“I am not resigning my office,” said Van Buren Public Schools Trustee Sherry Frazier at Monday’s school board meeting.
“I will make myself clear!” she said.
At the end of the more than three-hour meeting, Trustee Frazier said she resented School Supt. Pete Kudlak’s comments in his weekly digital message to board members. She said he said her position of trustee on both the school board and the Van Buren Township Board of Trustees was incompatible, according three attorney opinions.
Trustee Frazier said before she ran for township office, VBT Clerk Leon Wright checked with the state and found that these two offices were not incompatible. She was elected to the township board last November.
Supt. Kudlak said VBT Supervisor Kevin McNamara said there was no conflict of interest in his estimation.
Supt. Kudlak said what brought the issue to the forefront is the upcoming contract for the special assessment district for the paving of McBride Avenue in VBT.
He said everything was all right when there were no contracts between the township and the school district, but this contract makes Frazier’s offices incompatible. He said he has been told by the attorneys that the incompatibility of offices would bring all of Frazier’s votes into question since she was elected to the township board.
And, it could cost the school district thousands of dollars, Kudlak said.
Frazier explained that she recused herself from the school board vote on the $90,000 the district is contributing to the McBride paving. And, she recused herself from the township board vote on the McBride paving project – even leaving the meeting room while the board deliberated and voted.
“My intention is not to step down from the board,” Frazier said on Monday. “I’m going to get an Attorney General’s opinion.”
She said she has had to hire an attorney.
“I’m tired of the harassment and bullying that I’m getting,” Frazier said, later clarifying the harassment and bullying was coming from the school district’s attorney.
“My intentions are to continue serving in both positions as long as I can,” she said.
“I’ve never missed a school board meeting and the same thing at the township,” Frazier said.
Kudlak explained that the legal opinions he got were from the school district attorney, an attorney for the Michigan Association of School Boards, and even the Van Buren Township attorney.
He said there is no conflict of interest, but an “incompatibility of office.” He added there is no harassment at all of Frazier by him – and Frazier agreed Kudlak did not harass her.
“Collins and Blaha does not like having me on the board,” Frazier said, referring to the school district’s law firm that she has criticized for giving the district what she considered poor legal advice and still not settling the lawsuit brought by Savage teachers last year. She regularly announces the law firm’s legal fees when bills are sent to the district.
Kudlak said the attorneys said any vote they had that evening, such as the vote to use sinking fund money for parking lot work at two schools and the bus garage, could be called into question.
He said the attorneys said the prosecutor could file charges and the district would have to go back over decisions the board has made.
Frazier said she is tired of being bullied by Collins and Blaha attorney John Kava, in particular.
Frazier said after a recent closed-door session between the board and Kava on the Savage law suit, Kava said to her: “If you don’t resign, I’ll turn you over to the prosecutor and they’ll arrest you.”
She said she told him to go ahead and turn her over to the prosecutor and put her in jail.
“I’m not resigning,” she said.
- Previous story Davenport gets OK to construct office building at 337 Main
- Next story BHS Distinguished Graduates, Honor Society to be inducted
4 Comments
Weather
Paul White The following opinion is presented on-line for informational use only and does not replace the official version. (Mich Dept of Attorney General Web Site – http://www.ag.state.mi.us)
________________________________________
STATE OF MICHIGAN
FRANK J. KELLEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL
________________________________________
Opinion No. 5626
January 16, 1980
INCOMPATIBILITY:
Officers of school board member/vehicle trustee; school board member/city superintendent of public works; county road commissioner/township trustee; county road commissioner/village council member; county auditor/member of county health services board and member of board of commissioners/township assessor
Where a person simultaneously holds the office of school board member and village trustee, there is no incompatibility as long as the two entities do not negotiate or enter into an agreement with each other.
In Gray v Clerk of Common Pleas Court, 366 Mich 588, 594; 115 NW2d 411 (1962), the Court, with respect to a court bailiff’s failure to serve process, stated:
‘The continued failure to serve process in the instant case is the same as in the Cartwright Case. Failure for long periods of time to serve process, in accordance with the duties set forth in the statute, is misfeasance. It is to be noted that the statute calls to the attention of the court its duty to compel bailiffs serving process out of such court to perform their duties. Nonfeasance is a substantial failure to perform a duty, or, in other words, the neglect or refusal, without sufficient excuse, to do that which it was the officer’s legal duties of a public office is in and of itself not only nonfeasance but also malfeasance.
‘Public policy dictates that those who have charge of public officers and officials have the authority to remove them if they fail to carry out their duties, whether those duties are placed on them by statute or by the inherent responsibilities and duties of the office itself. . . .’
Thus, a public official’s abstention from the responsibilities of his or her office in order to avoid participating in the approval of both sides of an agreement between the two public entities which he or she serves is itself a breach of duty. Only vacation of one office will resolve the public official’s dilemma.
With this understanding of the incompatibility statute, the following relationships described in your inquiries may be analyzed:
1. School board member and village trustee
2. School board member and city superintendent of public works
With respect to the first and second relationships (a school board member concurrently serving as a village trustee or city superintendent of public works) it should first be noted that each local school district is a public body corporate. 1976 PA 451, Sec. 1132, MCLA 380.1132; MSA 15.41132. A member of a board of education of a local school district performs his or her duties without subordination to, or supervision of, the city or village government within which the school district is located. Thus, the first and second criteria for incompatibility under the statute are inapplicable.
COMMENT by PAUL This is not the entire Opinion, but only the part pertaining ti this issue. Posted with copy and paste. This issue was brought before VBT Board members. There was not
an issue with Frazier serving on the VBT Board.
Frazier has served well in both positions and deserves to stay in office.
She isn’t a sheep, so the current board members find it challenging that she sticks to her guns. The only reason the want he gone is because she doesn’t always agree with them like the other goats. Frazier is someone who is needed and a voice of reason.
I agree Trustee Frazier is not a sheep, she doesn’t go along to get along, the same goes for Trustee White plus he has the benefit of being a resident for about 50 years!!! Revising the travel policy is a good idea however Leon is making a reasonable request.