Dear Editor:

It seems the same group of people that petitioned for a recall on the last school bond referendum want to now sue the district because their rights were violated. Shouldn’t a recall petition be a stand-alone question? Why did it have a second question with a $10 million bond question on it? The Board of Trustees cannot do any project that costs $250,000.00 or more without a public referendum. So why can a group of petitioners just add a $10 million bond on a recall petition?  Did this group do this by forming a committee? Did they hold public meetings? Did they have legal council? Did they have a meeting in each town to inform the voters? Where did the $10 million figure come from? What did it cover?

These are just a few of the questions the Board had to answer so why not them? It’s one thing to want a recall petition, but to add a full bond question at the bottom of it sounds like a negotiation, not a recall petition.

I do know for a fact that some of this group were the ones that gave the Board of Trustees a very thorough lecture on their “due diligence” when the Board sought the last bond and that was a bond that was worked on for two (2) full years. When this group held a public meeting this spring, they were asked if they had been attending meetings. The answer was ... “a few but just because they weren’t at meetings didn’t mean they weren’t listening.” Is there a difference between listening and hearing? Asking for a friend!

One last question. Do the taxpayers pay these lawyer fees?

Steven Lorrain

Boothbay Harbor