Latest news with #CumberlandCountySuperiorCourt
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Portland sues Maine DHHS over General Assistance cuts for homeless shelters
May 6—The city of Portland has filed a lawsuit against the Maine Department of Health and Human Services hoping to overturn a new rule that will cut millions of dollars in emergency shelter funding for the city. The complaint was filed in Cumberland County Superior Court in Portland last week, arguing that the rule was not changed through the proper process and should be considered void. The city also asks for a temporary injunction barring the rule from being implemented while a judge considers the lawsuit. No court dates have been scheduled yet. If the rule holds, Portland leaders have said it will be difficult for the city to continue operating the shelter without a sharp tax increase or pulling from an emergency fund. "We're not just going to hope for resolution in the Legislature, we're also going to seek an answer in the court. We're not going to be passive," Portland Mayor Mark Dion said in a phone interview Tuesday. Rule 26 went into effect on April 1 and formalizes how the department determines shelter costs, 70% of which are reimbursed through General Assistance. The city has said it costs $84 per guest, per day, to operate the shelter, but based on the new rule, the state said it should only cost $48 per guest per day. The state is now using a standard known as the "zero-bedroom rate," equal to that of operating a studio or efficiency apartment for each guest. That number is adjusted annually and is based on location-specific fair market rents established by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. View this document on Scribd The state has said that Rule 26 simply formalizes an existing policy, but the city has argued that the cost of running such a large emergency shelter is not aligned with the zero-bedroom rate set by HUD. A spokesperson for DHHS declined to answer questions about the filing because it is an active legal matter. The agency has not filed any responses in court. THREE COUNTS The city's complaint outlines three requests. First, it asks that the courts overturn the adoption of Rule 26 because it should have been brought before the Legislature as a substantive policy change, rather than an internal hearing. "If they adjusted schedules, that would be fair for the agency to decide. But this is more than that," Dion said. "It should have gone to the Legislature. This was more than just a housekeeping rule." Dion argues that Portland has been substantially impacted by the rule change, especially when it comes to its budget and ability to provide shelter services. The newly proposed city budget accounts for $12 million in state and federal funding cuts, including the General Assistance reimbursement changes resulting from Rule 26. A draft budget presented by City Manager Danielle West proposes closing that gap by pulling $8.8 million from the city's rainy day fund, while still raising taxes by 6.2%. Without the rainy day funds, city leaders said the tax rate could have increased by 15.1% The complaint also asks for a temporary injunction to prevent the rule from applying to Portland. And it seeks to overturn a violation issued to the city in the fall that says its reported operating costs for the city shelter were too high. Dion said the City Council unanimously decided to pursue legal action against the state after meeting with the city's lawyer, Michael Goldman, in executive session last month. He said the session was focused simply on fighting to overturn the violation, but that the council ultimately agreed the city has legal ground to fight the rule change in court. "This is a very serious decision, but the state's actions have placed us in a very precarious position as far as the budget is concerned," said Dion. He plans to continue to petition the Legislature for more GA funding even as the case unfolds in court. "I think most everyone has come to the conclusion that we are a service center city that, for all sorts of reasons, finds itself trying to discharge a state responsibility — so it's a fair expectation that we get adequate funding from the state to carry out that responsibility," he said. Copy the Story Link We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others. We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion. You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs. Show less
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Yahoo
Lawsuit filed against family of child shooter in Cumberland County 8-year-old's death
The family of Jenesis Dockery announced Tuesday that they have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the mother and grandfather of an 11-year-old boy who officials said is responsible for the shooting death of 8-year-old Jenesis in 2023. Jenesis' parents, Fon and Kimberly Dockery, were surrounded by friends and family holding signs and their attorneys Harry Daniels and Chimeaka White outside the Cumberland County Courthouse in Fayetteville, some 90 minutes after filing the civil suit in Cumberland County Superior Court. Daniels said the defendants named in the lawsuit are Jenesis' babysitter, Chrystle Diane Michael, and her father Thomas Rosa Michael, who owned the weapon used in the killing. Jenesis was shot July 25, 2023, at Michael's Eastover home in the 3300 block of Mercedes Drive and died of her injuries two days later at UNC Medical Center in Chapel Hill. The signs, held by Dockery supporters at the news conference called for accountability, the remembrance of the life of Jenesis and awareness for juvenile gun violence. Some of the signs read "Accountability for Jenesis," "Justice 4 Jenesis," and ""We Won't Forget #Justice4Jenesis," and "We want justice. Gun laws need to change. Stop youth gun violence. Charge the adults." Many were wearing orange ribbons, representing awareness for gun violence prevention. 'It could have been avoided, prevented in so many ways. From securing weapons to supervising children, this could have been prevented,' Daniels said. 'This is a very difficult time but it's necessary because we want to hold those accountable that's responsible.' Related: Juvenile detained in Cumberland County shooting death of 8-year-old girl Daniels said Jenesis' father never thought his two children would be in danger after dropping them off at the Eastover home that fateful morning. The family also has a 7-year-old daughter who was at the babysitters on the day her sister was killed. 'He took his two children over there and the last call that he ever thought he would receive is the call that he received, and this family has been ripped apart,' he said. Daniels said he hopes that the lawsuit will prompt other families going through similar situations to seek justice. Fon Dockery described and shared his family's struggles since Jenesis' death. 'Our family has been changed forever by a tragedy that was very well preventable.," he said. "I represent my family, who's been in therapy consistently for two years, trying to manage life without our daughter." Daniels said that the 11-year-old responsible in Jenesis' death was charged by juvenile justice with involuntary manslaughter and larceny of two firearms and spent some time in juvenile custody. Chrystle and Thomas Michael were never charged. 'No arrest was made for the adults. The child who committed the act is back at home like nothing happened,' Daniels said. The lawyers allege that before the shooting, the boy posted dangerous photos to social media, which should have been a warning sign for the Michael family to keep him away from weapons. "If you look at the complaint … he's on TikTok with a gun beside his head, his face blurred out,' Daniels said. 'That should tell the family that you might want to make sure the guns are away from him.' A photo in the complaint purportedly shows the 11-year-old with a weapon. The civil complaint indicates the juvenile gained access to Michael's weapon during a visit to his grandfather's home. According to the lawsuit, the Dockery family is seeking damages in excess of $25,000. On Feb. 25, Cumberland County Democratic state Sen. Val Applewhite, along with Mecklenburg County Democratic Sens. Woodson Bradley and Caleb Theodros, introduced a bill known as the Jenesis Firearm Accountability Act, which would hold gunowners accountable for shooting-related crimes committed with guns that were lost or stolen. The bill would penalize adults who do not report the loss or theft of stolen firearms and would require gunowners to report any weapons lost or stolen within 48 hours. The bill states that anyone who fails to report a weapon missing or stolen that is used in the commission of a crime would be charged with the same level of crime as the suspect, unless the gun's owner could prove in court a 'reasonable inability' to comply with the reporting law. The bill has passed its initial reading in the state Senate and is now in committee. Public safety reporter Joseph Pierre can be reached at jpierre@ This article originally appeared on The Fayetteville Observer: Jenesis Dockery death family files lawsuit in child's shooting death
Yahoo
26-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Portland Jetport's parking expansion plan lands in court
Feb. 25—A controversial plan to expand surface parking at Portland International Jetport has landed in court less than one month after the city's planning board approved the $8 million project. The Stroudwater Neighborhood Association filed an appeal Monday in Cumberland County Superior Court asking a judge to reverse the Jan. 28 approval of a plan to add 265 long-term surface parking spaces near the existing parking garage. The complaint asks that the project be sent back to jetport officials and the planning board for additional information and reconsideration. The association believes the board failed to fully consider or require the city-owned airport to provide relevant information about the project's wetlands impacts and compliance with sustainability goals outlined in the jetport's 2018 master plan, said Woody Howard, president of the 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. The board also failed to fully vet alternatives to expanding surface parking at the jetport, such as moving ahead with an anticipated parking garage expansion and providing shuttle service to unused parking spaces at The Maine Mall nearby in South Portland, Howard said. "Really, this complaint is about the process," Howard said Tuesday. "We came to the meetings well prepared. We feel like we weren't heard. The jetport didn't provide information that was requested, and when we submitted information based on data they did submit, they said we misinterpreted it." The association's 15-member board of trustees voted unanimously to file the lawsuit against the city, Howard said. City officials declined a request for interviews because they don't comment on pending litigation, said spokesperson Jessica Grondin. Airport Director Paul Bradbury and Assistant Director Zachary Sundquist didn't respond to a separate request. The parking project won reluctant board approval in January after jetport officials were asked to return with answers to environmental concerns that cropped up at an initial hearing in November. Faced with growing parking demand, especially during holidays and school vacations, the jetport plans to build a 667-space lot on 13 acres along Jetport Boulevard and Loop Road. The project would reconfigure and improve 402 existing paved and unpaved spaces, including a long-term valet parking lot and the so-called cellphone lot, which is a short-term parking area where family members, friends, and Uber or Lyft drivers wait for imminent arrivals. At the January meeting, board members voiced lingering concerns but acknowledged the city-owned jetport's importance to travelers across Maine and the limits of their purview in judging whether the project meets site plan standards. Board members were especially troubled by a requested waiver that would allow the jetport to fill about 11,000 square feet of wetlands when many neighbors and others dispute the need for expanded surface parking in light of the city's sustainability goals. They continued to question whether jetport officials had fully considered alternative solutions to growing parking demand and whether it made more sense to build another parking garage now instead of later. While many airports have shuttle-served offsite parking like the jetport's Pink Lot near Exit 46 of the Maine Turnpike, Bradbury has said parking needs to be within walking distance of the terminal to make it sustainable and have the smallest carbon footprint. The neighborhood group hopes jetport officials will reconsider shuttle parking at the mall, make more efficient use of parking they already have, and move forward with a parking garage expansion that would have a smaller physical footprint and fewer environmental impacts. "We agree there's a need for more parking," Howard said Tuesday. "That's why we question why they aren't building another parking garage already." Ultimately the board approved the project 4-1, with member Marpheen Chann opposed. Chann criticized the jetport's last-minute offer to add a conservation easement to prevent development of other wetlands on airport property, saying the board and the public didn't have a chance to fully consider the proposal. The board included the easement as a condition of receiving a building permit, with details to be worked out with planning staff. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection is reviewing the project. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has already authorized filling the wetlands. The Portland City Council also must vote on the jetport's plan to spend $8 million from its $39 million unrestricted cash fund balance. Copy the Story Link
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. sues Cape Elizabeth man over social media posts
Feb. 19—A Cape Elizabeth man is asking Maine's highest court to dismiss a libel lawsuit filed by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who accuses the man of making defamatory statements in social media posts during Kennedy's recent run for president. David Vickrey's request that the lawsuit be dismissed was denied in late January by Cumberland County Superior Court Justice Thomas McKeon. Vickrey and his attorney have since filed an appeal of that ruling with the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. Kennedy eventually dropped out of the presidential race and was confirmed last week as the Trump administration's secretary of Health and Human Services, an appointment that was controversial because of Kennedy's past criticisms of vaccines and his false claim that some vaccines cause autism. Kennedy's suit accuses Vickrey of making false claims on X and "in statements to third parties and the public" that Kennedy opposes all vaccines, that he helped cause a measles outbreak in Samoa and that he wanted to cause the death of Black people. It says Vickrey also republished falsehoods in a 2020 blog post he wrote for the progressive website Daily Kos about Kennedy's speech at a rally in Germany. Vickrey wrote that the rally was organized by right-wing extremists including a neo-Nazi group. Kennedy said Vickrey attributed the claim to a German article, but the article had actually reported the rally was organized by a democratic movement that opposes fascism and extremism and excluded the neo-Nazi group. "Defendant knew ... that the German article he was translating never said Mr. Kennedy joined, associated, supported or spoke on behalf of the neo-Nazi (National Democratic Party of Germany)," Kennedy's complaint says. "Despite knowing this ... defendant published the lie all over repeatedly, with more flamboyant falsehoods." Vickrey, meanwhile, has argued that the "alleged defamatory statements almost entirely consist of his sharing of articles and videos from other content providers," including his sharing of a YouTube video about Kennedy's role in the Samoa measles outbreak on X and his sharing of a link to an article about Kennedy's anti-vaccine stances harming Black people. In his motion to dismiss, Vickrey said the suit violates Maine's anti-SLAPP statute, which protects people from retaliatory lawsuits that target free speech. In addition, Vickrey said the blog post and some of the posts on X fall outside of a two-year statute of limitations on defamation. Kennedy also is a public figure who failed to show any actual damages or injury from the posts, Vickrey said. "For over one year, plaintiff, a well-known public figure from a prominent American political family, a former candidate for the United States presidency, and now a potential member of the administration of President-elect Trump, has threatened and harassed David Vickrey, a citizen of Maine who happens to share political beliefs that differ from those of the plaintiff," Vickrey's attorney wrote in the motion to dismiss the case filed in November. Attorneys for Kennedy did not respond to emails or voicemail messages seeking an interview about the case. Brian Suslak, a New Hampshire-based attorney for Vickrey, said that Vickrey is not commenting on the case at the moment. "We have filed an appeal of the order on the motion to dismiss and we await the Law Court's decision on the appeal," Suslak said in an email. In a statement to The Defender, a publication of the nonprofit Children's Health Defense founded by Kennedy, Kennedy's attorney Robert Barnes called the denial of the motion to dismiss "a big win." "The court found that repeating lies about Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that have been proven false by prior lawsuits is clear evidence of actual malice toward Kennedy," Barnes said. In the ruling against dismissal of the case, McKeon said the anti-SLAPP law is intended to apply to cases involving a government response to free speech, not the response of a candidate such as Kennedy. Arguments rejected McKeon said he could not say "beyond a reasonable doubt" that Kennedy would not be entitled to relief, and that it wasn't immediately clear that Vickrey was simply expressing his own opinion as opposed to making defamatory statements. McKeon also rejected Vickrey's argument that a statute of limitations would apply, saying that the republication of past statements can lead to new harms. And he said the Communications Decency Act cited by Vickrey protects internet users but not "information content providers" who contribute to, develop or create content, either in whole or in part. "The complaint does not suggest the tweets that reposted links to third-party sources are the sole instances of alleged defamation, but rather that defendant defamed plaintiff on multiple social media platforms and on multiple occasions," McKeon wrote. Vickery said in court documents that this is the third time Kennedy has threatened to or has actually filed a lawsuit against him, including a 2023 defamation suit filed in New Hampshire that was dismissed because of a lack of connection between the case and the state. The judge also denied an appeal after Kennedy's lawyer filed a motion a day late. Copy the Story Link
