Townsend residents continue appeals to recall hotel vote

A vocal delegation of Townsend residents still want their city government to recall the vote approving plans for a hybrid hotel in town. In a Thursday, April 11 meeting of the Townsend Planning Commission, citizens accused commissioners of ignoring residents’ interests in favor of unwanted business developments.

Planning commissioners approved the plans in January after deliberating whether Ofland Great Smoky Mountains — previously called Yonder Great Smoky Mountains — qualified as a hotel or a campground. An eventual vote opted to treat the development, which will consist of dozens of miniature cabins, as a hotel, meaning the project fit the usage requirements for the land developers planned to use. A second vote approved the plans themselves.

During the public comment section of the meeting Thursday, speakers said the decision had shaken their faith in their local government.

Questioning

In March, Townsend residents, including a delegation calling themselves the “No Yonder Group,” brought a list of questions to the commission, asking for clarification on the votes. Key among their questions was the fact that former Planning Commissioner Sandy Headrick seconded and participated in both votes even though her term had expired.

Planning Commission Chair Michael Talley addressed those concerns in a March 19 meeting of the Townsend Board of Commissioners. Removing Headrick’s vote, he told the packed audience, would not affect the outcome of either decision, in which Townsend Mayor Don Prater provided the sole nays.

But on Thursday, delegates of the No Yonder Group said Headrick’s second to both motions rendered them void under Robert’s Rules of Order, which the planning commission uses to run its meetings.

“The vote was not obtained in good faith and should not stand, even if the voting outcome is the same,” Tomi McEvoy, representative of the No Yonder Group, told planning commissioners. “The legal precedent has been set to disregard the rules, and this seemingly minor loophole could have major legal impacts on future developments here in Townsend.”

Talley said Headrick continued to serve on the board when she seconded the votes because the mayor had not yet selected her replacement — meaning she was still eligible to second motions. After consulting with the city’s attorney, he also said the board was not necessarily required to second motions to take a valid vote because of the small number of commissioners.

Talley has previously said commissioners are legally obligated to approve plans that meet the city’s requirements. Ofland, he said, met those requirements.

Confidence

In a meeting filled with back and forth between commissioners and a sometimes-rowdy audience, Planning Commissioner Haskell Rhett said he felt the Ofland decision had sowed seeds of mistrust between the community and its government. The definitions in the city’s codes need to be updated, he said, so that commissioners can avoid similar situations in the future.

Rhett was not part of the planning commission in January. He moved to publish a formal definition of a hotel, but no vote took place.

Prater, who has previously voiced Rhett’s sentiment about updating definitions, said he would prefer the planning commission hold a work session to define a hotel, something Talley agreed with. The city’s upcoming Community Plan, Prater said, would provide an opportunity to examine all of the city’s definitions, but a work session would allow commissioners to hash out the details.

Commissioners tentatively scheduled a session for 6:30 p.m. April 22, and could discuss other items such as accessory use, the definition of an accessory building and lot sizes.