The Lewiston City Council voted 4-0 Wednesday night to extend a moratorium on mobile home park lot-rent increases, but the second special council meeting in as many nights did little to quiet growing questions from some residents and councilors over transparency at City Hall.
At the center of the criticism were Mayor Carl Sheline and newly installed Council President Josh Nagine, who defended the process as critics questioned why the council was moving with extraordinary urgency and why the city attorney whose legal advice helped trigger the special meetings was not present to publicly answer questions.
The controversy was underscored by an unusual protest from Ward 7 Councilor Brent Martel.
Martel attended the meeting but refused to take his council seat. Instead, he sat with the public before walking to the podium during public comment and delivering a blistering criticism of the process.
“What we are witnessing is an absolute failure of governance by the very people trusted to provide the city with transparency, leadership, and accountability,” Martel said. “And the people of Lewiston wouldn’t be wrong to ask: Can they trust their municipal government at all?”
The council had met the previous night and approved the first reading of the moratorium extension but failed to secure the vote necessary to suspend its rules and immediately take up final passage. Sheline then called Wednesday’s special meeting to complete the process.
That sequence left critics asking a basic question: Was this really an emergency?
Martel contrasted the rapid scheduling of two special meetings over mobile home park rents with the council’s response to Lewiston’s continuing gun violence.
“When shootings were happening multiple times a week in our city, you refused my request for a single emergency agenda item because I submitted it a day late,” Martel told Sheline. “If multiple shootings didn’t meet your standard for urgency, explain to the people of Lewiston why this does.”
Martel also said he emailed Sheline after Tuesday’s meeting asking whether the city attorney and Housing Committee chairman would attend Wednesday to answer questions. According to Martel, Sheline did not respond.
“You’ve told us the city attorney recommended that this needed to happen on this timeline,” Martel said. “The public shouldn’t have to simply take your word for that.”
Martel called for the attorney to appear publicly and explain the legal reasoning behind the urgency.
“If his recommendation is the reason we’re being rushed to act, make him available,” Martel said. “Let this council ask him questions publicly, where the people of Lewiston can hear the answers.”
Andrew Jones, who spoke immediately after Martel, continued the transparency criticism.
Jones said he had little personal stake in the mobile home park debate but was troubled by the process.
“This will be now, what, the third vote on this issue, two of them during special meetings,” Jones said.
Like Martel, Jones questioned why the council could mobilize so quickly over the moratorium while shootings had not produced similar action.
“We are a city gripped in gun violence, and we can’t seem to have a meaningful special meeting,” Jones said. “Sure, we had one, but there was no action items. Nothing was solved there.”
Jones also said the council should consider releasing information surrounding its discussions with legal counsel if those discussions were driving the urgency.
“It’s again an issue of transparency,” Jones said.
Jones directly challenged Nagine, who recently assumed the council presidency amid an earlier council controversy involving leadership and transparency.
“Come on, Josh, do better,” Jones said.
The criticism was not limited to Martel and Jones.
Ward 2 resident Laurie Horton accused the council of failing to follow a sufficiently transparent process and questioned why another special meeting was necessary when regularly scheduled meetings remained before the moratorium’s expiration.
“Many of you stood up here less than six weeks ago talking about transparency,” Horton said before directly addressing Nagine. “Tonight you decide. Are you being a transparent councilor? Or is this business as usual again?”
Mobile home park owner John Horn also told councilors the process was damaging public trust.
Horn said he received roughly five-and-a-half hours’ notice of Wednesday’s meeting and accused city officials of engaging in “verbal gymnastics” to justify the extension.
“There’s stuff happening in the back rooms, and you guys know it, that’s not right,” Horn said.
“You aren’t building trust in the community,” he added.
Nagine strongly rejected the transparency criticism.
“Every single part of this process has been open and transparent, with the exception of the executive session that we had,” Nagine said.
Nagine said he would be willing to waive privilege surrounding the executive session if a sufficient number of councilors were present and agreed.
“But unfortunately, some folks decided not to show up tonight,” Nagine said.
Councilors Linda Longchamps and Eryn Noble did not attend the meeting. Councilor Scott Harriman said Noble had a prior commitment and wanted her absence explained publicly.
Sheline also defended the timing, saying the city’s legal counsel advised the council that it may need to extend the moratorium to avoid a gap before a permanent ordinance could be considered.
“Legal counsel, our attorney, came to the City Council and said we may need to extend the moratorium,” Sheline said. “And then I called a meeting, and here we are.”
Supporters of the extension said that gap presented a genuine threat to mobile home owners.
Several Fox Run Mobile Home Park residents described substantial increases in lot rents and warned that another increase could jeopardize retirees and others living on fixed incomes.
Valerie Jackson said her rent increased from $500 to $550 after Boa Vida purchased Fox Run in 2025, while new residents were charged $600.
“This gap will allow park owners to increase lot rents and with no limit to the amount,” Jackson said. “That’s not an adjustment, that’s a displacement.”
Other residents described increasing costs and fears that they could eventually be forced to sell homes they had expected to remain in during retirement.
Park owners and other opponents argued that the council was unfairly portraying businesses as predatory and proceeding as though the outcome had already been decided.
Chris Saroy, a Ward 1 resident and mobile home park owner, said Sunset Gardens charges $386 per month, including water and sewer.
“When the council clearly demonstrates that it has no faith in the business community, it undermines any trust that can go both ways,” Saroy said.
Ultimately, the criticism did not stop the extension.
With Martel protesting from the audience and Longchamps and Noble absent, the four officials participating in the roll call voted unanimously to extend the moratorium.
The extension is scheduled to become effective Sept. 29 while the Housing Committee continues working on a permanent rent-stabilization proposal. City officials said the moratorium can be lifted once that ordinance is resolved.
Wednesday’s vote settled the immediate question of whether the moratorium would continue.
It did not settle the larger issue raised repeatedly from the public-comment podium: whether a City Hall leadership that has promised transparency is providing residents enough information to understand why some matters become emergencies, and others do not.
How would the politicians like it if Maine were to pass a law or ballot initiative that limits the amount of money or income any state level and federal level politician can earn ….period. Limit their ability to make a living. I think a ballot initiative would get enough public supportfor this.
There is not one good thing to comes out of old Lew,