BUCYRUS—The Health and Safety Committee meeting in the chambers of Bucyrus City Council ended up with one councilman walking out and a citizen calling for his removal from office.
Bucyrus resident Vicki Dishon spoke before the committee about the removal of Bucyrus citizen Carolyn Shireman from council chambers during Tuesday’s regularly scheduled meeting.
Dishon made it clear that she supports the council rules outlined in rule 1111.21. She said while she supports the rules, she did have a problem when they aren’t carried out correctly.
Dishon made the claim the pro tem President for Tuesday’s meeting, Councilman-At-Large, Dan Wirebaugh failed due diligence.
Dishon noted that she sent an email out to all council members outlining the required steps to remove someone from council:
The Chief of Police, or his/her designee, shall preside as the Sergeant-At-Arms at all Council and Committee meetings. The Sergeant-at-Arms will carry out all orders given by the Council President or presiding member for the purpose of maintaining order at City Council/Committee meetings.
(a) Procedure.
(l) Unless the Sergeant-at-arms perceives an immediate threat of violence or destruction of property which requires immediate action, the following procedure will be used to remove a subject(s) who refuses to relinquish the podium or disrupts the meeting.
(2) Notice. The Council President will notify any speaker to end their time at the podium or to cease any disruptive activity.
(3) First Warning: If any subject(s) fails to relinquish the podium or cease the disruption, the council President will inform the subject(s) that they will be removed from City property by order of the Sergeant-at-Arms.
(4) Second Warning: If the subject(s) fails to comply following the first warning, the Council President will then revoke the subject(s) right to remain in the meeting room and inform the person subject(s) that they will be subject to arrest for trespassing if they do not immediately and peaceably leave the room.
The content of this warning shall be “l inform you that your actions are inconsistent with the orderly function of this meeting and fail to comply with the lawful order from the Chair. I am instructing the Sergeant-at-Arms to have you removed from this meeting site and if deemed necessary by the Sergeant-at-Arms, to remove you from this building.”
(b) Removal.
(l) If following the warnings set forth in subsection (a) herein, the subject(s) fail to leave, the Sergeant-at-Arms may remove the subject(s) from the meeting.
(a) The Sergeant-at-Arms will first request that the subject leave the meeting. If the subject(s) leave, no further action will be taken.
(b) If the subject(s) does not immediately leave following the request of the Sergeant-at-arms, the subject(s) will be placed under arrest, physically removed from the premises, charged with criminal trespass, and any other applicable violations of the law, and immediately transported. (This document was copied from the original printed rules and may include grammatical errors.)
Dishon told committee members that Wirebaugh did not follow the procedures by declaring the exact wording he needed to say (noted in section four: second warning).
Wirebaugh interrupted Dishon when he told her,” Yes, I did.”
Dishon turned to Wirebaugh and said:” Excuse me. I will not interrupt you while you are speaking, don’t interrupt me.”
With that, while Dishon was still speaking, Wirebaugh walked out of the meeting.
Dishon did not miss a beat and quoted Wirebaugh’s response to her email:
“I believe the second sentence spells it out clearly.” Quoting from the resolution, Wirebaugh said,
“The Sergeant-at-Arms will carry out all orders given by the council president or presiding member for the purposes of maintaining order at city council or committee meetings.”
Wirebaugh went on to say:” In my opinion, the speaker’s behavior was beyond reprehensible and will not be tolerated by this council. Secondly, the speaker’s constant interruptions gave a little or no opportunity for repeated warnings. In today’s world, we can either be part of the problem or part of the solution,“ Wirebaugh wrote.
Dishon told the council that she took that response as an excuse for not properly carrying out the established procedure.
“Again, I don’t have a problem with the rules but do then they are not followed properly. Is that so hard? Dishon asked.
Former Council President Kurt Fankhauser echoed Dishon’s statements.
Fankhauser said when he was council president, he kept a copy of the rules (to remove someone from the meeting) at the corner of his desk: “I never had to use it once. I would like it noted in the minutes that Dan Wirebaugh just walked out of this meeting. He should be noted as unexcused.
While Vicki was talking, he couldn’t handle her speaking the truth. So he just walks out of here. An elected official does not get to decide whether he’s going to be absent or unexcused. Dan did not follow the statute that was passed for the removal of someone from the meeting. Therefore I am alleging he has committed malfeasance of office,” Fankhauser said.
Fankhauser further told the committee that there is a procedure in the Ohio Revised Code that should be implemented for Dan Wirebaugh to be removed from office. That ORV ordinance is 733.72.
“You can look it up. It takes five registered voters to take this complaint to the court. I welcome any of you on the council to join in that potential filing because I have a feeling there’s going to be a filing,” Fankhauser concluded.