PARIS – A motion that may have removed a member from the town’s ad hoc committee to review the subdivision ordinance was left high and dry Monday as the selectmen adjourned without acting on it.

The decision not to act came after several heated discussions between residents and the board over an agenda item submitted by resident Charles T. Hurd. The item asked the board to “discuss, review, and act to diminish the obvious conflict of interest that has been established by placing a self-admitted biased individual on the ad hoc committee.”

Jack Richardson, the member in question, has supported accusations that the committee was illegally formed and presents a conflict of interest.

“The fact that some think he is acting and voting fairly is irrelevant,” Hurd wrote in a letter to the town. “Considering his participation in threats of legal action, he is biased and cannot make a case for any other position.”

The ad hoc committee was formed after resident Ron Fitts, brother of board Chairman Ernest Fitts III, presented the board with proposed changes to the subdivision ordinance. The ordinance passed in June in a 487-468 vote. The committee is made up of the Planning Board and five members, including Richardson, who were appointed by the selectmen.

The committee will make recommendations to the Planning Board, which will present it to the selectmen, who will decide what issues will go to the town for a vote.

Richardson was one of six residents signing a letter to the town asking that the committee be dissolved due to conflict of interest, as well as one of 10 residents signing a petition for a restraint of proceedings due to a conflict of interest. The petition was included as part of an appeal filed in the Oxford County Superior Court by resident Robert Moorehead.

Moorehead claims that Ernest Fitts III and Selectman Glen Young both showed conflict of interest in their support for forming a committee during the Jan. 28 meeting, and asks that their votes be voided and the committee dissolved.

According to the appeal, Richardson unsuccessfully sought enforcement of the state’s conflict of interest laws with the state’s Attorney General and the Oxford County District Attorney.

“What this really is, it’s an obvious ploy to deflect light from what seems to be the real issue,” Richardson said Monday. He accused the board of attempting to reshape the committee to benefit a special interest.

Ernest Fitts III accused Richardson of undermining the board’s purpose.

“I just find it a little unfair that we have someone on the committee that doesn’t like the committee,” Fitts said.

Selectman Raymond Glover said Richardson had made his opposition to the committee clear before his appointment, and that he did not show a conflict of interest or a bias in his actions on the committee.

“I don’t think anyone will be able to say that Jack has not made an impartial decision,” Glover said.

Several residents at the meeting expressed the opinion that Richardson’s actions were a matter of free speech.

“We have here a person exercising a perceived right under the First Amendment to petition his government,” said David Stanley. “It is regrettable that he is being subjected to intimidation and retaliation for his action.”

“It bothers me that someone would go to the Attorney General’s office,” said Bruce Hanson. “But that’s their democratic right.”

Town attorney Theodore Kurtz said the only conflict of interest rule applying to the selectmen involved a possible financial interest in the issue. Kurtz said none of the selectmen displayed a conflict of interest.

Kurtz said that since committee members receive no salary or stipend, unlike town employees or selectmen, they may be dismissed without a showing of cause.