Nearly 50 people jammed a standing-room-only Porter town hall Tuesday where the division between Town Council members grew even wider over who will lead them in 2011.

Michele Bollinger, Todd Martin and Trevin Fowler voted to unseat Dave Babcock --- elected Dec. 28 --- as president in favor of Fowler, who’s starting his fifth month on the council.

The same trio later elected Bollinger vice-president with Babcock and member Jon Granat voting no.

Residents spoke prior to the vote, and Granat delivered a blistering statement citing a power struggle “between the council members elected by the citizens of Porter and those appointed by a select few” referring to Martin and Fowler being chosen in separate Republican caucuses with no more than five people voting.

Granat had nominated Babcock Dec. 28 to serve as president. Martin and Bollinger voted no, Granat and Babcock yes. Fowler was absent. Clerk-treasurer Carol Pomeroy broke the tie in Babcock’s favor.

Martin, Bollinger and Fowler subsequently in writing requested a special meeting to reconsider the vote. Last night, Babcock asked town attorney Patrick Lyp if the Dec. 28 vote was legal in light of town code that says such elections shall take place the first annual meeting of the year.

Lyp said just as Bollinger was elected Dec. 29, 2009 to lead the council for 2010, Babcock’s election could stand if that’s the council’s wish but there’s nothing that precludes members from changing their mind who will lead them. “What the council gives, the council can take away.”

Martin made a motion to vote again for president to give Fowler the opportunity to vote. Dead silence followed with no second; Bollinger eventually did second and the motion passed.

Babcock said replacing him is the majority’s right but if this can be done, it sets a dangerous precedent that things can be changed as the wind blows.

Spoke out Shirley McCarthy from the audience, “If this (Dec. 28 vote) wasn’t legal, this can go on forever. Then nothing they vote on when one is absent is legal.”

The council opened the floor to public comment that both supported and rejected a revote prompting frequent applause from both camps.

Karen Pisowicz said, “How dare Mr. Fowler question what Dave might do” referring to comments that there was a concern what appointments Babcock would make, and whether he would support the council’s programs and plans began under Bollinger’s 2010 leadership. Unlike others, Pisowicz said, Babcock has no personal agenda for the town.

Jeffrey Bailey, a 28-year resident, said Porter has lurched from controversy to controversy. “The town has become a laughing stock of the whole area because of political shenanigans....as a resident of Porter, I’m sick of it.”

But Stephen Huff said as a voter his right of representation was denied when a vote was taken when Fowler was absent. He said town code was ignored as was the will of the people. Voting again “needs to be done to wash away the stench from this governmental body.”

Fowler had announced Dec. 14 he would be absent Dec. 28 and later said he would have changed his plans to return had he known a presidential vote would take place.

Mike Babcock said the Dec. 28 election better be legal or the council is creating a slippery slope for itself. If not, “Whatever you do, understand you’re breaking down the power of the council and its ability to work.”

Bill Cantrell said at the Dec. 28 meeting any council member could have nominated another candidate to be president in addition to Babcock, but no one did.

John McCrum said when town code says “shall” that means must and whether the code wasn’t strictly applied in the past is irrelevant; existing laws need to be upheld now.

Addressing the council, Judy Chemma asked, “What are you afraid of? There’s something that stinks in Denmark that makes me wonder, what is the agenda here? It makes me very nervous.”

Heather Ennis said she’s been impressed with the Town Council’s leadership, and it appears the Dec. 28 vote was taken purposely in Fowler’s absence. “This is embarassing.”

Kathleen Strain said she can’t help wonder if the battle over who is president is related to the Porter Park Board controversy.

In his statement Granat said Martin, a six-week resident at the time, was chosen Aug. 27, 2008 by a GOP caucus on a 3-2 vote to fill a council vacancy; the other candidate was 　long-time Porter resident and Plan Commission member Ken Timm. Also, Sept. 9, 2010 Fowler was selected 3-0 by a GOP caucus to fill another vacancy, said Granat, but the second candidate --- resident Henry Huyser, town zoning board president --- wasn’t even interviewed by the caucus.

Granat said he is loyal to the people who elected him. “I believe there is no one more loyal to the people of Porter (than Babcock). For Michele, Todd and Trevin to imply Dave is not the right person to be president of the Porter Town Council makes me wonder where their loyalty lies.”

Lyp and some residents said town code may need to be amended to clarify areas that have led to disagreement.

Posted 1/12/2011