September 16th

Dear Reader,

I drafted the following statement to provide background for you on this issue. It will be entered into the public record on Monday, September 18, at the Board meeting. At the Board work session on Wednesday, September 13, Supervisor Boughton stated that he had conducted his own investigation and found no merit to the allegation. Curiously, he did not attempt to contact the "township resident" who originally made the allegation to Clerk Beard. This story has changed with every telling -- five different versions as of this writing. It is my firm belief that we must conduct a thorough investigation to determine what, if anything, happened and hold those responsible to account. Please contact me with your comments at askmary@eley.org.

Eley Statement:

Dear Fellow Board Members and Citizens of Fruitland Township,

At the last regular meeting of this Board, we reversed an illegal action taken by the Parks & Recreation Committee, ordering that the posts at the McMillan Road End be returned to their original position. The purpose of this action was two-fold:

1. Demonstrate respect for the democratic process established by this Board when it appointed a subcommittee to study the McMillan Road End issue and propose a land use plan.

2. Send a strong and clear message that freelance efforts to usurp the authority of this elected Board will not be tolerated.

A few days after that meeting, Clerk Beard sent an e-mail to all Board members and Attorney Robert Eklund stating, “A recent observation by a township resident has been brought to my attention that I feel compelled to address out of concern for the welfare of the Fruitland Township Board. A quorum (4) of Township Board members were deliberating and composing motions while removed from a public meeting. In the instance that this is an accurate observation we should be aware that this is a blatant violation of the Open Meetings Act, Act 267 of 1976. All discussion, deliberation and conduct of business must be performed during a public, open meeting as defined by law.” Clerk Beard attached a copy of the law for our review.

In my response (see my original e-mail response below), I agreed that this was a serious allegation indeed and requested a special meeting to investigate the validity of the charge. Two other trustees joined my request, falling one vote short of the quorum required to call a special meeting.

The dialog that followed was troubling. Elected members of this body invoking “Board unity” as rationale for refusing to investigate an alleged crime of conspiracy. The tenor of the discussion quickly devolved and it became clear that this allegation would go unchallenged and unresolved. Instead, Supervisor Boughton conducted his own investigation, asking Board members to respect his leadership on this issue.

Ladies and gentleman, fellow citizens of Fruitland Township, your trust and confidence in this Board is paramount. Indeed, without it our democracy could not function. You deserve to know whether your elected officials are conspiring, as alleged, to fix votes outside of a public meeting. If it is true, the guilty deserve to be punished, as required by law. If it is untrue, let the accuser be held accountable for his or her actions. But, absent a search for the truth, neither of these scenarios will come to pass and a cloud of suspicion will hang over the proceedings of this body, further diminishing your trust and confidence in your government.

You deserve better and we deserve the opportunity to clear our names. Therefore, I have taken this matter to the Muskegon County Prosecutor, Tony Tague, and requested a full investigation. According to Mr. Tague, he is required by statute to investigate all alleged violations of the Open Meetings Act.

I fully support fostering unity among my fellow board members, but not if it means covering up a crime. I do not know what Mr. Tague's investigation will reveal, but I can assure you that justice will prevail and that I will abide by his recommendations.

Thank you for your trust. Mary Eley

Judge for yourself. This is the original e-mail sent by Clerk Beard to Board members, followed by my response. These are public record, as defined by the Open Meetings Act, P.A. 267 of 1976. I have also included a link to the Act for your reference.

<<Read Clerk Beard's OMA e-mail>>

<<Read Eley response>>

<<Read Michigan Open Meetings Act>>