Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appointments Tif topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local commentator objects to aldermen's handling of TIF appointment during public comment
Summary
Gary Groman used the board's public-comment period to criticize Aldermen Schultz and Lucas for removing his name from consideration for the city's Tax Increment Financing Commission; the board later approved appointments to the TIF Commission as part of the consent agenda.
During the public-comment period at the Oct. 24 meeting, Gary Groman told the Board of Aldermen he believed aldermen had improperly moved to remove his name from consideration for appointment to the city's Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Commission.
Groman said the alleged motion to remove his name occurred on Oct. 14 and that two aldermen, identified by Groman as Alderman Schultz and Alderman Lucas, objected to comments he had made during a prior meeting. "Schultz made a motion, seconded by Lucas, that Gary Groman's name be removed from consideration because of alleged problems they had with those comments," Groman said.
Groman disputed Schultz's characterization of his prior remarks and said the video of his presentation "clearly shows" he did not ask the board to change an ordinance or to otherwise take official action. He told the board his comments were about "the pettiness of Schultz's correction" and that Schultz's later remarks were "despicable and lacking of honor," repeating that he believed there had been no request or opportunity for him to respond during his five-minute comment period on the earlier occasion.
The board did not provide a response to Groman during the public-comment item. The clerk then moved to the consent agenda; among the consent items listed and approved by vote was bill number 66-17, described in the consent reading as an ordinance "appointing members to fill certain vacancies on the city of Branson Tax Increment Financing Commission." The consent agenda passed 6-0.
The transcript contains Groman's statements and the clerk's subsequent reading of the consent agenda. The record in this meeting does not indicate any board action to investigate or re-open the appointment process in response to Groman's remarks.
