Vaughan had previously been recused from voting on solid waste because her husband, Don Vaughan, performs legal work for Waste Industries, one of the proposers. Last Tuesday, council voted by a narrow majority to initiate contract negotiations with another proposer, Gate City Waste Services.
Pollard wrote in a letter yesterday,
You have inquired about your voting status on the award of the contract to Gate City Waste Services LLC when this contract is considered following the public hearing on September 20, 2011. I have reviewed the action of the city council to date, the prior opinions on conflicts of interest relating to this matter, the relevant state law, city charter provisions and city policies. Under GS 160A-75, there is a strong public policy of requiring members to vote unless a member has a financial interest in an outcome whether beneficial or detrimental. In my opinion, there is no basis to excuse you from voting on the contract award to Gate City.
The Aug. 16 vote to initiate contract negotiations fell 4-3, with Mayor Bill Knight, at-large Councilman Danny Thompson, District 4 Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw and District 5 Councilwoman Trudy Wade in the majority. Knight, Thompson, Rakestraw and Wade have consistently voted in favor of reopening the landfill. Vaughan and District 3 Councilman Zack Matheny have been recused from voting on the landfill, Vaughan because of her conflict of interest on Waste Industries and Matheny because of a financial interest in Gate City Waste Services.
Pollard wrote to Vaughan in his opinion: "You have advised me that your connection to an unsuccessful proposer will not affect your judgment about what action on the contract is in the best interest of the city."
Vaughan voted in 2001 to close the landfill to household waste.
“When it was closed to municipal solid waste, I think we made a pact with the neighborhood,” she said, “and they should have been able to expect that would be respected.”
With Matheny recused because of his relationship with Gate City Waste Services, eight members of council will be allowed to vote at the Sept. 20 hearing. If the vote were to be tied 4 to 4, the motion would fail, and Gate City would not be selected as the contractor.
After that?
"It would be then up to the council to make a decision as to how proceed," Pollard said. "They could perhaps go to another proposer and go to the public hearing process again. There are probably other things they could consider."
If Waste Industries were to be reconsidered, Pollard confirmed that Vaughan would be conflicted out again.
"Maybe the council should have a straight up or down vote — vendors aside — on whether to reopen the landfill," Vaughan said in an interview today. "This council has never had a vote on should we reopen the landfill.
"The regional solution has not been thoroughly explored," Vaughan added. "It certainly is gaining more feasibility. And to not explore it is poor judgment. I went on record 10 years ago that a regional landfill was the solution. Now we have a regional landfill on the verge of reopening [in Randolph County], and we’re not in discussions with them. They are interested in Greensboro, which is the most important factor."
No comments:
Post a Comment