Goat Rope: Cape Brunswick Style

                   

As so often happens in this ‘profession’ of ours, sudden bursts of inconvenient reality interfere with our routine.  Or as others might say, “government happens.”  And you can take that literally, or translate it as you see fit.

           

Let’s just say your NSH correspondent is not a-mused.  Over the last few days, we had taken note of print media reports stemming from the BDC story, and specifically, the Cape Brunswick Town Council meeting of this week (Tuesday, Sept 4, 2013.)  More about those media reports soon. 

It was the first meeting in a good while, and clearly, the anointed were expecting public comment on the BDC/Brunswick Taxi story, which we broke on 19 August in this post.  We followed that up with a number of subsequent posts; there will be more, perhaps many more.

Based on those reports, we decided to watch the ‘video on demand’ version of the meeting, and consistent with our experience over the last several months, technical issues prevented us from doing so.  Apparently some changes made in the town’s relevant IT system elements have corrupted VOD capabilities, at least for folks like us.  Town staff is now hot on the trail of the problem, and in the mean while, kindly provided the files for meetings over the last few months in DVD form. 

When we returned to our offices this afternoon with the materials, we immediately undertook to watch Tuesday night’s meeting.  We don’t know if you are having the same problems as we’ve been having, but the link to watch the meeting is this.  It’s only the first ten minutes or so you need to watch to understand this post. 

If it doesn’t work for you, we’re not sure what to do right now.   The file is way too big to send to you by email (215MB); scribd will not upload it; and we don’t know how to edit the file down to only the first 10 minutes or so.  If someone can offer advice on this, maybe we can come up with a quick workaround.

Now to our title point.  What we saw in watching the first part of this meeting was a total goat-rope, municipal government style.  If you don’t know what “goat-rope” means, ask someone who has a military background to explain it to you.  If that’s not possible, think in terms of a SNAFU.

In so many words, following a brief public comment on the subject, Chair Wilson of the council attempted to clarify the specific role of the Brunswick Development Corporation (BDC); how it relates to town government; and how its governing directors are chosen.

In a word, she completely mangled the subject.  Further, Councilor Favreau did the same when he attempted to correct a comment by the member of the public who attempted to discuss the subject.  Favreau specifically stated that “the council does not appoint the three other directors.”

Furthermore, when Councilors Perreault and Brayman asked the Chair to clarify things, Wilson mangled the details again.  The more she said, the more she strayed from the clear content of the official defining documents that we linked in this post.  In particular, Wilson made several material mistakes in citing the BDC Bylaws, which you can find here.  We assume this is the version currently in effect, since it was provided to us by town staff just a few weeks ago.  It shows that it was last amended in March of 2010, as opposed to being constantly evolved by the board, in Wilson’s words.

Sadly, it appeared that neither Wilson or the other councilors had possession of the Bylaws or had read and understood them.  Their bad, as we see it, and even worse, town staff’s bad for not making sure they were given the proper materials in their packet.  Nor were they ‘read into’ the articles of incorporation.

Our summary of the worst points of Chair Wilson’s performance are these:

1) She was clearly prepared, with notes, to squelch any substantive discussion of the BDC and Brunswick Taxi story.  She was anxious to deflect any impression or suggestion that the town council and the BDC are closely interconnected.

2) She clearly goofed in describing the BDC as a ‘public corporation,’ because both the Bylaws and the Articles of Incorporation define it as a ‘local development corporation.’  (We’ll leave alone for the moment that many in this town believe that any ‘corporation’ is by definition evil, tramples on economic justice, and takes from the innocent public to enrich its corporate governors.) 

3) She completely bungled the description of the Board of Directors and how the individual members are selected.   For example, she said that the Council Chair appoints the two council directors, which does not comport with the Bylaw language, which says the Town Council does so.

To back up our case, we provide here, once again, the relevant passages from BDC Bylaws:

Section 1.3. Purposes.  The corporation is organized and shall be operated on a nonprofit basis to foster, encourage, assist, support, and promote the development, establishment, settlement, or resettlement within the Town of Brunswick, Maine, of industrial, manufacturing, fishing, agricultural, recreational, or other business enterprises. The Corporation shall constitute a "local development corporation" pursuant to 5 M.R.S.A. §13081(6).

(As we’ve pointed out previously, the sited M.R.S.A. section has been repealed.  And while one could debate the meaning of ‘local development corporation,’ it CLEARLY does not mean ‘private corporation,’ as had been suggested elsewhere.)

Section 2.3 Directors. The Board of Directors shall be comprised of seven (7) members. The persons holding the Town of Brunswick positions of Town Manager and Finance Director shall be ex-officio directors of the Board of Directors so long as they remain in those positions. The Town Council of Brunswick shall appoint two (2) members of the Town Council as Town Council directors, whose terms shall expire annually on December 31st. The Town Council shall appoint three (3) public directors, from a list proposed by the ex-officio and Town Council directors. Each of the public directors shall have demonstrated education or experience, as evaluated by the ex-officio and Town Council directors, in one of the following areas: law, finance, accounting, business development, or banking. Public directors’ terms shall expire on December
31st. The initial terms of the public directors shall be one year, two years, and three years, on a staggered basis. Thereafter, such public directors shall be appointed for three-year
terms. No Town Council director or public director of the Board of Directors shall serve in any capacity on any other economic development corporation or board serving residents or businesses of Brunswick.   Section 2.3 Directors - Amended March 10, 2010

(above emphasis ours)

We just watched the relevant video again, and all we can say is that if what Wilson said is accurate, the Bylaws of the BDC are being violated.

That’s about as far as we’re going on this for now; it’s Friday night, and we have other things we’d like to do.  However, public service minded as we are, we felt it was important that you knew about these transgressions of fact in a very public setting by our elected betters.

We’re not going to invest the time at this point to transcribe the erroneous statements, since we have them in digital form.  We only hope you can witness them on your own, or that we can find a convenient way to pass them along.

Why does this matter?  Here’s why: in the same way the news media has an obligation to print corrections when it messes up a story, we believe that even more, elected officials in our government have an obligation to formally correct the record when they make such glaring errors.

If we thought it would matter, we would demand that the public record be corrected.  But we know from years of experience you get nowhere with such stands.  We might as well demand that snow not fall this winter, or that Bowdoin College pay its full share of property taxes.

Even worse, if such easily substantiated errors are left to stand, what does it tell us about how much we can trust what has been said in the past, and what will be said in the future, especially since most of what goes on is not so easily corroborated or checked.  How are we to have any confidence at all in our supposed public servants if they can relate to us with so little attention to detail and accuracy?

We suppose many will read this and say: ‘what do you expect?  He’s an old crank who complains about everything.  Just let it pass and he’ll go away.’

In response, we ask you to indulge us in a moment of self-importance.  Not so humbly, we submit that our collective experience with elements of the federal government, state government, and municipal government give us a rare perspective on the ethics and culture that applies to all.  Our guess is that not more than a handful of Brunswick residents or readers could trump what we’ve seen in our years of working with the sausage makers.

If that makes us an old crank, or even worse, so be it.  But you don’t need to have seen all that we’ve seen to understand that trusting so called public servants is a surefire way to get burned.

If you still haven’t figured out what a ‘goat rope’ is, here’s an example that is ‘worth a thousand words:’

(Ed. Note: For the innocent damsels in our readership, these fixtures are called urinals, and they are most often found in what used to be known unambiguously as Men’s Rooms.  And trust us; you don’t want to mess around with any guy who says “finally….just what I need!”)

Technorati Tags: BDC,Town Council,Brunswick

Strong Commentary on the BDC and Brunswick Taxi

The following commentary appeared in The Ostrich on Friday, 27 September.  We have not yet met the author, but he has kindly agreed to let us run the item here on our little publication, and we hope to meet him soon.

Meanwhile, we welcome him to the handful of local residents who are ‘not going to take it anymore.’  He certainly minces no onions, celery, or words in his essay.

=======================================================

Putting the BDC on the up and up

BY DANIEL FORD

GUEST COLUMN

I attended last week’s meeting of the Brunswick Development Corporation to learn more about how this entity works and to ask questions about its operation. I remain skeptical the town’s best interests are being served by this board under its current bylaws, and I have to seriously question the validity of its most recent loan to Brunswick Taxi.

As a matter of background, I have over twenty years’ experience in a similar position for another quasi-public development corporation in Massachusetts- so I know from whence I speak. In my experience at the Lawrence (Mass) Economic Development and Industrial Corporation we managed loans ranging from $50,000.00 up to $300,000. We reported to the City Council through the Mayor and Community Development Director so as to assure the City’s economic development goals are being met. In addition to this volunteer position, I was employed as an analyst and capital markets trader for such firms as Lehman Brothers and EF Hutton.

In my career, I have never seen a forgivable loan from any source-either public or private. Indeed I was reasonably satisfied with the answers Board members provided another concerned citizen the BDC board members about their qualifications. One member said they were in banking, another is a CPA, yet another is a local businessman. So let me ask you this: With the seemingly varied and well-rounded backgrounds of the aforementioned individuals, have any of you ever seen a bank make a forgivable loan? Or even loan into a company that has a negative net worth? I think not- which brings me to one of many points I would like to raise- Why would Brunswick Taxi get such a forgivable loan? Why would the BDC commit nearly 10% of its net worth to one entity without any type of return?

Is this sound business? Not in any of my textbooks.

I had a number of questions when the chair called for one more and adjourned the meeting, so I will ask now:

What is the BDC policy on loans? What are the underwriting standards? Who reviews the terms and conditions of the loans? How does the BDC develop minimum performance standards? Who writes the loan documents? Do the documents have negative covenants? How does the BDC get leads? What is the relationship between the town and the BDC? Does the BDC employ outside counsel? If so, who and how much?. Are there other relationships between the BDC members and the Town Council? When was the last time the BDC called for outside candidates (not former elected politicians) to fill vacancies?

The business of the public should be seen and held in full view of the public, with public input. The fact that the BDC recommends its own members to the Town Council is stunning. It would be more seamless if the Town Council called for and interviewed candidates, thus securing a more representative body, rather than the current composition, which has led some to feel the BDC is an incestuous collection of political retreads.

This loan, and the BDC’s inattention to detail proves to me the banker, the economic development expert, the town manager, the CPA and the lawyer were a lot more than remiss in their duties. They are derelict in their duty to protect BDC from default.

Kudos to Bill Morrell whose refusal to support this boondoggle demonstrates his and his family’s sense of honor and commitment to the town.

Rather than call this a forgivable loan, why not identify it for exactly what it is: a sweetheart deal. The frustrating part is there is nothing we can do about it.

Meanwhile, Dale King is sitting behind his desk lighting cigars with our money while we have legitimate businesses that also need our help (i.e., the gluten-free bakery burned out 16 months ago).

If BDC members can look in the mirror and believe in their hearts the Brunswick Taxi Loan was a legitimate business deal, so be it.

If not then you have irreparably violated the public trust and should resign.

DANIEL FORD is a Brunswick resident and retired financial services executive.

Technorati Tags: Brunswick,BDC,Brunswick Taxi

Duck Calling? Other Side is more about duck profiling.

        

Duck Dynasty is a contemporary cable TV phenomenon.  Side knows very little about the show, having seen only a family member or a promo on various other programs.  Frankly, we’re up to our nose-hair with so called ‘reality shows’ about Gator Boys and Turtle Men and other formulaic hits of this era.  We got way more than our fill when younger family members spent time here this summer.

As Side’s father was fond of saying, ‘you see one, you’ve seen them all.’  And compared to us, he actually had a sense of humor.  If only we had inherited it!

We know one thing – the family at the center of Duck Dynasty is making their fortune as experts in calling ducks.  We’ve never had much interest or need to engage in duck calling, but after our phone call this week from Dale King, owner of Brunswick Taxi, we decided to spend some time on duck “profiling.”

By that we refer to the art of determining if something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and if it does, concluding chances are pretty good that it is a duck.

               

That’s because Dale asserted to us that we had some “factual errors” in this post.  We asked what those might be, and he replied that the town doesn’t have anything to do with or have any control over the Brunswick Development Corporation (BDC), and that the money they are ‘lending’ to him is not public money.  (Keeping in mind that the loan is entirely forgivable.)

We took exception to his view, relating facts from the founding documents, but he was clearly not receptive.  He was working hard to make us see that we really weren’t talking about a duck, but about something else entirely.  He wanted us to believe this is about a cute little puddy tat; not a duck.

     

Or maybe a cow:

                  

The more we think on the subject, the more convinced we are that a number of folks in town would probably like us to believe we’re talking about a glorious and fragrant tropical flower; anything but a duck.

         

In their defense, we must say there is a certain, “pronounced” aroma surrounding the subject, but we’ll leave it to others, including our devoted readers, to decide where it sits on the stink spectrum.  We have our own view, but far be it from us to to try to sway your olfactory observations.

We asked Dale if he had read the supposedly erroneous post, and he said no.  So Side, ever so interested in getting to the bottom of this matter, no matter how deep a hole that may require digging, suggested that Dale read the post, and then submit a rebuttal. We told him that if it was suitable for public consumption, we’d be happy to publish it.

He must still be working on it, because we haven’t heard from him since.  Some people just don’t understand the deadlines editors have to work to.

So let us make our case more specifically to you, using the BDC articles of incorporation  and BDC bylaws that we posted yesterday.

It seems pretty clear that BDC was created pursuant to Maine State Law as a Local Development Corporation, by direct action of the municipal officers of the municipality of Brunswick, which is itself a corporation.  Both Brunswick and the State of Maine are Governments, and we assert that the BDC is an instrumentality of government, and specifically of Brunswick municipal government.

So on this first glimpse, we’re going with ‘it looks like a duck.’  Even if the Statutory passage under which it was created has been repealed.  And even if the duck is keen on bottom feeding.

The Directors of the BDC are the Town Manager and the Finance Director (both ex officio); two Town Councilors appointed by the Town Council; and three ‘public directors’ from a list of candidates proposed by the first four aforementioned Directors.  So a clear majority of the Directors are municipal senior staff and town councilors, and the rest are appointed only with the recommendation of the foregoing and the approval of the town council.  In other words, town government has the controlling votes, and chooses the other voting Directors.

Not to mention this:

The Town of Brunswick, Maine, shall be the sole
member of the corporation with all rights and obligations of membership provided by the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws.

We’re no lawyer, of course, but we would argue the foregoing means the town has everything to do with the BDC, and that it has control of its actions.

                

Anybody see a duck walking with a very high step?  Bearing money?

Further, we point out that the funding that kicked off BDC operations was a loan from the town of Brunswick, which it has since repaid.  No matter, the funds that it has operated on since are the spawn of that municipal funding.  Furthermore, per the founding documents,

Upon the dissolution of the Corporation or the termination of it activities, the assets of the Corporation remaining after the payment of all its liabilities shall be distributed exclusively, either in cash or in kind, to its sole member, the Town of Brunswick.

As we see it then, the moneys that BDC lends or grants to its chosen beneficiaries are, for all intents and purposes, public monies.  If they aren’t, of course, they would have to be private monies, in which case we’d like to know who the private parties are that the monies belong to.  Maybe Dale knows, even if he isn’t saying.

Anybody see a duck quacking?

So there you have it; our take on things.  And since it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we’re sticking with our story that the BDC is an instrument of our municipality, and that it works its will with public monies.

Dale King may wish to argue otherwise in writing, and as we said, we’re willing to publish his offerings.

We’ll even go so far as to suggest that he could use this image to illustrate his argument:

    

We suspect it captures the way he and others of like mind want us to look at things.

Technorati Tags: Brunswick,BDC,Brunswick Taxi,ducks

(PS: if any readers sees reporting on the Brunswick Taxi – BDC relationship in the Forecaster, the Ostrich, or any other news media, be sure to let us know.  Thanks.)

“Top Ten Questions” Brunswick’s inquiring minds should want answered. On second thought, maybe not.

Questions, we have questions.  And we get questions as well.  It occurs to us that inquiring minds and interested students here in our perfect, richest little town in America would like answers to these questions.  So we’re throwing them out…………there.

Some of them might even stick to a wall somewhere, but we doubt anyone in the know or ‘in authority’ will pull any off the wall and provide answers.  Come to think of it, maybe we should have them turned into ‘visual art’ and use them to paper the new council chambers in the old McClellan building.

To assist you in comprehending their profundity, we’re grouping them into subject areas.

Brunswick Development Corporation/Brunswick Taxi

• Why didn’t Brunswick Taxi have to submit a written application to the BDC to receive its quarter million dollar totally forgivable ‘loan’?
• Does Brunswick Taxi’s consultant Scott Howard have any stake in the CNG Station planned for Brunswick Landing?  Could that possibly be why the BDC $247,000 sum includes $12,000 for CNG conversion to the taxi fleet?
• When will we find out how much Amtrak is paying Brunswick Taxi for crew transport services?  Especially since we have a quarter of a million dollars of pubic money invested in the company that holds the contract.
• Why didn’t Amtrak simply buy or lease a vehicle or two for the crews to use for self-transport?   They could have driven it up from Portland and placed it in an inexpensive garage, and then used it the next day for a return trip to Portland.  We think that would save well over $100,000 a year.
• How much was Scott Howard paid for his consulting role in obtaining the BDC ‘loan’ to Brunswick Taxi, and from where did the funds come?  The promissory note does not show any fund allocation to pay for his services.

      

• Is the BDC issuing appropriate IRS documents to BT to establish that a ‘forgivable loan’ is income?

        

Amtrak Downeaster & Concord Trailways

• When will the Brunswick Downtown Association and town officials herald Concord Trailways for their role in economic growth and vitality?

 

• What does the Amtrak Downeaster train connection to Brunswick offer that Concord Trailways buses do not?
• Why are locals so enamored with the Downeaster and its ongoing costs and higher fares, lesser service, and lack of flexibility as compared to the bus service?

Concord Trailways Schedule

Downeaster Brunswick Schedule

Downeaster Schedule

Schools/Budgets/Taxes

• School spending per student in Brunswick has grown in 10 years from less than $8,000 per student to more than $15,000 per student; what increase in educational value have we received for this doubling in cost?  What increases in achievement?
• Numerous local voices assert that Brunswick has excellent schools; what data is used to support this claim?  In other words, how do they know?
• Other voices state that people move to Brunswick because of  our schools; what data do they use to support this?  Have they determined why people move out of Brunswick?  And compared the two?
• How much will property taxes increase over the next five years on the basis of facts already known and the existing 5 year CIP?  Don’t forget to factor in the proposed outdoor pool at the Rec Center at Brunswick Landing, which will no doubt morph into an indoor year round pool.  What’s wrong with Coffin Pond?  And don’t forget cost growth at McClellan, which will probably continue for at least a year or two.  Oops….sorry; I forgot this is Cape Brunswick; if you don’t like the tax increases, you should move, as we were reminded by one member of the mommy mafia.

Town Council & Mr. Manager

• What are the real reasons Mr. Manager resigned, and received a sizable pay-off for doing so?

• Who knows the real facts behind the separation from employment by the town council, and when will they tell us?

• Does Mr. Manager have any possible business interests tied to the proposed Cooks Corner new road, or any other in-town development efforts that have arisen during his watch?
• Why isn’t the Town Council supporting constituents in opposing the Amtrak MLF evolution at the in-town Brunswick West site?

             

• What is the council’s “new direction?”  What was the “old direction?”
• Why did then Council Chair Suzan Wilson inflexibly reject our invitation to visit the proposed Brunswick West MLF site to personally experience the noise, vibration, and fumes of an idling Amtrak train set?

                   

• Why isn’t town councilor John “Johnny Protocols” Richardson, with his impeccable resume in economic and community development, vociferously advocating relocation of the MLF to Brunswick Landing or the Crooker Site at Cooks Corner to advance local, regional, and state multi-modal economic development, significantly reduce construction costs, and provide at least a chance for return on investment?

                       

OK, so it’s more than ten; but we started the idea with three!  So cut us slack like everyone cut the council and Mr. Manager when McClellan costs grew from $100,000 to well over $1 million, on the way to two million before long, we’d bet.

Not that it matters much around here.  We’ve got community pride to worry about, don’t you know?  And besides; it’s not costing the town anything.

It’s costing you.

Technorati Tags: Brunswick,questions,budgets,taxes,BDC,Amtrak,buses,Brunswick Taxi,council,Mr. Manager

Johnny on the Spot: JP comes to our rescue on BDC and the BTC

You all remember Johnny Protocols, shown here in one of his more well-known publicity photos with a kindred spirit:

Even DGiles probably knows that J.P. is now on the Brunswick Town Council, occupying the at large seat formerly held for many years by Joanne King.  The poetic justice in that reality remains to be addressed.

And even DGiles, as slender, young, and non-white as he apparently is, should know there has been a regular brouhaha locally over the Brunswick Development Corporation (BDC), and a completely forgivable quarter million dollar loan they gave to Brunswick Taxi, owned by members of Joanne King’s immediate family.  Or as we prefer to call it, a grant, which is what government calls a gift.

Clearly concerned about the massive ‘public confusion’ over the specifics of the BDC and it’s operation, Johnny seemingly took command of the subject at a BDC meeting held this week.  You can read about it here:

http://www.theforecaster.net/news/print/2013/09/19/brunswick-development-corp-considers-ethics-policy/173013

As we read it, we couldn’t help but notice a discrepancy or two, and perhaps a comment or two of J.P.’s that warrant a word from us.

For example:

Councilor John Richardson, one of two councilors now on the BDC board, said some of the proposed by-law changes, including the addition of a conflict-of-interest policy, were not a direct reaction to the recent criticism.

Richardson no doubt said this immediately after discussing the purchase of the Brooklyn Bridge by the BDC, in order to generate more revenue for simulating economic development in town.

Instead, he said, some of the changes have been in the making for months and, in some cases, years. The BDC's by-laws were last modified in 2010.

This is the same claim Council Chair Suzan Wilson made at the meeting on 3 September, arguing, in effect, that the Bylaws were in a state of constant review and change, even though they hadn’t been revised for more than three years.  Which leads us to believe that Wilson probably supported J.P.’s suggestion that the BDC purchase the Brooklyn Bridge.

"I think there has been a lot of confusion on the part of the public that has been driven by some personal and political agendas," he said after Wednesday meeting, "but largely, the public has remained somewhat confused about the role of the BDC, because the BDC has not done as good a job as it should in explaining its role, its mission and how it has improved the town of Brunswick."

Yeah, that’s it, Councilor.  If anyone knows anything about personal and political agendas, it’s you!  Meanwhile, to the extent your humble correspondent fed any public sense of confusion, our political aspirations and personal agenda are a matter of public record.  It may be a blank public record in this regard, but it is very public. 

If only J.P.’s were as public.  And of course, we can all agree that giving free vehicles to Brunswick Taxi, free money to Gelato Fiasco, and giving CEI a hell of a deal to move 55 jobs from another nearby town to ours is undeniably ‘improving’ Brunswick.

Some of the proposed changes include removing town Finance Director John Eldridge from the BDC board, adding another citizen member…

Call us perplexed as to why he had to identify who would be removed by name, rather than by office, which is the way the Bylaws deal with it.

Another proposed change would require the BDC to post advance notice of its meetings, with agendas posted to the town's website and BDC's proposed website.

Color us perplexed again; when we first read the Bylaws, we thought they skirted the issue of public notice of BDC meetings.  But again, Council Chair Wilson, at the 3 September meeting, was profuse in her assertions that the meetings are regularly ‘noticed.’

Richardson said the BDC is technically a nonprofit organization, and is considered a public-private partnership because of its board make-up, which consists of two ex-officio town staff members, two Town Councilors and three citizens.

Color us skeptical, but we’re confident the first version of this article we saw mentioned ‘four citizens,’ for a board total of eight, even though the Bylaws clearly say seven total.  But as pot-shooter DGiles will tell you, old fat white guys don’t know nothing.

Oops…then there’s this:

"It's very difficult to state to the public that with four public members, two town employees and two elected officials, that this doesn't have some sort of connection to the town," Richardson said. "It does. (But) you almost have to be a lawyer to understand ... that (BDC's current fund balance) isn't town money."

So that’s where we saw the expert opinion…from Johnny Protocols himself, a member of the board, and as it turns out, ‘a lawyer.’  Apparently, you have to be a lawyer to understand the BDC fund balance, even if being a lawyer means you can’t understand the
Bylaws.

So in case he needs a refresher, here’s the relevant passage from the Bylaws:

Section 2.3 Directors. The Board of Directors shall be comprised of seven (7) members. The persons holding the Town of Brunswick positions of Town Manager and Finance Director shall be ex-officio directors of the Board of Directors so long as they remain in those positions. The Town Council of Brunswick shall appoint two (2) members of the Town Council as Town Council directors, whose terms shall expire annually on December 31st. The Town Council shall appoint three (3) public directors, from a list proposed by the ex-officio and Town Council directors. Each of the public directors shall have demonstrated education or experience, as evaluated by the ex-officio and Town Council directors, in one of the following areas: law, finance, accounting, business development, or banking. Public directors’ terms shall expire on December
31st. The initial terms of the public directors shall be one year, two years, and three years, on a staggered basis. Thereafter, such public directors shall be appointed for three-year
terms. No Town Council director or public director of the Board of Directors shall serve in any capacity on any other economic development corporation or board serving residents or businesses of Brunswick.   Section 2.3 Directors - Amended March 10, 2010

(above emphasis ours)

You know, it’s almost like you have to be a lawyer to figure out what J.P. is saying, what he wants to say, what he means to say, and what he wants us to think he is saying.

“We’re just saying,” that is.

Technorati Tags: Brunswick,BDC,Johnny Protocols

Community Ethics: Brunswick Development Corporation Style

We shouldn’t have to remind you of the sordid goings on over the last year as the Brunswick Development Corporation doled out public monies to the very well connected and some who were less well connected.  If you’re feeling in the mood for a modicum of self-flagellation, you can scan this prior post compilation to get back up to speed.

As you do, you’ll see we assured there was nothing untoward going on at BDC; just public servants serving the public, in a manner of speaking.  We were also told that the BDC board had been working on by-law revisions since well before they made news with the Brunswick Taxi $247,000 grant, so the public interest in such was coincidental, and frankly, tardy.  The public kerfuffle was driven by “a political agenda” according to Councilor John (Mr. Speaker) “Johnny Protocols” Richardson, the Cape’s own politically driven agenda laureate.

Well, lucky us; the BDC has adopted a new set of operating guidelines, as reported in this article just before Christmas.  (When you read the article, be sure as well to read the reader comment below it by “Queenie42,” which sets a damn fine example of being pithy.)

As you might expect, Johnny P. was appropriately laudatory of the effort, and once again chided ‘some people’ for criticizing rather than praising the BDC’s work.  No-one is prouder of his humility than Richardson, and it’s always refreshing to see such modesty and restraint on the part of our public ‘servants.’

Here are the highlights of the new policy reported in the article:

The code of ethics policy requires BDC board members to:

• "Represent the interest of all people," including business owners and property owners;

• Not use the organization for their own personal advantage;

• "Do nothing to violate the trust" of the people they serve;

• Never use BDC to promote their own "partisan politics, religious matters or positions on any issue not in conformity" with BDC's policies;

• And never accept gifts from businesses involved with BDC.

We don’t know about you, but to us, these are about as broad and ambiguous as saying “go forth, do good, and prosper.”  And we’re confident that there’s enough wiggle room in the above so that even a modestly competent lawyer could help a client drive a 14 passenger van sideways through the holes in the language.  If they can’t find a Mack Truck nearby, that is.

Come to think of it, does anyone know if Brunswick Taxi has complied with all the conditions in its promissory note?  They read in part as follows:

e.  Work with Brunswick Downtown Association / Town of Brunswick for marketing and branding, not limited to painting the Brunswick logo on the back of the taxis; and purchasing an annual advertisement at the Visitors Center for three (3) years from the date of this Promissory Note.

f.  Purchase of the following vehicles and equipment, and provide proof of purchase:

• $150,000 - Purchase 6 new energy efficient taxi-cab vehicles to drastically reduce maintenance and repair costs, save and increase business and significantly improve the company’s and the town’s images.

• $30,000 – Purchase one new energy efficient handicap accessible minivan to increase revenues by expanding the services to the handicapped, seniors and educational and medical institutions.

• $45,000 - Purchase a new 14 passenger van to retain business and to meet the projected increase in corporate and institutional demand from Bowdoin College, Mid Coast and Parkview hospitals, the Brunswick Transportation Center and Brunswick Landing.

• $10,000 – Add GPS systems to all taxi-cab and van vehicles to improve efficiency, safety and tracking capabilities.

• $12,000 - Purchase compressed natural gas conversion kits for all taxi-cab vehicles to reduce emissions and to reduce operating costs.

We are no official authority on the matter, but so far, we think we’ve seen at least three of the Ford transit vans in the Brunswick Taxi paint theme, and a 14 passenger van as well.  The other van we’ve seen, a ‘mini-van’, does not appear to be handicap accessible (wheelchair ramp), and as we recall, was in their roster before the BDC deal was put in place.  But we’d have to check on that.

The funny thing is that as we read the promissory note, Brunswick Taxi has until August 1, 2016 to comply with the above obligations, which means they aren’t exactly under a lot of pressure to comply.  Not that this would allow for any mischief, since town authorities are surely keeping close tabs on the whole affair.  The little people have a short attention span and memory, but thank goodness, the public enterprise never, ever forgets to follow through.

Don’t you feel better now, Shirley?  Coupled with the ‘new directions’ narrative emanating from the town council, the public interest and public trust should be more secure than the Social Security Trust Fund.

We’ll close with this thought for today:

"It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters " - Daniel Webster

Technorati Tags: BDC,Brunswick Taxi,ethics

BTW re: BTC and BDC*

At the council meeting of last Tuesday, September 3rd, the subject of the town lending money to the Brunswick Development Corporation arose.  As we recall, it was a question from a resident.  The meeting, by the way, is still not viewable to us ‘on demand.’

Council Chair- (person, woman, man; take your pick based on your own PC view) Suzan Wilson responded with her trademark good humor, saying something like ‘the town doesn’t have any money to lend, ha ha; I wish we did…that would be nice.’

Apparently Chair Wilson is not particularly familiar with the state of town finances.  You can update yourself by looking at page 1 of this document, which shows as page 5 of the pdf file itself.

You’ll notice that the town is sitting on $18 million in ‘reserve funds,’ $9 million of which is ‘unassigned.’  Presumably, the reserve funds are loaned, for example, to banks or other institutions that pay us interest for the use of said assets.

Rest assured that we’re not advocating the town make funds available to simulate economic development via the latest ‘new thing.’  Even if it involves converting a vacant local property into a jelly bean manufacturing facility.

But we wouldn’t mind in the least if the leader of our local governing body showed a bit more command of the details of bylaws, budgets, and other assorted administrivia of day to day guidance of Cape Brunswick.

Like we’ve said before, life is one big learning experience, and then you die.

* For the uninitiated, this means “By the way regarding Brunswick Town Council and Brunswick Development Corporation.”

Technorati Tags: Brunswick,BDC,town council

Pigeon Feeding, Cape Brunswick Style

                   

Somebody somewhere once said “feed the pigeons, and you’ll get more pigeons.”  It’s pretty hard to deny the truth of that assertion.  Do it often enough, and you might even find some goats get into the picture.

     

Which brings us to the latest news about the Brunswick Development Corporation.

 

We’re talking, of course, about this recent report in The Forecaster:

BRUNSWICK — When the Brunswick Development Corp. received four funding proposals last month that exceeded the amount of cash it has in the bank, its directors had to take a step back to think about the bigger picture.

After holding a strategic planning session on Monday, BDC's board decided to change how it lends and grants money to nonprofit organizations and businesses, Linda Smith, the town's business development manager said.

From now on, BDC will focus its efforts in two ways: by offering grants to nonprofits for projects that have a community benefit, and by offering small loans to for-profit businesses, but only in tandem with other lending institutions.

BDC's board also unanimously voted to no longer provide grants or loans that could turn into grants to businesses, after a motion was made by Vincent DiCara, a new citizen board member who had offered the BDC advice last year after it lent an unprecedented and controversial loan to a business.

We don’t know Vincent DiCara, but we think we like his thinking.  It seems to us, reactionaries that we are here at Side, that feeding Brunswick pigeons has led to a pigeon feeding frenzy.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Unless, of course, it leads to some pigeons getting fatter than all the other pigeons.

                  

And they can’t get by unless the rest of us feed them.  Most pigeons learn they have to fend for themselves, and find a way to do so.

Other pigeons think they have a higher rank in the pigeon community, and that this accords them greater benefit.  Especially if they’ve had the authority to influence the rate at which pigeon food is extracted from the other bird species in the area.

Technorati Tags: Brunswick Development Corp,Brunswick