An attempt to start a recall drive aimed at ousting three Oxford Village Council members, whose votes led to the layoff of a longtime municipal employee, failed Monday morning due to a lack of clarity in the petition language.
‘I’m a little disappointed right now,? said village resident Monique Way, who filed petition language with Oakland County Sept. 22 seeking to recall village President Christopher Bishop along with council members Anthony Albensi and Michael Hamilton.
During a special hearing in Pontiac, the county’s Election Commission ? consisting of county Clerk Ruth Johnson, county Treasurer Patrick Dohany and Chief Probate Judge Elizabeth Pezzetti ? voted 3-0 to deny all three recall petitions.
Johnson cited parts of the petition language that were ‘unclear,? phrased in an ‘awkward? manner and lacking in ‘specificity? as the reason for the commission’s unanimous denial.
‘I thought they were unwarranted in general,? Bishop said. ‘I am happy to see that they were denied.?
‘The petition was clearly without merit,? Albensi said. ‘I’m glad the Oakland County (Election Commission) saw that and dismissed it. I believe these folks were out there creating a disruption, wasting time and taxpayer dollars. I’m happy that it was unsuccessful.?
‘I’m happy to have the opportunity to continue serving on the council and not have that in the way,? said Hamilton, who noted he didn’t even review the petition. ‘I felt it was bogus from the beginning. It was a shot in the dark from somebody who had it in for us, somebody who was dissatisfied with us for more than just those reasons.?
When asked if she plans to amend the petitions and re-file them, Way replied, ‘I will have to get back to you about that.?
‘I don’t have a problem if someone files a recall petition,? Bishop noted. ‘They’re more than welcome to do that. It’s part of the democratic process.?
Most the reasons cited by Way for the recall revolved around the village’s recent layoff of Treasurer Maureen ‘Moe? Helmuth, a 22-year employee.
In August, council voted to consolidate the clerk and treasurer positions and place the cost-savings from wages and benefits in the village’s Water Fund to help pay for the municipality’s yet-to-be-constructed $2.45 million water treatment plant.
Bishop, Albensi and Hamilton voted to merge the positions while council members Teri Stiles and Tom Benner voted against it.
As a result of council’s action, village Manager Joe Young decided to have Clerk Dan Luick take over the treasurer’s duties and lay off Helmuth as of Sept. 19.
Way initiated the recalls in response to the Aug. 26 village meeting at which a group of Helmuth’s supporters confronted council.
‘A bunch of us had some questions that the council was not willing to answer,? she said.
In her petition, Way, a village resident since 2004, accused Bishop, Albensi and Hamilton of the following:
n Refusing to answer the public’s questions regarding Helmuth’s dismissal during the Aug. 26 meeting;
n Repeatedly operating outside the village charter such as ‘being involved in employee matters beyond the purview and powers of the village council?;
n ‘Potential abuse of public office? such as micro-managing the village manager and his duties;
n ‘Continued refusal to be accountable? to village taxpayers;
n ‘Bolstering? the village’s water fund with money from the general fund;
n Openly discussing Helmuth’s employee evaluation results without her permission during two public meetings, placing the village in a situation for ‘potential legal actions.?
Way’s use of the terms ‘potential abuse? and ‘potential legal actions? were ‘unclear? in Johnson’s opinion.
‘Either there is a charge of abuse of public office or there is not a charge of abuse,? she said. ‘It really doesn’t tell me what happened and I think it doesn’t tell the public what happened. You cannot defend yourself against potential abuse. What is that??
With regard to the term ‘potential legal actions,? Johnson indicated its lack of clarity begs the question, ‘Was there any legal action taken against the village or not??
It was also noted that the ‘continued refusal to be accountable? portion of the language lacked ‘specificity.?
In her reasons for the recall, Way also accused Bishop of taking office while owing the county fees for late campaign filing and Hamilton of ‘public behavior unbecoming of an elected, public official.?
According to county records, Bishop failed to pay a $60 late fee assessed against him for not filing his campaign committee’s statement of organization on time. Bishop told this reporter he later paid the fee in full.
In March, Hamilton was ticketed for disorderly conduct by village police for his alleged involvement in a bar fight, however, the case was later dismissed.