WESTFIELD – The City Council voted to confirm 25 candidates for a host of city boards and commissions Thursday night over a span of nearly two hours.
The appointment process demonstrated two different philosophies among council members, pitting the Council’s Personal Action Committee against several councilors.
At-large Council Brent B. Bean 11, chairman of the PAC, requested a suspension of the rules to take up the immediate consideration of 21 candidates for reappointment to boards and commissions on which they already serve, under a blanket approval process.
Bean said that his policy regarding the reappointment of board members is to bring out the name without an interview process, unless contacted by a council member with a request to speak with individuals up for reappointment at a PAC session before the name is brought out of committee for action. Bean said that citizens already serving on boards and commissions already have gone through the council’s vetting process and do not need to repeat that process except under extraordinary circumstances.
Bean said that he will request people being named to a board for the first time appear before his committee for that vetting process.
Thursday night, prior to the council session, the PAC members and other councilors did interview four first-time candidates to serve on the Planning Board.
Ward 4 Councilor Mary O’Connell initiated a debate over Bean’s proposed process of reappointing citizen already serving on boards when she requested that the immediate consideration motion exclude Public Works Commissioner Joseph Spagnoli.
O’Connell’s motion to exclude Spagnoli from a blanket approval ignited a debate and resulted in several procedural issues and a recess while both the City Charter and City Council Rules were reviewed.
“I’d like to do these one at a time because I have issues with several (candidates),” O’Connell said. “Now I will have to do that at this (televised) meeting instead of at A PAC session.”
O’Connell questioned if Bean’s motion for immediate consideration of the reappointment candidates violated council rules, but was overruled by Council President Christopher Keefe who stated, after consulting the regulations, that the rule O’Connell cited referred to financial matters, which require a 10-day review period before the council can take action.
Ward 5 Councilor Richard E. Onofrey, who supported Bean’s motion for immediate consideration, then cited Council Rule 25 which prohibits the council from acting on any nomination from the mayor on the same night that it is submitted.
Ward 2 Councilor James E. Brown Jr., then made a motion to suspend the council rule to allow for immediate consideration and to vote on the 21 candidates for reappointment.
Several councilors objected vigorously to O’Connell’s actions.
Ward 6 Councilor Christopher Crean and At-large Council John J. Beltrandi both chided O’Connell that she should have addressed her concerns prior to the council meeting.
“All of these people have served the city for a number of years,” Crean said. “If I were one of these people up for reappointment and I got called in for a (PAC) interview, I’d say take me off the board.”
O’Connell said she did make several attempts to contact Bean with her reservations, but that he failed to respond to text messages and email communication.
The council defeated O’Connell’s motion to exclude Spagnoli by a 7-6 margin.
At-large Councilor David A. Flaherty said he was also uncomfortable with the blanket motion to approve the nominations because he had no knowledge of several of the candidates.
“If we don’t want to send (reappointment nominations) to the PAC, why not let the mayor just extend their terms?” he said. “It’s our job to evaluate these people. We have many new councilors since some of these people were first appointed, so we don’t have any knowledge of them.”
An interesting process then evolved as each of the 21 candidates for reappointment were brought onto the floor. Councilors with knowledge of those candidates would speak in support and answer questions from other members.
The first candidate was Grace E. Sullivan, a long time member of the Board of Assessors.
John Beltrandi, who is in real estate and construction, spoke of Sullivan’s extensive knowledge of the real estate market and of her experience on the Board of Assessors.
Flaherty, who voted to support the nomination, said that he did so because of Beltrandi’s recommendation.
“I trust your judgment, I trust your knowledge when it comes to real estate issues,” Flaherty said.
The Council proceeded down the list, with members sharing knowledge of the candidates. Flaherty thanked the council members for providing that input into his decisions.
The council voted 13-0 to reappoint 19 of the members. Flaherty voted against the reappointment of John Moriarty to the Flood Control Commission because no councilor had knowledge of the candidate or of the commission. Moriarty’s reappointment was approved by a 12-1 vote.
The only reappointment sent back to the PAC was that of Fontaine Velis, a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals. That motion, made by Flaherty was approved by a 7-6 vote.
O’Connell said that Velis has a poor attendance record on that board, one of the most powerful in the city, because it can set aside zoning requirements.
“This candidate has a problem with attendance and has made some really bad decisions,” O’Connell said. “Because of her action, the city is being sued. I cannot support this candidate.”
The PAC also brought out the nominations for five residents to serve on the Planning Board which is currently crippled by vacancies, three of which were resignations following the dismissal of City Planner and Community Development Director Larry Smith. The Planning Board is comprised of seven full members, one from each ward and one at-large member, as well as two alternates members.
The alternate members are eligible to vote on special permits if a full members is absent from the public hearing of that issue. It requires a super majority, five members, to approve a special permit.
The Planning Board currently has four members and has not conducted a meeting since November because of that lack of a super majority.
Mayor Knapik has submitted nominations for five additional members to fill the vacant seats on that board.
Flaherty, who attended the PAC session before the council meeting, said that the candidates lack the technical knowledge needed to execute their roles on the Planning Board.
“This is a very critical board,” Flaherty said. “Our role is to put people into these positions who can serve, not people who just want to serve. Nobody was asked one technical questions about zoning (during the PAC session). It’s not our responsibility that the mayor got rid of half the board.”
O’Connell supported that position.
“I’m nervous that now we’ll have a Planning Board with a majority of inexperienced people and no city planner to advise them,” she said. “I feel that we’re being backed into these appointments.”
Beltrandi said that four years ago, before his election to the council, he was appointed to serve on the city License Commission.
“I was brought before the council, to replace someone on the License Commission, with no experience. I’m grateful for the trust that the council placed in me to do the job,” he said. “These people have the best interest of the city in mind, many coming from other boards and commissions.”
Miller said that service on the Planning Board “is not rocket science.”
“Yes, it is technical, but it requires people with good judgment and the ability to read plans,” Miller said. “The people with (development and construction) experience are the ones submitting the plans (to the board for review), so it would be a conflict of interest for them to serve.”
“The Planning Board has been down for a month,” he said. “The sooner we can people onto the board, the sooner we can get the city moving forward.”
At-large Councilor Brian Sullivan said that background in the development and construction field should be a secondary concern for the council in making the appointments.
“Background is not as important as having people willing to learn on the fly, people who are not afraid to ask questions, to go through that learning curve,” Sullivan said. “We had six new people on the council a couple a years ago and we managed to get business done.”
At-large Councilor James R. Adams said that the scope of the Planning Board’s duties is wide-ranging, from providing recommendations to the counci, to reviewing and approving special permits and site plans as the city continues to grow.
“It’s a reflection of the mayor. He’s not going to put people forward who can’t help the city, who can’t move it forward,” he said.
All five nominations were approved.
