OPINION: Killeen council members must see eye-to-eye before they can move city forward

Things got a little testy among council members at last week's Killeen City Council meeting. For regular observers of Killeen city politics, there's nothing too unusual about this recent development. What makes it interesting — and more than a bit ironic — is that the heated remarks were made during a discussion about whether the members should go on a team-building retreat. Mayor Joseph Solomon placed the item on the meeting agenda for discussion. He was quick to note that he was not trying to force anyone to take part, merely suggesting it. He also noted that the retreat would be held in town, so no taxpayer money would be involved. The logic behind Solomon's proposal is evident. The current council is made up of seven people with very disparate backgrounds and personalities. The council also has only two members with previous council experience — a fact that is often evident when the council is trying to hash out an issue or follow protocol. But two aspects of the proposed retreat seemed to be a sticking point for some members: the presence of a mediator during the meeting, and the fact that it would be open to the public. Councilwoman Debbie Nash-King, a member with several years of experience as a council member and a mayor — took exception to the purpose of the retreat, saying, 'We don't have to be told how to treat each other, respect each other and talk to each other,' That may be Nash-King's take on the situation, but during that same discussion, another council member's remarks called her statement into question. Councilman Anthony Kendrick said, 'I would love to do team building so we could talk and kind of figure out why people talk too much,' an apparent reference to Councilwoman Mellisa Brown, who frequently offers her opinion during council meetings. Kendrick's comment drew a retort from Brown, causing the mayor to call a point of order so Kendrick could continue speaking for his allotted time. Councilman David Bass said having the retreat open to the public would defeat the purpose, saying that speaking frankly and learning from each other takes on a different vibe with observers present. Councilman Charles Kimble, the city's former police chief, said hie relationship with his council colleagues would evolve 'naturally and organically,' and that a retreat would do little to help. Ultimately, the issue of a retreat was left unsettled, but the discussion itself exposed a lot of areas where council cohesion is seriously lacking. Councilwoman Beverly Williams laid it all on the line, describing the atmosphere in the council chambers as 'a hostile environment.' She chided council members on their inability to get along and asked, 'When we have a retreat, will we really come together?' She said the members need to do so in order to make sound decisions for the city. Let's take some of the comments made by the council. First is the matter of the retreat being open to the public. Since it would likely involve a quorum, it would qualify as a public meeting under the Open Meetings Act. It doesn't qualify for any of the act's exception, such as personnel, real estate or litigation, so the meeting must be open to the public. Previous councils got around this requirement by having the retreats out of town, at venues such as Peaceable Kingdom near Youngsport. Doing so cut down on the number of residents in attendance. But it still was a public meeting. Bass is right that having residents present would change the vibe. Honest, frank comments about another member might not be made in front of the public — which may be seen as a good or a bad thing. Brown commented during last week's meeting that council members shouldn't say anything in private that they couldn't say in a public setting, but that may not always be a practical approach. That said, it is not acceptable for an office holder or city administrator to deliver veiled insults and subtle put-downs under the guise of conducting city business. The perception of tension between council members or between council members and administrators detracts from the discussion at hand and undermines the public's confidence in its municipal leaders. And Killeen's city council isn't the only body to experience this tension as of late. Last month, the Harker Heights City Council recessed for about 15 after a disagreement between Councilman Jesse Myles and Mayor Michael Blomquist about characterizing an absence as excused or unexcused. The issue flared up as Blomquist was calling the roll, and labeled Councilman Shane Hodyniak's absence as excused. Myles immediately called a point of order, which Blomquist informed him could not be done during the roll call. When Blomquist called Myles' name in the roll call order, the councilman declined to answer. Blomquist immediately called a recess and the council left the dais and headed to a conference room. The flare-up last month followed a previous disagreement between Myles and Blomquist. They mayor had described an absence on Myles' part as unexcused. In a subsequent meeting, Myles asked Blomquist where the charter gave the mayor the authority to describe an absence as excused or unexcused. It was never fully resolved. After the council left the dais at last month's meeting, members of the audience were visibly agitated by the display and said little until the council and mayor reemerged a few minutes later. Blomquist again called the roll, this time simply saying Hodyniak was absent, and the meeting proceeded smoothly from that point on. Still, several other incidents have occurred in recent months, in which council members have sniped at each other on a variety of topics, and more than one council member has questioned the mayor's authority in presiding over the meeting. The growing dissent led former Mayor Spencer Smith to go the podium during citizen comments last moth and basically tell the representatives to get their act together. He noted that people in Austin are watching what's going on in the city, and the council's behavior has consequences. The same could be said of the frequent sniping going on at Killeen council meetings. But in Killeen's case, not only are state leaders watching, but so are the candidates hoping to be hired as the next city manager. The last thing the city needs is to display a series of council meetings that devolve into insults and bickering. But team building doesn't seem to be the answer here — not for either city. In both instances, we're talking about elected representatives who come from different backgrounds and have different perspectives on the role of municipal governments, as well as the use of tax revenue. With such disparate personalities, it's not unusual that not everyone sees eye-to-eye on the issues. And in more than one instance, at least one council member has drawn a line in the sand on taxes and announced it from the dais. This hardly encourages any kind of meaningful negotiations on the issue. The main thing that needs to be established is mutual respect among the elected members — and that's a quality that's somewhat lacking at present. It's doubtful that a council picnic, or a three-legged sack race would produce the kind of team spirit that Mayor Solomon seems to be looking for. But he is right in his assessment that council members need to sit down and talk things out. If members want to avoid a public meeting, they can have chat sessions in groups of three or fewer, falling short of a quorum. In Harker Heights, Council members Hodyniak and Roxanne Flores have been tasked by Mayor Blomquist to put together a revised package of rules of decorum that will be reviewed by the whole council in the coming weeks. That's a positive step, but council members with differing viewpoints also could benefit from some one-on-one sit-downs. Ultimately, it's not necessary that council members all like each other, but it is essential that they respect each other — and the position they hold in city government. Without that, the sarcastic cracks, veiled insults and outright rebukes are likely to continue. And that is certainly not what the residents of Killeen or Harker Heights voted for.