Tuesday, March 5

THE PUBLIC LYNCHING, I MEAN HEARING

You could have knocked me over with a feather. The board of select brought to the floor a letter they had drafted to hold a hearing on removing one of the finance committee members. It surprised me only because it wasn’t on the agenda. This committee member is probably doing such a lousy job that the BOS has to act quickly to maintain the integrity of both the BOS and the finance committee. I do have to wonder however, when the BOS had time to discuss this issue, was it at an open meeting? Hmmmm! Well no matter.
Now I don’t know which committee member they are talking about removing, so we’ll have to wait until all the parties are legally informed before we can find out. However, they did say it will be a public lynching, I mean hearing. I find it interesting though that the BOS would choose this time to remove a finance committee member; when the finance committee is in the middle of an investigation about tens of thousands of unaccounted for water company funds. Perhaps they are multitasking.
One astute citizen brought to the attention of the Selectboard the fact that the town bylaws had no provision for removing an appointed official once they’re appointed. They always have the option to not reappoint the member if they so choose, but they do not have the option of disappointing them; pardon the pun.
I guess not having a bylaw provision is no problem for this BOS because, according to Mary Brazie, when they consulted the town’s attorney they were told they simply have to draft a letter calling for a hearing and they could remove any appointed official. This is just what I gathered from what she said. I’m quite sure the bylaw will catch up with whatever notorious crime this unnamed finance committee member has committed. Oh wait, could that fall under the ex post facto rule. No, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 of the constitution does not apply here in Egremont.
Well I guess we will all have to wait until the public lynching, I mean hearing. I’ll keep you posted on all the details; that is, unless I am the unnamed finance committee member that is going to be lynched, I mean examined. I wonder, if I am the unnamed finance committee member; and I do get lynched, I mean disappointed, will I be able to attend the various public meetings and disseminate the public information that is discussed in these public meetings? I hope to see you at the lynching, I mean hearing.

8 comments:

  1. SO, KEVIN, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO TELL ALL OF US ABOUT THE DISCOVERIES YOU'VE MADE REGARDING ABATEMENTS AT THE EWC? THE TOWN WOULD BENEFIT FROM THIS INFO BEING MADE PUBLIC, ALTHOUGH CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS MIGHT NOT.

    TO BE DISCLOSED: 1)HOW MUCH WAS ABATED IN EACH OF THE LAST 5 YEARS AND WHO WERE THE LARGEST BENEFICIARIES AND HOW MUCH DID EACH RECEIVE? AND 2) WHO GRANTED THESE ABATEMENTS?

    THANKS.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous
    Are you yelling at me or did your caps lock get stuck? Much of the discovery will have to be withheld until all the facts are in. The finance committee is curry combing all the information and has requested that I limit my releases to information that can be reasonably expected to be public. I agree that I have to be sensitive to what I share, as it may impede the investigation. Some of the information relates to individuals and has to be kept private for obvious reasons. I can only talk generally about generic facts that I know. Here it is.
    Abatements: We have not found that the town has any official abatement process or policy for the EWC. The closest example of “abatement” is one second home owner who had a pipe break and leaked several hundred thousand gallons of water into their basement. This customer asked the town to reduce the charge because the leak was an accident. It was not clear to me if that person actually received abatement. The majority of the so called abatements that were listed on the sheet that Mr. Turner presented at the BOS meeting were actually charge offs. They were told by the auditor that these uncollected monies could not continue to be carried on the books.
    In regard to the who, what, when, where and why, we really don’t know. This is what the finance committee is investigating. I know it seems like I am baiting you with the teasers but that is not my intention. All the information will come out but it has to come out properly. As it is appropriate I will keep the information flowing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wouldn't it be more appropriate for some third party to do the investigation? Someone like the attorney general perhaps that the select board would not be able to influence or try to bush up? How do we get someone else involved in this? It seems like some individuals may be trying to protect someone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If this what looks like a rail road goes forth there will be a very public investigation of all the parties involved. I'm tired of government corruption and won't tolerate it here in my hometown. We do need an outside investigation and very likely a turn over of people who have used long term positions to serve their personal agendas.

      Delete
    2. Outside investigations are expensive. (The CYA one the selectboard just approved for the police department fiasco will be at least $10,000.) Elections aren't. Throw the bums out.

      Delete
  4. If monies were mishandled or something inappropriate has been or is being covered up there needs to be an outside investigation. If $10000 is what it costs to keep our elected officials honest then it is money well spent as it may prevent something like this from happening again.

    ReplyDelete
  5. $10,000.00 is what we will spend on the investigation into the allegations made against the Chief of Police. A forensic audit into the town’s finances would be north of $30,000.00. Since it is unlikely that anyone will be hauled off in hand cuffs and there is little chance of recouping the money we have to consider whether this money would be better spent on other things.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If the FBI, district attorney and attorney general can investigate a toy account in Lee, why is it unreasonable to expect the same attention for a few hundred thousand dollars from our water company that are unaccounted for? And also, why are the selectmen trying to prevent us from finding out the truth. It would be nice to hear from some customers of the water company who actually pay their water bill month after month, year after year to hear how they feel about missing money or people who make it a habit of filing for abatements year after year and don't pay anything. What are the qualifications for an abatement? Is there a list of persons who have gotten abatements over the past 5 or 6 years? Are they the same people every year? These things need to be answered and you would think that the PAYING customers would be the most outraged.

    ReplyDelete