Whoa, Mr. Brackett. You publicly opined your feelings toward the Brunswick town manager, his associates and Town Council members as having “poor judgment of being stupid and showing a lack of common business ethics and feelings.” regarding the existing mess that Mr. Scott (T.) Walker, the Riverside Cemetery Association President created when he abruptly terminated the position by dropping off — hopefully all the cemetery records — at the town manager’s office and expected the Town of Brunswick to take control of the cemetery operations.

It is understandable that you, rightfully, appear to be upset, as many other cemetery lot owners at Riverside are, that the terms of Mr. Adelbert D. Bailey’s deeds don’t appear to be fulfilled. Town Manager John S. Eldridge has no hand in the creation of the existing, created turmoil, nor his staff or town council. The responsibility falls squarely on the shoulders of the former association president, Walker.

Let me share with you what I experienced during an advertised annual meeting of the cemetery association a few years ago which was held at the Methodist Church on Church Road, Brunswick. It started with a statement by Walker, repeated several times during the meeting, that he wanted out as he just was too busy. Those in attendance — by no means all board members — were informed that if they were to stay on the “board” for a specified, short period of time that they would be rewarded with a free four-grave plot. That action was considered a amendment to the bylaws by Walker. I raised the question who were board members and I was informed that anyone in attendance was one, although I had made it clear at the beginning of the meeting that I was there to observe as I was considering to possibly acquire a burial lot at Riverside.

Seeing there didn’t appear to be an agenda, including a vote for changes to the bylaws, I requested Walker’s daughter, who was identified as the secretary of the organization, to provide me with a copy of the bylaws and all amendments thereto. I have given up expectations to receive them at this point. Furthermore, maintenance of the cemetery came up and the person who was identified as being the maintenance person was told to buy a new riding mower at the association’s expense and from drive-by observations of the cemetery, it was apparent that a new riding mower had been acquired. The maintenance person was identified as Walker’s daughter’s husband. It should be noted that all personnel identifications were provided by Walker.

Lastly, Walker, who made it known that he was not contributing to the Social Security system through work, proposed and the “Board” agreed to provide him with a sufficient salary to be considered by the IRS as a qualifying income toward building up his SS earning years. He promised that he would “contribute” the same amount to the association.

Hopefully, Mr. Brackett, you have been enlightened by my epistle and that it has changed your opinion of what has led to the turmoil regarding the operations at the Riverside Cemetery in Brunswick. I realize that it might be difficult to do so, but a gentleman would openly and publicly apologize to T.M. Eldridge and all others that you addressed in your pointed letter.

Dutch Smith Brunswick