In the News: April 2, 2008
Councilors, former town manager fire parting shots in South Berwick
Portsmouth Herald
Jeffrey Grossman, who resigned as town manager March 21 under pressure from the Town Council, believes that his problems were largely the result of councilors who “didn’t like my leadership style.”…
The numbers add up for recall petition in South Berwick
Foster’s Daily Democrat
In a clear sign that some residents are not happy with the Town Council, a petition to amend the Town Charter to allow for the recall of councilors from office garnered more than enough signatures needed to get …
Bright future: Upscale escalation meets rural life in this old
A travel guide to South Berwick from the Boston Globe: When you cross the
Tags: news
April 2nd, 2008 at 4:29 pm
In regards to the petition to remove an elected official, the State of Maine has no such law. There is however a procedure to remove officials from office by impeachment or address, for misdemeanor in office.
Maine Constitution Art. 9,Sec. 5.
Municipalities are authorized by 30-A M.R.S.A & 2602(6) under home rule to provide for a recall of elected officials,by charter or ordinance.
It is recommended however that the threshold for the number of signatures required on a recall election be set high to prevent a small minority from forcing frivolous or repetitive recall elections.
It is also advised that the petition Not be required to cite a reason or “cause” for recall, as this is essentially a political exercise, not a due process proceeding.
Do we really want to go this way? what if the next so called minority, or the next disillusioned person starts the process, where will this end? It should be up to the elected officials to get along and find a democratic consensus. Go to elections and go to Town Council meetings, get elected but lets stay in the democratic framework we have.
I don’t always like what my elected officials are doing but I do not call for their heads.
April 2nd, 2008 at 4:41 pm
So, all of the residents of our town should work together and support our elected officials who couldn’t manage to work together and support the Town Manager? Where was the call to town councilors to suck it up and work with someone they may not have liked or supported? I suppose it has to start somewhere but why must it start with the residents who had nothing to do with this mess in the first place?
April 2nd, 2008 at 5:02 pm
“Municipalities are authorized by 30-A M.R.S.A & 2602(6) under home rule to provide for a recall of elected officials,by charter or ordinance.”
This above looks to me like the state is saying to either ammend the charter or create an ordinance in the communities so that the procedure can be followed.
The petition going around is just to add such a provision to the charter.
You may find that if it passes, an actual recall may not have as much support as the original intent of giving us the ability to do so does.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:00 am
I agree with George. This petition for a town charter change has been concocted only to provide a platform for the proponents to denounce our current elected officials. There was no outcry for it before.
Our citizen-councilors (they’re not professional pols) get elected for overlapping three-year terms. That is very short, and we have elections every year. Between those cycles and town meeting, citizens have a lot of power to shape policy. Don’t forget also that special elections cost money– possibly several thousand dollars every time one is orchestrated.
We do not need to tip the balance toward more chaos in South Berwick. Evaluate and comment, sure. We should attend meetings, speak out, communicate with our elected officials. But let’s also pull together
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:18 am
Also - the sitting council is more open to and solicitous of input from townspeople than any I have dealt with in the past ten years - there have always been good folks on the council ( and bless ‘em, what a job!), but all of the people we have now actually want to know what townspeople think - they do listen.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:04 am
When the petition for overturning the Contract Zoning ordinance was submitted, the Town Clerk needed to certify the signatures, and also the precise form of the petition. These were not small matters. With this proposed charter change for overturning Town elections , I assume a full and detailed review by the Clerk will occur, and that the legality of this exercise will be reviewed.
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:16 am
I also agree fully with George and Tony. This recall thing appears as a knee jerk reaction to anger by some at the hard decisions our councillors made.
It would add an arbitrary anda ad hoc “election” to poptentially undo the legitimate election. Last November (5 long months ago) we had an legitimate and orderly election. David Burke and Michelle Kareckas won decisively. Mr. Clough lost, for the second year in a row. Choices were made by our community in a democracy.
I think the calm and business-like proceedings at Town Hall that are happening now are strong indications that we are moving on. And also, by contrast of this atmosphere to teh previous atmosphere, that there is a strong difference that is positive.
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:18 am
Dear Lady Jane
The situation was not created by any specific town councilors, our past town manager did his part too. It takes two to tango.
Although I have not been able to go to council meetings recently, I went fairly regularly for over three years. I saw how new councilors were snubbed by the then reigning majority.
I learned in High School way back, that democracy is finding a consensus.
Mr. Grossman admitted his shortcomings in the Foster’s Paper. Also I know that some town councilors tried hard to work with the manager.
Anyway we have to stop putting the blame on everyone else, yes we the citizens have the duty and the right to get involved.
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:45 am
Sorry, but the blame squarely rests on the shoulders of those who created it - the town councilors and the town manager. I wasn’t putting blame on ‘everyone else’ - just where it belongs. My question was more in the rhetorical realm, because the town’s course has been altered by the recent events and we can’t go back in time. That doesn’t mean I won’t pull together and support our town councilors - I just have the right to question their decisions and the process used to ease the manager out of his position, and that is what I did.
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:59 am
George, with all do respect the quagmire we find ourselves in was created by specific town councilors and their inability to come to a consensis with the town manager and the other two town councilors.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:45 am
Ken,
More likely it was the other way around………………
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:57 am
I don’t beleive it really matters who feels who was at fault, or to blame, etc…
For me, the reason to allow the charter to be ammended falls to the minutes of the Jan 10th town meeting.
An executive session was called for.
The councilor who asked for the executive session was told it would be illegal and why.
Three coucilors opted to go ahead an go in to executive session even though such a session would be illegal.
I don’t care why they felt they needed to be in executive session, or the results. (well maybe a little, but that has nothing to do with following the rules and laws)
To me, the bottom line is that all of the councilors need to obey the laws and rules.
If any of the councilors opt not to, and again, I am not targeting any specific councilor or councilors, then we need some type of provision that allows us, the citizens to correct the issue.
If everyone follows the rules and the laws, I may not like their decisions, but will not agree with any attempt to remove anyone just for not coming to a decision I like.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:11 pm
No matter which councilors you think were right or wrong over the town manager issue, it makes no sense to start having perpetual elections in South Berwick. That’s what we could get with the charter amendment. Having recall contests every time some group gets mad is no answer to anything. And it could make things both expensive and disruptive.
If a councilor isn’t doing a good job, we can vote for someone else. The next election is always less than one year away under the current system. Terms of office are only three years. It seems like a good system for a town like ours and it has worked well.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:20 pm
I agree with Max. Also we should remember it’s hard enough to get good people to serve on the council even without “perpetual elections.” It is in many ways a thankless job. I am grateful that all the current councilors are so receptive to citizen opinions, which they must get sick of listening to, mine included. (Maybe mine especially!)
Do we want to hound our public servants even worse than we do already?
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Only if they are breaking the law.
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:37 pm
I think we need a way to remove councilors if there is an issue. It should not be an easy process, but it shouldn’t be impossible either. Most changes occur in response to an issue so maybe this is the way we get that choice. Three years is a long time if someone is constantly creating havoc. I don’t have any councilors in mind that need removal now, but we do need a change. There are councilors that I agree with and others that I don’t. As it stands now we have no way to remove councilors that are not acting in the best interest of the town.
April 3rd, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Sam,
That is my point exactly.
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Who gets to decide what is in the best interest of the town? Just asking.
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Molly,
If it’s illegal, it’s probably not in the towns best interest.
If it is a judgement call, my feeleings against theirs, then it’s not a legitimate reason.
If the council follows all the laws, and enacts an ordinance I disagree with, then I shouldn’t be able to do anythnig but gripe about it.
I don’t feel they should be able to be removed for something like that.
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Just an FYI.
I am for an ammendment ONLY if it is narrowly defined to that it can not be used as an open hunting license, or another tool for harrasment.
If it looks like the ammendment being proposed is an opening for a witch hunt, I’ll vote against it.
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Dave–That’s my concern. If you sit in every single meeting you could probably eventually find some procedural error or something that happens that might not follow the law exactly, not because of bad intent but because the administrative code is sometimes confusing. Also because we have staggered elections and terms are only three years, at any one time we are likely to have councilors who are still learning the ropes It’s a huge job for people to learn. I would hate to see a recall provision that would allow a recall for a stumble. I think that would have a chilling effect on the willingness of people to serve on the council.
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:08 pm
the knee -jerk decision to fire the town manager was the resoning for the petition.someone up above said that mr.clough is doing it because he lost.well he did lose and he is gathering signature’s,but there are a few more names on that petition and way more people gathering names.
he has every right to do this as a citizen of this town.and TonyT there must have been an outcry,because they have more than enough names to get it to a vote.question,why would you not support this charter change?
did you elect those councilor’s in question to work for you or for their own intrest’s? this vote does not throw them out,it gives the people the power to do so if they please.they must be held responsible for their action.
they had the manager removed now we want them removed for the same reasons.
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Molly,
I agree to a point.
I just think we need to have some means of removing someone who is really messing with the system.
I can understand procedural errors can occur without malice.
I also don’t think laws should be ignored if the law is pointed out to the people before they break them.
Right now, tempers are running high, and people are imagining the worst (or best, depending on their view point)
I don’t believe that any of the councilors should be recalled at this time.
However, if the same laws and rules are repeatedly broken without regard, then that is is something that should be looked at.
I’m not talking about point of order issues, or other trivial things.
I am only refering to blatent attempts to circumvent the laws.
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Molly and all , Plain and simple Illegal procedure, or activity is just that and if the illegal activity is at council meetings there should be not thought. step down or br removed . It can not be anymore simple.
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Does this sound familiar “he who cast the first stone..”
April 3rd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
As a resident of South Berwick, I am interested in a well-run town. We have excellent municipal employees, and a tax rate that’s about average for our area. Now we are caught in a down-draft, due to the economy and probably some recent over-spending, and it’s up to the town council to find our way out, so that in a year or so hopefully we’ll be back on an even keel.
That is probably going to take both cuts in services and tax increases this year, and it’s not going to be easy. For various reasons, the council decided it would be even harder with the previous town manager, so they let him go. (Apparently, looking at his unbalanced budget, the man felt the same way, which is why he took the money and ran.)
So now let’s see how they do. If they fail in the coming months, and more capable candidates come along, let’s elect those instead. Those pushing the recall petition seem to be enjoying themselves, getting a lot of attention and even TV exposure. But what I’m interested in is a well run town with good services. That is what we’ll want a year from now, a town back in good shape after hard work and compromise, not months of recalls and unnecessary theatrics.
April 3rd, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Diane,
I guess I’m missing something, but could you elaborate on your point?
April 3rd, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Come on: who decides if something’s illegal? The case on January 10 is not cut and dried. So the former manager said it was illegal? That’s hardly the fountain head of knowledge. The legal/illegal argument is rediculous in this case; things are never cut and dried. Except if you witness , say, murder or extortion……….
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Bill,
I don’t think that doing something that is expressly forbidden is a gray area.
I am also not saying that all remarks from the town councilors should be taken as gospel.
The point I would make is this.
There was a question of the legality of holding an executive session at that time and for the reason it was apparently requested.
Shouldn’t that have been checked by some, or all of the councilors before the meeting was brought about?
If the law states that a town council can not go into executive session in regards to a personnel issue with out giving 24 hours notice to the person involved, that seems pretty clear to me.
I am not saying what they did was illegal, I don’t know all of the laws either.
The town council, however is supposed to abide by all the laws, rules and regs.
We also have legal council to help determine is such things would be legal.
I am only saying that if the question is brought up it should be checked.
I disagree that these laws and rules are gray areas that can’t be followed.
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Dave,
Perhaps it was entirely legal. You’d have to be a lawyer or in the AG’s office to have a valid opinion, and thet would be disputed. Things are rarely black and white. The manager was covering his interests at that time. His statements at the time can hardly be counted on to represent the public’s interests. This example is the wrong example. It was a political process; not something like bribery or extortion………….
April 3rd, 2008 at 7:19 pm
I don’t think the town manager was doing his job. There has been no substative changes to the town to bring in corporate taxes so that the citizens taxes would be supplemented. He came up with bad ideas especially the contract zoning idea. Citizens spoke out. What i don’t understand is why his (Grossman’s) contract was renewed not too long ago. It should not have been renewed and we would have saved the town $102,000. Part of the problem is the lack of communication of what is happening with the town and I commend this website as a means to improve communication as well as initiate discussion. Discussion is good even when the parties disagree. That is what America is all about.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:02 pm
I whole- heartedly agree with you , Karen.
Discussion is good ~~~~ and it is necessary to communicate.
In my opinion, if there had been better communication these past few years in our town govt. I do not think we would be where we are today!
Our town needs to do better in this area, that’s for sure!
We live in a democracy. That IS what America is all about…
It is so nice to notice that some people are open-minded.
Our town, our nation, our world certainly would better if people could/would be open-minded and respectful of all.
Thank you for your comments.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Bill, the law is the law, especially regarding the political process of a town meeting.
The former town manager did raise the issue that the council is required to give 24 hours notice in regars to personnel issues, but the council chair and Bob Gagne agreed that it was not legal.
If the former town manager was incorrect, that could have been verified.
If he was right, then the executive session should not have been held.
That is not a gray area.
There are specific rules governing these meetings and executive sessions.
As town councilors, it is their duty for familiarize themselves with the rules.
At any rate, I’m not specifically targeting anyone in regards to this, I was using that as an example of where the law could possibly have been broken
I am also not saying anyone should be removed for that particular event.
All I am saying is that if the councilors break the law, they should be held accountable.
It is also the burden of the accusers to show that a law has been broken.
It is not reasonable to say that unless it is these specific laws, the council can do what they want. They need to obey all the law and rules governing town meetings.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Dave,
The world is not as determinant as you express it to be.
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:26 pm
I don’t think anyone here is saying that if a councilor or councilors occasionally fail to follow all the rules then they must be removed, we just want a mechinism to remove those councilors that continue to disregard the rules and laws. Just because there are staggered elections doesn’t mean that a councilor will be removed at the next election, esp if they have 2 more years to serve. And by the way, the town’s people decide what is in the best interest of the town. Didn’t say we wanted an easy way to remove councilors, just a way.
April 4th, 2008 at 9:17 am
My only concern with this sort of resolution and putting councilors under a microscope, it that it keeps some very well meaning people from getting anything done. It also prevents some very good people from wanting to serve. I can’t think of anyone who would want to serve in the current circus atmosphere.
April 4th, 2008 at 9:43 am
I couldn’t agree more with mrspeel on this one. I think the thing we all forget is that right or wrong, we are talking about people who not only reside in this town but to some are neighbors, perhaps friends, perhaps family members. They live here too, and I find it hard to believe that they are purposely trying to make the town they too live in a worse-off place. If that was the case I would imagine they would move to what they consider to be a better town. Regardless of whether or not we agree with them, or even how they go about things, I don’t think anyone could say they are not trying to better the town in which we and they both live together. To my knowledge, I have not heard talk of needing a charter change to recall counselors until this situation occurs. That speaks a lot to the motive behind it. These fellow town residents give a lot of their time to do for us what most of us either don’t have the time to do or just don’t want to do. Despite whether we agree or disagree with them, I believe they are trying to do their best and in return we should be doing our best, to work with them in a polite and respectful way even when we disagree. We certainly wouldn’t tolerate them talking to us in meetings when they disagree with us the same way some of us have spoken to them. Yes, they sit behind the table, but in many ways they are just like us. Citizens of this town we all love. We can’t go back and change what has already happened. But we can decide how we want to move forward, whether that be communicating and hashing our ideas for a better So. Berwick in the future in a respectful and constructive manner, or continuing on in this insult-filled circus that will not only be detrimental to the town, but will be detrimental to those of us who live here, including the individuals behind the table. I suggest we take the magnifying glass off each other and move it toward the problems that lie ahead, such as taxes or the need for economic development that both fits and benefits our town.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:33 am
no microscope huh!! the elected officials in washington are under our microscope because they are representing us.so why cant we put our council under a careful eye and have the power to remove them when they pull a stunt like they pulled?
we all have our side’s,and some want to be polite and respectful to all,and some do not.it seems that some people on this site just want to change the way people express themselve’s and could care less about the situation at hand.
some talk about laws at meeting’s and others write back about a gray area.all opinions,thats great.some talk about the manager not getting coporate tax base to offset homeowners taxes,great!but his hands were tied by some.nothing is getting cheaper in this world,and i doubt you taxes will be going down.so i hope that all of you who blog here daily show up at meeting’s and voice your differing opinion’s there where it counts.
because it wont matter until you do!
April 4th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Let’s not forget that the folks in Washington are PAID politicians, and thus should be under a microscope. Our Town Councilors are elected VOLUNTEERS. Should we be involved as citizens and pay attention to the goings on and voice our concerns? Absolutely! Its just that if Councilors are concerned with being criticized at every turn, nothing substantive will ever be accomplished.
April 4th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
I have tried for the last three and a half years to get the town to do something about the blatant speeding on the main roads including Portland St.and Main St.. Portland St. has 12,000 vehicles a day that adds up to 2.45 something million a year. Most are speeding, unless they are endlessly backed up, sometimes to the civil war memorial.
Engine Brake noise that rattle windows at all hours of the day, I have asked for some kind of ruling as seen in other towns all over the State.
So far zip dee du da, na da on both issues. so much for listening to the residents.
I handed in a list of 217 signatures from residents of these streets, asking for some kind of action to address the problem, so far noting has happened. Councilor Gagne even said he had never heard of complaints, what is a list of 217 signatures?
When over 100 people discussed the Contract Zoning for about three hrs. and there were some real good concerns presented. The Town Council passed the CZ five minutes after the Public Meeting was adjourned, without considering any of the proposed changes, yes there was a referendum to stop CZ, but nobody called for a recall vote.
How about paying $1.000,000 for an object worth only $713,000
How about putting a Library on a piece of property that the town already owns.
Issues>? there a many more which one are we going to use to recall the elected officials?
A thankless job at best, no pay, long hours, now with a chance to be recalled who would want the job? You?
April 4th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
George,
It sounds like you should run for Council.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
The Town Charter, creating a Manager-Council form of government, came about some 40 years ago in a period of ‘civil unrest’ and personality clashes similar to those now being experienced at the end of a very long disagreeable, costly winter. If memory serves me well (sometimes it doesn’t), the charter committee purposely omitted a recall provision to avoid the type of conflict we are now seeing when a movement is aimed at specific individuals who may differ in opinion from the petitioners. This can be divisive, and even destructive. I agree with those who stated that our council members were elected in a fair, democratic manner and should be allowed to serve out their terms. Certainly, we have ample opportunity for input.
I think our community would be better served if the petition were put aside for the time being. Instead, form a charter review committee comprised of a diverse group of citizens to thoughtfully review the charter, suggest revisions and updates (perhaps including a recall provision), and educate the citizenry on the charter and the way our government is designed to work. If the committee were given a challenge to complete this review and bring their recommendations back within a 6-9 month period, it would allow tempers to settle and the council would have a ‘breather’ to work their way through the immediate challenges of finalizing the budget, day-to-day governing and hiring a new town manager.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Older than Dirt,
That is a very reasoned, and reasonable suggestion. You historical perspective lends much to the context of this current period. Thank you.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Bill,
I agree.
That is a well articulated suggestion, and one I think many people can live with.
Maybe I wasn’t clear in my earlier posts, but the point I was trying to make before is that if any recall provision is added to the charter, it needs to be extremely limited in scope so it can not be used just because someone doesn’t like a decision made by the council.
If there is a change to the charter to allow any kind of recall, the standard needs to be set high enough so it can not be abused.
April 4th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
Democracy in action, this forum has given many a chance to say their piece, “older than dirt” has a very good suggestion, maybe he can organize this charter review group. A cooling off period would be good right now, and Dave you are right on a recall referendum it would have to have a high standard to as suggested by the State. I got the info for recall legislation from Lawlib, the State offers a service where any state laws in the are looked up for you, it is not legal advice though.
Oh no, not me for a council job, my wife would leave me and I would not have time to do the things I am doing now. We could use some young people in the council but they are busy raising a family etc.