To the Citizens of the Town of Strong:
I am writing this letter to let you know that I am resigning as your selectman effective immediately. I have appreciated being on the Board and previously had enjoyed it.
This past year, we were a very dysfunctional board. I personally put up with derogatory statements from some board members. Also, a lot of issues were “revisited” because there were those who didn’t like the way the issues were voted on the first time.
And, there were personality conflicts and personal agendas taking place. Often one selectman would go behind another selectman’s back because he/she didn’t think the work was being done properly. This was totally unfair as all of the selectmen are supposed to have equal powers.
This new board will be very much the same. I am not a sadist so rather than take the insults I will get off the board. I know I promised not to back down when I was re-elected but I thought everyone was professional enough to keep personal feelings out of the meetings. One can only hope that whomever takes my place will be a stronger entity than I am.
Once again, thank you for allowing me to serve you as a selectman.
Rebecca Croteau
Strong
Becky is a Christian lady who wanted to serve a second time as Selectman and had hoped for good things for the Town of Strong. She served diligently both times, but was unable to finish out either term because of her work ethics, honesty, and her well-being. Becky holds a college degree and credentials as a Paralegal. I think there are those on the Board who feel inferior to her intelligence. She is a very caring person and was an asset to the Board. Thank you Becky for your wisdom and trying to serve my town in a proper and intelligent manner.
I have to agree with Eunice. There are very few who hold true to thier beliefs. Dignity is a must and so few display this attribute. Be Proud Becky, no matter what anyone says or writes about your choice. In the end you have to prove yourself to no one but yourself. Look in the mirror and be proud of what you see.
We are proud of your efforts to make the town a better place…Your mother would be proud!!!!!
Becky, thanks for your service to the town. It’s sad that your voice will no longer be a part of the Board of Selectmen. I only wish that you had at least given it a try on the new board. But again, thank you. Hopefully another candidate of integrity will come forward to serve alongside the very capable individuals who remain as selectmen in Strong. It’s great to be from a town where talented people care enough to devote their time to serving others and step forward to run for public office. Thank you Clyde, Mary, Milt, and Rupert for your service. Isn’t it too bad that there are those individuals who only want to tear them down?
Can’t you see that Becky resigned BECAUSE of the OUTCOME of the ELECTION? Why can’t some people submit a comment without making a dig at good honest citizens who have a right to an opinion the same as he/she? I might add this: Who made a comment tearing Clyde, Mary, Milt, and Rupert down? I don’t see one anywhere here. Why don’t YOU stop tearing down to whomever you are referring. This article is about Becky Croteau and her good service to the Town of Strong, leave the others out of it.
Hahahahahaha! You are all such great free entertainment!
Here we go again! If you can’t take the heat, don’t go into public office. People have a right to have different opinions and if you can’t deal with it then you should stay out of these positions. Why do you keep costing the tax payers of Strong money to have elections everytime you resign! You should have at least waited until next year’s town meeting if you truely cared about the town and what it cost everytime you can’t take it and resign!
Before you rath judgment upon others think about it. You were not there the past year to know the hateful goings on and also the illegal re-voting on issues that had already been voted upon. Some of those issues were brought back until the vote satisfied the Chairman. A code of ethics is NOT alive and well in Strong. I am not the proud citizen I once was. Maybe it is time to go back to a three man board, as that would cut the problems by two!
oops! I meant to type life long resident not life lon resident
“Hateful goings on?” “Illegal re-voting?” Strong stuff, but strangely, you don’t actually name names or give examples of what happened. Give us specifics!! What were “those issues?” Otherwise, it’s just mean gossip. And tell us why you think a “three man board” would solve those problems? Hmmmm. Where did that little gem come from? Sounds like you were suspiciously close to the action. Since no one goes to selectmen’s meetings, I can only guess that you must be someone who is no longer on the board? Or maybe the spouse of one of those people no longer on the board? Or somone who was a behind-the-scenes string puller? Anyone can go to any meeting at any time to witness these allegations first-hand. If we rely on hearsay and vague snipings in this type of forum without demanding real proof, then we get what we deserve…nothing!
If there are illegal things going on then SOMEONE should be reporting this to the MMA. There should not be illegal voting or re-voting or ANYTHING illegal going on. Maybe someone needs to have MMA investigate the Town of Strong government goings on!
Helloooo! Let’s stop with the vagueness. Think for a minute about your statement: ” Maybe someone needs to have MMA investigate the Town of Strong government goings on!” Is there some reason residents can’t just go to meetings? Who do you mean by “SOMEONE?” People from MMA don’t just wander into a town office and start an investigation. They aren’t a detective agency of policing authority. Let’s not talk about “THINGS” and “ILLEGAL” Why don’t all the people who are mad start going to meetings?
What a novel idea! Citizens attending the Town’s Selectman’s Meetings to SUPPORT the Town and the Selectmen. Let’s turn the page!
Just a random thought to add:
If there is some horrible story of illegal goings-on in Strong’s government, why didn’t the editor of this esteemed Daily Bulldog hot-foot it to the town that’s only 15 minutes from her office to sit in on every one of those meetings? She should have had plenty of evidence, based on the above-mentioned hints and allegations.
Why didn’t the press hop on these stories of criminal activity? Interview these eye witnesses to greed and corruption? Bring bad behavior to light and save the townspeople from these evil-doers? The answer is here on this page. In front of us! Duh! Where’s Jerry Springer when we need him?
Amen to that!!!!
Alright- under the protection of anonymity, I will reveal the following: the “illegal re-vote” was NOT illegal at all. The vote concerned a tax evaluation abatement request that was voted on at a selectmen’s meeting. Those selectmen present voted to approve the abatement, conflicting with the town assessing agent’s recommendation. It was later revealed that a deciding vote under these circumstances was not just a simple majority of those selectmen voting, it was instead a majority of the entire board of selectmen, including any who were absent during the vote, or any who had justifiably recused themselves due to a conflict of interest. So, the board (wisely) decided to re-visit the matter. Not all of the voting members of the board voted the same way the second time as they did the first. That swung the outcome, so that the second time, the abatement request was denied. It’s not that intruiging when you know the facts. Disclaimer: I am not a selectman, nor am I related to a selectman.
Interesting musings, though not really effective or useful for engaging in civil and productive discourse.
Take this example from Thomas Jefferson’s writing of John Adams (remember them?) as a way to respect differences of opinion:
…why should we be dissocialized by mere differences of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, or anything else? His opinions are as honestly formed as my own. Our different views of the same subject are the result of a difference in our organization and experience. I never withdrew from the society of any man on this account…
Time to grow up. How can we expect our children to grow into adults of good character, judgment, and leadership in this environment?
And please, enough of the slinging of arrows from behind the screen of anonymity – it lacks credibility.
So, “One Who Knows,” you’re saying the first vote wasn’t done right the first time? Who is responsible for something like that? And the interesting part now seems to be this: why someone who voted one way the first time vote differently the second time. Very mysterious! Since you seem to be saying that at least one was recused and one was absent, three people made the decision the first time.
So two people voted YES to the abatement the first time around? If the recused person was still unable to vote, the second vote must have at least been a tie. But did the person who voted YES then vote NO? Vice-versa? And why? You seem to have the inside info here.
That can’t be too hard to figure out. Sounds like someone got cold feet? Or was new evidence uncovered? Farmington and Wilton, fortunately, have the videos of their meetings broadcast on TV. Sounds like that might help in this case.
It would benefit Strong to have their meetings video taped also. So much more shows up.
Amen to the video idea!