Selectmen turn down request
Petition ordinance not on special town meeting ballot
By Stuart Hedstrom
Staff Writer
DOVER-FOXCROFT — Less than a week before a Sept. 14 selectmen’s meeting, the board voted during a special session to not place a 300-plus signature petition on a community bill of rights ordinance on an upcoming warrant. The petition contents needed to be placed on the ballot either exactly as written or not at all.
The selectmen had decided to pursue meetings with the committee behind the community bill of rights ordinance and the two attorneys who weighed in on the document to identify and resolve issues to potentially bring something new forward.
The petition states that a community bill of rights for the residents of Dover-Foxcroft will be established to secure those rights by prohibiting corporations and governments from engaging in the acquisition of land for, or the siting of, private and public-private transportation and distribution corridors.
On Sept. 14 a request was made to place the community bill of rights ordinance as received on the ballot for a special town meeting on Saturday, Dec. 12. The request was voted down 4-2, with Select Chair Elwood Edgerly and Jane Conroy, Steven Grammont and Scott Taylor voting “no” and Select Vice Chair Cindy Freeman Cyr and Gail D’Agostino voting “yes” — Ernie Thomas was not present.
During open session, resident Sidney Mitchell said she was in attendance to request a special town meeting election, saying Dec. 12 would be an ideal date to provide nearly three months to familiarize residents with a proposed community bill of rights ordinance. “The people of Dover-Foxcroft, 316 of us, signed a petition to be able to vote on this ordinance,” she said.
“I’m asking you, please today approve this town meeting referendum on Dec. 12,” Mitchell said. “After two long years finally have people vote on this, it’s their right.”
Taylor wondered aloud how many of the over 300 signers had read the petition or had added their names simply to put the measure up for a vote. Mitchell said the community bill of rights ordinance was offered to everyone approached to sign the petition, and they could choose to look over the document or not.
Edgerly said the week before the board and everyone else present heard from the attorneys that “as it was written it was not able to be enforced at all.” Grammont added, “We went and sought out legal advice. The opinions were, without any ambiguity, the enforcement aspect was not legal.”
Mitchell responded by saying the community bill of rights ordinance is written to be defended, providing more protections than a land use ordinance on large-scale projects.
After the board voted to add the item to the agenda, Taylor asked who would cover the costs of a special town meeting.
Town Manager Jack Clukey said the municipality would. “We would run it like any referendum in the gym,” he said.
An alternate process for bringing the community bill of rights ordinance to a public vote involves a notary public calling a citizen’s town meeting, and some questions, such as whether the meeting would be decided by a show of hands or secret ballot and how the date and time are posted, would need to be determined in consultation with the town charter and possibly the Maine Municipal Association.
D’Agostino asked Mitchell if she has a notary in mind with knowledge of the process in case this method is pursued. “I have a notary in mind who really knows this language,” Mitchell responded.
“It’s a hard issue for me,” D’Agostino said. “I did not hear (attorney Lynne Williams of Bar Harbor) say we were compelled to put it on the warrant, she did err on the side of let people vote.”
During the closing remark Conroy wondered if the community bill of rights ordinance group had been approached by the town yet, wanting to say publically she is willing to approach those behind the petition.
D’Agostino said the group had not yet met following the meeting the week before.
In other business, the board voted to place three articles on the Nov. 3 ballot and a public hearing on the trio of questions will be held as part of the selectmen’s meeting on Monday, Oct. 12.
Clukey said the administrative committee met the month before and considered “how we can ensure we are always able to provide services if someone is missing or we are in transition.”
An ordinance — to be voted on Nov. 3 — was crafted “and we would be authorized to make deputy appointments and do what we need in different circumstances,” Clukey said, such as for the issuing of a building permit when the code enforcement officer is unavailable or if a position is vacant for a period of time.
Another of the articles concerns the town’s participation in the Community Based Renewable Energy Pilot Program for energy production at the mill complex downtown using solar and hydroelectric power. Clukey said the program has been reopened and the Public Utilities Commission will accept applications, which require a vote or resolution of support from the town’s legislative body.
“This is very important for the Mayo Mill project, to make the numbers work,” Edergly said.
The last of the three articles asks for authorization to refinance remaining wastewater debt. The amount to refinance is a little more than $1,361,000 and the interest rate would be reduced from 2. 5 percent to an expected rate of 1 percent or less, which along with the reduced timeframe is expected to achieve a present value savings of about $273,190.
In his report, Clukey said a moratorium ordinance pertaining to transportation and utility corridors runs through Dec. 4. He said as work on the comprehensive plan continues, town officials would like to extend the moratorium for at least 180 more days and a public hearing on this topic is planned for the Monday, Nov. 23 meeting. The comprehensive planning committee will meet to start the phase two work on the evening of Sept. 23.