Y'ah Don't Say, Corruption or Misrepresentation Of The Facts? TUMAB:Maneuvers Of The State Of Maine To Remove The Spotlight From Their Corruption

BDN reports “A former Maine Center for Disease Control division director who has filed a federal whistleblower lawsuit against the Maine Department of Health and Human Services must hand over more than three years worth of her diaries, medical records and mental health records, as well as the names of any doctor or mental health professional she’s seen since 2011.

The department’s lawyers had sought medical information for Sharon Leahy-Lind from as far back as 2008, but a judge ruled that they were entitled to only the information gathered since 2011, the year before she started as division director with the CDC.

Leahy-Lind’s lawyer, Cynthia Dill, argued “From my perspective, it’s a fishing expedition to look for ways to undermine either my client’s credibility. I can’t recall another case where communication with a life insurance provider was requested or an itemization of every health-related expense.”

Leahy-Lind has alleged that her bosses at the Maine CDC ordered her to shred public documents and then harassed and discriminated against her when she refused. Her allegations came to light last year when she filed a complaint with the Maine Human Rights Commission. In October, she filed a federal whistle-blower suit against CDC Director Sheila Pinette and DHHS, which oversees the CDC.” Read more HERE.

The state’s investigation found a host of problems with the way the Maine Centers for Disease Control distributed millions of dollars to Healthy Maine Partnerships programs last year. Now they turn the table and shine the spotlight on one of their own. Easy task when you’re in bed with the media!

 http://unmasker4maine.wordpress.com/2014/04/26/maneuvers-of-the-state-of-maine-to-remove-the-spotlight-from-their-corruption/

BDN: Attorney general: Watch out for Bureau of Motor Vehicles phone scam

By Ryan McLaughlin, BDN Staff

AUGUSTA, Maine — The state’s attorney general is urging the public to be wary of a phone scammer claiming to be from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.

The caller demands a fee be paid immediately or the driver will have a warrant for their arrest issued, according to Attorney General Janet Mills.

“If you receive one of these calls, hang up,” Mills said.

Over the last couple weeks, Mainers have been receiving calls claiming to be from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Mills said. The scam artists have been using technology that mimics their real phone number, showing the call to be from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.

Personal information should never be given out over the phone on calls that the caller did not initiate, Mills said.

 http://bangordailynews.com/2014/04/15/news/state/attorney-general-watch-out-for-bureau-of-motor-vehicles-phone-scam/?ref=polbeat

Maine's Circle of Corporational Corruption and Complexity Widens; Unmasking of Maine and Beyond:Maine Governor LePage Nominates Former AG William Schneider For Judgeship

 

Maine Judiciary Committee – Confirmation Hearing – William J. Schneider to the Maine District Court

Tuesday: March 11, 2014
Room 438 of the State House

1:00pm CONFIRMATION HEARING- Honorable Robert E. Mullen to the Maine Superior Court

2:00pm CONFIRMATION HEARING- Honorable Daniel I. Billings to the Maine Superior Court

3:00pm CONFIRMATION HEARING- Honorable William J. Schneider to the Maine District Court

Now to follow all of this you must first be willing to educate yourself on the facts.  First, the State of Maine, is a Corporation.

Next we are providing you with a whole lot of information based on facts not opinions.  So if you cannot follow along or do not care do not blame us for not trying.  And May God Help US All.

States Gov. LePage “In choosing judges, my focus is on the qualifications, demeanor, and integrity of the candidates, not politics.”

 William Schneider does not possess the qualifications, integrity, ethics, honesty nor trustworthiness of a judgeship.

As former Attorney General, he failed in his duties and obligations as Maine’s top law enforcement officer. His Obstruction of Justice, malicious prosecutions and selective prosecutions have interfered with justice and the rule of law. As he was unable/refused to perform his duties and obligations as Attorney General, his lack of respect for law and justice and his lack of honor in a position of public trust will not enhance public confidence in the legal system with Mr. Schneider on the bench.  

Additionally, this is contrary to the precepts upon which the Maine Code of Judicial Conduct is founded.
Mr. Schneider will carry his bias, prejudicial and selective “web of deceit” into the courtroom.

This nomination/confirmation must be opposed.

Related:  Maine Governor LePage Nominates Former AG William Schneider For Judgeship, click here.

An unrelated, but yet related happenings in another community:  http://www.votersopinion.com/2013/04/02/8008/

Reporters' Guide to Millennium Goals‏

As you can see by the attached book, there are a number of articles that need to be written to help achieve Millennium goals.  We need a similar collection of articles for the State of Maine, from history to corruption.

Read over the articles and see what does and does not apply to Maine.

Dwight Hines

   ReportersGuideMillenniumGoals2014ENG WEB FINAL

PeruNews: Second FOAA request letter after no response to earlier request‏

Dwight E. Hines, Ph.D.

IndyMedia

Livermore, Maine 04253

 

February 3, 2014

Mr. Jim Pulsifer, Chair
Peru Board of Selectmen
and Vera Parent, Clerk of Peru
26 Main Street
Peru, Maine 04290

Dear Mr. Pulsifer and Ms. Parent:

On January 22, 2014, I emailed both of you the attached letter containing the legal demand that you and Ms. Parent cease and desist from not complying with the Maine Freedom of Access Act.  I also emailed copies of the letter to Angela, secretary to the Board.  I spoke with her on the phone and requested that she distribute the letter to the entire Board.  She said she would distribute the letter to them.  I followed up my email to both of you with hard copies of the email, sending it by first class U.S. Mail.  

Your response to Ms. Witherell is not a response to my request.  Your demands to her for unreasonable, indeed, arbitrary, capricious, and unjustifiable amounts of money for just viewing the documents, is a constructive denial of the requests.  Charging for viewing documents is not allowed under Maine’s FOAA.

As of this date, you have not responded to my email or my letter — not even a simple phone call. Thus you two are continuing to fail to comply with the requirements of Maine’s FOAA and your manners and  styles now constitute aggravated bad faith.

I am repeating my demand that you provide me with the name and contact information of the attorney the Town of Peru who you will employ to defend my complaints of your aggravated bad faith failures to comply with Maine FOAA requests.

This letter is also to notify you to place a litigation hold on any and all documents created or maintained by the town of Peru for the past five years that pertain to or relate to all, or any, or part of our FOAA requests in content, category, or procedure. 

Dwight Hines

Copy:
Peruvians for an Honest Government
Lisbonreporter.com
Brenda Kielty, Ombudsman, Office of Maine Attorney General
Peru Board of Selectmen

Attached:

Cease and Desist letter of January 22, 2014, with FOAA request and a request for name and contact information for town attorney for Peru.

Dwight E. Hines, Ph.D.
IndyMedia

Livermore, Maine 04253

January 22, 2014

Mr. Jim Pulsifer, Chair
Peru Board of Selectmen
and Vera Parent, Clerk of Peru
26 Main Street
Peru, Maine 04290

Dear Mr. Pulsifer and Ms. Parent:

I demand that you and Ms. Parent cease and desist from refusing to
comply with legitimate Maine public records requests from Martha
Winterell and others, including me, for access to documents on Town of Peru expenditures. Your refusal to provide access to documents as
requested, your refusal to keep your appointment with Ms. Winterell to allow her to view documents, and your claim that it would take “150 hours” to access the documents are all real and constructive denials of our FOAA requests.

Please be aware that your bad faith actions, over a period of months,
means that a Superior Court Judge could require the Town of Peru to
pay all attorneysʼ costs and fees including, but not limited to Ms.
Winterellʼs preparation time and costs and her time and expenses she in coming to the Town Office for her appointment to view documents from Ms. Parent, an appointment that Ms. Parent failed to keep. The Judge will also be told that the tens of thousands of dollars Peru spent for computers, hardware and software and training, over the last four years, without competitive bidding, have not improved or increased
transparency of the Townʼs actions.

Please note that I am copying this letter to the U.S. Internal Revenue
Service as a formal complaint that individuals have received substantial amounts of money from the Town of Peru without taxes being withheld or notice of the payments to the IRS, payments that are now known to be over $5,000.00 to Mr. Tim Holland and over $6,000.00 to Ms.Hussey.

1

As you know, Maine is not just rated at the bottom of all states in being unfriendly to businesses by Forbes Magazine, a position Maine has held now for 4 years, and Maine also has a substantial underground economy. Given that Mr. Holland does not, and has not for some years, paid his local taxes, it appears that Peru is contributing to the underground economy. Though we will need to examine the Town records to know how much the amount of money is not accountable.

Please provide me with the name and contact information for the
attorney who will be representing the town for our claim of bad faith
failure to comply with FOAA requests. Second, be advised that you
need to notify your insurance company of these bad faith failures or risk losing your litigation coverage.

Dwight Hines

Copy:
U.S. Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigations
Lisbonreporter.com
Peruvians for Honest Government (PHG, Martha Winterell)

2

Citizens Letter To Maine Governor LePage

Dwight E. Hines, Ph.D.

IndyMedia

42 Israelson Rd.

Livermore, Maine 04253

207-897-2032

dwight.hines@gmail.com

 

January 15, 2014

The Honorable Paul Lepage, Governor,
State of Maine
State House
Augusta, Maine 04333

Dear Governor LePage:

I was stunned to read of the attacks on you for alleged violations of Maine’s Freedom of Information Act.  I can not understand how your future opponents for election, Mr. Cutler and Mr. AHWA, failed to read the Maine FOAA, specifically Section 5, before they complain​ed to the press.  I am especially concerned that the Maine Attorney General, Ms. Mills, also did not know how the law is applied here.  You were more than in compliance in responding the the public records requests at “your convenience”.  I do not like section 5 but it has been used to delay answering my requests by  different individuals.

​  It is of interest that the Attorney General has never supported a private, little person, FOAA request.​

Governor, it appears to me that Attorney General Mills is holding you to a standard that she does not attain on FOAA.  Indeed, my FOAA requests to her office to view a $300,000.00 grant last year was met with delay that was longer than the delay you were criticized for so roundly.  Note that the grant was not competitive and there was no cost benefit analysis.  I believe it was not a good decision to award the grant.

Please note that the attached letter putting the SunJournal on the Newspaper Death Watch list only applies to the the SunJournal.  We have no data on other newspapers at this time.  However, given the response to your FOAA decisions by the SunJournal, it appears they are not objective.  

Governor, I don’t know who I’ll be voting for but I wish that we had better,

​ ​

more ​reasonable and thoughtful media coverage of these issues

​than we do now.

​

​  Indeed, it would be difficult to have this letter published by the traditional print media in Maine.​

Dwight Hines

Attached
Maine law on when FOAA response is required
Letter to Newspaper Death Watch

   Request Letter to Newspaper Death Watch by Dwight Hines

​

§408-A. Public records available for inspection and copying 

5. Schedule.  Inspection, conversion pursuant to subsection 7 and copying of a public record subject to a request under this section may be scheduled to occur at a time that will not delay or inconvenience the regular activities of the agency or official having custody or control of the public record requested. If the agency or official does not have regular office hours, the name and telephone number of a contact person authorized to provide access to the agency's or official's records must be posted in a conspicuous public place and at the office of the agency or official, if an office exists.

 http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/1/title1sec408-A.html

Lisbon Residents Definitely Need A Change For The Positive

DO WE NEED A POSITIVE CHANGE IN LISBON??

Lisbon Town Manager Stephen G. Eldridge

As we enter in 2014 are we going to allow things to continue as usual or are we going to ask this council to make a positive change?  As we reflect on the last six (6) years of our town under Stephen G. Eldridge as Town Manager; let’s reflect on the growth or the lack of growth of our community.

Let’s take a look at our tax dollars:

a.        $33,484.79 – This is the amount of tax dollars unaccounted after Chief Brooks decided to Lease to Purchase two vehicles instead of purchasing the vehicles that was approved by the Council for $48,816.00.  Where did this remaining money go?

b.      $223,514.00 – This is the difference in the Undesignated Funds from 2012-2013.  The Auditors called this an “Unfavorable Expenditure”.  So what were these tax dollars used for?

c.       $71,750.78 – This is the Forfeiture Funds received by the Police Department for use by the Police Department.  The money was received in September so why has Chief Brooks not utilized any of these funds to the outstanding items on his Capital Improvement Plan?  Are the taxpayers going to use tax dollars instead of forfeiture funds to purchase items on the Capital Improvement Plan?

d.      $2,000,000.00+ – This is the amount of money used by Stephen Eldridge since he became Town Manager from the Undesignated Fund.  So what was this money used for?  It certainly was not used on our roads.

e.      $22,307.00 – This is the current fine by the state for two spillages and the lack of an Operations & Maintenance Plan dating back to 2012.  If Mr. Leighton had an Operations & Maintenance Plan in place and had trained the personnel in the Sewer Department in proper maintenance there is a possibility these spills could have been prevented.  These are our tax dollars wasted.

f.        $32,500.00 – The investigation into the misappropriations lasted less than nine (9) months and resulted in no one being charged or the funds returned to the town.  These are Federal funds to be utilized by town citizens.   

Where is this money and who is responsible?

On August 21, 2012, the town transferred $84,424.00 from Overlay/TIF account to numerous other accounts.  The following year the town transferred $87,460.84 from the Overlay/TIF account to numerous other accounts.  Do you get the feeling the town intentionally over budgeted the Overlay/TIF account?  

 Is this their slush fund?

The residents of Lisbon continue to have to pay rising taxes.  With all of the funds I have cited above, I wonder why it is necessary to raise taxes in our community. 

In January 2014, the Town Council will be reviewing Stephen G. Eldridge’s contract.  I am sure many of you could come up with many many reasons why we need new leadership in Lisbon starting with the Town Manager.  If you agree, please contact your Councilors and support the removal of Stephen G. Eldridge as Town Manager.

POSITIVE CHANGE IN LISBON WOULD BE THE REMOVAL OF STEPHEN G. ELDRIDGE AS TOWN MANAGER IN 2014.

Larry Fillmore

Collusion or Just Plain Stupid‏

                       COLLUSION OR JUST PLAIN STUPIDITY??????

Recently, there was a legal question that came up because the Town Council was unfamiliar with our Town Charter.  Several citizens have read Section 6.05 (a) Amendment After Adoption and they all agree.  Below is the excerpt from our Town Charter.

It appears clear that ALL revenues received by the town from any source needs to be brought before the council for acceptance.  This will ensure all monies are accounted for and are properly disbursed in accordance with the Town Charters and all laws whether it is Federal or State.  This was the point of contention; Does the forfeiture fund received by the Police Department have to follow our Town Charter?

On October 1, 2013, Chief Brooks gave a very good presentation as to the United States Department of Justice:  Criminal Assets, Forfeiture and Money Laundering section and what these forfeiture funds could be used for.  These forfeiture funds can ONLY be used by the Police Department for law enforcement purposes.  Below  is an excerpt from Chief Brooks’ presentation clearly outlining what forfeiture funds can be used for??? 


However, the Town Attorney, Roger Therriault, has presented a letter to the Town Council (See Below) which contradicts our Town Charter.  In Attorney Therriault's, memorandum, he has stated the State Law MRSA Section 5824(3) requires approval by the legislative body of a municipality but he is not aware of any Federal requirements for the same.  This is a Town Attorney which does not even acknowledge our town's Charter and its requirements.  This is our town and we have a Charter the Town Council needs to follow.  

So ask yourselves this question “Is our town attorney looking out for our best interest?”  

Can anyone explain why our Charter was not referenced by OUR TOWN ATTORNEY?   

It would appear the town attorney has provided our Town Council with bad information since he never referenced our Charter.  If we cannot depend on him for accurate legal advice maybe the town needs to look for another attorney.

According to our Charter, funds received after an approved budget must be approved by the Town Council and forfeiture funds are to spend for law enforcement purposes ONLY.  However, these funds still come under the jurisdiction of the Town Charter and the Town Council.  This is to ensure the integrity of the Council and the Town.  Chief Brooks must spend these funds in accordance with our Purchasing Policy and must have the approval of the Town Council.  This is in accordance with our Charter.  No one has the authority to ignore our Charter and do whatever he wants.

Larry Fillmore

PPH: Former Maine town clerk pleads guilty to embezzling nearly $20,000

By KAITLIN SCHROEDER Morning Sentinel 

BELFAST — A former clerk for the town of Troy pleaded guilty Tuesday in Waldo County Superior Court to embezzling nearly $20,000 in town funds.

click image to enlarge

Kathy Mattingly

Kathy Mattingly, 56, was arrested in June after she confessed to the embezzlement during an interview with a Waldo County Sheriff’s Office detective.

Mattingly’s attorney, Nathan Bell, said he and the state still are negotiating sentencing arrangements for the class C felony conviction of theft by unauthorized taking or transfer. A class C felony is punishable by up to five years in prison and $5,000 in fines.

Read more

Editor's Note;  
Isn't funny all these other Maine communities are convicting town employees for theft against the taxpayers'.  But in Lisbon We STILL can't get an honest answer to ALL the missing Monies, including the $32,500.00 from the Economic & Community Development Department that was uncovered by a Great Person that Lisbon Police Chief David T. Brooks harassed, intimidated, and tried to emotionally break the person before they ended up resigning.  But it did not stop there. They, Brooks, Eldridge & Therriault, continued to demean and LIE during court proceedings for others as well.

Check and See if you still have a Heart Pulse!!!!!!!!

WHERE HAVE OUR TAX DOLLARS GONE?????

WHERE HAVE OUR TAX DOLLARS GONE?????

I have compiled a listing of monies that are either missing or misappropriated.  I am sure there are many others that the taxpayers can come up with that I have forgotten.

1.       $32,500 misappropriated from the Economic Community Development Fund.

2.      The Town’s Revolving Loan Fund that does not revolve.

3.      The Town’s Tax Increment Financing (TIF).

4.      Two (2) million tax dollars gone from the Undesignated Fund account.

5.      The Police Vehicle scam.

6.      The “Unfavorable Expenditure” identified by this year’s Audit.

We all know that under no circumstances will we ever see any of the $32,500 again and no matter what happens; the cover-up of these funds will never be discovered.

It has been proved that once a loan is approved and the funds issued; no one monitors the repayment of these funds.  Currently there are nine (9) active loans listed as of July 1, 2013.  However, two (2) of the loans belong to businesses whom have been out of business for years and the collateral was never collected.  Three (3) businesses are far past their final payment date going back to 2008.  That leaves four (4) active; so how hard it is to keep track of four loans? 

 There are a couple of the loans that should have been written-off years ago but the town has NO leadership.

The TIF program is so screwed up that the current town manager signed the contracts with effective dates prior to him being the Town Manager.  Also, the town has been paying businesses not listed on the Credit Enhancement Agreement. 

 Lisbon Town Manager

What can I say about the two (2) MILLION tax dollars unaccounted FOR from the Undesignated Fund Account?  When our illustrious Town Manager, Stephen G. Eldridge, took office the Undesignated Fund had over three (3) MILLION tax dollars and as of the last Audit there is just over one (1) MILLION tax dollars left. 

 The Town Council just spent approximately $40,000 on wage increases.   

The Town Fathers and the Charter Commissions felt strongly about maintaining at least 12.5 percent in the Undesignated Fund Account to prevent the town from going into bankruptcy.  Because of the words “Strive to Maintain”, the Town Council does not feel compelled to maintain this balance.  At the current decent in our Undesignated Fund account, it will be no more than a year or two before the town is bankrupt.

I would like to tell you more about the Police Vehicle scam but I have not been able to compute all the tax dollars involved in this scam because the information the town has provide contradicts itself.  Also Mrs. Maloy has been double-talking trying to confuse the issue like at the last Town Council meeting.  I will provide more once I have the information.

During the yearly Audit presentation, there was an Observation on page 4 of the report that stated that in 2012-2013 there was an “Unfavorable Expenditure” that was related to the Undesignated Fund Account.   

 At the last Town Council meeting, I asked for an explanation.  As usual, Chairman LaRochelle, refused to answer any questions even under Audience Participation Response.  If you check it out, Chairman LaRochelle hardly ever answers any of our questions.  The council totally ignores the Public’s concerns. 

 However, on Friday I submitted another Freedom of Access Act (FOAA) requesting copies of the Purchase orders involved in this “Unfavorable Expenditure” and IF I receive it I will post it for all to see.

I believe that it is time this community demands a Forensic Audit.  I understand that it is costly but it cannot be as costly as all the money the town cannot account for.  Wouldn’t it be nice to know where our tax dollars are going and who is taking them?

Larry Fillmore

 Responsibility lies with the above faces. (left to right, Gregg Garrison, Roger Bickford, Dillon Pesce, Lisa Ward, Fern Larochelle, Stephen G. Eldridge, Gina Mason, Mark Lunt, and Town Clerk,Twila Lycette

Sacrifices Made For Free Speech, Gone With A 'Backhanded" Vote In Lisbon, Maine, United States of America

A SAD DAY IN LISBON

Today is Veterans Day, a day to remember the many sacrifices our veterans have made in the defense of this great nation.  JFK once said “Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country”.  I spent 20 years in the Army and 20 years as a Department of Defense civilian because I believe in this great nation and our Constitution.

The last time, I left Lisbon it was in good hands with the Selectman.  These men were strong leaders who believed in this country and our Constitution.    The residents were allowed free speech and people took part in local government.   

Today, sadly this is no longer true.  These leaders were replaced by members of the” Good Old Boy” network whom do not believe in our Constitution.    These representatives such as Mike Bowie, Lori Pomelow, Fern LaRochelle, Miriam Morgan-Alexander, and Gina Mason are responsible for stripping the right of free speech in our community and the lack of participation.   

At town council meeting, the people are censored and restricted as to when and what can be said.  This is because councilors are afraid of criticism because they know what they are doing is wrong.  However, Chairman of the Appeals Board has taken this to another level by denying the Public the right to speak at a “Public Hearing”.  How can you hear the Public at a Public Hearing if the Public is denied the right to speak?

Veterans Day is a day to honor our veterans who travel to foreign lands, live under extreme conditions, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.  Free people have the right to speak out against injustice.  Throughout the years too many veterans have made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of these beliefs.  These are the true heroes of this nation.

It is a sad day in Lisbon when so many have suffered so much defending this great nation and its principles just to have a few losers strip our citizens of their right to free speech and participation in our local government.

Larry Fillmore

Is Free Speech Dead at Lisbon “Public Hearings”?

 Is Free Speech Dead at Lisbon “Public Hearings”?

A couple years ago Lisbon Councilors decided to silence their critics by severely limiting public input at Lisbon Council Meetings. They decided to only allow the public to speak on items directly related to an agenda item.

About a Month ago the  Lisbon Appeals Board went a step further by refusing to take any input from the public at an Appeals Board “public hearing”. Chairman Morgan-Alexander stopped a Lisbon resident from giving relevant safety testimony at this public hearing.  She allowed the applicant and abutters to speak but refused to let the public give opposing relevant testimony.

According to an MMA (Maine Municipal Association) guideline this type of meeting is considered a quasi-legal hearing and is regulated by different guidelines than a legislative public hearing.  If these guidelines are not strictly adhered to the results of the hearing may be subject to costly litigation.

Questions raised by refusing to adhere to MMA guidelines.

•     What is the purpose of “Public Hearings” if not to hear from the public?

•     How can the public voice its opposition to unsafe conditions when the Appeals Board refuses to let the public speak ?

•     Has the equal protection requirement been fulfilled when members from the public are not allowed to speak?

This was an  appeals board meeting advertised as a “public hearing”.  

It appears  Free Speech is on life support in Lisbon.

Respectfully

Joe Hill

LisbonMaine.net

Are The Voting Taxpayers In Lisbon Getting Short Changed By Their Elected Representatives?

WHO DO OUR COUNCILORS REALLY REPRESENT?

During the discussion on the Worumbo Mill proposal, the people learned of a conversation that took place in the later part of 2010.  This conversation took place in, yet another illegal, Executive Session.  The primary councilors who did not want the mill to come down at the Millers expense were Dale Crafts and Gina Mason. 

Former Councilor now State Representative Dale Crafts

 Lisbon Town Councilor Gina Mason

 This question was never officially voted on by the council because the council did not want the people to know what was going on.  Now three years later, the council is trying to push the purchase and demolition of the mill onto the people of Lisbon.  What has changed and what deals have been made behind closed doors? 

Why wasn’t the proposal by Miller Industries back in 2010 brought to the people for consideration?  Why is it so very important to bring it to the people now?  The council stopped it before without going to the people or a referendum so why not stop it now at this point?

Anything the council does not want the people to know is discussed behind closed doors in Executive Session.  This is not right but there is no way to prove it until something like the 2010 Executive Session comes out because no one is supposed to discuss the contents of an Executive Session.  The only reason that this one came out is because it is three years later and there was no vote taken.  The fact is our councilors use the Executive Session privilege to keep the people from knowing what shady deals they are doing.   

Another shady deal was when the town sold 4 Campus Avenue to the Brunswick Housing Authority for $1.00 and over a million dollars Federal grant went with it.  There is no telling what other slimy deals have been made behind closed doors under the pretense of an Executive Session. 

 Town Manager Stephen G. Eldridge

 Vice-Chairman Lisa Ward

Now let’s look at the Public Hearing and what took place.  Both Town Manager Stephen Eldridge and Vice Chair Lisa Ward tried very hard to protect the interest of Mrs. Miller and Miller Industries.  

 Councilor Ward campaigned for election to help the elderly and those on fixed income.  She has kept this campaign promise that got her elected by voting during the past two years to raise taxes.  Now Councilor Ward is more concerned in protecting the interest of Mrs. Miller and Miller Industries than the interest of the people.  Mr. Eldridge would do anything to see this proposal approved even to the point of lying several times during the Public Hearing and was called out on it.  Who does Mr. Eldridge represent?

It is so strange to see councilors asking all the RIGHT questions because they know that something is not right and then vote to approve the item the previously had reservations about.  As a result of this practice, the town has approved two contracts illegally. 

These councilors were voted into office to provide their individual qualities and not to join a club.  Council Lunt and Councilor Pesce are the only councilors who have ever voted against anything.  I remember a time when two Councilors (Pomelow and LaRochelle) both said they did not feel that they had sufficient information to vote at this time and then voted to approve the item.  Where is the integrity?   Normally, when it comes to voting it is always 7-0.  How is it possible for everyone to agree on almost everything?  The people elected our councilors to represent the people and make the RIGHT decisions for this community. 

So tell me again, who do our councilors represent?

Larry Fillmore