Two Alna selectmen finalized their censure decision involving the other member June 22. Second Selectman Steve Graham and Third Selectman Coreysha Stone found First Selectman Ed Pentaleri in violation of the ethics code on one of five points resident Ralph Hilton raised. The other four were not proven, Stone and Graham found.

The one they said was proven was “perceived (conflict) of interest and appearance of bias.” The document’s final version Graham provided June 23 states: “Although these actions used in evidence relate to (efforts) taken by Ed Pentelari as a private citizen and not while acting as an elected (official), these interests and (efforts) could impact Mr Pentaleri’s decisions-making as it relates to a course of action connected to the litigation ... and therefore could be perceived as a (conflict) of interest/ bias.”

The litigation involves Jeff Spinney’s earthwork-boat launch off Golden Ridge Road. According to Wiscasset Newspaper files, a selectboard Pentaleri was not on settled with Spinney on the project and, in September 2021, just before Pentaleri rejoined the board, another selectboard decided to seek the ramp’s removal on the basis it violated zoning. While Pentaleri was still off the board, he and others had appealed the project’s planning board approval.  

“In acknowledgement that there might be a perceived (conflict) of interest and an appearance of bias at this time, a censure to Mr. Pentaleri and recusal from all further matters related to the Spinney boat launch is best for the town,” Stone’s and Graham’s decision document states. 

Hilton and his lawyer Benjamin Smith of Augusta said the decision did not include “guidance as to standards of behavior expected in (the) future,” as the ethics code reads. Smith said of the censure and recusal statement, “It’s pretty vanilla. It doesn’t really say much” about the recusal, he said. “Does it mean pending matters? Does it mean new litigation ... What expectations are there about Mr. Pentaleri’s involvement going forward ... Can he communicate directly or indirectly with board members, can he talk with (Maine Municipal Association) about the issue, can he talk with the town attorney about the issue?”

Smith reiterated, Hilton wanted clarification on Pentaleri’s expected conduct, “to avoid us from being here again.” Graham called Hilton’s proposed additions a good checklist to refer to, but he was not sure that level of detail was needed in the censure-recusal document. The draft document “covers it,” Graham said. 

Other participants said the ethics code’s “guidance” reference is for when someone is being reprimanded, and that this is a censure, not a reprimand. Spinney said a censure is a reprimand.

Jon Luoma urged selectmen to be careful about basing a censure on the grounds the draft stated, that “there might be a perceived (conflict) of interest.” He said it opened up a can of worms for any official who has a stance on a controversial issue to be accused of having a conflict of interest. That wording resulted from evidence at the June 8 hearing indicating there was that perception, Graham said. 

Pentaleri recalled championing the ethics code last year and said he did not regret it. He regretted the code not giving the board a way to take an action such as calling for a recusal except via censure or reprimand. “I’m prepared to live by the process whether the decisions come out the way I would have liked or not,” he said.

Pentaleri suggested he still be allowed to help in the boat launch matter in one way: Providing information to the town attorney, such as an administrative record, so Graham and Stone can continue the litigation most effectively, if they choose to continue it. Graham rejected the idea out of concern narrowing the recusal’s scope to allow Pentaleri’s communication with the town attorney could lead to further ethics complaints. “I think that (recusal) needs to be a bright line.”

Earlier this month, Maine Supreme Judicial Court rejected the town’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling in favor of Spinney’s request on filing deadlines and against the town’s request to dismiss Spinney’s appeal of Alna appeals board decisions, according to the June 13 order and a June 20 press release Spinney referred Wiscasset Newspaper to, from Mark Robinson of MainePR.com. In it, Robinson states in part, “The Law Court’s dismissal of the town’s appeal means the case will go back to Superior Court for review of underlying permitting decisions. That could take eight to 12 months.” The release includes Spinney’s lawyer Kristin Collins’ saying “Both the Superior Court and the Law Court were definitive in rejecting the town’s legal arguments ... I think elected officials have had tunnel vision on this case for the last couple of years. Maybe it’s time for a fresh look at the wisdom of having discarded the settlement.”

In a phone interview June 23, Graham called the law court opinion disappointing, but not shocking. When someone files an appeal, it can go either way, the retired lawyer of almost 50 years said. 

Selectmen have an executive session to consult with legal counsel on their Thursday, June 29 agenda. Graham explained he could not say if the session involves Spinney boat launch court matters. 

Also June 29, the board plans to take up the relationship between it, the road commissioner and the roads committee; and take up the matter of recently lain rocks at Pinkham Pond. The meeting at the town office and over Zoom at https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83010446545 starts at 6 p.m.