OLD ORCHARD BEACH — A council discussion of the town manager’s contract did not take place after it failed to get enough votes for an executive session, but the issue generated much public discussion.
Town Council Chairwoman Sharri MacDonald called an executive session Wednesday night “concerning the town’s legal rights, duties and responsibilities related to the continuation or termination of the town manager’s contract, with possible discussion and action to follow,” she said.
Councilor Michael Coleman said he received a voicemail on Friday from MacDonald in which she said that the majority of the council wanted the town manager to resign, and that she had asked Town Manager Mark Pearson to resign that morning. Coleman said he had never been asked his opinion on the matter.
“This doesn’t pass the smell test,” he said.
Coleman said anything said that night should be aired in public, because the taxpayers are the ones who would be affected by any decision.
“I see absolutely no reason that this should go into executive session,” he said.
MacDonald said she had received information from a staff member that the town manager was going “outside the purview” of what he could do. MacDonald said after speaking with council members, the majority of whom thought the town manager should resign because he was not a good fit for the town, she spoke with the town attorney, and as a professional courtesy, offered the town manager the option to quit.
Town attorney Rob Crawford said he believed there needed to be an executive session in order to ensure “frank and candid” conversation.
John Richardson, attorney for Pearson, said discussions should be in public.
“The only one prejudiced today by transparency is my client,” said Richardson. “And he stands ready, willing and able to answer any question.”
The council chambers were packed, with some members of the public at times yelling out.
The council failed to get the five votes needed to go into executive session. However, after the close of the meeting, the council agreed to allow residents to speak and a public discussion ensued.
One issue under discussion was a preliminary audit report noting concerns of the town.
Pearson asked auditor Ron Smith if it appeared steps he had taken were in best practices to fix problems he inherited, and Smith agreed he had. Pearson asked if he committed any wrongdoing since coming on the job in February.
“I would say it’s fair to say we have found no wrongdoing on your part,” said Smith.
Also at issue were merit-based raises that Pearson issued, which he said were within his duties as town manager.
Resident and retired lawyer Cris Johnson said he frankly didn’t like Pearson much, but giving the town manager an ultimatum without discussion was a disgrace and bordered on a violation of rights.
“This man has been deprecated in the newspapers, on Facebook,” he said. “”¦ You, my friends, are guilty ”“ you are guilty of pride, of arrogance.”
Resident and local business owner George Kerr said Old Orchard Beach is a place that occasionally squabbles.
“I think today is nothing more than a family argument. I hope that’s all it is. And I hope we’ve all learned something,” he said.
“Now the big issue is, what comes out of this?” he asked, and he urged the council to have a workshop to “work out your differences” and “put Old Orchard Beach first.”
Councilor Robin Dayton urged residents, if they have concerns, to talk to the town manager and stop listening “to rumors and hearsay,” and if they still have issues after that, to speak with town councilors.
“Whether you like it or not, we’re all still stuck together,” she said.
She said she’s seen many people at the meetings who care about Old Orchard Beach and do hope to move forward.
— Staff Writer Liz Gotthelf can be contacted at 282-1535 Ext. 325 or egotthelf@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less