Council to name hiring committee, over mayor's objections

LEWISTON — Councilors will select their own appointees to a citizen committee tasked to review city administrator resumes, despite Mayor Larry Gilbert's objections.

Councilors voted to create a committee to sort through resumes, selecting five viable candidates for the city's top job. Councilors will select the Lewiston's next city administrator from that group.

Each councilor and Gilbert will get to select one person each for that committee. The council's eight selections will meet with representatives from the Androscoggin Valley Chamber of Commerce, the Lewiston-Auburn Economic Growth Council, Central Maine Medical Center and the Lewiston School department.

But Gilbert complained that the council's decision was a clear attempt to get around charter requirements. The charter lets the City Council create ad-hoc, advisory committees but only the mayor can make appointments.

"I can look up the definition of words like 'ad-hoc' and 'advisory', and this fits that definition," Gilbert said. "What we have here is an advisory group."

Councilors got around that charter requirement by giving the committee real power. Instead of advising councilors which candidate to hire, the committee will make real decisions, choosing five candidates for council selection.

It's enough of a distinction to satisfy the charter, according to City Attorney Martin Eisenstein.

"This is structured in a way that the committee will be making real decisions," Eisenstein said. "They are not appointing a city administrator, but they will be making real decisions and will have real power. It is different than an advisory group."

Gilbert disagreed, and called the council's decision an abortion of the charter.

According to a resolution adopted Thursday, councilors can choose candidates that the committee overlooked. Gilbert said that proved that the committee was an advisory group in nature, but Eisenstein compared it to a district court decision. The court does have real power, but can be overruled on appeal, he said.

Councilors narrowly agreed, adopting the resolution by a 4-3 vote. Councilors Robert Reed, Denis Theriault and Larry Poulin voted against the measure.

"In my opinion, this is an advisory committee," Poulin said.

Theriault complained it was unethical. He accused Councilor Tom Peters, who drafted the resolution, of trying to circumvent the City Charter and said he was considering filing a complaint with the Maine State Bar Association.

"The specific intent of this is to get around the charter, and I think that's clear," he said. "I certainly see this as some sort of an ethical violation, but maybe I'll just let the bar association decide."

Councilor Reed had proposed not creating a committee and having councilors decide themselves.

But Councilor Betty Dube said the committee is a necessity. Councilors and the mayor don't trust each other and the public seems to agree. It's important to bring in voices from outside of the council.

"The problem is not a problem with the charter," Dube said. "The problem is with us, with the council and with trust. The problem is that there is no trust right now, and we need to rebuild it."

Councilors gave the committee until Oct. 15 to come up with their five job candidates. Councilors are scheduled to give Human Resources Director Denis Jean the names of their appointees by Friday afternoon.

As of Thursday, the city had received 41 resumes from potential replacements. Candidates run the gamut from high school graduates to those with law degrees.

Councilors also agreed to keep candidates identities confidential, at least until there are three top candidates.

staylor@sunjournal.com

 

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...

In order to make comments, you must verify your account.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.

Advertisement

Displaying comments, from newest to oldest

Robert61's picture

Looks like it will be a

Looks like it will be a Paradis vs GIlbert campaign this fall....

big daddy's picture

Lewiston doesn't need a

Lewiston doesn't need a mayor, they need a ringmaster for their 3 ring circus.

DA01's picture

King Tom Peters circumvented

King Tom Peters circumvented the charter. What he did was illegal and for that I applaud Councilor Theriault for filing a complaint with the Maine State Bar Association. King Tom even said at the last meeting on this subject that he would find away around the mayor/charter. This is a serious violation of the law. That is unethical especially acting as a lawyer himself in the matter. The 4 members of the council that favored King Tom are just as guilty.

concerned KD's picture

DA01-Im sorry but you and

DA01-Im sorry but you and especially Mr. Theriault are wrong with this assumption that the maine bar has a role to play here. The only person that can be looked at from the Bar is Eisenstein( city lawyer). Eisenstein is legal council on this matter. Tom Peters is a city councilor not the city attorney. He has done nothing unethical or illegal. Maybe you personally and Mr. Theriault personally dont agree with it but the bar can only look at the city attorneys performance and judge him, NOT Tom Peters. Mr Theriaults efforts will be futile in this matter and quite frankly be another big waste of time.. Not to mention Mr.Theriault is not in a possition to be accusing people of acting unethically after he is guilty of showing up curbside to try to use his position as city councilor to get his son out of trouble with the police dept... As well as trying to scurry and cover his sons depts for illegally sold tractors on line. HMMMM does he even know the meaning of the word ethical?

tron's picture

What Councilor Peters did

What Councilor Peters did was underhanded, sneaky, unfair, but it's not illegal. This is what lawyers do, look for loopholes. He thinks he found one. I suspect this thing will be headed to court, once the committee is officially assembled. Stay tune next week.

L-Town's picture

Robert61... Can I be your

Robert61... Can I be your pick for the committee???

Robert61's picture

Sorry, my nomination was

Sorry, my nomination was given last night, and yes I already have a second choice if the first cannot serve.

tron's picture

I believe Mayor Gilbert is

I believe Mayor Gilbert is upset because the council is trying to take away what little authority the mayor has. The charter gives the mayor very little authority, but it does give him this. The committee establish is only advisory, hence it has no authority to do anything, since the council is allowed to ignore their choices. Strange that the council keeps all of its authority, while trying to steal what little the mayor has. bob reed is ingenuous when he stated that the council did not give Councilor Nelson the authority to find a loophole. During the last meeting ALL COUNCILORS want a way around having the mayor making the final decision on appointments. To his credit bob reed saw the light, but has convenient amnesia as to his previous position. I was also amused how his definition of compromise is the heck with the law, do it my way, that's a compromise.

Councilor Dube pegged it right, no one trusts anyone. There is nothing to suggest that the Mayor would reject any councilors recommendation. He was merely guarding his mayoral duties for himself and future mayors. This distrust is a direct result of the shenanigans of the last few months, so you've nurtured this distrust, bobby. The apparent need for secrecy in everything breeds this distrust. Why are the names of the candidates being held in secret? Do you really want to consider someone for the position that is ashamed to let it be know they want the position? It appears from a previous article, most do not mind having their names released, but the council still wants everything done in secret. Even this committee will meet in secret with no public access. Is this really the way to run a city? Is this even legal?

Of course all this is coming about because of some councilors insistence on completing the selection process within a very tight time frame. The committee will have only one month to vet forty names. This undue haste is bad for Lewiston. The city deserves better.

Robert61's picture

I'll start answering trons

I'll start answering trons questions and misstatements when he answers one simple question...which of my wife's two grandfathers raised 5 children during the middle of the Great depression?

tron's picture

paternal, and that has

paternal, and that has relevance how? A diversionary tactic?

Robert61's picture

Why tron, you made a

Why tron, you made a statement that my wife's grandfather "eaised 5 children during the MIDDLE of the Great depression...lets see Ray and his twin were born 2nd & 3rd in 1939, you and your sister were both born after 1940...exactly how does that qualify for raising children in the middle of the great Depression which most historians say ran from 1930-1939? It ges to truthfullness, you'll say anything to make a point even when its a lie...congratulations you lied about your own father.

tron's picture

apparently you forgot about

apparently you forgot about two children who died. But you probably knew about them, but brought them up because you figured I would not mention them since it was always a sad point for my mother, but thankfully she isn't alive to see what kind of an A$$ you are. JERK! Again I'll ask as to relevance.

Robert61's picture

tron, I was unaware of ther

tron, I was unaware of ther children who may have passed, I have only met 5 and never heard there were others. That being said, even if the two who passed were born prior to Ray, Ray and his twin were born in December 1939, making it impossible for your father to "raise 5 children during the middle of the great depression....you're still short of being accurate in your statement, which has come to be a trademark...what part of timeline do you not understand...

tron's picture

Again, calling me stupid,

Again, calling me stupid, inappropriate coming from someone with your background. Where is it written that YOU can make up the timeline. Many scholars, every one much smarter than you,and me, would argue that the depression didn't really end until our entry in WWII. But for YOU to attack me instead of justifying your actions shows the caliber of man you are.

sickenedlewistonian's picture

Ummm tron evidently you

Ummm tron evidently you missed the part of the meeting that king larry said he probably WOULDNT use any of the councilors recommendations which mr reed and others argued with him over cuz had he agreed to use their recommendations none of this other stuff would have been going on. again king larry just wants to throw weight around that he doesnt have. He is pompous now as he was as police chief.

L-Town's picture

What kind of a man is Larry

What kind of a man is Larry Gilbert??? I don't know him... Is he right on this issue??? Robert61 should Mr. Gilbert be trusted???

concerned KD's picture

Sounds like bait Robert,

Sounds like bait Robert, dont answer, sounds like a Gilbert henchman out for ammo roundup.. Let me answer for you... just a few words come to mind: egotistical, power hungry, narcicist, with a political agenda to feed.

Robert61's picture

concerned I agree that it is

concerned I agree that it is bait...hook, line and sinker...

L-Town's picture

Robert61 i'm just having

Robert61 i'm just having fun... It was bait just wanted to see what u would say... I'm not a fan of Gilbert or Bennett

Rinoblast's picture

This whole decision is

This whole decision is clearly about being a rock in a hard place (or a catch-22 if you prefer). Vote in favor of the committee and you make it appear like you want transparency while also stepping on the city charter. Vote against thew committee and you support the charter but look like you're power-hungry or an ally of King Larry (which I think at this point no councilor wants).

Robert61's picture

Exactly what I was trying to

Exactly what I was trying to say! The phrase throwing out the baby with the bathwater comes to mind based on some of these comments and people thinking they know why I voted as I did.

momof4's picture

Interesting stuff. NOBODY

Interesting stuff. NOBODY should have the power Mayor Gilbert is constantly seeking. He is desirous of hand-picking the next Administrator who he hopes will"owe him one" and do his bidding. I don't know how the citizens of the City can stand him. If this were happening in my town, I can assure you the muskets would be coming down from the fireplaces.....

suesits's picture
verified

I cannot believe that the

I cannot believe that the council has finally done something for the citizens of Lewiston. Congratulations!!! to the Peters, Bailey and Dube for finally letting Therriault and Gilbert know that they are not in charge, Poulin only follows so that he doesn't upset King Larry man up Poulin. Reed also changed his mind from the last meeting, also afraid to rock the kingdom. It was entertaining to see Theriault poutting after the meeting, grow up and act your age. As for the Mayor your tantrum on TV has probably taken care of your reelection and we thank you for that. It always makes me laugh when he tries to bring the charter into play when it serves his purpose but when it doesn't there is no mention of it. Let the committee help decide with the selection of the next adminstrator, your record has not been that favorable in your previous appointments.

sickenedlewistonian's picture

Robert just because the

Robert just because the council can override the decision of the committee that is just a safety feature incase for some reason its found out members of the committee are biased in any way or lets say the 2 committee members chosen by King Larry n his Jester Theriault try to sway things the way the king n jester want it can be appealled by the supreme court in this case the court being the city council. I see the fact of the council being able to override the choices as a safety net to protect the city of lewiston from having the wrong person in office of administrator I see it as nothing but a safety net for the better of the city and yet still gives the committee power. Past committees have made choices that didnt better the city and actually hurt us but we were bound by their choices this just gives us the leeway to keep everything on track to do what is right for the city.

Robert61's picture

I have no problems with

I have no problems with being able to overturn their decision as a committee, but in doing so I am only asking the question - do we really have an advosry committee if in fact we do not have to accept their decision. For me, that simple question and not being comfortable with either answer given left me little comfort on the issue.

concerned KD's picture

Ahhh, King Larry- The

Ahhh, King Larry- The council needs to have a provision in place to cover they're a$$ in a worst case scenario. What if for some reason those people appointed to the commitee became corrupted for some reason and were to appoint an individual who has alternative agendas and or would disrupt the process of the council making a decision or stack the pool with the worst people leaving only one solid choice. Well if you have 4 out of 5 people who would be completely wrong for the job in the pool then that really leaves the council with one real choice thus hindering the council from picking from the best qualified individuals. Therefore they still need a provision that allows them to revise the commitee choices in case there is some sort of wrong doing. Council MUST retain the power of choice or they would be, as Gilbert so eloquently said it "aborting"the charter. Do I think this scenario will occur? NO. But they need to have CHECKS AND BALANCES. this is a staple of democracy. Gilbert is Pi$$ed he cant have his way. AWWW poor king Larry cant dictate to the people of Lewiston and payback some of those favors to his chronies hiding in the wings. Well Cry to someone who cares about your agenda. Pack your bags for Paris and BON VOYAGE.

sickenedlewistonian's picture

Robert your last comment

Robert your last comment made no sense. Your saying that the committee has real power and is more than an advisory committee if that is true then the mayor does not get to pick the group. All the mayor wants is to fill the group with his hand picks so that he can still control the choices they make. Last time you all discussed it robert you were adimant about the mayor not having that kind of power. As for involving the bar association there is nothing they can do here. Tom was not acting as an attorney but rather as a city council president. Of course Theriault agrees with King Larry the court jester never goes against his king. Robert you fought hard last time to keep King Larry in check and when push came to shove you sided with King Larry. If the committee has real power in anyway than its not an advisory committee point blank. As for the clause of the council being able to add or remove names I think its a good idea because who knows better wat should be considered than the council. As for needing the committee I think councilor Dube said it all and nobody could have put it any better. The king and the jester need to leave and bob bring back the bob who fought against the king a couple of weeks ago he does a much better job for the city.

Robert61's picture

Sick- what I said was

Sick- what I said was everyone needs to make a decision for themselves on whether they feel the committee really has power or not - in my opinion they do not because while they will make a recommendation, the motion made based on what Mr. Peters presented allows us to disregard the recommendation and go with someone totally off the list. We are not bound by their decision. Had it simply said we must choose the administrator from a list of 3-6 final candidates provided by the committee and no one else then that would be real power, real decision making authority. BY saving that power for ourselves, we made them an advisory committee only as outlined in the Charter.

I agree with you, the Mayor wishes to hand choose who served on the committe and as its a council decision, that was not a way any of us wanted to go. MY hope had been that the Mayor would simply say - its an ad hoc committee but for the good of the community I will not oppose the person chosen by each councilor. He would still appoint his own choice as well, but we would not have broken the charter rules, which I felt were violated given the opt out of the council in the decision making.

As to the bar - I'm not familiar with the rules and procedures so I'll not comment on that one. But i will say it felt like going around the charter and the Mayor and i understand where one could question the ethics behind it.

Make it clear, I was not "siding" with anyone. I was taking what I understand about the Charter and applying it to this situation. It really boils down to whether one feels the committee has real power or not and given that we could choose to not use their recommendation, I felt they were beter defined as an ad hoc or advisory committee and thus voting in the afirmative would be voting to not uphold the Charter.

Given the charter issue, and knowing all this was about to occur, I made the early motion to not have a committee and then when that would not pass I also voted no so I could preserve my right to reconsider the motion later (I do know a bit about Roberts Rules of Order). I was expecting the council committee motion to not have enough support and then go back to the Mayoral plan which also would not have enough support, leaving us back at square one. I was wrong in that assumption, some were simply tired of an Emporer woth no Clothes as Councilor Dube stated and I suspect thats why the vote passed. As to your last comment I was still fighting against the king, but keeping the charter in mind)

What is more interesting is when the community sees who each of us selected to represent our interests in the process. I only had one person indicate they had interest in serving and I felt they would be an excellent choice.

concerned KD's picture

Robert- the people elected

Robert- the people elected the council to make the decisions, not a commitee. I know you as a councilor do NOT want to relenquish your 1/6 of power of decision. If there was no provision then the councilors might as well go home till the commitee is done choosing for them. If the council does not dissagree with the commitee then YES the commitee has the power outlined here. Just because there is a CHECKS AND BALANCES provision does not mean they are powerless. Do I personally think the council should have moved forward and made the choice themselves and told Larry to pound sand in France.YES. However, some people in lewiston are looking for a more transparent way to fill the position and this is a way for the council to save face with the community. That Is who you work for here, NOT king Larry of the circle jerk clan.

Robert61's picture

Concerned, I completely

Concerned, I completely agree that we need a transparent process, my concerns last night was that there was no way to arrive upon concensus in dong so. We were all in unison last time we met on this subject - I laid out a potential plan to move forward, all councilors agreed but the Mayor made it clear he would have final say on who would be on the committee, from there it went downhill quickly and last night we decided to stay at the bottom of the hill.

concerned KD's picture

It is too bad that the

It is too bad that the council has to stay at the bottom. But only Larry is to blame for that. He should not be throwing himself into the councils charter outlined job. He needs a reality check. the people dont want him involved in the process. the bottom line is the administrator will be in place long after Larry is gone and he's done enough imposing of his will on the people and the council thus far, we dont need any more from him. He needs to sit back, take the PR photos and cut the ribbons till his time is done. Then go away.

Robert61's picture

Agreed. People need to

Agreed. People need to udnerstand that my vote last night was not in standing in support of the Mayor, but standing in line with the Charter which I swore to uphold.

TREEHUGGARRR's picture

Mayor Moonbeam, when is it

Mayor Moonbeam, when is it your moving to Paris?

In the mean time, ........

http://www.wmtw.com/news/20718143/detail.html

Gary52's picture
verified

Such a nice, friendly little

Such a nice, friendly little circus!

L-Town's picture

Robert61 I want to hear from

Robert61 I want to hear from u...

Robert61's picture

LTown, what would you like

LTown, what would you like to hear?

I knew it would be an issue, thus I raised the motion to not have a committee and actually do our job ourselves.

As to what occurred, the question is how do you define decision making power...if the commitee gave us 5 names and we have to choose from those then they have real power, but because the motion included the ability for the council to "abort" those choices (sorry, couldn't resist) than its little more than an advisory committee which means that it has to be appointed by the Mayor. Thats why I voted against it - I felt it was totally circumventing the charter and if you watched previous meetings it was clear that Tom Peters specifically crafted this to get around the Mayor, which in effect means he was trying to get around the Charter.

That being said, it all could have been avoided if the Mayor had simply allowed all of our choices to be accepted without change by him and that woudl have met with current Charter requirements. That simple compromise would have moved us forward quickly, appropriately and in a dignified matter, in my humble opinion. This election will be interesting to say the least.

L-Town's picture

Well thanks for the inside

Well thanks for the inside scoop... So who is the bad apple of the group??? Is it the Bennett camp vs the rest of the council??? You got my vote Robert61... Lewiston Rocks!!!

Robert61's picture

Sadly, I think we all at

Sadly, I think we all at times look like bad apples, and that comes from refusing to rubber stamp anything coming at us. Either you want a council that asks the tough questions and has desention, or you want a council which simply raises their hand in the affirmative to whatever the administration seeks to do. I recently asked for capping bonded indebtedness and wanted a super majority - I felt people in my ward were concerned that over the last 8 years we've gone from about $35 Million to $114 Million bonded indebtedness....that troubles me and we have to really scrutinize what we are bonding at a time when we cannot find the funds to fix our roads.

concerned KD's picture

Hey Robert, Sounds like old

Hey Robert, Sounds like old Larry boy is looking for something to do. Why not let him have an advisory commitee to look into the $114mill indebtedness and what HE CAN DO FOR THE PEOPLE TO GET BETTER ROADS. We can get him some cheerleaders and soapbox and he can really feel like he is doing something. You should make a motion to assemble a commitee to look into this and see if he wants to appoint the commitee members.If the council votes For a ADVISORY commitee, it is Gilberts oath/job/responsibility to Lewiston to select members per charter. Maybe he will jump on some face time for the cameras and get him out of the councils hair. Just a thought. :)

Robert61's picture

Sounds a lot liek the budget

Sounds a lot liek the budget review committee he was trying to establish but failed. If only he had compromised and been willing to change the timing of their existence, he would have had a great committee helpingthe city....oh well, I tried LOL

Enoch's picture

Three cheers for Betty

Three cheers for Betty Dube!! When she spoke last night she was acvtually profound! She dealt with the whole issue of the "white elephant" in the room, that being the blatant underlying mistrust between our governing officials, and how they needed to ensure the new City Administrator hiring process a task involved a broader range of input than just the Councillors. When she made her short and powerful speech it was so VERY sad to see Gilbert had left to use the restroom!!! The person needing to hear it the most didn't hear it at all.
Have to say the end of the meeting was priceless when Theriault is seen sitting there in a frozen, stunned shock as the room empties about him, and a hot, beet red, Larry Gilbert is just about vaulting over everyone trying to get his post meeting "The charter has been aborted" TV interview with the Network TV crew underway (before he could have time to think a little and make sense). He was so mad and rambling, that he didn't even have his usual Ahhh's and Ummm's strewn in his speech!

Robert61's picture

Enoch, I have to admit, well

Enoch, I have to admit, well said!

Jay Bee's picture

Ginger1 - what are you - a

Ginger1 - what are you - a comedian??? This is about egos - not about voters. They will care about Lewiston when rainbows and unicorns dot the landscape.

Ginger1's picture

Do any of these councilors

Do any of these councilors put their constituents opinions before their own?

fixit001's picture

Rather you like gilbert or

Rather you like gilbert or not ,and I do not, personaly I think he was a lousy cop and a mayor, that said I believe Strongly in our constitution and city charters and the rights of all citizens rather others feel it is some piece of paper to be stepped on when it gets in your way as such the councils ploy here. An strong message and complaint to the Bar Association should be sent and those who have any right to practice law should be disbarred immediately including Eisenstien!!!! Peters should be removed asap for his total lack of control he seems more and more like the child in the store thowing a tatrum because mommy would not buy him some candy, we have all heard the type screaming thier head off and the parent not wanting to spank him in public, it is a shame he has not grown up yet!!! I may not like you Gilbert BUT YOU ARE RIGHT!!! Rules are not ment to be broken !!!!

change's picture

I think that Marty should

I think that Marty should hope that the 4 that voted don't miss a meeting. The last time paid city staff didn't agree with the Theriault-Gilbert clique, Theriault arrogantly proclaimed "I have the votes to buy out your contract" without a public meeting it is illegal to form a consensus through one on one meetings and for the mayor to ask the city attorney for opinions. Is it better to abort the charter for back door politics or as the mayor says they did to open up the process to the most diverse group possible to restore some credibility to this shameful display of petulance. Jim Bennett asked the council to get an opinion relating to Theriault's impromptu attendance of a Dept. heads meeting the Attorney backed Bennett and he's gone. Imagine if judges could be fired by the public defenders sooner or later they all believe the judge wronged them and they have the votes to fix his wagon. The friday night massacre comes to mind councilor Bailey is absent the mayor breaks the tie.1)They instruct Phil Nadeu to fire Marty but, Phil refuses so they fire him and Denis Jean is in the hot seat till he tells them they cant do what they want. Kathy may be our only hope to stop the madness!

Advertisement