Public Protection Committee
Minutes of 10:00 A.M., 12-17-08 Meeting
Town Office Meeting Room
1. The meeting was called to order at approximately 10:00 A.M. by Chief Bender.
2. Attendance: Fire Chief Mike Bender (MB): Harbormaster Shawn Murphy (SM); Board of Selectmen (BOS) Liaison Rick Mooers (RM): Paul Slack (PS), Manager, Mount Desert Water District (MDWD); Citizen representative Dennis Schubert (DS); Police Chief Jim Willis (JW); Public Works Director Tony Smith (TS); Town Manager Michael MacDonald (MM). Invited but absent: A representative from the Northeast Harbor Ambulance Service (NEHAS).
3. The following officers were elected within the PPC:
• Chairman Mike Bender (TS-JW: 5-0)
• Assistant Chairman Jim Willis (TS-JW: 5-0)
• Secretary Tony Smith (TS-JW: 5-0)
4. In addition to the citizen representative(s), at which time there is one, it is anticipated that the Committee would have four voting members from the municipal departments of fire, police, harbor and public works; one from the MDWD and; one from the NEHAS. Paul Slack was asked to be a voting member. He said he would discuss it with his directors and report back to us. It was approved to request and welcome representatives of the MDWD and the NEHAS as voting members to the Committee. (TS-SM: 5-0).
The rationale to be a voting member is to have an official hand in any decisions that might be made by the Committee and subsequent recommendations to the BOS and, through them to the NEHAS, for example.
5. The participation of Acadia National Park was raised by Paul Slack. Paul pointed out that they are a large landowner in Town and abut the Town’s water supply. Jim Willis pointed out, and it was generally agreed, that the Committee was intended to address municipal-type services and needs.
6. Michael MacDonald commented that the Committee is to be an advocacy committee. He went on to say that a citizen stopped in to the Town Office and picked up a number of generic committee application forms. This lead to a general discussion of how many people should be on the Committee and what type of selection process is followed by the BOS when considering a person for appointment to any particular committee.
• What if a person is appointed to the Committee that is counterproductive to the Committee’s charge and is generally disruptive to the proceedings? It was pointed out that we are going to conduct our meetings in general conformance with Robert’s Rules of Order and, by virtue of this, such actions can be addressed and controlled.
• It was generally agreed that there is no need for a 1:1 ratio of citizens to municipal-type Committee members. If citizens have differing opinions from any of the members, they can take their concerns to one of the other members.
• The issue of minimum and maximum number of Committee members was discussed. It was agreed that the Committee would be more efficiently managed with a maximum number of 10 members which would include up to four (4) citizens. General discussion ensued as to whether or not Committee members should review all applications and, should the applicant state three (3) reasons why they should be added to the Committee and, they should be required to attend a BOS meeting and asked why they will be an attribute to the Committee. It was agreed that the following will be the Committee’s recommendation to the BOS regarding prospective appointees:
• “We welcome any citizen participation as appointed by the BOS up to four (4) citizens. (5-0: DS-TS)
7. What constitutes a quorum was discussed. The concern with a committee comprised of 10 members is having enough attend a meeting to be able to have a quorum and conduct business. It was decided that:
• Five (5) voting members in attendance including one (1) voting citizen constitutes a quorum and
• A majority vote of any quorum constitutes passage of a properly made and seconded motion. (5-0: TS-JW)
8. Agenda Item 4 was discussed:
• It was noted that all departments were discussed in the comprehensive plan albeit briefly. It was decided that the department heads and the MDWD and NEHAS representatives would bring their needs to the committee
• Outside agency review: after Tony Smith finally bought into the idea, basically because Dennis Schubert suggested the “glass half full versus half empty analogy” it was generally agreed that reviews by outside entities could be beneficial to groups the Committee members represent.
9. Dennis Schubert raised the question of the town’s liability should we identify a deficiency that does not get addressed and an accident or injury results because of the lack of attention to it. Does any “Sovereign Immunity” exist? Rick Mooers explained the Maine Tort Law. No definitive answer was arrived at.
10. It was agreed that if we are to have an Article for something in the 2009 Warrant, we will need to pay heed to the Warrant Committee – BOS – Town Meeting schedules.
• 2-15-09 is the final date for the BOS to review something.
• A warrant article would have to be finalized by 3-17-09.
• The 45th day prior to town meeting is 3-21-09.
11. Dennis Schubert offered that the next two years might be the best time to build e.g. town office expansion or public safety building, due to the state of the economy: cheaper labor, contractors looking for work.
12. When the general question of “What is the BOS looking for?” was asked, Rick Mooers suggested:
• Make us whole in the short and long term,
• We don’t necessarily need to be at or set the gold standard but must meet generally accepted standards and,
• We would like the best bang for the buck.
13. It was agreed that the municipal-type voting members would present their respective 5-year plans for capital improvements at the next meeting scheduled for Wednesday, 10:00 A.M., January 14, 2009 at the town office (5-0: DS-TS)
14. It was agreed that we would meet on an as-needed basis.
Prepared by: Secretary Tony Smith
cc. All Attendees; Jennifer McWain; Joanne Robbins, NEHAS
| 
