I attend most Lewiston City Council Meetings in silence, but at Jan. 3’s meeting I was moved to speak publicly against a parliamentary maneuver to muzzle the current — and all future — mayors.

No one else made my point (viewable at 3:25:00 on the city’s recording), which was that no matter what he says during discussion, in his role as presiding officer this mayor runs all meetings in a neutral fashion.

At no time did I ever witness Carl Sheline “place his thumb on the scale” during deliberations, as Counselor Lee Clement publicly charged. The mayor always keeps any rowdy room in order and holds every public speaker to the three-minute countdown.

Moreover, and more importantly, I have never seen this mayor cut off any councilor’s choice to speak — no matter the length, political stance, repetitiveness, or level of coherence.

He never twists a vote. Ever. In fact, his position has lost in recent contested votes.

Since the publicly stated reason for proposing this amendment to the council’s rules of procedure is so blatantly false, we are all left to ponder, what was the real reason for bringing forth this extraordinary proposal?

Elizabeth Eames, Lewiston

Related Headlines

Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.