| Joanne Cole |
The Select Board’s June 27 meeting brought to mind the saying, “New boss same as the old boss.” With members Tammy Donovan and Dustin Ward newly elected but returning to their former seats, the new board was in fact the same as the old board, right down to its officers: Peter Bragdon was re-elected Chair and Paul Larrivee Vice Chair.
Board and committee appointments were the main agenda item for the evening, and the new board struggled with a process and criteria for filling open seats, same as the old board. This time, however, questions about past practice added a new complication.
Along with making committee appointments, the board awarded a contract for two new Transfer Station roll-off containers: only one bidder, price a whisker under the $30,000 budgeted = done. Maine Equipment Company of Hermon will supply the roll-offs.
The board also moved forward on bid documents for a new ambulance, a Fire Rescue extrication tool, an upgraded phone system, and heat pumps for the Meetinghouse and Library. On the ambulance, the board asked for pricing for a gas-only unit rather than diesel and wanted two different chassis types for comparison as well as an extended warranty. A demo unit might fill the bill, Interim Chief Craig Bouchard told the board, but those are going fast, so time is of the essence.
Board and committee appointments. Once again, certain key committees had more applicants than available spots, reviving an already-vexed question of how to choose among them. Last June, lacking an established process and clear criteria for appointments, the board filled vacancies but seemingly to no member’s satisfaction.
Several fundamental questions emerged at that time: Should appointments be made based on the written applications? Applications for reappointment were limited and lacked detail compared with applications from first-timers. How should the board weigh the values of continuity versus fresh perspectives? How much should specialized expertise count in the decision? What about the problem of members knowing some applicants personally but not others? May people be appointed who already serve on another committee? Should all applicants be asked to appear in person to level the playing field?
To move forward than, the board made appointments but without discussing all the applicants or comparing their applications and qualifications. Going forward, they would workshop a more thoughtful, equitable approach, they decided. The board did in fact hold one workshop on board and committee policies but made limited progress.
Against that backdrop, the board on June 27 was considering another round of appointments, once again without guidelines for choosing among applicants. This time, the Budget Committee, Economic Development Committee and Land Management Planning Committee had more applicants than spots. Several applicants were in the Meetinghouse ready to introduce themselves, perhaps as a result of seeing the board—still without a written policy—give priority to in-person applicants for appointments to the new Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee this spring.
Members were under way discussing Budget Committee applicants when Chair Peter Bragdon raised a new possibility: that the board must reappoint returning members who reapply, in this case Joe Bean and Jeff Hamilton. Past boards have said “if you reapply, you automatIcally get reappointed,” Bragdon said. That precedent creates an expectation of reappointment, he said, and it could be a violation of due process not to appoint them, potentially exposing the town to liability.
Bragdon had researched the question with the Maine Municipal Association, and Town Manager Christine Landes confirmed the issue is legitimate. A person should be reappointed unless there is “a substantial reason” not to, she said, and they’d be entitled to a hearing if they weren’t reappointed. Under the town’s policy, the only grounds for not reappointing is attendance, Bragdon said.
”I’m just shocked,” said Vice Chair Paul Larrivee. “This is news to me tonight.” He and others had ranked all the candidates based on their written applications and were looking forward to hearing from those attending. The reappointment/newcomers issue affected several committees.
Committee members’ frustrations were evident as they acknowledged several newcomers with impressive applications and qualifications might be bypassed in favor of returning veterans, not present, whose applications in some cases were brief and incomplete.
Member Stephen Hathorne wondered aloud whether the board even had a set precedent or consistent policy of automatic reappointment. Member Tammy Donovan thought not, that the board’s process was “willy-nilly.” After further discussion, Hathorne cut to the chase, saying they “might as well bite the bullet” and follow the manager’s apparent recommendation to be on the safe side. Later in the meeting, Kathleen Potter suggested there hasn’t been a consistent reappointment practice by the board, as she was appointed to the CIP committee several years ago over an incumbent seeking reappointment.
Having decided that returning applicants are entitled to be reappointed, and perhaps to a hearing if they are not, the board later declined to reappoint Charles Gauvin and John Salisbury to the Land Management Planning Committee. Members cited attendance issues and possible future availability and proceeded to fill their seats without giving Gauvin and Salisbury an opportunity to be heard. Other committee appointments proved less fraught. The membership of all committees can be seen on the town’s Boards and Committees page.
Candidate Referendum Committee challenged. Resignations of two members of the Candidate Referendum Committee were accepted [disclaimer: Debra Smith and Joanne Cole of NGX], and Tammy Donovan took the occasion to ask that the committee be disbanded, citing unspecified issues with the committee’s charge and composition. A vote to take up the question failed, as the topic wasn’t on the agenda. The board will discuss the committee at a later meeting.
Public comment. Earlier in the meeting, resident Laura Jane Sturgis thanked Christine Landes for serving New Gloucester and invited board members to reflect on whether their close management style might have been a factor in Landes’ decision to resign and relocate. Also speaking was resident Roger Levasseur, with four decades of service in Fire and Rescue. He urged to the board to reconsider its plans to hire a full-time chief rather than someone who can respond to rescue calls. He also had issues with the absence of standard operating procedures in the recently adopted Fire Rescue ordinance, suggesting the lack opened the town and responders to liability. More broadly, Levasseur argued for contracting out rescue service, noting the substantial cost of the current system.
There was more. Watch the video of the board’s June 29 meeting at this link. Find the agenda and supporting documents at this link.
