To: The editor,
I would like to thank you for printing my letter in Friday’s paper and hope you will allow me to comment on the article that also ran that day ‘Selectmen reappoint K7P as Town counsel”. I know your reporter was very busy at this meeting and would like to add some news for your readers. I did state in that meeting that I believed they were in violation of the open meeting law and that I would file a complaint. While I was a little optimistic on how long it would take to do this the following complaint should be public record at the town clerk’s office and the board of Selectman by noon Tuesday.
I am filing a formal complaint that an open meeting law violation occurred in the town of Templeton at the Board of selectmen’s office at 690 Patriots Road on Thursday February 16, 2012. It is my contention that this meeting was not properly posted on the single most important site now available, the list of meetings on the town’s web site. And that it was not properly posted until Wednesday February 15, 2012 in the afternoon. People aren’t looking for a piece of paper posted at the clerk’s office they are on the internet looking for this information so it is crucial this be posted properly there. I further believe this meeting was intentionally scheduled in conflict with another meeting to deliberately limit the amount of discussion regarding a very serious issue for the citizens of Templeton and that this meeting occurred without the citizens of Templeton being properly protected and advised by legal counsel. I further believe one selectman may have a very serious conflict of interest in the vote that was taken and should have abstained from voting. I hereby request an investigation forthwhith.
That is as it should read and I wonder how many folks will agree that the Town is not having an open meeting if the let the people speak folks won’t even let the town counsel speak. Folks “our” taxes pay for “us” to receive counsel as a town and when our leaders decide that “they” will not let them speak and will not even listen to their advice then we are in serious trouble because as far as I can see this is exactly” taxation without representation” . Folks I can only hope you remember how dangerous this is and that “your” Attorney General’s office will begin an investigation very very extremely forthwith as I think there are a number of folks in town that will be interested to find out if this office will up hold both the letter and the intent of the open meeting laws.
I still watch what’s happening in town and speak with citizens and what I hear is that the let people speak were “terribly misleading”. Perhaps some folks will ask their new selectmen if they remember some of the things they said while campaigning as I certainly will not be surprised to find out that they do not recall. It’s awful hard to keep your story straight when you try to mislead a lot of folks all at once.
I also would like folks to know that I believe there were serious ethical violations at this meeting and hope folks remember past letters regarding my concern that the present chairmen of the board was allowed to use the law firm he just voted to hire for his personal use as a taxpayer and citizen and I have to ask. Have we allowed Mr. Columbus to hire the town’s attorneys for his personal use?
Folks have to know that one complaint does not light a fire anywhere in state government and it is up to you as citizens to watch this meeting and file your own complaints. Perhaps the BOS or Town clerk’s office will make these forms and procedures available for those that are not able to get them on line.
I also want Templeton citizens to know that when seeking truth you will often run into coincidences that will leave you wondering. This occurred after I heard Mrs. Wilder use the term “Forthwith “. Sometimes I check words just to be sure my own definition is correct and wanted to be sure forthwith meant immediately not just expediently, posthaste or a.s.a.p. Now I often check words on line but in this case I was not on line and went to my Webster’s unabridged by Random house published 2003 by Barnes and Noble and found the following definition word for word: forth-with (forth’with’,-with’, forth’-) adv. Immediately at once; without delay: Any official accused of dishonesty should be suspended forthwith. (1250-1300; ME; see forth, with). I want folks to know that I certainly am not claiming divine guidance nor am I a religious person but after reading that definition and usage I think I might have said amen more than once.
Sincerely Yours
Robert C. Mitchell
Templeton Citizen
That struck me as an odd thing for her to say as well. It was out of place, forced. It was as if what she meant to say was, "before a judge can sign the injunction".
ReplyDeleteWhat was the rush Ginny? next time try 'tooth sweet', that would at least make for good comic relief.