FAIRFAX SELECTBOARD DISMISSES TWO DRB MEMBERS

Fairfax Selectboard dismisses two DRB members
By LEE J. KAHRS
Messenger Staff Writer

(From The Wednesday, April 6, 2005 Edition Of The St. Albans Messenger)
FAIRFAX - The selectboard here has officially removed two members of the town development review board (DRB), effective immediately.

Former DRB Chair Colleen Steen and long-time board member Barb Young were notified of the selectboard's decision by letter on Wednesday March 30.

The board's decision caps a lengthy review process, prompted by infighting on the DRB and complaints from residents who felt their development projects have been handled improperly.

The board conducted evaluations of DRB members on Feb. 23. On March 28, the selectboard held a public hearing on the issue of removal from the board with Steen and Young. Two days later, each woman received a letter regarding her removal.

"You are being removed from the DRB due to your personal conflict issues with other members of the Board, which are overshadowing its effectiveness," the letter stated. "These personal issues have led to a defensive environment, which is counterproductive to a sound decision-making process."

Young served on the town Planning Commission from 1991 to 2000, when the DRB was formed. She was chair of the DRB from 2002-2004. Her family owns and operates L. W. Young Excavating in Fairfax.

In a phone interview this morning, Young agreed that the DRB was dysfunctional and changes were needed, but she disagreed with the board's decision to remove her.

"Something needed to be done," Young said, "but I didn't think I was part of the problem and I'm being used, I'm the sacrificial lamb."

Young said the irony of the setectboard's decision is that she originally agreed to join the board in order to make sure applicants were treated fairly
"There were people on the DRB who were making up their own rules and not following the bylaws," Young said. "I absolutely feel like a scapegoat."

In an e-mailed statement to the Messenger, however, Steen pointed to Young's excavating business as a major conflict of interest, something she has long opposed.

"The people of our community deserve to have land use decisions made in a consistent way, without conflict of interest, without favoritism," Steen wrote. "The fact that the former chair owns an excavating business and gets work directly from DRB applicants is not O.K. The fact that this excavating business has often been employed by the applicant while going through the review process is not O.K."

Steen said the fact that she chose to address this issue as a member of the DRB does not constitute a "personal conflict."

"The conflict that existed was a conflict for the entire community," Steen wrote. "It affected other excavators, who may have been denied jobs because the former chair had already made a deal with the applicant. It affected the way some applicants were treated, depending on who they had hired for the excavation work. It created inconsistency and erratic decisions and conditions for projects."

Young categorically denied Steen's claim, saying she has never let her position on the DRB affect her family's business.

"I have never, ever contacted an applicant, either before, during, or after the hearing on an application before the DRB," Young said. "If we ever worked with an applicant, it is because they contacted us, and we put out a bid with other contractors."

Young also said she contacted a staff attorney with the Vermont League of Cities and Towns (VLCT) about any potential conflict of interest. Young said the attorney, Brian Monaghan, told her he found no problem with her being on the board as long as her company only took on work after an application was reviewed.

"That's one of the things I have been very, very careful about," she said.
Young added that it is unfair to exclude business owners from local boards because of perceived conflicts of interest.

"You exclude a whole category of business people, carpenters, plumbers, landscapers, lawyers who couldn't serve on boards," she said. "That is not right and I'm going to stand on principle on that."

Steen was unanimously elected chair last November, and has been on the DRB for at least two years. She also served on the planning commission.
Steen also expressed frustration, saying Young had started to recuse herself from some reviews where the applicant had employed Young's excavating business. Steen said the board was starting to make decisions more effectively under her guidance.

"We have made great progress in the last four months," Steen wrote, "dealing with many issues including more organized meetings, efficient use of time, effective use of skills, and conflict of interest. The selectboard evaluated individual members of the board in the middle of the reorganization, and made a decision based on how the board operated prior to Nov. 2004."

Steen faces a civil suit brought by one disgruntled Fairfax couple, who have had lengthy dealings with the DRB.

Deanne and Ronald Morin filed the suit in Franklin Superior Court on Feb. 11, claiming Steen has treated their various DRB applications unfairly
and with prejudice. The Morins, who own and operate a construction company, claim that Steen's behavior conflicts with the Fairfax ethics ordinance, and charge Steen with "abusive treatment" of them during DRB hearings.

In addition to resident's complaints about the DRB, there Is also a record of animosity between Steen and Selectman Ed Nuttall, who also sat on the DRB as an alternate.

Nuttall resigned from the DRB on Feb. 7 on the advice of town attorney Steve Stitzel. who said Nuttall must either resign from the DRB or recluse himself from the selectboard before DRB discussion and evaluations could occur.

In her e-mail, Steen characterized her feelings about her removal from the DRB as "sweet and sour...and puzzled."

"My feeling of sour is that I have been accused of a "personal conflict" because I have addressed a conflict, which adversely impacts the entire community," Steen wrote. "My feeling of puzzled comes from the fact that we finally had a DRB working together for the best interests of the community, following the by-laws consistently for everyone, and without conflict."

Steen said that the "sweet " comes from the fact that she will have more time to enjoy her other interests.

Young said she did not feel supported by the selectboard during her entire tenure on the DRB. She said she feels the selectboard's decision to remove her was based on outside pressure for change from the community.

The one aspect both women agreed on was that the select-board's decision was unfair.

"They got pushed into a corner where they felt they had to do something," Young said. "I feel like they didn't have any evidence to remove me."

"The action of the select-board to remove me from the DRB is untimely, and without cause," Steen said.