![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vLBskviibzULVoaAES_G5h88N_Lh7c_k7LXJMZgFdUFW_6NXTDPxuhHGS9Bydq3L7BQmHy9aw6dGFTNIbfVBlxtY6K8dIpA9Y1ZWSzYA=s0-d)
Has the Lisbon Council been caught once again with egg on their face?
On August 28th Appeals Board Chairwoman
Morgan-Alaxander refused to let the public give relevant safety
testimony in a matter before the Board. She denied the public (in an advertised “public hearing") their rights by not allowing them to voice their concerns. This in my opinion constitutes an egregious abuse of power that should result in her immediate removal as chairwoman.
Appeals Board “Public Hearings” are considered “Quasi- Legal” and not Legislative in nature. They are more of a formal affair, restricted by clear legal restraints, and if not properly conducted, can result in costly litigation for the town, individuals, and town officials.
Chairwoman Morgan-Alaxender opened said public hearing and allowed Town Council Chairman Larochelle to give testimony on the matter before the Board but refused to let any of the audience have the same opportunity to give opposing safety testimony. No opposing argument was allowed.
Recently an objection, FOA (freedom of access) #136, to Ms. Morgan-Alaxander’s handling of this matter was lodged with the town. The response to this complaint was as follows...
When the Town was asked for proof that the Town obtained a legal opinion from MMA the following e-mail was received from Town Manager Eldridge.
Eldridge’s E-mailFrom: Steve Eldridge
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 12:54 PM
To: Beth French
Subject: RE: FOA #136
There is no document with the MMA Legal opinion. This was done with a telephone call.
Stephen G. Eldridge, MPA,ICMA-CM
Town Manager
Town of Lisbon
300 Lisbon Street
Lisbon, ME 04250
Office 207-353-3000 ext. 102
Fax 207-353-3007
Cell 207-754-6533
The Towns excuse for allowing this kind of behavior is supposedly based on a decision given over the phone by the MMA. (Maine Municipal Association) This decision seems to be in direct opposition to one of the MMA’s own published guidelines
“How to Conduct a Public Hearing” .
Has the Lisbon Council been caught once again with egg on their face? I will let the readers examine the evidence and make that determination for themselves.
Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. (Sir Walter Scott)
Respectfully
LisbonMaine.Net
Joe Hill
Editors Note: What is the purpose of a "Public Hearing" if not to hear from the public?
Appeals Board “Public Hearings” are considered “Quasi- Legal” and not Legislative in nature. They are more of a formal affair, restricted by clear legal restraints, and if not properly conducted, can result in costly litigation for the town, individuals, and town officials.
Chairwoman Morgan-Alaxender opened said public hearing and allowed Town Council Chairman Larochelle to give testimony on the matter before the Board but refused to let any of the audience have the same opportunity to give opposing safety testimony. No opposing argument was allowed.
Recently an objection, FOA (freedom of access) #136, to Ms. Morgan-Alaxander’s handling of this matter was lodged with the town. The response to this complaint was as follows...
When the Town was asked for proof that the Town obtained a legal opinion from MMA the following e-mail was received from Town Manager Eldridge.
Eldridge’s E-mailFrom: Steve Eldridge
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 12:54 PM
To: Beth French
Subject: RE: FOA #136
There is no document with the MMA Legal opinion. This was done with a telephone call.
Stephen G. Eldridge, MPA,ICMA-CM
Town Manager
Town of Lisbon
300 Lisbon Street
Lisbon, ME 04250
Office 207-353-3000 ext. 102
Fax 207-353-3007
Cell 207-754-6533
The Towns excuse for allowing this kind of behavior is supposedly based on a decision given over the phone by the MMA. (Maine Municipal Association) This decision seems to be in direct opposition to one of the MMA’s own published guidelines
“How to Conduct a Public Hearing” .
Has the Lisbon Council been caught once again with egg on their face? I will let the readers examine the evidence and make that determination for themselves.
Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. (Sir Walter Scott)
Respectfully
LisbonMaine.Net
Joe Hill
Editors Note: What is the purpose of a "Public Hearing" if not to hear from the public?
1 comment:
Does anyone believe Eldridge? Did he give the name of the person with whom he spoke? Unless there is proof of this call given by MMA we can assume that there is none. Good letter Joe.
Post a Comment