Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ward5 Eligibility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Lewiston school committee to investigate Ward 5 representative's eligibility
Summary
Multiple residents told the Lewiston Public Schools committee they believe the Ward 5 seat was unlawfully filled and asked for an internal investigation; the chair read an attorney statement saying eligibility deliberations are normally held in executive session.
Multiple residents at the Nov. 17 Lewiston Public Schools School Committee meeting urged the committee to investigate whether the Ward 5 representative is legally eligible to hold the seat, alleging the representative does not live at the publicly listed address and that the mayor’s appointment was improper.
Lisa Jones, a Ward 2 resident who said she was speaking on behalf of Ward 5 residents, told the committee the seat was “lawfully vacated when the former member moved out of the ward” and said the current occupant was “apparently unlawfully filled by a mayoral appointment.” Jones said a city-clerk letter contradicted the chair’s public claim that the clerk had settled the representative’s address and urged the committee to conduct an internal investigation.
Marcela Leclerc, who identified herself as a Ward 5 taxpayer, said inquiries about the representative’s residence have been met with refusal to disclose an address and contrasted that with public records she said note a police report related to a stolen firearm associated with the representative. Leclerc said the committee should pursue an investigation and “actions need to be taken.”
The committee chair paused the public-comment timer and read a statement from the committee’s attorney, saying that under the city charter and state law the school committee is the judge of its members’ qualifications and that deliberations about a member’s qualifications are generally held in executive session unless the charged member requests public deliberation. The chair said any formal vote on qualifications would be held in public and cautioned commenters against defamatory remarks.
Other speakers offered contrasting views. Kiernan Maduras Collins, a Ward 5 resident, called the public criticism “defamatory” and said residents of Ward 5 feel well represented. Martin Chartrand, also identifying as a Ward 5 resident, thanked the committee for its work and said he felt fortunate to be represented by the current member.
The committee did not take a public vote on member eligibility during the meeting; the chair moved the matter to the procedures described by the attorney, and later the committee voted to enter executive session to discuss a personnel matter. The committee did not announce a public, substantive investigation or a timeline for any next public action during the session excerpt.
What's next: The attorney’s statement indicated the committee may deliberate on eligibility in executive session (unless the named member requests public deliberation) and any formal vote would be in public session. The meeting record shows the chair moved to enter executive session on a personnel matter later in the agenda.
