More Information About The Michael Bowie Recall

"I am sorry that I was not able to be at the Tuesday's recall petition
meeting."
Dot Fitzgerald
Thanks again.


Lisbon Town Manager Stephen Eldridge  had this and supporting documentation available at last night's special Recall Meeting and failed to share with all (23), twenty-three people in attendance.

December 14, 2010

Mr. Stephen Eldridge
C/o: Town of Lisbon
300 Lisbon Street
Lisbon, ME  04250


RE:  December 8, 2010 Information request/Recall Committee


Dear Mr. Eldridge;

Please find this letter to be in response to your correspondence of December 8, 2010 which was received via United States Postal delivery on December 11, 2010.

The recall committee overseen by Dorothy Fitzgerald, resident of Lisbon Falls, Maine is responding to your correspondence of December 8, 2010 and attempting to provide you with all information outlined regarding the recall of councilor Michael Robert Bowie. 

The recall committee actions outlined regarding the recall of Town Councilor, Michael Robert Bowie at 282 Main Street, Lisbon Falls, ME, pursuant to Section 8.3 (1) of the town Charter are supported by the Town of Lisbon public records which you have available for your own personal viewing and additionally any townsperson.  Facts regarding a recall do not require corroboration according to the Town of Lisbon working charter.  Information is available through town records however that support the basis of the recall.

The actions taken by the recall committee against Councilor Michael Bowie for a recall as supported by the Town of Lisbon Charter were for the following reasons:

A.  Denying any councilor the right to place an item on the agenda (charter sec. 2.04)
B.  Not consulting with all the councilors when dealing with the town manager (charter sec. 2.04)
C.  Improper influence and/or conflict of interest regarding the use of town funds (chapter 12)
D.  Failure to properly preside over a Town Council meeting.

Item A: Denying any councilor the right to place an item on the agenda (charter sec. 2.04) is supported in action by review of the town council meeting minutes from September 1, 2009 and December 1, 2009.  Councilor Cote as noted in page 17 of the town council meeting minutes of September 1, 2009 asked Councilor and Chairman Michael Bowie to place a request for a J Brake on route 9 as an item for discussion.  On December 1, 2009 Councilor Cote presented the entire town council with a letter asking for a charter amendment allowing the registered voters in Lisbon to have a vote on the annual municipal budget.  Councilor Cote was told that the item would be placed on the agenda for formal discussion at a later date however, this was never discussed during a council meeting and did not appear on an agenda at a later date or to date.

Item B: Not consulting with all the councilors when dealing with the town manager (charter sec. 2.04) is supported based on comments and information discussed in particular at the town council meeting of September 7, 2010 and again at the meeting of September 17, 2010 and throughout additional meetings made public.  Specifically, see page 3 of the September 17, 2010 town council meeting minutes.  Councilor Mason stated “I’m embarrassed to sit here and tell you I didn’t know this was going on.  My question to Steve and Mike is why as six councilors that are just equal to the seven, why weren’t we told about this before the tax bills were sent out.  The only reason I knew was because I received my tax bill and happen to live on route 9.”   Mr. Bowie, chairman of the town council, received an email from town manager Steve Eldridge on September 1, 2010 at 9:56 a.m. notifying him of the drop in “our personal property value that totals $19,846,420. This includes an additional PP of just over $6 million in new value Knight Celotex (which we knew would drop this year) $1,491,620 loss. The one that really hurts is Dingly Press which has been over taxed by $18,354,800 in value.”   This email was not shared with councilor Crafts until September 10, 2010.   Councilor Bowie should have at minimum, shared this information with the other councilors and met with the councilors in preparation of the publics reaction and request for answers as the public was right in asking.  If additional information is needed, please see the town council meeting minutes for all of the details on this matter of September 17, 2010.  Clearly and as documentation supports, Councilor Bowie had knowledge of town information, crucial tax information dated September 1, 2010, that was not shared with other councilors timely and not prior to the next town council meeting on September 7, 2010.

Item C: Improper influence and/or conflict of interest regarding the use of town funds (chapter 12) is supported based on the findings and advisement of the Ethics Panel in regards to Councilor Bowies discussions and voting relating to the Police Department and the Police Department salaries.  Councilor Bowie continued to participate in discussions regarding the Police Department budget after the recommendations made by the Ethics Panel were given.  Councilor Bowie has abstained from voting however, it was recommended by the Ethics Panel that Councilor Bowie not participate in conversations relating to the Police Department budget regarding salaries and recommended that he not be in the room during these discussions.  At the August 3, 2010 town council meeting and during the recent 2010/2011 budget meeting as well as the 2009/2010 budget meetings, councilor Bowie remained as chairman in the meetings and participated in discussions relating to the Police Department budget and of note, the salaries.    The August 3, 2010 meeting related to the COPS grant program.  Although the first 3 years are grant funded, the 4th year is paid through the police department and under the municipal budget.  You may reference the video tape and letter that the Ethics Panel provided to the Town of Lisbon in January 2009 on this matter.  Ethics Panel Chairman, David Bowie publicly read the letter and advisement from the Ethics Panel publicly at the January 20, 2009 town council meeting.  If you review the audio/video from that meeting and the vote that followed by the council which was to adopt and accept the Ethics Panels advisement, you will see that this included the abstention of Councilor Michael Bowie from police department salary discussions and included the recommendation that he not be present in the room during such discussions.

Item D, Failure to properly preside over a Town Council meeting is supported, please reference the town council meeting minutes of February 17, 2009.  Specifically, page 5.  The items discussed and addressed at this public meeting by Chief Brooks were not on the agenda and did not pertain to the Police Department budget or an item warranting public discussion.  Chief Brooks used this time as noted in Part 2 of his presentation to belittle, ridicule and display of outright insubordination as a town employee towards a town councilor.  The issues Chief Brooks had related to a blog that Councilor Cote was alleged to be the editor of - The Lisbon Reporter.  The Lisbon Reporter is owned and operated by a former Lisbon Falls resident who has total editing control and always has.  This former Lisbon Falls citizen has stated publicly that he is the owner and editor.  If an issue arises with an item on the blog, it should have been addressed by the blog not publicly and not to the tune of almost 2 hours in time.  The chairman should have limited the time and or not allowed it to proceed as it was not the time nor the place.  It also appeared evident that a few councilors including Chairman Bowie, had prior knowledge of this pending “performance” which is not professional and should not be represented by a councilor.  Chairman Bowie has limited citizens during public hearings to a 2 minute timeframe when speaking.  Citizens who pay taxes and should be allowed time to speak without being cut off by a councilor provided they are within their time limit set forth.  Councilor Bowie has displayed his inability to run or facilitate a meeting on more than one occasion and the charter supports this infraction as outlined as an action for a recall.

I believe the attached letters and documents pertaining to the reasons for our recall petition as supported by the Town of Lisbon Charter have sufficiently addressed your request for information under the Maine Freedom of Access Act as all items the recall committee reviewed and based their petition on are and were based on town public records.  Our decision to take the recall action was not made lightly or without habituation however, many more residents than just those who signed the petition have asked for this action.  This action was not taken because of bias or not liking the color of a shirt worn by Councilor Michael Bowie as suggested or without findings of support by records maintained by the Town of Lisbon.

The items we have noted are supported by town documents/records and do not require our explanation as a recall committee, the findings and information are all supportive of our actions and if a citizen does not agree, they can cast their vote in opposition or not express their vote at all. 

Sincerely,

Dorothy Fitzgerald
Lisbon Falls Resident
Recall Committee Chair