Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Alternate Ceo topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board to post alternate code‑enforcement officer language after debate over state law
Summary
The Readfield Planning Board voted to post proposed LUO language creating an alternate (deputy) Code Enforcement Officer for public hearing on May 24 after staff described operational gaps; one member argued state statute requires the select board to appoint CEOs and opposed posting until the town attorney confirms the legal reading.
The Readfield Planning Board voted to post a proposed Land Use Ordinance amendment that would authorize a deputy (alternate) Code Enforcement Officer for a public hearing on May 24.
Eric, who presented the draft language and background, told the board the change aims to provide a formal backup when the CEO is unavailable and to remove ambiguity about appointment and authority. "...there's no gray area which is fairly important to me," he said, summarizing the proposal and noting the draft had been reviewed by the town attorney.
One board member raised a procedural objection, distributing excerpts of Maine statutes (Title 38 §441 and Title 30‑A §20001) and arguing that state law requires municipal officers (the select board) to appoint CEOs annually. That member said the concern was about process, not the idea of an alternate, and urged the board to confirm the town attorney’s interpretation before advancing appointment mechanics. "I'm going to vote no because I think it's not lawful," the member said during the vote.
Other members countered that Readfield operates under the town‑manager form of government, and that the town’s practice and ordinance language have long allowed delegation to the town manager in appointment matters. Several said the public‑hearing notice can describe creating an alternate position without finalizing appointment mechanics, allowing legal clarification in the meantime.
The motion to post the select‑board‑proposed language for a May 24 public hearing passed on a voice vote; the transcript records the motion, a second and a voice vote but does not record a roll‑call tally. Eric said he would contact the town attorney and share any written clarification with board members, and the board agreed members could raise revisions at the public hearing.
Why it matters: establishing a formal alternate CEO clarifies who may act for enforcement and permits when the regular CEO is absent; if the appointment process conflicts with state statute, legal uncertainty could affect past or future CEO actions. Board members asked the town attorney to confirm how Title 38 §441 and town‑manager delegation provisions interact, and said they would consider edits before forwarding final language to the select board.
Next steps: The board will hold a public hearing on May 24 on both the alternate‑CEO LUO language and a separate solar ordinance amendment. Staff (Eric) will follow up with the town attorney and report back to the board before the hearing.
