News

Cruel or just unusual?
Council to vote on whether to abolish CEDC
By Elizabeth Prata

Gray--When is a committee a failed committee? When is a Council being too confrontational? These questions arose last week when the Gray Town Council looked into abolishing a town Council-appointed committee most Councilors deemed unproductive and negative. The discussion, an unusual one in municipal governing, shook up the committee's supporters and drew ire from members, with one member having to be gaveled out of order and the meeting recessed while he calmed down.

What are they supposed to do?

The Community Economic Development Committee (CEDC) is charged with four tasks, to:

-- promote, assist and encourage initiatives that will further the role of "Community" to the citizens of Gray.
-- promote, assist and encourage the improvement and expansion of established businesses in the community and the general economic welfare of the Town of Gray.
-- promote, assist and encourage the development of new businesses that comply with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the general economic welfare of the Town of Gray.
--cooperate with other community, region and state organizations and agencies for the promotion, assistance, encouragement and development of the community and economic climate of the Town of Gray.

What have they been doing?

Over the last six months, the Council had noticed that the committee had not been working toward any of the tasks with which they were charged. Rather, they were engaging in negative discussions about how they perceive that they no power to do anything, how they have no direction from Council, and told guests that the Council did not support them and that Gray had nothing much to offer.

In an early attempt to calm the tensions, Council and CEDC agreed to meet, but even that became a bone of contention for CEDC. CEDC wanted to meet at a workshop, which at that time were untelevised. Council requested that CEDC come to a regular Council meeting, which are televised. CEDC then refused to come.

When asked if the committee had engaged in any community endeavors, referencing the first task outlined in their rules, chair Julie Sheets responded that the committee only meets one time per month and that they need to prioritize. Community fell to the bottom, with the committee's preferred focus disregarding the first task in their charge and instead, as Sheets explained, their focus was on solely business and zoning.

Tensions built with the addition of a new member, Jeanne Adams. At Ms. Adams's first meeting, former CEDC member Lynn Olson was antagonistic toward the new member and she charged Ms. Adams with being unfit to serve. No fellow CEDC member said that Ms. Olson was out of order.
Initially Councilor Skip Crane was the liaison to the committee, but when John Welch was appointed to Council, Mr. Welch asked to be the liaison. However, Mr. Welch missed two of the next three meetings, including his introductory meeting.

Council concerned

The Council discussed these and other CEDC issues at their December 20 meeting. At its January 3 meeting, they discussed them again, under the umbrella of notification of abolishment.

The item ended up being a two-hour topic of heated discussion. CEDC members charged the Council with confrontational actions, and charged them with attacking the committee.

Vice-Chair Andy Upham asked the committee repeatedly for evidence of productive work. "What have you done?" he asked, but the CEDC responded with statements charging the Council with being unproductive.

After two hours, the vote was 3-2 with Councilor Duda and Welch opposed to accepting the notification of abolishment. The January 17 meeting is the meeting at which the final vote whether to abolish will take place. Because abolishing a committee necessitates a change to Council Rules, a 4-1 vote is required.

What does Council say now?

In an interview this week, Councilor John Welch said, "The Town Council took confrontational action by placing on the agenda first the abolition of the CEDC before having a conversation with the 'accused'". Asked if missing 2/3 of the CEDC meetings to which he had been assigned as liaison could be the reason why he was unaware of the issues surrounding the CEDC and Council, Mr. Welch responded, "No." Left, Welch.

In an interview, asked if Mr. Welch felt that the CEDC as currently composed is an enhancement to the Town of Gray, he said, "Yes, they are individuals with many different views." The Monument asked Mr. Welch what he expects of the committee in the future and what his plan would be to elicit it, but he made no comment, except to say, "I hope we all could talk about the future action of the CEDC."

Former liaison Councilor Skip Crane has a different view. He said, "It is clear to me we have a committee that did not want to work with Council and has not contributed to the town anything substantive in a while. Resources like MMA, GPCOG, Maine Dept of Economic development, have not been explored." Exploring other resources is the fourth task in the committee's charge. Right, Crane

Chair Gary Foster said, "I was hoping for a positive presentation to convince the Council of the relevance and importance of the committee. Perhaps something they were working on to promote Gray to potential businesses, or to improve the business climate. Unfortunately, that was not the message from the CEDC at the January 3 meeting."

Resounding silence from CEDC

The Monument e-mailed Chair Sheets seeking her input and followed up with a phone call. Other members were also encouraged to respond. Ms. Sheets refused to respond and The Monument heard from no other member. The Monument had asked the following questions of Ms. Sheets:

"I am working on an article regarding the CEDC and the Council. As CEDC Chair I ask for your responses to the following for publication. Though if any other member has an opinion or would like to share information I would welcome it."

"At Tuesday's meeting, the Council indicated that they are dissatisfied with both CEDC's attitude and CEDC's lack of work product. It is true that the CEDC has regularly indicated derision of the Council in word and deed since June. And the challenging and combative attitude displayed by members on Tuesday (one of your members had to be gaveled down and the meeting recessed) also tends to support Council's concern about CEDC's negativity. If Council decides not to abolish your committee, do you feel you can encourage your members to have a positive working relationship with Council? If so, how?"

"Two of your members stated flatly that the situation is not fixable. (Ralph, Jeanne). Do you agree with them?"

"If you feel the Council is in error in observing that CEDC has been unproductive, what can you point me to that shows productivity? I would appreciate it."

When CEDC asked to meet with Council and Council subsequently invited you to a meeting, why did you refuse?"

"When Council responded to your request for a task by asking you to look into the regulatory quagmire, and you stated flatly at the November meeting that you "have no intention of investigating the Planning Board in any way, shape, or form" was that because a member of the CEDC is on the Planning Board? Or is it because you did not want to complete the task?"

"Do you agree or disagree that citizen Lynn Olson's comments at an earlier CEDC meeting were out of order? If they were out of order, why did you not indicate so to Ms. Olson at the time?"

"Do you have further comment that you would like readers of The Monument Newspaper to know about the situation? I welcome your thoughts."