By Greg Chandler
Zeeland Record
Zeeland city planners have approved an addition to their bylaws that defines what constitutes a conflict of interest and how such matters should be handled.
Commissioners voted 6-0 July 9 in favor of the addition.
“We determined we needed to get some formal guidelines or formal policies in place,” Community Development Director Tim Maday said.
The conflict of interest issue arose last summer as commissioners were debating whether to approve rezoning of several parcels on Main Avenue for the Mead Johnson Nutrition modernization project.
Two commissioners – Amanda Cooper and Robert Blanton – recused themselves from any discussion or vote on the rezonings because of their ties to the Lakeshore Advantage economic development organization, which had worked closely with Mead Johnson in putting together the project application to the city.
Cooper at the time was Lakeshore Advantage’s senior vice president of strategic growth, and has since been named its interim president. Blanton’s wife, Beth, is senior vice president of engagement for the organization.
At a Planning Commission meeting in June 2025, Cooper said that she had never met or spoken to anyone from Mead Johnson about the project.
“Did they have a conflict? They did have a conflict,” said City Attorney Jim Donkersloot, who crafted the language. “You can’t be accepting money working for somebody who is representing the project, and then say you’re truly an independent voice.”
In July of last year, Planning Commission Chairman Bill Elhart directed city planning staff to put together a conflict of interest statement to add to the commission’s bylaws.
Under the language, a conflict of interest “shall include, but is not necessarily limited to”:
• Deliberating on, voting on, reviewing a matter or lobbying a commissioner on a matter in which the member has a financial interest;
• Deliberating on, voting on, reviewing or lobbying on a matter involving a corporation, company or any other entity in which the commissioner holds an ownership interest;
• Deliberating on, voting on, reviewing or lobbying on a matter concerning the commission member’s spouse or children, including stepchildren and children-in-law, on matters for which one has a personal, financial or emotional interest in a matter or a personal relationship with an individual.
• Deliberating on, voting on, reviewing or lobbying on a matter where the commissioner is an employee or whose employer is an applicant or agent for an applicant, or has a direct interest in the outcome.
• Representing any applicant, developer, neighbor or party directly interested in a matter before the Planning Commission or emailing or discussing a case with other commissioners if one has a financial interest in the matter.
Any commissioner who has a conflict of interest or thinks they may have a conflict of interest would need to state that before a public hearing is held or before casting a vote on the matter. That member would then have to step down from their seat, but could remain in the room and could comment to the Planning Commission is if he or she were from the general public, according to the new bylaw language.
Zeeland Record
Zeeland city planners have approved an addition to their bylaws that defines what constitutes a conflict of interest and how such matters should be handled.
Commissioners voted 6-0 July 9 in favor of the addition.
“We determined we needed to get some formal guidelines or formal policies in place,” Community Development Director Tim Maday said.
The conflict of interest issue arose last summer as commissioners were debating whether to approve rezoning of several parcels on Main Avenue for the Mead Johnson Nutrition modernization project.
Two commissioners – Amanda Cooper and Robert Blanton – recused themselves from any discussion or vote on the rezonings because of their ties to the Lakeshore Advantage economic development organization, which had worked closely with Mead Johnson in putting together the project application to the city.
Cooper at the time was Lakeshore Advantage’s senior vice president of strategic growth, and has since been named its interim president. Blanton’s wife, Beth, is senior vice president of engagement for the organization.
At a Planning Commission meeting in June 2025, Cooper said that she had never met or spoken to anyone from Mead Johnson about the project.
“Did they have a conflict? They did have a conflict,” said City Attorney Jim Donkersloot, who crafted the language. “You can’t be accepting money working for somebody who is representing the project, and then say you’re truly an independent voice.”
In July of last year, Planning Commission Chairman Bill Elhart directed city planning staff to put together a conflict of interest statement to add to the commission’s bylaws.
Under the language, a conflict of interest “shall include, but is not necessarily limited to”:
• Deliberating on, voting on, reviewing a matter or lobbying a commissioner on a matter in which the member has a financial interest;
• Deliberating on, voting on, reviewing or lobbying on a matter involving a corporation, company or any other entity in which the commissioner holds an ownership interest;
• Deliberating on, voting on, reviewing or lobbying on a matter concerning the commission member’s spouse or children, including stepchildren and children-in-law, on matters for which one has a personal, financial or emotional interest in a matter or a personal relationship with an individual.
• Deliberating on, voting on, reviewing or lobbying on a matter where the commissioner is an employee or whose employer is an applicant or agent for an applicant, or has a direct interest in the outcome.
• Representing any applicant, developer, neighbor or party directly interested in a matter before the Planning Commission or emailing or discussing a case with other commissioners if one has a financial interest in the matter.
Any commissioner who has a conflict of interest or thinks they may have a conflict of interest would need to state that before a public hearing is held or before casting a vote on the matter. That member would then have to step down from their seat, but could remain in the room and could comment to the Planning Commission is if he or she were from the general public, according to the new bylaw language.
