You thought this would go away? Select-Persons-Three: you thought you could haul in your own personal agenda, plop it on the desk of the Town, and, without so much as a by-your-leave, proceed to take right over? And that no one in the town would even bat an eye?
On the afternoon of Monday, 8-10-09, The Town of Paris was served with yet one more set of papers from Oxford County Superior Court. Sharon Jackson's Amended Complaint is a well crafted missile that includes a more detailed list of alleged violations of state and federal law, and requests punitive damages and other monetary compensation. It is a follow up to the 7-22-09 Complaint . (Note: viewing this and some other ".pdf" documents linked to this blog requires signing in with Google.)
Ms. Jackson is indeed fighting for her job. She is supported in that effort by the many who believe she brought impressive and much needed management skills, implementing a workable system for the mechanics of running of our town.
However, voters, the firing of Ms. Jackson is only one very unfortunate facet of a bigger agenda.
Consider:
*If a company is not in the red, the books balance, the business manager has received only outstanding reviews, and the staff working under the manager functions reasonably well, what other motive might there be to dismiss the manager?
* If there was no discussion with members of the full board before Troy Ripley attended his first board meeting, 6-22-09, how could his arrival have coincided with the firing of a manager such as described above? Who might have been planning ahead?
*Interfering with the correct workings of a machine without expertise can cause irreparable damage to the machine. What kind of motive would provoke that kind of interfering?
* The functioning of a municipal organization is like the workings of a machine. Interfering with that functioning, for any motive not readily discernable to the voters, puts the town as a whole in jeopardy.
*Who voted to have the town taken "in a new direction?" and for what motive?
*Was there some other vote, after the 6-13-09 Town Meeting, that would allow manipulating the town's budget? Did anyone vote that it was not important to avoid extra costs by careless selectmen that could result in thousands of extra dollars in legal expenses? What motive could ever be acceptable for circumventing the voters?
Who gains here? There is more at work here than the firing of a manager. Who gains here? Are all of our elected officials privy to information going into decisions? Who gains here? Is there transparency in the decisions being made?
Who gains here?
Are the interests of the whole Town of Paris being served?
Who's running this town?
