Residents questioned Council President Chad Blake’s continued residency in Lapel during an often tense special meeting Thursday night. Blake defended his status, describing the destruction of his home, his temporary move to Edgewood and his ongoing efforts to rebuild in Lapel. The council ultimately continued the matter to allow additional documentation to be presented.
LAPEL — What began as a special meeting to examine the residency of Lapel Town Council President Chad Blake quickly grew into a broader and at times heated discussion about transparency, trust and accountability in town government.
The Lapel Town Council met Thursday, Aug. 27, at the Lapel Lions Club for a special meeting officially called to “hear the facts of residency.”
Council members Chad Blake, Lindsay Washmuth, Kristi Worthman and Jeff Beck were present.
Before getting to the residency issue, the council amended its agenda to add a tolling agreement and public comment.
The decision to allow residents to speak set the tone for much of what followed.
Residents Question Residency — and Trust
Several residents used the public comment period to challenge whether Blake should continue serving as council president while currently living outside Lapel.
Clay Parkerson was among the first to address the council and framed his objection as going beyond the legal question.
Parkerson said his concern was the “moral concept” of someone making major decisions affecting Lapel while not currently living in the town.
“We have a person sitting on this board that’s the president of this board that does not live in this town,” Parkerson said, arguing that the decisions being made by the council can involve millions of dollars and have long-term consequences for residents.
His comments reflected a theme that continued throughout the evening: even if Blake’s situation can legally qualify as temporary residency elsewhere, some residents questioned whether remaining on the council was appropriate.
Other speakers raised concerns about transparency and previous town decisions, including the controversial LKQ matter.
The discussion became about more than an address.
It became a discussion about public trust.
Several residents argued that documentation establishing Blake’s residency should have been made available earlier and questioned why citizens had reached the point of seeking legal advice to get answers.
The atmosphere throughout public comment was noticeably tense. Speakers expressed frustration directly to council members, and accusations of evasiveness and a lack of transparency surfaced repeatedly.
At points, residents also questioned whether Blake should be presiding over a meeting examining his own eligibility to remain on the council.
Blake Explains What Happened
Blake later gave the council his account of how he came to be living outside Lapel.
According to Blake, the situation began after a tornado struck on April 2, 2025, leaving his Lapel home uninhabitable.
Blake said the damaged house was eventually demolished on July 11, 2025, and that finalized blueprints for a replacement home were completed later that month.
What followed, he said, was a lengthy process involving septic requirements, contractors and determining whether a new home could practically be constructed on the property.
Blake told the council that he explored housing options while that process played out. Renting locally was difficult, he said, in part because he has two large dogs.
He ultimately purchased a home in Edgewood.
Blake explained that Edgewood put him closer to work and that purchasing rather than renting made financial sense while he worked toward rebuilding in Lapel. He characterized the Edgewood property as an investment rather than an abandonment of his Lapel residence.
Most importantly, Blake maintained that his intention has been to return.
He told the council that he had previously discussed his circumstances with legal officials and maintained that his temporary living arrangement did not eliminate his Lapel residency.
According to Blake, progress toward rebuilding has continued.
He said Adams Environmental became involved with the Lapel property in May 2026. Site work followed, and soil testing was performed Aug. 19.
Blake said the results indicated the property could support a new septic system — clearing one of the significant hurdles preventing construction of a replacement home.
Council Members Want Documentation
Blake’s explanation did not completely resolve the matter.
As the meeting progressed, questions shifted toward what documentation should be considered as evidence of his residency and his intent to return to Lapel.
The council discussed an evidentiary process and what information should be reviewed before making a final determination.
Members questioned Blake about documentation supporting portions of his timeline and discussed obtaining additional records, including information related to the soil testing and communications surrounding his efforts to rebuild.
That created one of the central tensions of the evening.
Blake maintained that his circumstances had already been reviewed and that he had been working toward returning to his Lapel property. Critics countered that the council and public should be able to see sufficient evidence to independently evaluate those claims.
The meeting transcript shows Blake said he had vetted his documentation with the town’s legal team, the state election board and county prosecutor. He maintained that he was permitted to temporarily live elsewhere while rebuilding his Lapel home.
A Legal Question and an Ethical Question
The meeting repeatedly revealed two separate arguments taking place at the same time.
One is legal:
Does Blake continue to meet the residency requirements necessary to hold his elected position?
The other is political and ethical:
Even if he legally qualifies, should someone currently living outside Lapel continue making decisions on behalf of the town?
For several residents who spoke Thursday, satisfying the first question would not necessarily answer the second.
For Blake, however, the distinction is significant. His position is that circumstances beyond his control forced him from his home and that he has maintained his intention to rebuild and return.
That difference in perspective fueled much of the evening’s disagreement.
Tolling Agreement Approved
The council also approved a tolling agreement after receiving an explanation from legal counsel.
According to the explanation given during the meeting, the agreement preserves the legal rights of the parties while discussions continue by effectively preventing a statute-of-limitations deadline from becoming an immediate issue.
Counsel characterized the agreement as a good-faith effort to allow the parties to work toward resolving the matter without either side losing legal options simply because time had passed.
No Final Decision Thursday
Despite the lengthy discussion, Thursday’s meeting did not produce a final determination on Blake’s residency.
Instead, the council moved toward continuing the proceeding so additional documentation could be collected and considered.
The transcript indicates that requested information included soil-test results and communication records connected to Blake’s attempts to rebuild. Scheduling also became an issue as council members discussed finding a date when the necessary members could participate.
The meeting therefore ended with the central question unresolved.
Blake remains an elected council member whose term, according to the Town of Lapel’s published meeting agenda, runs through Dec. 31, 2027.
What happens next will likely depend less on competing statements made across the council table and more on the documentation ultimately presented.
A Meeting Marked by Frustration
Perhaps the clearest takeaway from Thursday’s meeting was the level of distrust present in the room.
Residents did not simply ask where Blake currently sleeps. Speakers questioned how town leaders communicate with residents, how major decisions are made and why the residency issue had progressed far enough to require a special meeting and legal involvement.
Blake, meanwhile, presented a much different picture: an elected official displaced by a natural disaster who says he has spent more than a year working through practical and regulatory obstacles to rebuild his home and return.
Those two narratives collided Thursday night.
The council now faces the task of determining the factual and legal question of residency while also confronting a more difficult problem that cannot necessarily be settled by documents or a vote: restoring confidence among residents who made clear Thursday that, for them, the issue has become as much about transparency as residency.
The Town of Lapel lists its next regularly scheduled Town Council meeting for Thursday, Sept. 17 at 7 p.m.
LiveInLapel.com will continue following the residency proceedings and will provide updates as additional documentation is presented and the Town Council considers the matter.
