Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Belton board schedules interviews for vacant seat after member says leadership transition 'blindsided' colleagues
Summary
After a board member publicly read concerns about a prearranged leadership transition and the timing of a mayoral application, the board agreed to interview four top-ranked candidates at a May 27 special meeting and decided not to stream that meeting.
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board members moved to schedule a special meeting on Wednesday, May 27 at 4:30 p.m. to interview four candidates for a vacant seat and to consider a turf agenda item; the board voted to approve the motion.
The meeting included an extended, prepared statement from a trustee who said she had received detailed information a week earlier describing a sequence of events (a vice president stepping down, Dave Daniels assuming the vice president role and former board member and current mayor Norman Larky later applying) and said the public meeting unfolded "exactly as they had previously been described to me step by step." She said she was "completely blindsided" and raised concerns about transparency and the appearance of precoordination; she explicitly said she was not accusing anyone of wrongdoing but said the circumstances warranted public acknowledgment.
Board members discussed mechanics for reviewing candidates (time-stamped numbers tied to application time stamps), scoring guides similar to hiring practice, and whether to interview three or four finalists. By consensus they selected candidate numbers 5, 2, 10 and 11 for interviews. The board discussed interview format, length, question submission deadlines (Tuesday before the interview), and whether the interviews should be streamed. A majority of board members said the interviews should not be streamed, citing concerns that remote viewing could allow candidates to observe or share information inappropriately; others argued streaming would enhance transparency. The board ultimately decided not to stream the special meeting but confirmed the meeting will be open to the public in person.
The winning candidate from the special meeting will be seated at the June board meeting; the board directed staff to post the special meeting and requested interview questions be submitted in advance.

