Saturday, March 22

REALLY CHARLIE? REALLY?

In a recent Berkshire Record article I read that the town of Egremont is appealing the AG ruling that the selectmen violated the open meeting law. Since Charlie and Jeremia are quoted I will address them in this response.
Really Charlie? You think you're right and your lawyers are appealing? How many lawyers are we, the taxpayers of Egremont, paying for your screw ups? In case you haven't noticed this is our town and you are opening our town to yet another law suit. Maybe you should ask the town what they think before you act. Rather than run for another term, perhaps you should consider resigning and gracefully stepping out of the way. But I guess you don’t do anything gracefully.
I've read the rebuttal letter and all I can say is, really Jeremia? You think this town believes that your intent is to protect the people from committing a crime? Be real. In your rebuttal you misquote the AG as saying “notice is not required by law”. The fact is that the AG said “advance notice is not required”. Did you actually read the documents before you drafted your rebuttal? Did the selectmen read the documents before they approved this action? The Selectmen are suing the AG in the name of the town and no one noticed that Jeremia misquoted the AG. Who are we entrusting the affairs of our town to?
Jeremia should know that the moment a person notifies the chairman of their intention to record they’re not committing a crime. The law is satisfied upon notification that the citizen can record. Now you're going to argue that the AG is wrong? The words are clearly written in the text of the law and AG finding.
Weren't you the one that advised the BoS that there was no law requiring they be heard by the citizens attending an open meeting? You seem to have given the selectmen some very questionable advice. Do you get paid by the mistake? You have to understand that you are a line item in the town budget; the town can defund your position with one vote. You work for us. Try serving the townspeople rather than the town hall.
This appeal of the AG decision is just dumb; the selectmen need to take the slap on the hand and get over it. This action borders on abuse of process and illustrates exactly why this administration needs to be removed; starting with Charlie.

Our town is still dealing with the ramifications of what many believe to be Charlie’s vendetta against Reena Bucknell. And now it’s official, the attorneys for the former police chief have filed a wrongful firing law suit. Now the town has to pay to defend against this board’s stupidity. Then, to add insult to injury, Charlie Flynn asks the town to trust him for another three years? This town can’t afford another 3 years of Charlie Flynn.

12 comments:

  1. Perfectly said, Kevin.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kevin: You really opened our eyes to the inner workings of our town government. This is definitely a constructive deed. I think change is in the air!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Karen: The people are the inner workings of our town government. And I hope you're right about change being in the air. But how do we get the people to participate?

      Delete
  3. Hey Kev -

    You running for office in our Town Hall Gov't? (Record article). LOL, since we don't have a Town Hall Gov't., check it out, it's something diff.

    If Selectmen are so stupid, how come we have a surplus of $ 400,000 for emergencies and a low tax rate, at last a functioning Police Dep't without that incompetent Reena, a great Fire Dep't, ?

    We are the envi of our surrounding towns, like GB

    Maybe you ought to pull out and let the pros continue.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Whoa... I'll respond to that! Our low tax rate isn't because of an incompetent Selectboard. It's because we have no services. Yet, the tax rate has been climbing steadily for the last three years, and will continue. Why? Because the Selectboard has no incentive to hold down costs, like the school budget, which is HALF of our budget. Bruce Turner is the Business Manager for the school and works on the budget. Do you think he will question it, for Egremont's sake, after he's presented it to the school board. NO WAY. Then there's Charlie. He's ON the school board. Do you think he'll question it, for Egremont's sake, once he approves it for the 5 towns? NO WAY. Then there's Mary. Well... Mary doesn't own ANY property in Egremont so she doesn't pay property taxes here. NONE. She owns property in Sheffield and is happy to have the other towns carry as much tax burden as possible. So who is watching OUR wallets? It used to be the Finance Committee, so the Selectboard did everything they could to get rid of Finance Committee members who disagreed with them and made the job so unattractive that competent people choose not to serve. Well done Selectboard. The Selectboard and the gang at town hall are all in it for themselves. How bad is it? So bad that the Selectboard actually chose Bruce Turner to be the Town Accountant when IT IS ILLEGAL for a Selectman, who is responsible for disbursements (that's what they do!), to also be the Town Accountant. Look it up!

    You seem to have a problerm with former Chief Bucknell, by the tone of your post. Her competence is NOT the issue. It is how the Selectboard removed her. It was both immoral and illegal. The Selectboard had many options to determine her competence. If you read the Pomeroy Report you would have read that they clearly stated there was "nothing actionable."

    Bucknell was here for 15 years and under review annually. Where were the Selectboard's issues during those years. Interestingly, they only had problems recently, after Bruce Turner's daughter had an alleged DUI in town, Mary's husband had allegedly assaulted a town official and Charlie... well who knows what Charlie's problem is. Apparently the Selectboard is troubled when they are held to the same standard as all of us.

    You think we are the envy of other towns? Step out of your cocoon and ask people. We are the joke of South County. But those of us that actually sit in Selectboard meetings and listen are not laughing.

    You call them pros. Then the bar is pretty low. Sad for our town.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Once again, I must wonder if Anonymous has the courage of his/her convictions. In any event, Anonymous inadvertently proves Kevin's point: We are the envy of other towns because PAST selectboards have kept our expenses down. This one seems to be trying its hardest to make us "like GB."

    Richard Allen

    ReplyDelete
  6. Have no services? What R you thinking? Police, Fire, Water, School, Park, Lake, Highway, Snow, Transfer Station. Sure, there are some problems, but they get fixed.

    Taxes going up? Taxes go up for other reasons than expenses going up. Like property assessments going down, so rates inctease to meet expenses.

    Finance committee been headed by Laura Allen for years, not exactly a liberal "spendthrift". Keeps a good eye on expenses.

    Why did Penglase and others resign FC? They coulda help keep an eye on things if you think that Town out of control.

    Bruce Turner conflict of interest? Prove it. Mary suspect in Water Company shortage? $20,000 professional audit says no way.

    Seems to me plenty good people serving on FC. One bad apple removed for cause doesn't spoil the barell.

    Get a grip you malcontents, you live in a great town, don't knock it at every turn to save what, "a thin dime"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please don't try to change the town history.

      No one ever accused Mary or anyone at the town hall of anything.

      The record is clear and in writing. Even Mary admitted that there were no accusations, she said she just "felt" they were accusations. This statement is on video and audio.

      The only challenge to the town hall was to account for money that was not accounted for.

      Now we all know where the money was lost.

      Delete
    2. REALLY CHARLIE? REALLY?

      Delete
  7. Apparently the writer of this blog has no intention of stopping his campaign of personal attacks. Sad for him and sad for us as a community if we can't recognize a harmful influence when we see one. Come on Egremont - we're better than this.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Really?
    I don't consider this a personal attack? I was attacking the facts of this appeal. I was addressing the people who were quoted in the article according to their quotes. I was referring to text in the actual documents filed with the AG.
    Anyone looking honestly at the evidence would have to conclude that this appeal is unfounded; At least in regard to the facts.
    Now if Charlie and the BoS want to take this case to the Superior Court it is their prerogative. However, Egremont will have to pay for the privilege of setting precedent.
    We all remember what happened when the town was sued for denying free speech at the ATM.

    ReplyDelete