Spence resigns, Hill and Goodover appointed

SEELEY LAKE – The Seeley Lake Sewer District Board not only appointed two new directors but it elected the new directors, president and vice president at its Nov. 15 meeting. The board then voted to work with the county to extend the expired interlocal agreement until a new agreement can be signed.

Three days ahead of the meeting, Director Troy Spence sent in a resignation letter. In the letter he states that he felt that he and the community had received false information from the previous board and that he had done his duties to try and get that information corrected.

“I cannot continue to move forward with a project the town of Seeley Lake can’t afford or need,” wrote Spence.

With Spence’s departure and the resignation of Director Juli Cole last summer, the board then had two vacancies. Cole’s vacancy had been advertised ahead of the District’s October meeting and three people applied: Pat Caffrey, Walt Hill and Pat Goodover.

The board had interviewed Caffery and Hill in October and Goodover was interviewed at this meeting.

Discussion then shifted to whether both positions should be filled or just Cole’s.

“I think we need to fill both positions today. That way we can go forward with everybody being educated at the same time. There’s no reason to put it off,” said Director Mike Boltz.

President Beth Hutchinson disagreed saying that Spence’s resignation was new and there may be other people in the community who would consider applying under the new circumstances. She didn’t think the board should do things by the seat of their pants when they already have an established process to fill the vacancy.

Director Davy Good felt that time was important. He acknowledged that the District followed the process for filling the first position but after advertising for a month there were only three applicants.

Hutchinson countered that she would support filling one of the positions and that having one vacancy for one more month was not a big deal.

Missoula County Commissioner Jean Curtiss was in attendance and pointed out that it was on the agenda to appoint the forth and fifth director. She felt it was unnecessary to delay the second appointment when they already had three applicants.

Bolts moved to appoint both positions and Good seconded. The pair voted for, while Hutchinson opposed the motion.

The split vote touched off a discussion on what constitutes a majority. The District bylaws state that it takes three votes to the affirmative to pass any action of the board.

Boltz disagreed asking how any business would ever get done. Two votes to one was a majority and the bylaws also state that board vacancies are to be filled by a majority of the remaining members. He went on that the agenda stated two positions were to be filled and that’s what they should do.

After Curtiss provided Hutchinson with a copy of the state law she agreed to fill the positions. The motion to fill two was re-voted with all three in favor.

Goodover and Hill were nominated and voted into the vacant positions.

Hutchinson said the two would be seated at the next board meeting to give them time to be sworn in by the county. Boltz objected saying Curtiss could swear in the two and there was a notary present.

Hutchinson argued that when Cole, Spence and herself were elected they had to go to a county clerk to be certified. It was also specifically on the agenda that the new directors would be seated at a future meeting. Hutchinson moved on with the meeting going to the next agenda item.

Boltz objected bringing it back to the issue of seating the new directors and threatened to table nearly all the remaining agenda and adjourn the meeting. He felt that the new directors should be able to participate in the remaining agenda items.

Good agreed and moved to seat the new directors at the meeting. Boltz seconded.

“Some of you people who were saying things needed to be on the agenda, you’re so quiet now that it’s a different agenda,” said Hutchinson. “I will admit, I’m totally confused. [For the last] two meetings I’m told it must be on the agenda - it is not on this agenda. It is on this agenda that they will be [seated] at the next meeting.”

Boltz and Good voted to seat them while Hutchinson opposed bringing back the issue of whether board business needed three votes to the affirmative to take action.

A member of the public suggested that agenda item could be amended. Good moved and Boltz seconded. Hutchinson yielded and joined them in voting to amend the agenda and seat the new directors.

With Goodover and Hill seated, Hutchinson moved that the board elect new officers. Spence was the vice president and Hutchinson said she got the feeling that while she was president it would perpetually aggravate some people. The board unanimously supported the motion.

Good was nominated for president but he declined and instead nominated Goodover. Goodover accepted the nomination and was unanimously voted president. Hill was nominated and voted vice president.

Hutchinson presented the board with a checklist of items required before the project could move forward to bidding. District Manager Greg Robertson went through some of the list as to where things are in the process. He said he has been waiting for direction from the board before tackling several items on the list.

Robertson is provided to the District as a General Manager by Missoula County through an interlocal agreement. That agreement expired Nov. 14 so Robertson’s ability to work on the project moving forward was in question.

At last month’s board meeting, Good and Boltz were appointed to a committee to contact the county and start the conversation on what the interlocal agreement would look like moving forward. Curtiss informed them that they needed to reach out in writing to the commissioners to start the conversation. Robertson said he had not received that request as of the meeting.

Since the last sewer board meeting, the county commissioners requested that Robertson work on some options to present to the District for extending or renewing the agreement.

Curtiss explained that the commissioners realized that it may be a bit overwhelming for Good and Boltz to try and put in writing what they wanted when they don’t even know what the county is offering or questions to ask. Robertson said he is in the process of writing up the options and expected he could finish that in the next few days.

Curtiss suggested that the board draft a letter asking for the county to allow Robertson to continue working on some of the specific tasks that need doing until the interlocal agreement could be updated. She reminded the board that most likely the District will need to be hiring a new manager for the project as it will be more work than Robertson can provide given his other county responsibilities.

The board voted to request an extension to allow Robertson to continue working on specific tasks until the interlocal agreement could be renewed.

Hutchinson said she had talked to Rural Development’s Montana Community Programs Director Steve Troendle about the required user agreements. The agreements were required to show public support, give permission to enter property and provide the number of hookups that need to be in the bid.

Goodover appointed Boltz and former board member Mike Lindemer to serve on a committee working with Robertson to create a draft user agreement. A concerned citizen that previously had commented will be contacted to serve on the committee too if the citizen is willing.

Hutchinson said the projected operating and maintenance budget should be reviewed in order to better inform users of the cost. If the county backs off on how many resources are available to the District at no charge there could be significant changes.

Robertson explained that the county has never intended on running the treatment plant and the existing operating and maintenance projections include wages for a full time and part time operator. The county would be willing to train those operators in when the system first starts up but nothing beyond that.

Another issue raised is the District administrative budget. Hutchinson pointed out that they are only a couple months in and are exceeding it in some areas. Legal fees for defending the District from Don Larson’s lawsuit are also unknown. Hutchinson had requested an invoice from the attorney but hasn’t received it yet.

The current administrative budget has a large reserve built into it and Hutchinson thinks it needs to be looked at to make sure it will balance at the end of the fiscal year.

In other business, the board discussed trying to settle Larson’s lawsuit outside of court. Everyone agreed that bringing closure to the lawsuit was important but Curtiss suggested they wait and see how the case develops because she didn’t think Larson had a case.

The board also discussed communication between board members along with rolls and responsibilities of board members.

The next regular board meeting is scheduled for 5:15 p.m., Dec. 20 with the location yet to be determined.