Dear editor,

Re: Mob atmosphere alive in Union Bay

In the letter to the editor, Susan Hargreaves states: 鈥淭his is when the gallery began with the outburst of comments. This was the 鈥榤ob鈥� atmosphere to which Alan de Jersey was referring.鈥�

What Susan Hargreaves fails to mention is that she took part in the 鈥渙utburst of comments鈥� by attempting to act as chair and 鈥渋nform鈥� those attending the meeting on the bylaws pertaining to the matter trustee Livesey raised, and proclaiming to all to get on with the meeting.

The conversation continued between the chair and trustee Livesey, and again the administrator interrupted and actually spoke while the chair was responding to trustee Livesey. The administrator then announced they hadn鈥檛 been circulating any letters.

Chair Godfrey was no longer involved at that point. When trustee Goldswain spoke regarding the letter, the administrator took over the meeting and addressed trustee Goldswain, asking who was circulating the letter.

At this point the meeting deteriorated, as the administrator had taken the focus off trustee Livesey鈥檚 鈥減oint of personal privilege.鈥�

The letter is authentic, sent from Michael Galambos, and contains allegations against two board members, and trustee Livesey wanted to know exactly which board members were referred to as committing illegal acts.

Why is an employee interfering with and railroading a board discussion?

Why is this conduct by an employee tolerated at a meeting of the elected board of trustees? This employee was never requested by chair Godfrey to answer or contribute to the conversation he was having with a fellow elected trustee. 

This employee creates a 鈥渇ree-for-all鈥� atmosphere by these unwarranted outbursts.

This lack of respect for proper board procedure by this employee is a common occurrence at board meetings, and in fact, was the cause of individuals speaking out of turn at the Dec. 15 meeting.

At times, it鈥檚 hard to tell who actually is chairing any meetings.

Mary Reynolds,

Union Bay