County Election Commission rejects recall petitions against Scio Township officials

The recall petitions brought against Scio Township Supervisor Will Hathaway and township board trustees Alec Jerome and Jane Vogel were found to not be of sufficient clarity and each petition was rejected by the Washtenaw County Election Commission on Oct. 15 during a Recall Petition Review Hearing.

The official ruling states the petitions were found not to be of sufficient clarity and factuality to enable the officer whose recall is sought and the electors to identify the course of conduct which is the basis of the recall.

In setting the stage for their rulings, the county election commission said the role of the hearing was to simply vote on whether or not the recall petition language is of sufficient clarity and factuality. The election commission rules on the submitted language alone.

The public was given a chance to speak to each petition, for and against. There were a number of township residents who did, including David Read, who submitted the recall petitions to the county.

Many, except for maybe one speaker, spoke out in support of the recall efforts and cited their various concerns with these township officials, which ranged from the way public meetings were being held in Scio and how public comments were handled to what they see as the mistreatment of the township clerk during meetings.

There were just over 50 attendees to the review hearing, which was held virtually and remotely over Zoom.

Read said he had video evidence he wanted to show and submit as evidence to the petition claims, but this was not allowed during the hearing.

The recall petition against Hathaway said the reasons for his recall included that he: 1) has consistently ignored the Open Meetings Act by curtailing residents’ right to participate remotely in Scio Township’s public meetings. 2) met with proponents of a neighborhood Special Assessment District without opponents present which resulted in pitting neighbor against neighbor; 3) censured Public Comment at Township meetings; 4) denied select Board members their right to participate in Board discussions/debates during public meetings; and 5) bypassed the Township Compensation Commission and doubled his yearly salary to $72,000 for the part-time position to which he was elected. This matter is currently under litigation.

Hathaway spoke during the hearing and submitted a letter to the election commission stating his opposition.

“I am writing to challenge the recall petition language filed against me as Supervisor of Scio Township on October 4, 2021. The petition lists five reasons for my recall. It is my understanding that if any of the allegations in the petition is determined to be either vague or nonfactual, then the proposed petition is deemed invalid. I assert that all five of the allegations are unduly vague and not factual…,” said Hathaway and then stated his case against each recall reason.

Vogel also spoke and submitted a letter in opposition, as did Jerome with his own letter, but he could not attend the hearing.

Noting that if there’s an issue with any of the petition reasons stated than the entire petition is rejected.

For the Hathaway petition, the county election commission ruled the use of the word “censured” was problematic. County election commissioner Lawrence Kestenbaum, who is also the county clerk, said there’s an issue with the use of this word and it was probably not the correct word to use.

Fellow county election commissioner and county treasurer Catherine McClary agreed and said she could hear the pain and concern in the voices of some of the residents who spoke, but emphasized the election commission needed to vote on the petition language. With the word censure, she said they would need to see language that provided a more specific example of it.

The recall petition reasons for Jerome included, he has: 1) moved to delete residents’ comments he deemed subjective from Board minutes; 2) twice voted to deny residents, who are attending remotely due to health concerns, the ability to speak during Public Comment; 3) voted to double the salary of the part-time Supervisor, deliberately bypassing the Township’s Compensation Commission; and 4) is attempting to limit fellow Board members comments to once per agenda item with one follow-up thus eliminating robust discussion and debate.

The county election commission found this petition to also not be of sufficient clarity.

McClary said the reason there needs to be sufficient clarity is that it will enable the officer whose recall is sought and the electors to identify the course of conduct that is the basis for the recall.

She said with the Jerome petition there needs to be more specificity. For example, she said they need to see details such as when did Jerome vote to deny residents the ability to speak during Public Comment and what was said.

She said the petition was vague.

And the recall petition reasons for Vogel included, she has: 1) did not take the time to educate herself on the Open Meets Act (OMA) or general knowledge of Township’s processes and procedures before taking office and ignores advice from her more experienced and knowledgeable peers; 2) glaringly oblivious to the requirements of the OMA and continues to violate them; 3) as the Township Board representative to the Transportation Alternative Planning (TAP) committee, she instructed committee members attending remotely that it was not necessary to identify their current location; 4) instructed the TAP secretary to discard comments made via Zoom “chat” and residents’ emails from TAP minutes; and 5) regularly insults fellow Board members and is rude to Township citizens.

McClary again said this petition was vague and added that it was also subjective and mean, which may be an example of some of the pain from residents, but it’s still not sufficient .

As the hearing was about to conclude, county election commissioner and Washtenaw County Probate Judge Darlene O'Brien said they can hear the angst and pain in the residents, so she hopes the different sides will seek a dispute resolution and peacemaking way forward.

As a township resident himself, Kestenbaum said he’s also concerned about the township’s governance and troubled by what he’s heard. He said he hopes they can find a path forward to peaceful resolution.

Read said he would be at the county clerk’s office with refreshed petitions on Monday morning.

For more information on this hearing and to see the documents presented by the different sides for it, go to https://www.washtenaw.org/2430/Recall-Activity-by-Year.