Working supervisor discussed by board
BY SUSAN BRYANT
A working supervisor motion was discussed at the Lowhill supervisors’ April 5 meeting.
Board Vice Chairman George “Buddy” Wessner Jr. reported on the list is the working supervisor motion that Chairman Rick Hughes put out there.
“I know Rick is not here, but I think we need to talk about this a little bit, because I was really disappointed this was even on the agenda,” he stated. “After Rick found out Roadmaster Joe Kalusky was running for supervisor, he wanted to put a motion out there that he cannot be a supervisor and work for the road crew at the same time.
“So, he wants to make a motion that Kalusky cannot do that, and I just think that is completely ridiculous.”
Resident Karl Reed commented on the issue.
“I have no idea how you do this,” Reed said, addressing Supervisor Curtis Dietrich. “If Rick put that motion forward and you won’t second it, you can’t because everybody’s talking about conflict of interest.
“You’re the guy with the biggest conflict of interest in something like that. Your conflict is bigger than the sky in Montana.
“If you wanted to block him, you’re the only guy on the ballot.”
Dietrich responded.
“We already have a motion that is on the books on Jan. 4, 2010,” Dietrich said. “Richard Hughes made a motion to eliminate part-time work by supervisors and set a limit of $1,200 per year for attending advertised meetings.”
Wessner then responded.
“That was for part time,” Wessner said. “He (Joe) would be a full-time roadmaster.”
Wessner then alleged Hughes called Kalusky and threatened him that he would be fired if he continued to run for office.
“He called the day before Joe would have to pull out,” Wessner said, before asking Kalusky if it were true.
Kalusky responded.
“He (Rick Hughes) did call me and tell me I would lose my job, because Curtis called him and told him I was running.”
Wessner commented.
“I am not going to entertain this,” Wessner said. “I am not going to make a motion. I just wanted to bring it up and bring it out to the public because to me this is just slimy politics.”
Solicitor David Brooman commented on the issue.
“Because Rick is not here, and I do not know what his logic is, and I did not hear about it until just now, I would suggest you table this until Rick is available,” he stated.
Reed then asked Brooman if Hughes discussed the issue with him.
“No,” Brooman responded. “I will not lie. I had a conversation with Buddy that day. He alerted me to the agenda because I did not know it was on the agenda because it was fairly oblique.”
Brooman added he needs to look into the issue to see if two votes are needed to do what is being suggested.
“I don’t suggest wasting money and researching a rather novel issue, if it never comes to fruition,” Brooman explained. “I do not recommend spending the money to research it because it is not an issue today.
“I would suggest tabling this until Rick is available.
Wessner agreed and the issue was tabled.