Sparks fly between
mayor, city council
by Holly Allen
In a split vote following a heated debate between Mayor Jeanette Shipley, City Administrator Audree Guzman, and members of the city council, Valley Falls resident Jayson Oliver was removed from his appointment as a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission during the Sept. 6 meeting of the city council.
Oliver was arrested outside City Hall Sept. 5 and booked into the Jefferson County jail on charges of criminal trespass and felony stalking. According to Kansas statute, stalking is typically a Class A misdemeanor. Felony stalking requires a previous stalking conviction.
Oliver’s removal came at the recommendation of Guzman, who also serves the Planning Commission.
“If he has other charges of stalking, I’m not sure the city, as a body, should have that member representing the city in any capacity to an appointed group,” Guzman stated. “I don’t think that would be a good representation of public trust.”
The city council was unaware of Oliver’s criminal history at the time of his appointment to the board, as the bylaws do not require a background check on appointees at this time. The information was not disclosed by or asked of Oliver.
Though the board has not adopted a set of stipulations for the removal of its members — such procedures are not required by state statute — Guzman’s recommendation was based on violation of the ethical code of conduct in the bylaws for members of the Planning Commission.
Guzman and city attorney Leonard Buddenbohm advised such procedures for removal should be added to the bylaws in the future.
Buddenbohm also apparently agreed with Guzman’s assessment of the situation.
“If you don’t (remove Oliver from the board), it looks like you’re accepting of his position with the city, despite the current and previous charges against the member,” he stated. “I suggest this motion would be in the best interest of Valley Falls, period, regarding public trust and not getting into any details.”
Dissention at the suggestion of removal came primarily from Mayor Jeanette Shipley, who insisted there is no procedure in place for Oliver to have disclosed the information of his past record in advance of his appointment.
Guzman prickled at Mayor Shipley’s apparent defense of Oliver, stating, “Do you want him on the board? Because it sounds like you’re kind of fighting for him. Since you went to the call that he was at, I’m asking you, are you being biased?”
Taking offense to the line of questioning, in an apparent effort to not have the argument at a public meeting, Shipley requested a motion for adjournment, which was not granted by the council.
Instead, councilwoman Jennifer Ingraham moved that Oliver be removed from the Planning Commission board immediately.
The motion prompted an immediate response from Shipley. “You can’t make that motion — am I not in charge of this meeting?”
A back and forth ensued, with council member Judy Rider reminding Shipley, “You’re the mayor, you have no vote here.”
Though councilman Salih Doughramaji appeared to agree that Oliver should be removed from the board, he hesitated to do so until the bylaws were rewritten in such a way to include verbiage giving the council the explicit right of removal in a case such as this.
“I would feel better about putting that in place, and then, based on the new rules we set up, make the motion for removal,” Doughramaji explained. “I have no affection for this guy, no more than anybody else. There’s no hidden agenda here, but I want to be fair, not only to him but to the next guy who may piss somebody off.”
Guzman reminded the council that the Planning Commission was set to meet the following week, and suggested it may not sit well with her or the other members to have Oliver as a part of that meeting.
“Would we be protecting the city’s interests from a legal standpoint most effectively if we were to remove (Oliver) from the Planning Commission?” council president Gary McKnight asked of the city attorney. “If we don’t, and something were to happen — complaints were filed — could we be held responsible for not addressing this issue?”
As a unanimous agreement was not forthcoming, the board determined to put Ingraham’s initial motion to remove to a vote, with Ingraham, McKnight, and Rider all voting in favor.
“The victim is a part of the community, and I do not support (Oliver) being any part of anything that represents us as a city,” Ingraham said. “I will always stand behind a victim of stalking. If there’s nothing in our bylaws at this moment that prevents us from removing him, then I do not agree that we should wait.”
With council member Matt Frakes absent for the meeting, Doughramaji stood alone as the sole vote against removal at this time.
“To eliminate somebody without the explicit bylaws in place, I think that would be wrong,” stated Doughramaji. “If we had those stipulations in the bylaws today, I would have voted differently.”
At the conclusion of the vote, Mayor Shipley asked the names of those voting in favor and against the motion be recorded as part of the minutes “in case of lawsuit,” to the collective disagreement of the council.
“We’re not going to do anything different than any other vote,” said Doughramaji.
The group was in consensus that changes to the bylaws were required, with the addition that appointment is pending background check and procedures for removal be written.
“It’s not uncommon to run background checks even on appointed positions that aren’t paid,” said Buddenbohm. “You can’t just assume you know people.”
The city’s Planning and Zoning Commission meets on an as-needed basis to preview proposed amendments to zoning ordinances, site plans and plat applications, and also makes recommendations to the council regarding current and future development of the city.
Court records indicated that case no. 2005-CR-002148 was filed against Oliver in Shawnee County Dec. 27, 2005, with five counts of violation of a protective order, listed as violation from stalking protection order inside the document, with dates of Sept. 11 and 21, Oct. 2, and Nov. 19, against Karen Oliver. A bench trial was had and Oliver was found guilty. The court suspended execution of imprisonment and placed him on 12 months supervised probation.
Case no. 2006-CR-001410 was filed in Shawnee County Aug. 6, 2006, with one count of violation of protective order. This, too, was a violation from stalking protection order with a date of July 1, 2006, again against Karen Oliver. The judge signed on Dec. 19, 2006, and the sentence was to run concurrent with the other five convictions.
On Nov. 5, 2007, a release from supervision was filed.
Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office records indicate Oliver was released from custody Sept. 7 last week, two days after his arrest.