A former Lincoln County Emergency Management director filed a wrongful termination suit Nov. 7 in Wiscasset Superior Court. Maury Prentiss served in the job from May 2021 to Aug. 9, 2024. He served as deputy director prior to his promotion. 

On Aug. 26, County Administrator Carrie Kipfer confirmed Prentiss was no longer in the position and "he did not resign."

Prentiss appealed his termination to the county commissioners, but it was denied. On Oct. 9, Prentiss sent a letter of decision to Wiscasset Superior Court. He asserted the "termination decision rendered is not substantiated by evidence." Prentiss says he was terminated without cause and commissioners failed to follow the proper five-step termination process. 

According to court documents filed by Prentiss' attorney, the termination was in retailiation for "engaging in appropriate conduct while engaged in his duties, but which his superiors objected to because they had previously authorized the inappropriate activity." Prentiss alleges the commissioners' retaliatory termination constitutues a violation of the Maine Whistleblowers' Protection Act by failing to follow appropriate procedure and proceeded without inclusion of a human resources official.

On Dec. 3, Kipfer had no comment on the case. "We do not discuss personnel matters or ongoing litagation," she wrote.

Boothbay Harbor attorney Richard Elliott II represents Prentiss. On Dec. 4, he reported Prentiss was terminated for violating the county's personnel policy. "The burden is on us in an 80B appeal," Elliott said. "But they (the county) aren't making it clear what he did. We requested a record, but they didn't keep one."

In a court document, Elliott requested an extension for filing the trial motion to Jan. 16, 2025. "Defense counsel has only just received the record from his client and described the same as an inch and one-half collection of documents. As such, plaintiff requests an extension for the filing of the trial motion and supplying the required record contemporaneously with the motion and allowing counsel to meet regarding the record."

Elliott believes the controversy is over equipment removal from one of the county's communication towers. Elliott didn't attend Prentiss' appeal hearing, but he reported one comment seemed to stick out. "He (Prentiss) called them out for removing the equipment unilaterally, and in doing so, they (the county) broke the law," Elliot said. "They are punishing him as a whistleblower by bringing it to their attention."

Court documents also asserted problems with the county's investigation. Elliot claims the investigator should've recused herself because she was a "close friend" of one of the two complainants. 

Another alleged problem is the investigator was on vacation when the incident happened. "The two complainants investigated and had an 'ax to grind' with my client. When she returned from vacation, she just 'rubber stamped' their conclusion," Elliott said.  

Another alleged problem is a lack of involvement from the Human Resources Department as part of the investigation. Elliott claims no human resources representatives were involved until the appeal hearing. "The irony is human resources wasn't involved or notified until the very end, and then they didn't say anything during the hearing," he said. 

In summation of the complaint, Elliott stated "The petitioner requests this court to overturn the decision in the petitioner's appeal to the county commissioners, order plaintiff's job reinstated, payment in full of all missed wages, and for such other and further relief as the court deems just and appropriate to include costs and reasonable attorney's fees."