Wording for Sidney Twp. attempt to recall the trustee refused

STANTON – The Montcalm County Election Commission unanimously rejected proposed wording on “recall reasons” for a recall petition filed against Sidney Township Administrator Jed Welder due to a lack of clarity, although this does not mean that the topic is definitely finished and covered.

On September 27, Jeffrey Lodholtz of the Township of Sidney filed a lawsuit against Welder regarding his position as administrator of the Township of Sidney.

Wording submitted in the recall petition reads: “Mr. The Welder took money from an outside company and voted on the subject that would benefit him.” Mr Welder has intimidated and cursed citizens while hiding (behind another) the name of a council member online.

On Friday morning, the Montcalm County Election Commission held a clarification hearing to determine the sufficiency and factuality of the language submitted.

Minors and Estates Court Judge Simon III explained at the start of the hearing that the Montcalm County Election Commission was there strictly to determine whether the wording was specific enough for a petition reminder and nothing more.

According to Simon, the state legislature and the Michigan Constitution require that the petition for an officer’s recall clearly state each reason for the recall. Each reason, said Simon, must be based on the officer’s conduct during his tenure.

“The electoral council will then determine if each reason for recall is sufficiently clear to allow the official whose recall is requested (welder) and the voters who vote on the recall to identify the conduct which is the basis of the recall. , Simon explained. “The Michigan Court of Appeals weighed in on this matter, stating that the Michigan Constitution and law required a clear statement of reasons for recall based on an act or acts during the conduct of the officer’s office. the callback is requested.

“To emphasize, it is not the duty of this committee to determine the veracity of the reasons given for Mr Welder’s recall, but whether the reasons for the recall, as set out in the petition, are sufficiently clear to that Mr. Welder and the voting public can identify the specific donut that warrants a recall.As counsel, we will not express an opinion on whether Mr. Welder’s recall is warranted or warranted.

Simon also noted several times during the hearing that Lodholtz or anyone else in Sidney Township can resubmit the wording of the recall with more precision if the Montcalm County Election Commission rejects what was submitted.

“The petitioner can file a new petition and have that same hearing to see if the language is more precise and clear,” Simon explained. “I want this to be absolutely clear.”

Regarding Lodholtz’s current wording, Simon said he had several concerns regarding the petition.

“The first four words are ‘Mr. The welder took the money. For me, that could imply that he took a bribe. I don’t know if this is the case. He says he took money from an outside company. Which company? And he voted on the subject. What subject ? And did he vote for or against? he wondered. “… I am not a resident of Sidney Township. I don’t even know what it is. I have no idea why this recall petition was filed after reading it.

“… And he intimidated and cursed citizens while hiding behind the name of a council member online. Again, this is a very subjective statement. It doesn’t seem to be precise. I have seen many public meetings over the past year where board members are also intimidated, yelled at, cursed and cursed at. They are also harassed, in my opinion.

Montcalm County Clerk Kristen Millard said she echoed Simons’ concerns and further pointed out some missing information in the petition.

“There is no date here that indicates when this allegation may have taken place,” she noted. “I have the same concerns about money and ‘outside the company’. Who is the outside company? Who is “them” when he says it benefits them? “

Montcalm County Treasurer JoAnne Vukin also agreed, the committee voted 3-0 to decline the wording of the reminder.

“Again, that doesn’t mean this is the end of the problem,” Simon said as a reminder. “The board of directors has no skin in the decision. Mr. Lodholtz can file a new petition, or someone else can file a new petition.

Public how

With more than 30 people in attendance at Friday’s meeting, several spoke up when given the opportunity to do so during the public comments.

Laura Engel of Sidney Township tried to rebut some of the accusations set out in the wording of the recall.

“I know Jed and his parents,” she said. “Bully doesn’t describe any of them. Jed was a United States Marine and was a commissioned officer in the United States Army. The training he received in both organizations undoubtedly taught him that he did not have to endure fools with pleasure. I’m sure he’s also unhappy that with the onset of the turbine issue his property has been vandalized and his children intimidated. The word “bully” is a subjective term and its use in a recall petition can rightly be questioned. It is most correctly used when it comes to preying on the children of an elected official.

Crystal Morgan, Welder’s lawyer in Spring Lake, said Welder was asking the commission to “dismiss the petition in its entirety” because of the lack of clarity.

“The allegation of bullying is not a factual allegation. It is not a factual event. It’s very subjective, “she said.” It can be interpreted in many ways to mean something physical, verbal or social. It is often used interchangeably with the word ‘discrimination’, which again once, is very broad and very subjective.

“… Regarding the complaint of the vote, for example, a citizen would be faced with guessing or going to the township, reviewing the minutes of all the meetings and all the votes that have taken place since the start of the mandate of this official. Morgan continued. “This is not what our legislature intended.”

In July, Welder, which signed a lease with Apex Clean Energy, was criticized by many residents after failing to refrain from a wind restrictive order in Sidney Township. Welder also received criticism for posting repeated posts in the Zoom chat room feature as Clerk Carrie Wills during a virtual meeting in February.

“(The petition) is about Jed Welder posing as another board member and acting unfairly to what we would expect from an elected official,” Erik Benko of Sidney Township said in public comments. “The subject was covered in The Daily News. As someone who has been one of the targets of this unworthy bullying behavior of an elected official that has made us all lose confidence in him as an elected official, which is why we are here today, I am here to tell you that I feel strongly about these proceedings and I hope, as a constituent of this county and township, that this is continued, taken seriously and maintained on the subject. “

“I’m going to echo everything Erik Benko said about the meeting where he (welder) posed as another Sidney Township board member,” Township Wendy Winters agreed. from Sidney. “It’s in Zoom video. We were led to believe his comments were from someone else. I do not believe that an administrator from our canton should pretend to be another and she takes responsibility for it.