Published: August 28, 2008 07:31 pm            

Judge hears citizens groups’ case for recall election in Bluefield

PRINCETON — A spokesman for a citizens group that is seeking a recall election in Bluefield had his day in court Thursday.

However, Circuit Court Judge William Sadler didn’t render an immediate decision on the writ of mandamus petition filed by Blaine Braithewaite on behalf of members of the Concerned Citizens for a Better Bluefield, and also delayed a decision on a motion for a summary judgment filed on behalf of the city of Bluefield by City Attorney Brian Cochran, who is asking the court to dismiss Braithewaite’s petition.

Sadler gave Braithewaite until Sept. 5 to file a written response to the motion for a summary judgment filed by the city, and gave the city until Sept. 12 to respond to Braithewaite’s filing. Sadler said he would issue a written ruling upon receipt of both documents.

Braithewaite said a failure by the Bluefield Board of Directors to act upon a recall petition containing the signatures of 232 citizens seeking to oust the current elected board — as allowed under the original 1921 charter of the city of Bluefield — prompted the citizens group to file the petition in search of a “extreme remedy” that would force the city to act upon the recall petition.

Braithewaite said the citizens group objected to the city’s motion for a summary adjustment because of errors and a misrepresentation of state statue. Braithewaite said the Constitution provides citizens a right to “reform, alter or abolish” their government.

Cochran said state code would supersede city code, which in return would require the collection of more than 1,000 signatures, or 20 percent of registered voters, for a valid recall petition. Cochran said Braithewaite’s recall petition also failed to name the five elected Board of Directors. Cochran said Braithewaite began collecting signatures in mid-2007 when former Mayor Gary Moore was still on the board. Cochran said more than 100 signatures were collected while Moore was still a board member. Moore, who later resigned because of a new job that required him spend a majority of his time outside of the city, was later replaced by Mary Frances Brammer.

“There is no way those first 100 signatures could have contemplated recalling Mrs. Brammer,” Cochran said. “She wasn’t even on the board at that time.”

Cochran said many of the signatures on the recall petition collected by Braithewaite also were of individuals who don’t live in the city limits. Braithewaite said the petition also contained several “non-original signatures.”

Cochran said another city election will be held in about eight months, and Braithewaite could run as a candidate at that time.

“I feel confident in our interpretation of the state code requirements,” Cochran said following the conclusion of Thursday’s court hearing. “We have confidence that the court will make a decision that is appropriate.”

The original petition filed by the citizens group directed the defendants — including former City Solicitor John Feuchtenberger, Mayor Linda Whalen, and board members Pete Sarver, Ron Crabtree, Mary Frances Brammer and Jim Bailey — to show cause on or before Thursday as to why the writ of mandamus should not be granted. Braithewaite said Thursday he just received the city’s motion for a summary judgment six days ago, and didn’t have proper time to respond to it.

None of the five elected board members attended Friday’s hearing, but Feuchtenberger did attend with Cochran.

The citizens group is seeking a new election, and alleges the board has violated and continues not to comply with state statues, specifically the Open Government Meetings Act. The petition also argues the board has not created a comprehensive plan for job creation, job retention, cost efficient ways to deliver city services and adequate recreational facilities for youth and other citizens.

– Contact Charles Owens at cowens@bdtonline.com

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.