers had voted for whom. The decision was deferred for further consideration.