IRON MOUNTAIN - A member of the Iron Mountain City Council was removed from the collective bargaining committee Monday night by a vote of 5-2.

Councilman Dan Burke and Mayor Jeff VanLaanen were opposed to the motion to remove Burke from the committee, which also includes council members Bruce Rosen and Ted Corombos.

The issue was added to the council agenda by Rosen for action on an alleged violation of the collective bargaining process.

Rosen noted that Burke's re-election statement in The Daily News on Saturday said that council members were looking to lay off a police officer.

"That is a clear violation of collective bargaining and has never been disclosed," Rosen said.

Mayor VanLaanen said that the allegation from Rosen is that the statement that the council wants to lay off a police officer is prohibited from discussion in open session. All that can be said is that Burke is a member of the city's collective bargaining unit.

"It's here written in the paper for everyone to read and it violated that bargaining effort," Rosen said.

VanLaanen disagreed, noting that Burke did not write that he was disclosing something as a part of the collective bargaining committee.

Burke noted that this action was being taken by the council on the eve of the council election.

Council member Tina Peterson noted that what Burke put in the paper was something that was discussed in executive session as a part of collective bargaining. She asked whether the council could discuss this in executive session if it wasn't appropriate to do so at the meeting.

"It's not permissible to go into closed session on this issue," said City Attorney Gerry Pirkola. "The council has to decide what they want to do. In general, you're on a committee and discussing something from an executive session is not appropriate."

Rosen noted that this is something that has been discussed and they are in the middle of collective bargaining.

Peterson felt that Burke knew exactly what he was writing in his election information . "He discussed an issue rather than informing people what his background was or why he was running for council."

"As a part of collective bargaining, he disclosed information in there that he was bound by confidentiality not to say. It's not something that is part of an existing contract. It's a collective bargaining topic that has neither been affirmed or denied," Rosen said.

Peterson agreed. "It was an idea discussed as a part of bargaining and that's big because it can affect future collective bargaining sessions."

"It violated the confidentiality of the bargaining unit. The remedy at this point is to move to remove him (Burke) from the collective bargaining unit," Rosen said.

Peterson also felt that this needed to be done based on what information he put in the paper. "It's sensitive information and clearly what you did was not to benefit the city."

VanLaanen disagreed. "Just because one member disagrees with the other two I wouldn't agree with removing them. That is a last resort and a drastic move."

Corombos agreed that it was a drastic move they had to make. "It's unfortunate that it has come to this. But we need to get someone on the committee who will work for the benefit of the city. Everything aside, he contributes nothing to this committee."

Even with the action to remove Burke from the committee, Rosen noted that he still wants to pursue the matter further with the city attorney. "It's a distinct violation of the law here," he claimed.

Linda Lobeck's e-mail address is llobeck@ironmountaindailynews.com.