Results of a controversial March election for the Peninsula Community Planning Board have yet to be announced, resulting in an in-depth analysis of the group’s bylaws by the City Attorney’s Office, District 2 Councilman Kevin Faulconer and the board itself.
The controversy revolves around a resolution that says eligible candidates must have attended one of the last six meetings prior to the March election meeting, which was allegedly added to the board’s bylaws in January 2000.
However, Gregg Robinson, chair of the board’s elections committee, did not provide that information to candidates or in published announcements online and in The Beacon Feb. 22.
The board realized its mistake, but could not find the language in the bylaws until after the election had passed and proceeded without screening candidates for previous meeting attendance.
“That was my mistake,” Robinson said.
After the election, a letter from the city affirmed that the amendment did in fact exist, forcing the results into limbo. However, the city has deferred the final decision on enforcing the rule to the board.
“We don’t have a copy of the amendment, we just have something that says that the amendment was approved,” Deputy City Attorney Alex Sachs said. “The planning board itself will be the one to make that determination about the election in terms of the candidates who are elected.”
Of the top six candidates who ran for the five open seats in the March 15 election, only one “” Darrold Davis “” had not attended past board meetings. Davis received the second-most votes.
Adding to the controversy, longtime board member and chair Cynthia Conger came in sixth. If the election stands as is, she will lose her seat.
If Davis is disqualified for not having met the attendance prerequisite, Conger will continue her tenure.
According to Robinson, Davis, like others, was not informed of the attendance requirement prior to the election.
Despite receiving more votes than Conger, some members of the board said they believe that Conger should stay.
“We’ve got our own little mini-Florida going on,” Robinson said. “There will be hard feelings no matter what happens.”
Sachs said he is working to determine whether the amendment is actually a part of the group’s bylaws as well as researching how other planning groups have handled similar situations to give the board suggestions on how to proceed.
According to member Geoff Page, the board will wait to hear Sachs’ recommendation before certifying the election results
“The board is pretty divided about the whole thing,” Page said. “I don’t think there’s going to be any unanimity on this.”
Robinson said he is inclined to follow the city attorney’s recommendation, while Page said the attendance rule be followed.
Currently, both Conger and Davis are listed as elected members on the board’s Web site.
Some board members have searched for the middle ground, suggesting that Conger remain on the board and Davis become an alternate.
According to Sachs, the office will have recommendations for the board by the end of the week, giving it time to discuss the issue before voting at its next meeting April 19; however, Robinson doubts the city will have an answer by that time.
“They’ve been saying that for the past three weeks,” Robinson said.
While the debate continues, the board has united on one issue “” both Robinson and Page agree it’s time to take a good look at the bylaws and to make sure they reflect the practices of the board.
The next meeting will take place Thursday, April 19, at 6:30 p.m. at the Point Loma library, 3701 Voltaire St.