39 A.3d 48
Me.2012Background
- April 6, 2010 Town Council outsourced dispatch to Brunswick; contract drafted by town attorney; manager signed June 29, 2010; term July 1, 2010–June 30, 2016.
- Section 6.10 of town charter requires multi-year contracts to be made or approved by ordinance.
- October 7, 2010 ordinance ratified the contract; October 12, 2010 meeting ratified by ordinance.
- Reassurance Program existed pre-outsourcing; Good Morning Program superseded it post-outsourcing; plaintiffs claim the new program is inferior.
- McGettigan and Rice are residents with disabilities/medical conditions who relied on dispatch; they filed an amended complaint seeking declaratory judgment that the contract was void and an injunction; the Superior Court dismissed as moot, which plaintiff appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the case moot after ordinance ratification? | McGettigan (and Rice) argue the contract was void ab initio and not cured by ratification. | Town argues ratification by ordinance makes the matter moot. | Not moot; controversy remains about charter interpretation and contract validity. |
| Does § 6.10 require ratification by ordinance after procurement, making the contract valid once ratified? | Interpretation that ratification cannot validate a void contract. | Ratification aligns with plain meaning; contract not void due to ratification. | Ordination ratification satisfies § 6.10; contract not void for lack of prior ordinance. |
| Do McGettigan and Rice have standing to sue? | Plaintiffs allege standing as residents affected by services. | Town contends lack of standing for at least one plaintiff. | Standing issue not reached on appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kittery Retail Ventures, LLC v. Town of Kittery, 2004 ME 65 (Me. 2004) (interpretation of municipal charter language; plain meaning governs unless illogical)
- Passamaquoddy Water Dist. v. City of Eastport, 1998 ME 94 (Me. 1998) (charter language interpreted by plain meaning; surplusage principle)
- Carroll F. Look Constr. Co. v. Town of Beals, 2002 ME 128 (Me. 2002) (contract award and its effect; mootness and practical impact)
- Roberts v. Roberts, 2007 ME 109 (Me. 2007) (de novo review of mootness determination)
- Anthem Health Plans of Me., Inc. v. Superintendent of Ins., 2011 ME 48 (Me. 2011) (mootness standard; real and substantial controversy)