After the selection of Fred Messerle for the office of Coos County commissioner I emailed Bob Main and Cam Parry to express my concerns over potential conflicts of interest. Messerle has extensive land and business holdings in Coos County and I have been told may have an interest in a local bank that regularly does business with the Port of Coos Bay. Messerle is married to the director of the South Coast Development Council and his brother, Ken Messerle, is a registered lobbyist who consults with local agencies that also collaborate with the county from time to time.
In my opinion, it would be hard for anyone to put aside all these influences when making decisions and even if he could, the appearance of impropriety will always be a specter. The potential for lawsuits stemming from decisions seen as colored are great.
On the one hand, if Main and Parry vote in lockstep, as it appears may be the case, Messerle’s votes may not be necessary as the quorum will prevail without him. If we had a truly diverse board of commissioners, however, Messerle could be the deciding vote.
In my email to commissioners Main and Parry I asked them who would be responsible for determining when Messerle should recuse himself from voting but after more than a week I have not received an answer. This concern is the basis of my complaint to the Oregon Government Ethics Commission.
This brings back the matter of unauthorized executive sessions. Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen wrote that “…transparency and citizen oversight” is essential to our democratic system of government and compliance with “Open Meetings Law and Public Records Law is an essential duty” of all government agencies, officials, and employees. Public meeting and records rules are more than just an ‘Emily Post Guide to Etiquette‘ they exist to protect the public, the taxpayer.
My objection to the selection process for filling the elected vacancies the county has suffered lately is the selection panel, rather than the commissioners themselves, are seen as responsible for the choice. Now that Main and Parry have taken full ownership of the appointment of Fred Messerle to the board of commission the public can fully consider the wisdom of the choice they have made during the next election should they choose to run again. This is the beauty and representative of the purpose of open meetings.
Probably, the same people who elected Bob Main in 2008 are not likely to vote for a Fred Messerle.
Again, in the absence of any answers from the commissioners I would encourage anyone who is concerned about this matter to seek guidance from OGEC.
UPDATE: Some citizens have questioned whether topics discussed in the executive session held in advance of the May 17, 2011 board meeting were legally exempt from public view. Cause for concern is that Main, Parry and the yet to be appointed Messerle emerged from an executive session with a prepared statement about the applicant deliberations conducted in executive session on May 10. Additionally, immediately after the board meeting and after the swearing in of Messerle, all three commissioners were observed going into a meeting in Main’s office.
Chatting about fishing tackle for all I know. Just because they form a quorum doesn’t mean they are talking about county business or that there is anything nefarious going on. If, however, they are talking about county business, no matter how benign, outside of public view and without proper public notice they are in violation of public meeting rules. This denies the public the opportunity to contribute to the dialog on matters that affect all county citizens. There is a wealth of knowledge and experience available to the commissioners if they are willing to listen
What do you think they are talking about in there?