County Board clears up the abstention vote
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
By Carmen Ensinger
The issue of when a board member can or should abstain from a vote came up at the special board meeting called on Wednesday, July 20 to revote on appointing long-time Greene County Rural Water District (GCRWD) Chairman David Longmeyer.
Longmeyer was voted off the board by the County Board at the July 13 regular board meeting by a 3-3 vote of the board which included one abstention vote by board member Chris Elliott. A tie vote results in a motion failing, therefore Longmeyer was not appointed for another five-year term on the GCRWD board.
The vote came as a shock to those associated with the GCRWD and the board and resulted in numerous calls to various Greene County Board members which resulted in Board Member Regan Joehl calling for the special meeting for a re-vote.
At the July 13 meeting the voting went as such: Board Chairman Mark Strang, along with board members Andrea Schnelten and Joyce Clark voted no on Longmeyer’s re-appointment while board members Christy Lake, Earlene Castleberry and Joehl voted yes. Board member Chris Elliott abstained resulting in the 3-3 tie, which is the same as a motion not passing.
Joehl explained his reason for calling the special meeting.
“My initial concern was Chris’ abstention vote,” Joehl said. “I didn’t feel like he was qualified to make that vote and therefore it was an invalid vote.”
Joehl said that according to the by-laws an abstention vote should only be used when a person can show a directed interest
Schnelten said she would like States Attorney Caleb Briscoe, who was also in attendance, to remind the board when an abstention vote should be used and explain what directed interest was since it was very vague.
“My interpretation would be that if the person you are voting on would be a family member or if you have direct dealings with them that would qualify, such as a business relationship,” Briscoe said. “Or, if you stand to gain monetarily from what you are voting on.”
Elliott said he didn’t have any such conflict that caused him to cast his abstention vote.
“My reason for abstaining had nothing to do with a conflict – I abstained over not having enough information,” Elliott said. “It was clear that this was very different from the appointments to the boards we have made in the past.
“I’m in a position where it is a 3-3 vote. I didn’t want to make a no vote and be uninformed and that is the wrong vote to make, or make a yes vote and be uninformed and that is the wrong vote. So, with no information, I just chose to abstain because my vote is going to affect all of the customers in the rural water district.”
After this issue was settled, the issue arose of who was allowed to call for the revote. Normally, according to the by-laws, it would need to be a member of the “losing” side, but since it was a tie, Briscoe said he felt it could be either side who could call for the vote.
Clark settled the matter by originally being a “no” vote and makin the motion for the re-vote.
