A recall drive is officially under way against city councilors who voted Aug. 21 to seal records pertinent to the city’s sale of a Park Street building.

Activists Larry Scott and Robert Westlake began collecting signatures Tuesday morning inside Bath Middle School, where Bath voters were weighing in on a special election for state Senate.

In a 7-1 vote on Aug. 21, city councilors declined to disclose information from a Feb. 6 executive session about the sale, approved in executive session April 1, of a cityowned Park Street building.

The building at 9 Park St. was assessed for tax purposes at $6.5 million and sold to a Phippsburg developer April 17 for $799,000. Many voters allege the building was sold for less than its worth after deliberations that should not have been secret.

Essentially, the Aug. 21 vote meant residents would have no more information about the sale than they currently do, even after any independent investigation, which councilors also have voted to pursue.

“We have a situation where a single lone vote voted for common sense in city government,” Michael Wischkaemper said, referring to Ward 6 Councilor David Sinclair, who cast the lone vote Aug. 21 to disclose executive session information.

In voting against disclosure of information from executive session on Aug. 21:

— Councilor Meadow Merrill said she was concerned “that allowing information learned in executive session might compromise the interests of other parties involved.”

— Councilor Sean Paulhus said he was concerned it would set a precedent revoking the council’s privilege of conducting business in executive session.

— Councilor Steve Brackett said he had reservations about releasing information learned in executive session, and felt strongly about it because City Solicitor Roger Therriault said that it had never been done before.

— Councilor Carolyn Lockwood said that “most of the information” was already in the public domain, and didn’t see the need to waive confidentiality of executive session for the investigation.

— Councilor Andy Winglass objected too, saying that “essentially, what we would be allowing is public scrutiny” of information that was revealed in executive session.

Councilors Tink Mitchell, Mari Eosco and Bernie Wyman did not speak on the issue.

Brackett, Merrill, Paulhus, Lockwood, Eosco, Mitchell and Winglass all voted against giving the investigator the right to talk with them and others about events that took place in executive session. Wyman did not vote.

Targeted in the recall effort are Wyman, Winglass, Lockwood, Paulhus and Merrill.

Although Eosco, Brackett and Mitchell are not being targeted by the recall, they are facing re-election in November, and the citizens’ group is actively seeking candidates for their seats. Sinclair is not being targeted.

In order to recall a sitting councilor in Bath, a petition must have half the number of signers as voters who voted in the election in which the councilor being recalled was last elected.

That number varies by ward, and by whether a councilor was elected in an offyear or presidential election.

As the only at-large councilor, 1,250 signatures are needed to recall Winglass; the others need 200 to 300, depending on the turnout last election.

If activists get the required number of signatures — and there is no time limit — recalls go to a citywide vote.

The City Council then has 60 days to set a date for such a referendum. Then special elections would be called, separately from the recall vote, to fill the vacated seats.

ghamilton@timesrecord.com