It is not Local Charters that must Align with State Law, but State Law which must Align with the Maine Constitution
Complacency breeds neglect. Neglect becomes enslavement
All are welcome to join the family for a reception to celebrate Elise’s life to be held Thursday, June 15, from 4-6 p.m. at the Studio 53 Fine Art Gallery, 53 Townsend Ave in Boothbay Harbor.
This year, relative to my own size and momentum, I have been seeing a lot of growth in subscribers and open rates for this newsletter.
Here you see where I was at when 2023 opened (before the new dashboard):
In the almost first five and a half months of 2023 I have increased my subscribers by about 33.3 %.and the open rate has increased by almost 20%. In the last thirty days views increased by 34% over the previous thirty days.
It’s fair to say my newsletter is on a growth trajectory.
This is where I was at in January of 2022
I started my Substack newsletter with my Andersen Design Mailing list, Since the nature of my situation had changed so did the subject matter of my newsletter and so it was expected that there would be unsubscribers as well as new subscriptions and that combination contributed to the small increase in my subscriber base.
The reason I am able to grow my subscriber base is because this newsletter is a prioritized dedicated activity. It is a dedicated activity because I need to do it for my own psychological wellbeing in a world where what is valuable, sensible, consistent with our Constitution and systemically well-founded is being aggressively erased by powerful public-private partnerships that use the fourth estate to market their self-interests to the public, and to intentionally drive out other perspectives.
When I first started talking about the issues in the Boothbay Register. Members of boards stepped in to advocate that there is only one valid forum to have a conversation about public issues - meetings conducted by the boards. Everywhere our lives are controlled by boards that assume authority mirroring the private corporate hierarchical order, in which employees serve the interests of the corporation but the ideal of a democratic form of government is embodied in the phrase “by the people and for the people”..
The narrative unfolding through this newsletter enlightens the constitutional rule of law, particularly the Home Rule Amendment and Article IV Part Third, Sections 13 and 14 of the Maine Constitution, which have been violated over and over again since the centralized economy of Maine was deemed into existence by the Maine Legislature in 1976., and ever since the wealth divide expanded unabatedly.
In the very recent past Maine legislative enactments have made large advances in infringing on both the home rule amendment and sections 13 and 14. while the public attitude is complacent. The Maine Constitution and political philosophy need to be brought back into the public narrative. Right now, here in Maine I am a loner narrator as far as I can see but it has to start with one voice and I hope that just speaking thoughts out loud and casting them into the wind will find its way into a whirlwind of voices.
I give Selectman Steve Lewis credit for engaging in a public forum, briefly, but he made unsupported accusations that I was misinformed and did not respond when I backed up what I said.
Steve Lewis Mackenziella 5 months ago
The school charter is almost 70 years old. It dealt with many things that were outdated. The new one takes out outdated language and makes it readable. (Language is a signifier, not the thing signified, comment by author) Not sure if you have ever seen the current one, it is awful to say the least. The charter only deals with how the school is setup and how each town pays. (That’s a choice- not a mandate. The idea that the charter should be no more than a budget is the outdated part- comment by author) We all (select boards and CSD) agree that all big expenditures and budgets should be brought to the voters by ballot in each town to be voted on, not in the school gym by a handful of people. Now I hated to see town meeting go away on the town level but the truth of the matter is nobody came. The last few town meetings we had in Boothbay less than 50 people attended. By changing to referendum we get 400-600 people voting on our budget, which is a much better sample size. Is it ideal? No, I do miss town meeting, giving people the chance to ask questions.
As far as the housing…. I think you are off base on your assessment. Rather than get into a typing argument I prefer to speak in person. Anytime you want info, you know where i work.
…. What I meant was a lot of what you keep repeating I believe is false. Rather than keep repeating it, ask questions in the proper setting, not in the comment section. You can get most info right from the town office, including a copy of the new proposed charter. (emphasis by author)
Like I said earlier, I don’t normally comment on here because online commenting doesn’t usually end well, something I’m sure you would agree. (No! online is on the record! Commenting in board led meetings doesn’t end well - see the end result of open legislative hearing on the Boothbay Town Charter. comment by author!)
Once all the past Town charters were on the school website but since the boards decided to repeal and replace the school charter, that has been taken down. Outside of newspeak, language hasn’t changed significantly since 1953. i would have noticed if the language was so outdated as to be unreadable.
The only substance in the replacement charter other than that it will “align with state law” is the budget process and that is why when the boards talked about the charter, they talked only about the budget process, in the manner of low-level bureaucrats in the state corporate hierarchy rather than leaders of a sovereign Town in relation to the state as the state is in relationship to the federal government.
The replacement school charter was enacted by the Maine Legislature on June 12. The text online does not appear to have been amended from what the boards originally submitted, even the 10-year referendum schedule that Bruce MacDonald protested because it does not align with state law, remains unchanged.
Bruce MacDonalds testimony on the replacement school charter
If you look at Section 6, you will see that it proposes a 10 year budget validation cycle. This is in direct contradiction of Maine State Law which requires a three-year cycle for a school budget validation procedure. If you send this bill, as written, with Section 6 included, to the the full Legislature for their approval, you will be supporting a provision which will essentially disenfranchise the citizens of Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor from the three year cycle for the format of budget approval which is available to citizens of all other school districts under the current provisions of Title 20-A, Part 2, Chapter 103-A, Subchapter 4, paragraph 1486
CORRECTION! Bruce McDonald’s Amendment was accepted. I did not realize at the time I wrote this that Amendments are not reflected din the Bill Text
I advocated in my written testimony that the words “align with state law” should be struck out as they implicate that we are relinquishing our home rule authority but my amendment recommendation was given no voice in the work session where I was not allowed to participate in my status as a mere inhabitant of the municipality. This is consistent with my typical experience of attending meetings.
This school charter should be constitutionally challenged as a violation of the home rule amendment of the Maine Constitution, particularly if it is confirmed that the new school system will be part of the Maine Space Corporation educational program. The chartering the Space Corporation is arguably a violation of Article IV Part Third Sections 13 and 14.
Maine Constitution, Article IV, Part Third
Section 13. Special legislation. The Legislature shall, from time to time, provide, as far as practicable, by general laws, for all matters usually appertaining to special or private legislation.
Section 14. Corporations, formed under general laws. Corporations shall be formed under general laws, and shall not be created by special Acts of the Legislature, except for municipal purposes, and in cases where the objects of the corporation cannot otherwise be attained; and, however formed, they shall forever be subject to the general laws of the State.
Sections 12 and 14 respect the separation of power between the state and the private sector. As the state chartered one corporation after another and devised ways to transform municipalities into subsidiary corporations of itself, no one challenged their constitutional authority to do so. Now we have a corporate state that participates in industrial sector that it should be regulating.
Steve Lewis Mackenziella 5 months ago
Where do you get such BS info? The TIF expansion is to provide sewer/water to the property. It will spend approx 15-20% of TIF revenues, hardly the lion’s share. 40% public dime? There are some grants being used but most of the funding is coming from private donations. The idea of generating no tax revenue is also not true. They are a not for profit until the units sell, which will be 100% taxable at that point. The owners will become taxpayers. This small development will use 15% municipal services??? Again, not sure how you come up with that number.
I also see you comment all the time about the school charter. About everything you say is false. The new “charter” will require public vote in each town. Isn’t that the best option? Have you ever been to a school budget meeting? There is very little public participation except school staff there to vote, is that how you think it should be? The towns want the most people possible to vote for the biggest budget number in our budgets. One of the most go to for your talking points is the “Maine Constitution”, doesn’t that require a public vote and if so, should the school budget as well?
If you had been paying attention to any of the meetings you would know all this, maybe it’s just easier to complain from the sidelines?
I normally just scroll over these comments for a chuckle or two but your continued misinformation is just getting old.
I heard through the grape vine that someone wanted to invest in property at the Industrial Park but didn’t do so when they found out that there was no sewage and water supply to the property. This might explain why the Industrial Park is mostly storage units.
Mr. Lewis seems to question my 40% reference that I quoted from this selectmen presentation given by the BRDC which specifically identifies the target as 40% grants and 60% donations, which Mr. Lewis implied is disinformation. He goes on to say “There are some grants being used but most of the funding is coming from private donations.” True, “most” being quoted in the report at 60% donations, as I stated.
Mr. Lewis seems very confident that the owners will become taxpayers once the units sell but he does not give a reason for his confidence. I took a brief look at LAWS RELATING TO PROPERTY TAXATION Volume 1 published by the Maine government. It begins by laying emphasis on parts of the Maine Constitution, including the home rule amendment, which our legislative representatives, both those elected (the public part of our government) and those unelected (the private part of our government) infringed upon when they wrote LD 2003-HP.1489
The property tax laws say this
For the purpose of establishing the valuation of unimproved acreage in excess of an improved house lot, contiguous parcels and parcels divided by road, powerline or right-of-way may be valued as one parcel when each parcel is 5 or more acres; the owner gives written consent to the assessor
to value the parcels as one parcel; and the owner certifies that the parcels are not held for sale and are not subdivision lots. source (emphasis by author)
You can see the law is clearly written in terms of land acreage and not buildings so according to the above the BRDC is the owner of a single parcel of acreage on which property taxes are accessed. There are no parcels or subdivisions. BRDC owns all of the acreage. If this law governs the identity of the property-taxable owner, it will always be the BRDC, even if the corporation sells every single unit to a private owner because the BRDC will retain ownership of all the acreage until it sells it as a single parcel to another owner, so we have been told by Ms. Cooperider.
Of course, there might be other laws that interact with the above but Mr. Lewis did not cite anything to support his assertion that it is the houses that property tax is collected on and not acreage.
When Desiree Scorcia, a member of the audience, asked if there was a way to get a list of other projects to see how they have gone and how they stand now. Erin answered chomhousinq.org which is identified on its parent corporation Boothbay Selectmen Town Meeting Report, September 2022
CEI’s 2021 audit, reports CHOM was transferred valued at $1,002,820.00, while Ms. Cooperrider’s bio for New Heights Group reports that she served 17 years as “Development Director for CHOM, a statewide affordable housing developer, helping to grow the organization’s asset base from $5 million to more than $100 million using low-income housing tax credits, state and federal historic tax credits, grants, loans, and private equity.”
BRDC will continue as landowner beyond the buildout and current leadership because of investment in land and infrastructure, said Cooperrider. Homes and rentals will be subject to a homeowners association which will have some control over the property and BRDC control through deed restrictions, purchase and resale oversight and other mechanisms now under investigation; apartments will be managed by a professional company, she said. source
The source for this quote is an article in the Boothbay Register titled Selectmen get housing development presentation. I couldn’t find the article using the Boothbay Register search function but I had it in an article that I published in this newsletter. and you can also find it by typing the title in a Google search bar.
Who are the homeowners in the home-owners association? We have only been informed for certain that the BRDC will sell eight of the homes to its inhabitants. Are the other homeowner’s equity investors whose ownership is subsidized by the public investment, a common practice in state corporate welfare deals in which investors get ownership and the public gets the trickle-down economy which has been disproven by over half a century of continual expansion of the wealth divide.
Today, as I was composing this post, it was announced that the BRDC got its 501 C3 status but at the time Mr. Lewis wrote his comments, the BRDC did not have that status required to collect tax deductible contributions unless it was fiscally sponsored but if it was, no one is saying. If the BRDC was collecting “donations’ prior to receiving its 501 3C status, it might have been using “conditional gifts” which is just contemporary language for “pay to play” in which, by state law, there are no limitations on the terms a “donor” can make. “Conditional” means the donor is getting something in return but the public is not necessarily entitled to know what that is. There is plenty of time and also the means provided by state law to set up an equity ownership elite, hidden from public view, before the corporation acquires 501 3C status that permits tax deductible donations and that is used as the face of the corporation. We don’t know because the corporation is allowed to operate in such secrecy that the selectmen do not even ask for the identities of the board members. So I can only offer speculation, which I repeatedly identify as speculation about a murky area not open to public view.
One can wonder if in contemporary language equity investor and donors are interchangeable terms used by non-profits taking donations before they have 501 C3 status.
Information is provided to the selectmen in Exhibit A where the address is BRDC, c/o The New Height Group, where Ms. Cooperrider has been a principal since 2015. Erin Cooperrider’s bio for New Height Group reports that she served 17 years as “Development Director for CHOM, a statewide affordable housing developer, helping to grow the organization’s asset base from $5 million to more than $100 million using low-income housing tax credits, state and federal historic tax credits, grants, loans, and private equity.” (Emphasis mine)
And what happened to the other 99 million dollars? The selectmen were not asking the Boothbay Regional Development Cabal any questions which should be their job but they behaved as if they had been uploaded into the state corporation with its powerful wealth redistribution functions, long, long, ago. The protocol is don’t ask questions of the higher-ups in the hegemonic order of the public-private government.
Selectman Steve Lewis: I also see you comment all the time about the school charter. About everything you say is false. The new “charter” will require public vote in each town. Isn’t that the best option? Have you ever been to a school budget meeting? There is very little public participation except school staff there to vote, is that how you think it should be? (emphasis mine)
Here Steve Lewis is conflating the school charter with the budget process which is governed by the school charter, but the school charter can include anything that the inhabitants of the school charter want it to cover, provided it can be approved by the Maine Legislature, which is its own special interest corporation that has reinvented our public educational system as its own instrument. What he is talking about is that the school charter includes a budget process that requires a public referendum- but the charter itself was never put through a public referendum. Mr. Lewis acts as if he does not understand the distinction between the charter and the budget process, conveniently. Are we to believe it?
If Article IV Part Third Sections 13 and 14 of the Maine Constitution had not been so flagrantly violated in the years since 1986 when the Maine Legislature deemed that centrally managing the economy is an “essential government function”, the state might not have been able to evolve into the public-private industrial complex that it is today.
Back then there was no internet to expand opportunities for other narratives to emerge such as I am unfolding in this newsletter.
Today blogging has gone mainstream. By viral standards my newsletter is a tiny blip but from my own perspective it is on a trajectory of steady growth. I passed the 2000 goal bar as I was composing this post:
The $612.00 figure does not represent 30 days of income. It is the amount of income I have made since I started this newsletter on Substack and more accurately, the amount of income I have made since I started blogging.
But the newsletter is also a vehicle for making connections. Through this newsletter that
I became a peer reviewer for Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, located in Germany.
I became fiscally sponsored by The Field, located in NYC (I just noticed that I received my first donation through The Field on May 15 from Deborah Todte. Thank You Deborah Todte ,and also thanks to John and Lynn Seitzer for sending a check for my project in the mail, all local supporters!, And as I am composing this post a third donation came in from Judith Anderson, Thank you all, It not only helps finically but it is very encouraging!).
I was invited to be on the UpCarta, a knowledge sharing platform in Turkey, and
on TealFeed, a knowledge sharing platform based in India.
Through Tealfeed I was introduced to Marquee Equity, and Indian investment firm that responded to my ideas about reinventing Andersen Design as a network of independent slip-casting studios. This is the firm I would like to hire to help me find further investors.
Through contacts made by publishing this newsletter, I have developed a system that can produce an income and advance my mission but I am only one person and so I cannot take advantage of that system as I would be able to do if I had a team. I prioritize writing so I don’t have time for self-promotion or researching and applying for grants and running a conventional Kickstarter projectThis newsletter is funded by paid subscriptions and I hope one day by advertising. My goal is that it will carry its own weight someday soon.