Wednesday, September 28, 2011

911 Discussion


L/A 911 DISCUSSION

At last nights, Town Council workshop, there were several items discussed which were not on the schedule calendar. This was supposed to be a Strategic Planning session. Well instead, the council discusses how to cover up Leighton’s abuse of the Purchasing Policy by changing the Purchasing Policy. They also discussed the Lewiston/Auburn 911 consolidation and the Lisbon Connection problem.

The first topic was the Purchasing Policy which in my personal opinion was excellently written. I believe it is very clear and provides a fair and just exception to allow for contracts to be awarded to local businesses. However, the council eliminated the last two sentences in paragraph Section 86-34 Formal Bidding (A). I believe this was an excellent change.

There apparently is a problem with the "Lisbon Connection" bus service to connecting towns. The Western Maine Transportation lost some Federal funding due to budget cuts. This means someone will have to make up the difference. Currently, the Town of Lisbon is paying $25,700 for this service. There were several items brought out like cutting some of the runs; consolidating runs and raising the rates from $1.00 to $1.50. The issue was tabled for another workshop in order to have a representative of the company come in and explain all options to the council. This I believe was the right decision.

Next, Bowie discussed the Lewiston/Auburn 911 consolidation of communication centers. Bowie is totally against the consolidation. I wonder why? Could it possibly be his wife works for the Lisbon Police Department and would have a direct and indirect impact on her? Of course no one can see a conflict of interest here. Bowie is doing everything he can to protect Brook’s empire and his wife’s employment. Brooks sat in the audience so proud of his stooge. Bowie did his very best to poison his fellow councilors. This was totally unnecessary because Bowie runs the council and the puppets will do anything Bowie tells them to do. What a waste of time!!

The remainder of the meeting dealt with the Vision statement for the Town of Lisbon, the strength and weakness of the town and the council never got to the threats and opportunities of Lisbon.

Bully Bowie would not allow Mrs. Fitzgerald to speak even after Chairman Lunt recognized her. I wonder who really runs the town council.

Larry Fillmore
Concerned Citizen

Thursday, September 22, 2011


MORE INCOMPETENCE BY TOWN MANAGER

I have reviewed Mrs. Fitzgerald’s letter on the Lisbon Reporter and I totally agree with her. The Town Manager, Stephen Eldridge, prepared a document on behave of the Town of Lisbon and the Town Council to return the property at 231 Lisbon Street to Mr. James Morreale with specific terms and conditions.

There are numerous issues with this document as far as I am concerned. I do not understand why this document was not presented to Mr. Morreale prior to receiving it at the meeting. Mr. Morreale has retained counsel and certainly would need to have his lawyer review the terms and conditions of the agreement before signing it. This document first appeared on the town web site on Friday evening under Agenda Documents. This document was presented to the whole world prior to Mr. Morreale receiving his copy. Is this the right procedure? Try to bring up a personnel issue before the town council and see if the council will allow it. I do understand Mr. Morreale presented his case before the council but some details should not be revealed to the public prior to Mr. Morreale.

Also, why is the amount owed to the town of Lisbon not included in this document? Evil Eldridge is the Tax Collector for the town of Lisbon and certainly should know exactly how much money is owed. So why was the amount not included on the agreement? Could it be the Town of Lisbon is going to continue changing the amount owed in order to mess with Mr. Morreale and his lawyer? I can almost guarantee the people of this town Evil Eldridge and Councilor’s Bowie, LaRochelle and Vice Chair Pomelow have a different agenda and the town will take Mr. Morreale’s property back before this situation is final. Remember, these three voted to take his property on September 6, 2011.

The terms and conditions are extremely vague and leave compliance up to the discretion of the Code Enforcement Officer (CEO). These terms and compliance should have been outlined with references to the town ordinances in order to ensure Mr. Morreale clearly understands what is required of him. Not fully outlining the violations of the town ordinances, opens the door for a difference of opinion and we all know whose opinions will be valued more in a court of law. The town of Lisbon needs to have the CEO, outline in detail, the exact requirements Mr. Morreale needs to comply with instead of leaving this agreement so vague and open to interruption.'

This is exactly the manner in which Evil Eldridge operates. Instead of spelling everything out in detail, write vaguely in order to create an opening for the town to seize more property. By the way, where is the processed abatement on 231 Lisbon Street submitted in April 2011? I wonder why the abatement was not included in this agreement to establish the tax requirements on Mr. Morreale’s property. Again, another detail left out of this agreement which would ensure Mr. Morreale has all the facts pertaining to the property at 231 Lisbon Street.

Larry A. Fillmore
Concerned Citizen

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Friday, September 9, 2011

why?


Why?
 
Why is Lisbon Council so vehemently refusing to place the budget approval in the hands of the people?

By the Councils own survey results there is overwhelming support (99.5%) to have the budget placed on the ballot. Our Councillors are intelligent people.They know what the public wants but they still resist.

Is there Someone or something preventing them from doing their job and putting undue pressure on our councillors? In order to decern where this interference is coming from we need to ask ourselves who benefits most by keeping the status quo.

If the budget were placed on the ballot the municipal departments would inevitably be in jeopardy of loosing some of their funding. I feel that most likely one or more of the town departments are attempting to quash this charter change in order to maintain their fiscal position.

If this theory is correct, Lisbon residents need to band together and insist the council abide by their wishes. Call all your councillors and insist that they include the budget item on the upcoming charter changes. (Mr. Lunt wants a written letter)

If we don’t take back our town things will only get worse. Let your councillors know you see what is really happening and you wont stand for it anymore.


Lisbon Residents are in charge of their own destiny. Don’t let anyone make you think otherwise.
.

Joe Hill
LisbonMaine.net
 
 
 
 
 
 


 

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Actions Speak Louder Than Words


Actions speak louder than words!

Lisbon Town Council showed their true colors last night and it wasn’t pretty.

I had heard rumors about Lisbon Council heartlessly taking property but I wasn’t prepared for last nights example of legal property theft. Never have I seen a group of people more devoid of any human compassion.

Tuesday night Mr. Morreale asked the council for one week to secure the remaining few dollars he owed on his back taxes. Three of our councillors (Larochelle, Bowie,and Pomelow) voted to refuse Mr. Morales seven days to get the last few dollars needed to completely pay off his debt. Instead they voted to take his property.

To compound this injustice it appears that most of the back taxes owed may have been levied inappropriately. Mr. Morreale had a recent tax abatement on his property that reduced property values and consequently taxes by over 60%.

Why did these three councillors do this? Are there plans for this property?

I feel that town employees that have a hand in property seizures should’t be allowed to profit from their own actions by purchasing the same property below market value. This practice gives the appearance of impropriety.

We should curtail this morally revolting practice of property confiscation and find an alternate solution that will ensure that our town collects its needed revenues and at the same time assists struggling home owners in uncertain economic times.
 
Sickened
F.E. Stacey