CAMDEN — At a regularly scheduled July 7 meeting, the Camden Select Board heard comments concerning the agreement that ends employment of current Town Manager Audra Caler; however, because of its placement in a consent agenda and grouped with other housekeeping municipal business, there was no vote on the matter. 

Public opinion, on the other hand, was plentiful during the public comment period, with multiple attending citizens standing at the podium asking the Select Board to reconsider its decision and rethink the agreement before them.

They critiqued the process and questioned motives of some Select Board members, as well as the timing of the town manager contract consideration. And, they referenced a lack of transparency.

Select Board Chair Chris Nolan said at the outset of the July 7 meeting that he knew there were citizens present who wanted to speak about items on the consent agenda.

"Tonight we will go ahead and allow that as usual during nonagenda items [during the public comment period]," said Nolan.

He added: "just keep your comments to two to three minutes, and unfortunately, we are unable to respond to those but we appreciate your comments."

He clarified that the Select Board would not move the consent agenda item concerning the Caler agreement off of the consent agenda and onto the action agenda section; therefore, he said, the comments would be made during the public comment period on nonagenda items.

"The consent item is going to stay where it is," said Nolan. "As a result, since we have people here who are interested in speaking to it, you are welcome to speak to it."

Camden resident Anita Brosius-Scott said during the public comment period that she was disappointed in the meeting's agenda-setting practice.

"I am particularly surprised, actually very surprised, and concerned that you chose not to move this particular issue that we're talking about off the consent agenda," she said. "Putting it here as public comment period means that you don't have to respond, and you don't have to discuss it."

Camden's Acting Town Manager Jodi Hanson explained July 8 that the consent agenda was approved as a concept by the Camden Select Board when it adopted its bylaws in 2022 (see attached PDF). 

"While the bylaws do not specify the procedure for acting on the consent agenda, the Board's practice has been that if there are no objections to any of the items, the consent agenda is declared adopted without discussion or a formal vote," said Hanson.

She added: "The consent agenda is intended for routine housekeeping matters, such as license renewals, road closures for events, block parties, confirmation of Library Board of Directors appointments, Village Green applications, and other routine items that typically do not require discussion. We follow the same general approach as Ellsworth and Lewiston. 

Concerning the lack of a board vote on the Caler-Camden agreement, Hanson said: "The Chair at that time declared that a separate vote was not necessary for the consent agenda as a whole if no items were removed, and the other Board members were in agreement. However, any item pulled from the consent agenda for further discussion is considered separately and may require a vote.

"The Charter does not dictate how Select Board meetings are conducted or how the meeting agenda is organized."

Citizens speak

Several citizens urged the Select Board to rework the agreement and have Caler remain on her job for a probationary year to work with the current Select Board. And, they questioned the use of the consent agenda for the topic's discussion.

The memorandum of agreement had been grouped on the July 7 meeting agenda with the, "Approval of renewal victualer & lodging licenses: 8 Bells, Camden Maine Stay Inn, Captain Swift Inn and Towne Motel" and, "Confirm and ratify Memorandum of Employment Agreement with Town Manager, Audra Caler".

When it came time to consider the consent agenda, there was a brief pause, and Chair Chris Nolan and board member Chrisso Rheault agreed almost simultaneously. 

"Just move on," said Rheault.

"We just move on," agreed Nolan.

A few minutes later, Camden resident Geoff Scott asked, "Don't you vote on the consent agenda?"

"No," said Nolan. "There is no need for a vote."

Scott, who had run for a seat on the Select Board at June Town Meeting, but was not elected, said he felt railroaded by the Select Board. Stephanie Smith, another Camden resident, said she felt blindsided by the Select Board and was discouraged by the leadership.

Judy Gove said the decision was ill advised and questioned whether there was an agenda by Select Board members. 

Wendy Andresen countered, saying she supported the Select Board's decision, adding that she had spoken, "to many people who have said, 'we really need a new town manager' and, 'find someone more in keeping with who we want, we want to be heard more.'"

Stephanie French, and former Select Board member, cautioned that the Select Board was bound legally not to discuss personnel matters.

Stephen Gold, Camden citizen, said: "I can only assume that basically Audra has been fired. My feeling is that basically she has been fired. I have serious questions about memo of agreement."

Tony Grassi said he was concerned about the Montgomery Dam removal, as well as Caler's departure.

"I was horrified by the lack of transparency," he said. "I think it was disingenuous, and I think you [speaking to Nolan] and Bobbi Oxton Blake knew you were going do this, and you never told the public that that was your plan when we had an election. I think that's abhorrent."

Camden Select Board member Susan Dorr herself took to the podium to say that she regretted, "where we are right now." Dorr said, "I want more than anything for Audra to continue on," adding: "I disagree with this action taken by the board. I hope we can turn this around."

Camden resident Deb Chapman said: "I know, in the memorandum there were things, comments made about Audra, about her performance. And so, to people who think this is a good decision, I have one question. What was wrong? A change was needed. Why?"

Whether or not Gold is right, and that Caler was fired, may not be known, at least for six years. That is because the agreement approved July 7 and signed by Nolan and Caler on June 26 contains a gag order on comments that could be construed as derogatory on various parties for six years after Dec. 31, 2026. (Read Camden Select Board to discuss Town Manager Dec. 31 'separation of employment' agreement for document details).

"Audra Caler and the Town of Camden, for itself and on behalf of its elected officers, and employees, with regard to Audra Caler and her employment with the Town of Camden and her service to the Town of Camden, expressly acknowledge, agree, and covenant that they will not make any statements, comments, or communications that constitute disparagement of one another or that many be considered to be derogatory or or detrimental to the good name or business reputation of one another."

And whether or not Caler wanted to remain as Town Manager, as she has been since 2017, is not verified, although Geoff Scott said at the July 7 meeting that he had spoken with Caler, and he said she gave him permission to say she wanted to continue as town manager. Caler has declined to comment.

The turmoil over town manager leadership in Camden began just prior to the June 9 annual Town Meeting.

Prior to the June 9 annual Town Meeting, the Select Board discussed when to schedule the conversation about renewal of the Town Manager's contract, which expired June 30. Board members decided to wait until after June Town Meeting Select Board elections to take up the contract conversation. There was no further mention of that action, although former Select Board Chair Susan Dorr said july 7 

On June 9, Camden reelected Chris Nolan to the Select Board, as well as Bobbi Oxton Blake for her first three-year term to the board. They joined board members Susan Dorr, Chrisso Rheault and Ken Gross.

The Select Board held an executive session at the June 16 meeting and likewise defined it as a personnel matter. The board then held a special meeting June 23 with an agenda that addressed several items, including a discussion about the interview process for a new Camden Police Chief, and the possible appointment of a municipal employee to, "to perform the duties of the Manager until their return pursuant to Section 3.02 of the Town Charter."

The agenda also included two executive sessions, one concerning a personnel matter, the other, to talk with the town attorney.

"Based on Audra’s contract in the packet, the train has already left the station on this decision, that the Select Board has already reached a decision on removing the Town Manager," he said. "You, the Select Board, have done so without any community input."

Scott continued, "And I’d like to point out that neither of the two newly elected members of the Select Board ran on a platform of removing the Town Manager."

He said that Chair Chris Nolan and Bobbi Oxton Blake, "ran on keeping the police force local and getting rid of paid parking … and … importantly keeping an open door and listening to the public: they ran on greater transparency. To that point, there have been 2 or 3 executive sessions where, I assume, the discussions occurred to develop the agreement that is included in this week’s SB packet, giving 6 months’ notice to the Town Manager. So the community has had less than a week to respond. I, for one, feel railroaded by this Board on this consequential decision.

 "Based on Audra’s contract in the packet, the train has already left the station on this decision, that the Select Board has already reached a decision on removing the Town Manager. You, the Select Board, have done so without any community input. It may be that the Select Board members who felt like they were at the ‘kid’s table' now feel empowered to make changes. I think this is the wrong change to make."

Citizen Comments

Geoff Scott

Based on Audra’s contract in the packet, the train has already left the station on this decision, that the SB has already reached a decision on removing the Town Manager. You, the SB, have done so without any community input. It may be that the SB members who felt like they were at the ‘kid’s table” now feel empowered to make changes. I think this is the wrong change to make. 

And I’d like to point out that neither of the two newly elected members of the SB ran on a platform of removing the Town Manager. They both ran on keeping the police force local and getting rid of paid parking … and … importantly keeping an open door and listening to the public: they ran on greater transparency. To that point, there have been 2 or 3 executive sessions where, I assume, the discussions occurred to develop the agreement that is included in this week’s SB packet, giving 6 months’ notice to the Town Manager. So the community has had less than a week to respond. I, for one, feel railroaded by this Board on this consequential decision.

I’m hoping you all read Tom Hedstrom’s response published in the PenBay pilot. It was an excellent letter, well written. Tom served on the Select Board for three years, 2022-2025.

Tom spoke out strongly against removing Audra. His reasons for keeping Audra in her position were well presented and thought out. I’m super tempted to read his entire letter to get it in the Select Board record.

Some of his main points: Audra was always prepared, she cares, works hard, studies the issues, understands the options, presents the facts for the SB to decide, makes sure the work gets done after decisions are made. Audra is experienced and capable. Parting ways with Audra Caler is a mistake. And one last point: What message will the action of firing Audra have on our ability to attract the next Town Manager? 

I want to remind everyone here that all the decisions in the past year, the past 3 years, the past 10 years, all the decisions were made and supported by the Select Board. Yes, they weren’t unanimous decisions, but they were SB decisions. They were not Town Manager decisions. So if you disagreed with the decisions, look to the Select Board to complain to. Vote new members in. That’s the solution, not releasing a competent Town Manager. 

Chris and Bobbi ran on a platform that said they wanted to hear from the community. So here I am. Here’s Tom Hedstrom. I’ve heard from dozens of people this week and none of them agree with this decision. I’m happy to supply their names. 

So what to do?

This is the 3rd SB meeting since the vote, so you, the SB need to make a decision. Renew, or not. I encourage you to consider a third option – renew Audra’s contract for a year – you could consider it a probationary year. As part of that probation, as good managers, you, the SB should share with her the issues you have with her performance. And I believe you should share those issues with the community. Make the discussion transparent, as you have promised, not behind closed doors. Then in the fall add an advisory question on the ballot asking for the community to weigh in on her performance. And as part of that advisory question, educate the public about what you, the current members of the SB are so upset about with Audra’s performance. 

I’ll close with the same lines Tom Hedstrom used in his  letter to the editor: There is an old Joni Mitchell line: “You don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone.”  Camden had a mature, experienced, steady, educated, and dedicated Town Manager in Audra Caler.  I saw that firsthand.  Camden will be very fortunate to find someone as good again.

Stephanie Smith

I've worked with Audra. I was on the Conservation Commission. And I must admit, there were times I did not agree with some of her positions, but I have to say she was professional. She listened, and when I read Tom Hedstrom's letter, that's when I learned, and felt blindsided, that somehow our town is turning 360 degrees without many of us being aware of what's happening.

I hope you all heed the messages in Tom's letter. I worry about the impact on the employees that were loyal to Audra. And I think it's going to be very difficult finding a town manager who will have the skills that our town needs. And there is no town manager that's immune from criticism. There's no select board person who's not immune from criticism. Everybody makes their mistakes, everybody moves on. I'm very discouraged and concerned about the future leadership.

Judy Gove

I just want to say thank you all for serving as select board people. It's an important job for our community, and not an easy one, I'm sure. Nor is the town manager's job easy.

And I want to take this opportunity, one, to echo what Geoff, to echo Tom Hedstrom's letter in the Pen Bay Pilot, and to express my appreciation for Audra. And for her leadership, for her fair mindedness, her professionalism over the past 10 years, guiding this town and working with the Select Board, and the various departments in town.

I don't have a lengthy speech prepared, but I just wanted to express that appreciation and say that I feel the new configuration of the Select Board acted hastily in this decision.not to renew Audra's contract, and I believe it is ill advised.

I like Jeff's idea of providing a period of time to work together as a Select Board with the town manager before making big changes like this. I echo this lady's Smith's] remarks that this has not been transparent, has taken us by surprise, although I feel that there must have been an agenda to have it happen so rapidly. And I think it's a shame.

So I, too, am concerned. This is a wonderful town. It is a special place to live. And we need to work together and find the best solutions, and not make hasty decisions that may not be in the best interest.

Also, it would be very hard to replace somebody with her professionalism, her innovative ideas.

Ben Ellison

I agree with everybody who's spoken already, strongly. I was pleased with the emphasis you and Bobbi put on transparency in your campaign, and really disappointed how it's been working out. Particularly what got me was reading the MOA with Andra. It signed on Friday, June 26th. And I don't think it became public knowledge until almost a week later, and then only as part of the Select Board packet. When I believe you knew people were really confused about what's going on, and you could have easily had suggested to the Acting Town Manager that they released the news on it. Simple stuff.

I think you've made a terrible mistake.

Anita Brosius-Scott

I second the comments that my husband, Geoff, made. I am particularly surprised, actually very surprised, and concerned that you chooe not to move this particular issue that we're talking about off the consent agenda. Putting it here as public comment period means that you don't have to respond, and you don't have to discuss it.

The rules for the Select Board do permit someone to come forward to you prior to a meeting, and request they'd like to make comments, and they request you take something off the consent agenda, and back onto the regular agenda. And you have chosen not to do that, and that concerns me.

We've only had you guys for a couple of weeks, and already I've got cold feet about this transparency that you advertised. You advertised yourselves as wanting to have a Select Board that's transparent, and I don't feel this is a transparent process, and it's a very major process that you have taken on immediately. It's inappropriate. And it's not, in my opinion, reflective of the town's wishes, and you're not sure, either, whether it's reflective of the town's wishes.

I would like to reiterate also is proposing that a one-year probationary period be signed, that Audra to be signed on for a one-year probationary period, which is a decision you can make tonight, because you're up against a deadline, that deadline being the number of weeks after the public meeting that you have to make this decision.

the decision you can make is not yes or no. It can be one year, probationary period, and I'm going encourage you guys to make that decision so that there is time that you can get people to weigh in, if that's what you want, which could happen in November.

You could provide a year for order to respond to what your concerns are about her management, and she would have an opportunity to to make good on whatever it is that you're concerned about.

I've been here 33 years. We watched a lot of managers come and go. And I would agree that she's done a great job. Every manager has had his or her weakness. I guarantee you. Each during that period of time, there have been significant weaknesses on managers. Frankly, I think it would be an incredibly difficult job. I have a lot of sympathy for those people. I'm asking for that probationary period. 

Ray Andresen

I am sure that this Select Board had reasons to get into this contract with Audra. And if you read the contract, they cannot make any disparaging remarks about entrepreneurs. And she make any disparaging remarks about Camden. There is no way that any of us know what the reasons are that her contract was not renewed. And I don't think the Select Board is in a position to tell us what the reasons are. Like all of us was kind of surprised by the decision, but also was very surprised by the move to try to have her contract renewed before the election.

Tony Grassi

I have sort of two agendas, as you might expect. I'm worried about the river. But first, I will comment that I was horrified by the lack of transparency. I think it was disingenuous, and I think you and Bobbi Oxton Blake knew you were going do this, and you never told the public that that was your plan when we had an election, and I think that's abhorrent.

I think the gag order that Ray referred to is also abhorrent. There is no reason for a gag order. You've campaigned on transparency. What you've done is you've shut down any ability for anybody to say anything. And as I understand it, from reading in the documents and the agenda, there are no bad comments in Audra's review. So what you've done is you've chosen to shoot the messenger, when you didn't like the decisions that the Select Board made when you and Ken were on the board.

As you might expect, I'm very concerned about the river. And I know that you three all have objected to the removal of the Montgomery Dam, but the voters have spoken. The town is sitting on a roughly $6 million to implement that project. I don't know who's going do it. Audrey was able because she had all the experience running the town. She had capacity to apply for and administer those grants.

Now, I don't know who you're going have do that, but it isn't going be some new town manager who's also trying to figure out how to run the town. You better have a good plan that effectively spends that money.

I fully support the library, and I'm sure, for the portion that the library is responsible for, it will be done exquisitely. I have no doubt about that.

But I am concerned that there's a lot to do in administering these grants, reporting, and you can screw it up, and you can end up spending a lot of money in places that aren't priorities. I really worry that without Audra, you have no ability to manage that grant.

Secondly, there are grants that are outstanding with NOAA for helping fund East and West and Seabright [dams] improvements that are necessary because those are high hazard dams.

If you don't pursue those grants effectively, the town will have to pay for those improvements. And the taxpayers are going have to pay for it.

I want to know what your plans are, and I think you should be very clear to the public. What your plans are to ensure that we actually get those grants.

My understanding is, is this is a very high priority for NOAA, so there's a very high likelihood that we can get those grants. But only if you do an effective job,  That's another six, seven, eight million dollars. There's a lot of money at stake here.

And for you to just be sort of willing nilly saying, oh, gone, whole new, whole new game. I want to know what your plan is for managing the Megunticook River going forward.

Rick Bates

As the former town manager in Rockport, I worked pretty closely with Audra over the years, and she inspired me with the fact that, as one of the old timers in municipal government, I was worried that there wasn't enough young people coming into the field that had the talents and skills that she has.

I always felt with her — I've been in municipal government for 40 years — I always felt with her that I was playing catch up. She was so smart. She was way smarter than I ever was. I always felt like I was trying to catch up to her, because she knew things instantaneously and was very, very, very sharp. She's one of the best, in my opinion, one of the best of the young managers in the State of Maine, and probably in New England, if you were to evaluate her.

It is within your power, authority, to not renew her contract. She has a contract, it runs out. It is within your power, but because it is within your power, should you? That's the question you should be asking yourself.

There's really no reason to not renew her contract, except for the fact that some of you don't like her.

Did I agree with her the whole time I worked with her? No. There were some decisions she made I questioned, but we worked it out.

I would hope that you guys would work out those issues you have, and give her another chance. Not another chance, but continue her contract for a year, for three years.

You have the power, but should you use it? That is my question to you.

Susan Dorr, Camden Select Board member

As the former chair of this body, I feel like there is a timeline that's really important for people to understand. We could have done this renewal back earlier in the year. I wasn't as aware of the timeline as I should have been. There was a process that was overlooked.

At the same time, several very divisive issues were working their way through the town. We went through the dam process, which blew apart political alliances, neighborhoods, friendships in a way that I didn't even imagine was possible.

And then, we faced the parking issue, and the possible merging our police services with Knox County to deliver our law enforcement through the Sheriff's Department.

These were initiatives brought about by an innovative town manager and they proved to be so explosive, and so divisive, that there were people who I have thought of as friends and allies for my whole 35 years of living in this town....

We could have forced a vote in our last meeting before the election. We were entitled. That distinction, and forgive me to my colleague Ken Gross, muddied the waters between making the distinction between appointment and employment, and we had the power within the charter to make that employment decision. 

However, the firestorm that would have resulted — I don't even want to tell you about the state of my inbox. I'm retired. I've got grandchildren. I don't need to do this. I do not need to be public enemy number one over a vote. And it's because a very loud, negative group in this town that has created an environment that was hostile to Audra, was hostile to us as a board.

I regret not having pushed that through, but it really felt like it would have created a situation in town that was more explosive than it needed to be. I regret where we are right now. I want more than anything for Audra to continue on as our manager. Her depth of knowledge, her curiosity, her initiative, is unmatched, and we are creating a dumpster fire of a situation where we will not be able to find leadership that will guide us through the important things that we need to do.

I disagree with this action taken by the board. I hope that we can turn this around and rethink it. And I thank you all for coming out. All it takes is enough people to not stand up and speak for actions like this to happen. So here you are, and I appreciate you. 

Susan Ryder

I just want to ask you all to think about the fact that this town has become divided, and we go from zero to 100 about everything now. And why?

Why can't we, why can't we speak as neighbors? Why can't we be why can't we work out differences of opinion without people making character aspersions and publicly speculating about people's motivations. And there's all kinds of things going on that really don't need to happen. It's happening everywhere in this country, but why can't we just say, we're not gonna do that here?

I'm looking to you for leadership. I'm looking to each one of you to say, look, we're not going allow that to happen. We're going behave in a way that our constituents are gonna be proud of.

We're going make decisions in a transparent way. We're going explain them. We're going to be public about it. We are going have maybe more citizens committees, and we're going have more input, and we're going have more engagement. Because that's the way you keep this town alive.

Otherwise, we're gonna be at each other's throats.

You'll be gone, the next election, and we'll have to think about all of this again next time, with somebody else. I want to be in this town. I love this town. I want to keep my taxes, of course, like anybody else at a reasonable level. And I'm really concerned that, there are going be some downside consequences to this constant infighting. We've got t stop it.

Hear what people were saying tonight. Be transparent, be open, and listen. You're all volunteers. We appreciate that. You're not experts. We appreciate that. So take advice from the experts, like Audra, not to say you have to do everything she says, but you make the decisions and she executes them. That's how this is supposed to work. So please use that process in an effective way. 

Stephanie French

I was on the Select Board also; I didn't write a letter. I have a lot of things that I could say about Tom Hedstrom's letter. But I'm not going to. I have a lot of things that I could say about Susan's speech that she just made. I'm not going to, because I feel like there was a lot of things that you signed — I kind of feel like you were muddying the waters right there, because I don't think that you're supposed to speak about personnel matters. Select Board people are not allowed to speak on personnel matters. That's why the transparency hasn't been given to all of us.

When I've been looking and watching what's happened through all of this, I've been thinking to myself, perhaps Audra has made the decision that she doesn't want to stay here. When she went on medical leave, perhaps the new change in the board, she's decided she wants to make a different move.

Does anybody know any different? We don't know.

When I'm reading and watching everything going on, I haven't heard any other stuff going on. Perhaps other people have talked to other people that have been willing to talk to other people. But I haven't heard anything else.

I've only been seeing what's been given here, which hasn't been a lot, because you are not allowed to give us personnel information.

When I read the memorandum of agreement, I'm looking at it as, on the 26th you guys made an agreement to extend till the 31st [December] as an agreement, not like you're firing anybody. That was my understanding of this. Unfortunately, other people have a different understanding, and I'm kind of shaken my head as to where that information is coming from.

That is concerning, because Select Board members are not supposed to be speaking to anybody, but what happens. in any other meetings, especially about personnel matters. 

Stephen Gold

I've observed a lot of Select Board meetings and I've been almost overwhelmed at the depth of Audra's knowledge. Things about obscure state laws, grants, ways to get them, procedures. I've brought up things, and she's corrected me about just stuff that a great town manager really has to know.

I'd also like to say that between Tom's letter and Rick's comments — what you heard from is two town managers. who are probably really the experts extolling the ability of this person.

As to what happened over the course of weeks? I know that I read published comments before the elections that Audra wanted to stay.

I can only assume that, in essence, since then, this may be a memorandum of agreement or whatever you call it, but basically, Audra's been fired.

The memorandum of agreement is a way to protect both bodies, give Audra a chance in terms of looking for another job. But my feeling is that, basically, she's been fired.

I also have some serious questions about that memorandum of agreement in terms of potentially the gag order.

I think in one way, you handicap Audra when you say you're not going say anything, if you get a request for a reference.

There's also some financial details, like, if Audra did go get a job next month, we're on the hook for an additional month of salary, even if she left.

The other thing being, if you hired someone next month, theoretically, we're gonna pay her for six months, and there wasn't anything that was said, except that the new hire would be the town manager. What would Audra be? Would she be here? Would she not be here? Would she be out checking license plates? I thought it was a rather poor memorandum. 

Lavana Snyder

 I have been in the community for 30 years. I didn't plan to get up here tonight because I didn't know this was going to happen. But what I do want to say is when I voted, I voted for a change. I felt strongly that when a community starts to govern themselves with citizens' petitions, there's a problem. So I voted for change. I am up here, mainly to support the Select Board decision. And I haven't heard that from anyone else out there. I voted for this Select Board. I support the decision you made.

Wendy Andresen

I also support your decision. I honor your decision. I know you didn't take it lightly. And for all the supporters that Audra has here, I must say, you have prepared any words of dissent, I can tell you, I've spoken to many, many people, who said, We really need a new town manager. We really need a new town manager. We really need to change things.

We don't see why we can't go ahead and find somebody who's going to be more in keeping with what we really want, and we want to be heard more. I appreciate how many people have have come out in support of Andra, but I can assure you, they're an equal number of people that I've heard differently from. And I think, frankly, giving her six months of probation or whatever you want to call an according to the understanding, I think that's more than gracious of you. And I think you're well within your rights to make this change, and to proceed in the way that you have planned. 

Deb Chapman

I haven't been here for 30 years, but I've been here since 1989. I think that's almost 30 years. I had prepared a statement indicating at least three major ways in which I had worked with, not for, but worked with Audra. But Tom Hedstrom said many of the same things. He had longer period of time working with her, and said it more eloquently than I could have.

I am here to reemphasize how professional, how resourceful, how many contacts she had, how good she was, at just about everything, including remaining calm in the face of vile and untrue statement, sometimes in this room, but more often in media.

I cannot imagine how you will find in this market anyone who has a tenth of her capacity.

The one thing I mentioned, that Tom didn't mention, that I know from my years of experience as a consultant, is there is a particular managerial skill that Audra had in spades, and that is what people call being able to work, to look from the balcony.

What that means is that what they see is broad and deep, but not involved in the bits and pieces, that allows them to have vision and to plan for the future. She had all of those qualities. I have been deeply saddened and worried about this.

I also echo the concerns people had about the lack of transparency, and I don't know about not being able to talk about personnel issues.

I know, in the memorandum there were things, comments made about Audra, about her performance. And so, to people who think this is a good decision, I have one question. What was wrong? A change was needed. Why?

 You can't just state an opinion like that and condemn someone using it. So, finally, I can't imagine working with anyone who was more effective and more pleasurable to work with. than Audra. And if you don't reverse this decision, and we lose her, we're going lose a lot of other people.

Karen Grove

I've been in this town pretty much my whole life. First of all, I want to thank everybody here. Everybody, because we are engaging in civil discourse, which is something that this country is beginning to lose. So, good on you.

Secondly, having served on the select board and the Charter Commission I know that the Select Board is — and I'm going to just restate what was said by Stephanie — they are not allowed to discuss anything about employment. They just can't. So this wish for transparency, I don't know how transparent you think they can be, but they really can't. They're really locked by the charter — what they can and cannot do as far as discussing. anything to do with the employment of our town manager, or most anybody else that's employed by the town. So, thank you all for your service. You're doing an incredible job. And thank you all for being civil. 

Alison McKellar

I just want to say, really, briefly, as a past Select Board member, that I take issue, maybe a little bit, with one of the things that Susan said — that sometimes it can seem like ideas or proposals are coming from the town manager, but in all three of the cases of controversial issues that were brought up, really what the town manager's role is, a lot of the time, is to remind the Select Board and the community of past planning efforts. 

Anybody that scrolls through the pages of the Camden Herald or the boxes and boxes of reports and studies that have been financed and participated in by residents over the years can see that parking has been a problem forever and ever.

It was once proposed that more parking be added to Harbor Park, that there could be some pavement in Harbor Park, that the Elm Street School, could be demolished for more parking. The school district had to vehemently object at the time. So that's been a longstanding issue.

Another issue is regionalizing another with law enforcement services, and the mandate that has been expressed that we should be working with other towns.

The other thing is, the river that's come up over and over again.

Sometimes the town manager gets blamed for coming up with things when really what it is is giving some history. These are the things that are in the comprehensive plan. It's been said that regionalizing is a goal. Is this something you all want to consider? And that it then is the Select Board's job to say no, I don't think there's an appetite for this or that.

I just want to correct the record there a little bit, that none of these were new issues. They were things brought up and they turned out to be very controversial, but the Select Board really needs to take the responsibility for being the gauge of, is this a conversation the community wants to have or not? 

We should be careful in the future about blaming the town manager for blaming us of things that in the comprehensive plan, or things that have been recommended in the past.

Reach Editorial Director Lynda Clancy at lyndaclancy@penbaypilot.com; 207-706-6657