Document text
Planner gets city scolding By CHRIS BRISTOL The Medford City Council backed off a threat to remove planning commissioner Dennis Nielsen, opting instead for a written "admonishment" that one dissenting council member described as censorship. "We're trying to put a muzzle on somebody," council member Skip Knight complained. "We're saying we don't like what he says." Nielsen appeared before the council Thursday night to answer a host of misconduct charges, including accusations that he is obstructive, argumentative and disruptive. The special council hearing drew a number of spectators and supporters, including at least four of Nielsen's Planning Commission colleagues and members of United Medford Citizens, which disagreed with the restrictions the council placed on Nielsen's ability to defend himself. Among the restrictions: Nielsen was barred from presenting witnesses and he was denied legal counsel. Mayor Lindsay Berryman began the proceeding by reading the charges, including allegations that he fails to heed the advice of city counsel on planning and land-use law and that he has "pre-determined" positions. Among those positions is a perception that Nielsen is an enemy of developers. Nielsen has described him self as a defender of exisiting neighborhoods and a foe of zone changes that allow higher housing densities. Those accusations were based in part on City Attorney Ron Doyle's review of four recent Planning Commission meetings. The tapes weren't played during the hearing. Speaking calmly, Nielsen denied the accusations. He conceded that he is argumentative, but strongly denied that he is disruptive. "I don't think a person needs to stop asking a question until it's answered," he said. He also denied that he has not been receptive to legal counsel (Planning Commission meetings are quasi-judicial, and a city attorney attends most sessions) and goes against the law. "Their advice is not the final word," he said of city legal advisers. "That's why we have courts. That's why we have judges." In the discussion that followed, several council members made it clear that they have received complaints that Nielsen has been rude and antagonistic to city staff and so-called "applicants" with business before the commission. But nobody on the council would say who was making complaints. Nielsen asked the mayor. "Members of the community have brought those issues forward," Berryman replied, refusing to elaborate. In the end, the council elected to retain Nielsen and adopted a letter of "admonishment" written by Council Vice President Bob Strosser, who defeated Nielsen two years ago for the council seat that opened up when Rob Patridge resigned for the state Legislature. The letter essentially rebuked Nielsen as charged. It remains to be seen how Nielsen's fellow commission members view it, since the letter could be perceived as a direct threat to the commission's independence. Two council members, John Michaels and Curt Bennett, made it clear they would like to remove Nielsen if he doesn't comply. Michaels, a former colleague of Nielsen's on the Planning Commission, repeatedly accused Nielsen of not understanding planning law -- accusations that Nielsen was not given the opportunity to refute. At least one council member, Skip Knight, took exception to the letter, likening it to censorship. Knight was the only council member who didn't vote to conduct the hearing. Knight also disagreed with the hearing itself, the way it was set up. So did council member Bob Moore. "He's fighting ghosts ... and I don't think that's fair," Knight said. "You have a right in this country to confront your accusers." Three years ago, the City Council fired then city manager Andy Anderson without a public hearing. This hearing was scheduled to avoid the appearance of back-room politics, city leaders have said. Throughout the hearing, four of Nielsen's eight colleagues sat behind him in a show of support. Several have disagreed with the council's assessment of Nielsen and have speculated that disgruntled developers have been pulling the strings. Noticeably absent was Carl Bartlett, chairman of the Planning Commission. After the meeting adjourned, Ernest Garb, president of United Medford Citizen's, accused the council of failing to make its case against Nielsen. By law, the council can remove a commission member only for misconduct or non-performance of duty. "They didn't address the issue," he said. "They didn't even come close. It was just a lot of people sounding off." Nielsen said he remains confused about the council's motives. The city council has never removed a planning commissioner in Medford's history, and his term ends in eight months. "Obviously I've ruffled somebody's feathers," he said. "Who they are, I don't know." Today's Edition : News | Sports | Business | Weather | Tempo | Classifieds Mail Tribune Copyright � The Mail Tribune 2000, Medford, Oregon USA