Waldport mayor walks out of another executive session, but council moves ahead on city property rules

By GARRET JAROS / Lincoln Chronicle

WALDPORT – A special meeting of the Waldport city council on Wednesday – held solely to continue the regularly scheduled meeting from the previous week which ended prematurely with the mayor’s departure – resulted once again in the mayor’s premature departure.

Last week’s meeting was abruptly adjourned during the council comments and concerns portion at the end of the regular session because of a verbal commotion set off by with an audience member.

Councilors were scheduled to hold an executive (closed) session following the meeting, but Mayor Heide Lambert left after the open session was adjourned.

The agenda for Wednesday’s special meeting was short. It began with the interrupted council comments and concerns from the previous meeting, followed by the executive session meant for last week and ending with a public session to announce any actions taken during the executive session.

Executive sessions are closed to the public so government bodies can deliberate in private limited topics detailed in Oregon law. The press is allowed to attend but cannot report on the specifics of what is said, with the caveat the media can report if what is said strays from the publicly notified topic.

The council moved to begin the executive session with the posted topic of considering “matters relating to the safety of the governing body and of the public staff and volunteers and the security of public body facilities and meeting spaces.”

But before leaving the room, Tony Thimakis, the lead petitioner in the failed effort to recall six council members and one of only two community members who attended the special meeting, was given permission to pass out copies of a document he had emailed addressing the subject of the executive session.

“Your proposed resolution does not address safety or security needs to restrict the city council from using their authority to inspect, investigate, or determine if any activity is needed to address the concerns of the citizens,” the statement read in part. “As such your use of ORS 192.66-(2)(o) is at best an extreme reach of the law for an executive meeting.

“This is actually a change in the authority of the council and should be addressed by the community,” it continued. “Changes in the role of councilors, as defined by charter and council rules are and should continue to be discussed in open meetings. You are working on a work-around for Council Authority and Responsibility.”

A second Thimakis letter claimed in part that the city manager does not have the authority to deny councilors from visiting or authorizing visits to property

“That is the council’s authority,” it said.

Cutter told the council he had submitted Thimakis’ email along with his response to the Oregon Government Ethics Commission.

Executive session

The executive session began with Cutter stating its purpose and what instigated the need for it. Lambert immediately objected, saying what he was saying was outside the scope of the ordinance cited to hold the meeting.

Cutter replied that if she felt it was outside the scope, it was her option to declare it and leave the meeting if she so chose. Lambert asked if Cutter planned to continue, to which he replied they did.

“Okay, well then, I will not facilitate the meeting that is not in open meeting compliance,” Lambert said. “I object. Please put that on the record right now. Thank you press for being here and recording this.”

Councilor Jayme Morris said reporters could not record because it was an executive session. Lambert responded they could record anything not covered by state law used to call the meeting.

Lambert then left the executive session and did not return for the public meeting that followed.

The Chronicle immediately reached out via text to ask Lambert why she left Wednesday’s meeting. She responded Thursday by text to say in part that the ordinance cited to hold the meeting “only allows the council to speak about city owned property” and “there was no specific facility listed so council could only speak about security as a whole, not a resolution in closed session.”

She felt it was an open meeting law violation to speak about a specific property or an alleged incident.

“In order for the ethics commission to not hold me liable, I will not facilitate a closed meeting where the discussion goes beyond the scope of the ORS,” she said.

And then in reference to an incident in October when she gave permission to community members and a watershed group to go past no trespassing signs on city-owned property adjacent to Township 13 and adjoining city owned property where the water treatment plant is located, Lambert said the way that property has been kept off limits to the public is wrong.

Open session

Once back in open session, councilors and Cutter discussed the property where the trespass occurred and the dumping of fill from the South Crestline Drive project on the property. Cutter previously stated the fill would eventually be used for base to extend the road that goes past the water treatment plant.

The city manager said he would be happy to give tours to councilors, the public or the press but that city-owned property and facilities are otherwise off limits for safety and security reasons.

Dunn then asked if councilors had any questions before voting on the resolution discussed in executive session.

“This is nothing new, this is in our charter already,” Dunn said. “We’re not changing nothing…”

Cutter interrupted with a clarification.

“No councilor shall have access or the individual authority to grant access to any city facility …” Cutter said. “Our charter is very explicit that the authority of a council comes from the council as a whole, not any individual. Councilors requesting access must request such access from the city manager or from the body of the council. This simply says … you need to talk with me or decide as a body that you want to hold a tour. Again, the charter establishes the authority … that I manage the properties. This is to ensure everyone’s safety … ‘No councilor shall discuss or inform others about the security of any facility nor give permission for others to access or trespass.’ Again, this just comes back to common sense councilor responsibility …”

The council, with Jerry Townsend absent, unanimously passed the resolution while Thimakis again spoke up to say if the language was already in the charter then the council was wasting its time.

Cutter responded by saying the resolution and the executive session were on the agenda for the council meeting last week “and the public absolutely had the opportunity to weigh in during citizen’s comments and concerns.”

• Garret Jaros covers the communities of Yachats, Waldport, south Lincoln County and natural resources issues and can be reached at GJaros@YachatsNews.com