Stop breaking the law.

    

     It seems like Selectman Chartrand just doesn’t get it. The law about public meetings is very clear, and last night, Dan decided to ignore it again.  The Board of Selectmen met for an early meeting with the intention of going on a field trip to visit the DPW. Chairperson Gilman was absent, so Vice-Chair Chartrand presided over the meeting. 

     When they finished with the regular meeting, Chartrand asked for a motion to adjourn the “business portion” (his words) of the meeting.  Nancy Belanger made the motion, but Don Clements was concerned about the legality of adjourning the "public sessions" and reconvening for a “work session.“ Chartrand ignored Clement's concerns and insisted that they adjourn because they were going to be late going to the DPW. He was more concerned about the time than about what was proper and legal. Chartrand called for a vote and declared the meeting adjourned, although it wasn’t clear who voted for or against adjournment.

     Frank Ferraro rose to offer some friendly advice supporting Clement's observation that the Board should keep the meeting open and just announce a move of the location. That way, the Board would not be violating the public notice law because there was no public notice for the “work session.” Chartrand thanked Ferraro and said that the TV was off and they would consider it the next time.  In other words, Chartrand was more concerned with the time than what the law required.

     Look, undoubtedly some will say this is no big deal and that this constitutes nitpicking.  This might be true if it was not a pattern of behavior we have witnessed.  This isn’t the first time that Chartrand has violated the public notice provisions of state law. He clearly has shown disdain for having to follow laws that he feels are too inconvenient.  Even when a two-term Selectman and past Board Chairman points out the law.  Perhaps Chartrand should take one of the courses offered by the LGC on the public’s right to know.   Residents rights are protected by law to ensure they are privy to all public meetings of this and other boards.  Even the recent simple act of attempting to move public comment to end of the Board of Selectman meeting has the appearances of discouraging public input.  When actions such as these are not challenged, the instigator is emboldened to continue.  And this seems to be the case with Chartrand.