Patch Files Open Meetings Law Complaint Against Mount Pleasant

Patch on Tuesday filed a complaint with the Racine County District Attorney’s office alleging that Mount Pleasant officials violated the state’s open meetings laws when they went behind closed doors to hire a new village clerk/treasure.

The complaint was filed against Village President Mark Gleason; Trustees David DeGroot, Jerry Garski, Gary Feest, Sonny Havn, John Hewitt, and Don Schulz; and Village Administrator Kurt Wahlen in connection with a closed session that took place during the July 8 Village Board meeting. 

The complaint revolves around the manner in which closed session during the July 8 village board meeting was noticed. Specifically, the agenda cites state statute 19.85(1)(c) and says the closed session was being held for the purpose of:

Considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility, specifically: Village Clerk/Treasurer Position.

In its complaint to the district attorney, Patch contends the officials:

• Improperly used state statute to cloak the true intent of the session to interview a candidate and hire that person;
• Invited members of the general public — Sturtevant Clerk/Administrator Mary Cole and Racine County Clerk Wendy Christensen and applicant Stephanie Kohlhagen -— into the closed session as part of an interview and hiring process without the general public being fully aware of what was taking place during the session; and
• Did not following historical best practices of being specific on the Village Board meeting agenda in the spirit of open government and transparency.

At the July 8 meeting, five board members - Trustees Jerry Garski and Don Schulz stayed behind - went into closed session and conducted a short interview with Stephanie Kohlhagen, the finalist for the village clerk/treasurer position. Cole and Christensen were also present to give their recommendations after serving on a panel that interviewed seven finalists for the position.

Trustees emerged back into open session and voted 4-1 to hire Kohlhagen. Trustee Gary Feest voted "no," and Garski and Schulz abstained.

Before going into closed session, Feest questioned how the hiring process was even moving forward without express direction of the village board.

"It is my feeling that this entire process to this point ... suffice it to say I'm trying very hard to determine who runs this village," he said. 

Gleason did not return phone calls seeking comment on the matter, however, Hewitt said he didn't have a comment about the way the public notice given for the meeting.

"I assumed we'd be interviewing, but I didn't know if that would be one person or all seven finalists," he said. "(Patch) is well-within (its) right to file a complaint if (they) feel there might be something wrong with the notice."

During the board meeting Monday, resident Mike Devine also took issue with the way Kohlhagen was hired, citing statute 19.85 and saying any discussion of the position should have been done in open session.

“Statute 19.85 does not authorize applicants if discussing general matters,” he said. “Only final selections can be done in closed session.”

Historically, any interviews or consideration of candidates have been noticed specifically on meeting agendas.

“Our village attorneys have always cautioned the board to be as specific as possible to avoid any question about open meetings law,” former Trustee Karen Albeck told Patch.

Attorneys for the village said they couldn’t comment about the closed session because Patch filed the complaint.