Bradley abstains from votes amid legal proceedings

Bradley abstains from votes amid legal proceedings

CUMBERLAND – Citing concern over the legality of business being conducted by the Town Council during an ongoing court case, Councilor Peter Bradley abstained from all council votes during a meeting Nov. 6.

Bradley is contesting the council’s move to remove him from the council presidency. The Valley Breeze reported last week that the case is moving to R.I. Supreme Court after a Superior Court judge decided that the matter wasn’t in that court’s purview.

Bradley went to the main lectern during the public comment portion of the Nov. 6 meeting to tell his colleagues that he believed he should be presiding over meetings in keeping with the charter, but elected not to disrupt town business as the debate plays out in court, deferring to town attorneys’ opinion that votes can proceed. He reiterated that town solicitors are not keeping taxpayers in mind by pushing the matter of whether he was properly removed from his position out of Superior Court where they could have allowed it to be decided.

“So, I will let that office make a determination as to who should preside over meetings of this council, keeping in mind that I am present, ready, willing and able to do so,” he said. “Based on my presence, I will also point out to all members of the public and persons bringing business before this council, there is certainly a question of legality as to all business being conducted.”

Added Bradley, “To the extent that I am present at meetings and do not preside, for any reasoning, actions taken by this council are not proper based on the charter, or in other words not legal.”


Not sure why the town wouldn’t want a quick resolution to this litigation. I understand driving up Bradley’s costs might be the motivation but depending on the outcome those costs may come back to the taxpayer. I am not sure what Bradley did but I never witnessed him making comments under his breath like the new Council leader appears to sometimes do..especially when Rep McLaughlin shares feedback to the Council

If the council president has lost the confidence and trust of the council, why would he or she want to remain as president?

All this nonsense is over hearsay . So if your are on the council and dont like what the president is saying you just vote them out ? He is the only one on the council I trust.

You trusted the judgement of the council to appoint him as their President but now that they all no longer have confidence in him, including people who voted for him as president, (i.e they're giving you an answer you don't like) now you somehow don't trust their judgement? Seems like it is not so much you have an issue with the Council appointing their leadership, you have an issue with them appointing leadership that you don't like.

Better question is... If your council members make false allegations against the council president, why would you want them as your council?

as I understand it, no-one is getting "voted out." This is about leadership on the town Council.

The people did not vote him in as president of the town Council.

Bradley's abstaining from all votes has the effect of removing his voice from the conversation. This is a decision he made, not forced by anyone else. He silenced himself. The people voted for him to represent them. So he should vote.

Like and trust have different meanings . his down fall when he voted against pay raises .