|
This is your opportunity to express your views and opinions locally and globally about local issues, Internet issues, or whatever is on your mind. Letters may be edited for clarity and/or omitted due to time or space constraints. All letters must be signed and include the writer's address or email and telephone number. Please be non-libelous and in good taste. The Daily Me staff and/or advertisers do not take responsiblity for the views express in letters submitted. Monday, April 27, 2009 "You can feel good about Hood"…NOT! This slogan has brought smiles to the faces of young and old alike for several generations. I remember as a youngster, in the early 1960's, my dad shipped milk on the "Boston Market." The milk actually traveled less than 20 miles to the H.P. Hood cottage cheese plant in Newport, Maine…The best cottage cheese in the Northeast…The biggest producer of the same on the East coast. My 4th grade class and my 4-H club both took field trips there. We were given Hood Dixie Cups with individual wooden "spoons" taped to the tops which told us, "You can feel good about Hood." In the late 1960's, our farm switched to the Maine Market." Maine had a unique pricing system linked directly to consumer demand. There were several bottlers in the Bangor area, the bigger ones being Grant's Dairy, Smiley's, Footman's and Pleasant hill Dairy, probably more. Our milk went to Pleasant Hill, about 40 miles from the farm. These dairies tried to bottle about 90% of what producers sent there. The price was about 1/3 higher on the "Maine Market than on the "Boston Market," $16.00 compared to $12.)) per hundred weight (CWT), or about $1.00 per gallon at the farm compared to $1.50…a big incentive to be on the "Maine Market." A similar difference today is offered by the "Organic Market" versus the conventional market. Producers of organic milk receive about 30-50% more per gallon or CWT as do "conventional" farmers. To do this, we have to adhere to strict rules as to how our land is treated, using no chemical A.K.A. synthetic fertilizers or crop protection products. Our animals must be allowed to have access to green grass and sunshine, no unnatural medications, hormones or stimulants. It is not all about the money. It is a philosophy, a paradigm of returning to a simpler, more stress-free life for the family, farm and future. In 2005, Mark McKusick convinced H.P. Hood to look to Maine for a source of organic milk. Two companies, Horizon Organics and Organic Valley Coop., had been in the state since the mid-1990's, paying roughly $19 CWT for about 10 years. Mark could see that a third party would stir up some competition and, perhaps, make a price advantage for Maine organic producers. It worked. Our farm started shipping organic milk to Hood in July of 2006 at a price of $24.50 CWT, or about $5.00 over what it had been for roughly ten years. More increases were promised and some came. The other processors had to bring their prices in line with H.P. Hood, who stated that they wanted to be the "price leader in the organic market." They wanted most of their milk to come from Maine. They stuck their neck out at Mark's urging, and went to Washington County to pick up four family farms and also to Aroostook County, doing the same. It wasn't viable, but it would be; the potential was there. Aaron Bell of Tide Mill Organic Farm in Edmunds, ME was H.P. Hood's poster child for this new generation of family farms. With a history of six generations on the same land, this Downeast farm had not sold milk since Aaron was born. The farm started selling to Hood the day Aaron's son was born, bringing hope to aspiring farmers in Washington County where there hadn't been a dairy farm in nearly thirty years. In February of 2009, H.P. Hood, in a certified letter, informed Aaron that his organic milk contract would not be renewed…nor will the contracts of the other Washington County farms…nor will those of the farms in Aroostook County. Eight family farms currently find themselves without a market when H.P. Hood had gone after them as producers, promising everything but a termination letter. "You can feel good about Hood"…NOT! Less than a month later, two other producers in Central Maine were notified that their contracts would be terminated on October 1st, 2009, a six month notice. Mark McKusick and Richard Larry, the two producers who had worked so hard to get Hood into the area now find themselves cut off. They are very forthright with their opinions and everybody knows where they stand. They had not been quiet regarding Hood's about-face to its farmers. Our farm was wooed by Hood to renew our contract with them in July of 2008, but at a lower price than my earlier contract had paid. I chose to go with Organic Valley and terminated my relationship with Hood. H.P. Hood has gone back on its word to the organic family farms of Maine. They told us a story to get us to sign with them. Once we signed a contract, when renewal came up, they wanted us to be puppies, to "rollover" and sacrifice for the good of H.P. Hood. Hood's organic is labeled under the trade name of "Stoneyfield Milk." For the solidarity of the Maine daily industry, Maine farmers as a group, and the citizens of this great state, please join me and my family as we organize to boycott all Stoneyfield milk and H.P. Hood labeled products until our voices are heard. To The Editor; Friday, March 27, 2009 The past few weeks have brought a plethora of letters to the editor regarding MaineCare and its faults, its benefits and who's to blame. I had been working for and against MaineCare for at least the last eight years and possibly more years before that. During my freshman term in the Maine House of Representatives, it was voted by the majority party to increase the eligibility for MaineCare and add another 50,000 participants to the plan. When I asked, “Where's the funding coming from?” The majority leader responded with, “Don't worry, it'll be there.” Now that's an answer that explains everything, doesn't it? What I have seen is misappropriations, abuses and state incompetence on the part of the Department of Health and Human Services. Why there aren't better controls on who receives MaineCare, how much and how long the individual is able to make the claims is beyond me. Currently, there are over 270,000 people on MaineCare. This is serious when you consider that the population of Maine is only 1.3 million and that includes men, women and children not taxpayers. At this point in time, MaineCare is totally out of control and has a budget costing the taxpayer over 20% of the state budget of $6.1 billion and growing. And this doesn't include the current revelation that the system has been overspent by some $235 million! However, the wisdom in Augusta claims they can resolve this problem with $65 million in stimulus money, place it in the general fund and use it to leverage another $170 million from the federal government to total out the entire $235 million over expenditure! Now, that's what I call clever fiscal management. Mayo Regional Hospital is owed some $4 million dating back to 2005. MaineCare currently reimburses costs at 100%. However, the Legislature in its infinite wisdom has been debating dropping that down to 70% or even 56% of the Medicare fee schedule for physicians and other healthcare providers, starting in the new biennial budget. Hospitals have been fighting this along with a proposed cut in reimbursement to critical access (small, rural) hospitals such as Mayo. With one in five of the patients utilizing MaineCare either through the hospital or physician's offices, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who's paying the bills – the privately insured. As incredulous as it sounds, MaineCare recipients have been using the Mayo's facilities for any little medical problem. Why not? It's free. And there's no co-pay. Each time a MaineCare patient uses the ER the cost to the hospital is $341.20 for each patient. And if an ambulance is needed, you can add on another $675.00 plus $8.95 per mile traveled, with a patient, added to the costs to MaineCare. It takes expenditures like these to make you realize that something is very wrong with the way DHHS allocates their funding. As a matter of fact, the hospital cannot turn down a MaineCare patient, or any other patient, but at least a patient with insurance can receive guidance to a better and less costly form of treatment. MaineCare is not concerned with cost. As an example of just how MaineCare complies with the provider's bills, one optometrist received two long overdue checks from MainCare for $7500.00 each only to have them recalled by the state. A local dentist received a MaineCare check in the amount of $13,000 for itemized services rendered only to have the state recall the check. The optometrist has since left town and the dentist has withdrawn from MaineCare as a result. It seems that with the DHHS computer system totally useless, DHHS was fiscally shot gunning providers in hopes to keep the providers in the system. One provider received a check from DHHS in the amount of $100,000 for three patients! Obviously, the check wasn't cashed. And it gets worse. Over $500 million was sent out to providers. All but several million was reclaimed. However, our optometrist and dentist contributed their share back to the coffers of DHHS. Why are doctors joining hospitals and abandoning their practices? It seems very obvious to me – they can't rely on MaineCare to keep them in business. They'd sooner have a salary from the local hospital. Private health insurance is extremely expensive. Why you ask? Because a resident of Maine is not allowed to purchase a personal health insurance plan outside the borders of the State of Maine! The majority party in the Maine Legislature put this act into place. It's a supposed effort to pursue a single payer health insurance program where the state is totally responsible for all health care in the state. If the current MaineCare program is so far out of whack, what makes them think a single payer program will work any better? Where do we go from here? There was a referendum being circulated to overturn the private insurance restriction mandating insurance purchases within the state. It failed because of incomplete signatures. There's intent to redo the referendum and, from what I understand, it's in process. The wise thing for us to do, as concerned citizens, is to sign that referendum. When you consider that a family can purchase an insurance plan out of state for one third of what it costs to purchase that very same plan within the state it doesn't take much thought as to which direction one must go. Competition is a wonderful thing. Perhaps we should look at eligibility. Currently, the poverty level is set by DHHS and it allows participants to have a monthly income of up to 200% above poverty level. Maybe we should set it at 100% of poverty level. And with the instate health insurance plan mandate dissolved, health insurance would be affordable to all those who are working. Extenuating circumstances must be considered, but only with a personal monthly interview with a DHHS provider. Everybody has health services available to him or her. Law provides that no hospital can turn away a patient for financial reasons. Last year $1,288,173 was “written off” as bad debt by Mayo Regional Hospital never to be collected. And $1,521,580 was attributed to “charity care” by the hospital. Did MaineCare step in to help? Absolutely not. The patients hadn't been certified. It seems to me that the only way out of this dilemma is to overturn the healthcare insurance mandate with a referendum, allow outside insurers into the state and readjust eligibility to all MaineCare recipients. Otherwise, as the current soaring DHHS debt has shown us, the health system in the State of Maine will reach a point where the state will fail financially. The taxpayer is in trouble with an uncertain future and carrying on with the current MaineCare system by the State Legislature is unconscionable. Jim Annis Dover-Foxcroft 564-0820 To the Editor March 16-20 is National Long Term Care Administrators’ Week. Administrators must undertake a rigorous internship, followed by state and national board exams, in order to be entrusted with the care of a vulnerable population. There are ongoing educational requirements. They must be masters of multi-tasking, taking into account every aspect of a person’s lifestyle, not just medical needs, on a 24/7 basis. On behalf of the Maine Chapter of the American College of Health Care Administrators, I commend, salute, and thank those administrators in nursing homes and assisted living facilities who are committed to providing excellent quality of care and quality of life for Maine’s elderly. Congratulations on a job very well done! Sincerely, To the Editor First of all I have to comment that I love your updates and "Town Managers Report" on the TheDailyMe website. Judy does an awesome job with that site. As always probably these emails you receive from residents are not always positive and patting the elected officials on the back. I do have to say that I am quite impressed with what you have done so far and I enjoy reading your report as well as the internet broadcast which David Giles has set up and I try to watch faithfully and actually I have been a property owner in Dexter for about 15 years and until David started broadcasting (which I saw on Judy's website) I started viewing the town council meetings and started following town business for the first time. Though I am not considered a full time resident of Dexter (though I have paid approx $6,000 this past year on taxes in Dexter which include three properties, 2 on Lake Wassookeag and one on Pleasant street) due to the closing of Dexter Shoe Co. which I had to move as there was no jobs in Dexter, Newport, Dover, Guilford, etc.... which equaled my pay at Dexter Shoe Co, I moved away, I moved to Asia where all the shoe trade currently is. In the 6 years away each time I come back to Dexter for 6 weeks and my wife for approx 3 1/2 months a year. We take pride in that we buy local, we buy all of our building materials from Tillson,all of our gas from Exxon, all of our oil from Robinson's, all of our groceries from Buds, anything we can buy in Dexter we do and the little we can not find in Dexter we source out of town but we try to buy from little shops such as Dave's World and etc which has ties back to town.... We don't do this for the business, I don't buy the $30 gallon of paint from Tillsons where I know I can drive to Wal-Mart and get the same paint for $22 in worries to keep Tillsons open, I do it because they hire local people and I hope to think that extra $8 keeps those people employed so they do not have to go thru what I have done as its a strong possibility that they will not be as lucky as I and find a position like I have. So all this rambling has let me to this question(s), Why has the Utility district raised their rates 23.9% without explanation except in quote "raising cost of operating Dexter Waste Water system"? What is the increase of operating the waster water system? This is a public function, they should have the numbers and reason for public review. Where or whom can I contact to see this information? Can you help me in forwarding this email to the district or board or please let me know how I can contact them. I have searched for an email address for Hartland Cushman, Gregory Brawn ,Peter M. Mealey, Robert Crawford & Francis L. Kaufman and to no prevail. Since living in Asia its hard to communicate via phone due to time difference but I would like to suggest perhaps if David Giles could set up a web conference for some of these meetings. I have alot of questions, especially regarding the boat launch... I can not believe that is going to court and that these gentlemen oppose a "state funded" boat launch and my speculation is that this enormous increase is to pay for their lawyers in this case. What grounds or documentation do they have to justify this increase?? Was this voted on by the town in the past election? I was traveling and was unable to get a ballot so I am not sure what was on it but it seems that he majority of the town is for the launch except these gentlemen. I have a boat, I own properties on both the big and little lakes as mentioned above and I have a launch at my property on the big lake. This is not a personal issue for me, I will not use the launch as I will launch from my property BUT has anyone thought outside the box on this ......the launch is free!!!!!..... I take my boat on occasion to Big Indian, Moosehead, etc..... every time I go, no matter what lake I always fill my boat, truck buy sandwiches, soda, etc...... averages depending on gas $70 to $100 each time near the boat launch in that town... that is money spent in the town.... that could be Robinson's, that could be buds, could of been the Big Apple...could be Lakeshore Lunch.. This is a community thing and because the narrow minded people on the Utility board can not see this, it seems that they don't care about the future of the town. Too be honest I think its a personal thing where these people do not want boats on the lake or boats on the lake of size that will require a launch, this will generate revenue for the town at no cost!!! Their stand of endangering the water quality, what's their figures? where is their proof? My wife is Dexter born and family has owned a camp on the big lake for many many years and not too far from the intake, actually very close to the old Lunders camp. That lake has not changed in 50 years, what proof do they have saying that it will endanger the water quality?? This is all speculation. Paul & Laurel Curtis To The Editor: Seeing him empty out 20 odd years of memories from a small metal container really brought it home and despite Dean's jokes and effort at keeping things light, it was a hard thing to watch. So often I have read a brief blurb in the Doc Talk about someone with several years in the department retiring or moving on to another job and I have wondered what it's like for the friends and co-workers they leave behind. The Department of Corrections is an all too often thankless job and if it wasn't for so many of the senior staff many of us wouldn't have made it. Dean is one of those people that leave a hole in the Department and the hearts of the people he worked with. He has an uncanny knack for knowing when someone is down and would somehow always find the right thing to say. Even in a department where all staff shows bravery and commitment every time they come to work, Dean stood apart as someone special. In an emergency he was always first through the door and it has always been a standard joke here at CCF that you had a better chance of being hurt by Dean running over you than you did by any actual situation. It wasn't that Dean was a hot dog but rather that his concern for his co-workers dictated that he always put himself out in front. If someone had gotten hurt Dean would have taken it very personally. So many people encompass positive qualities, but Dean somehow manages to encompass them all. You had to be careful around Dean not to mention a plumbing or carpentry issue. Doing so would more than likely result in Dean showing up at your place with his tool box and his considerable knowledge and skill. If you mentioned a broken chain saw, Dean would just happen to show up the next day with an extra chainsaw for you to borrow until your's was fixed, more often than not, this too was done by Dean himself. He is the poster child for selflessness and it was never more evident than his announcing his retirement during the proposed down sizing here at CCF. The list of people who wanted to donate time for Dean while he fights another round of cancer was endless, but in true Dean fashion, instead of drawing full pay, he chose to retire and preserve someone's position. Dean is currently in Boston and will remain there for the next several weeks. He faces a long recovery in which to build his immune system back up from the aggressive chemo treatment he has received. We are currently collecting donations here at the CCF Sergeants' office to try and help defray a small portion of his medical and travel expenses as well as having a benefit supper for him. Anyone wishing to donate can contact the facility 24/7. The number to call is 207-285-0841. Sergeant John Roberts To The Editor: Also, a new boat launch would help improve the economy of Dexter, something that is desperately needed. What makes this deal a “no brainer” is that it would not cost the local tax payers one dime. The State will pay 100% of the cost. But, because five people on the Utility District refuse to use basic science in their decision making process, Dexter stands the chance of losing out once again. Not only does Dexter stand the chance of losing this opportunity, but tax dollars have to be paid to fight their arrogance in court. As if that wasn’t bad enough, now the average water/sewer bill has skyrocketed to help pay their side of the legal expenses. As for the arrogance level that reigns supreme on the Utility District, I only have to point to Greg Brawns own words. In an article from the SVWeekly.com, he stated “I would approximate that 90% of the boat traffic on the lake is not big boats and any that can't fit under the bridge can usually gain access at other points on the lake". Here is a news flash for Brawn and others on the board. Not everyone owns water frontage and even if we did, not all of us finds is necessary to cause erosion and contaminate the water by backing vehicles into the lake wherever we chose instead of using a boat launch. Perhaps the Utility District should be forced to go through mandatory training on the environmental benefits of using a boat launch. While we are at it why not give them a basic science class on the near impossibility of a potential gas/oil leak at the proposed boat launch site, being able to travel 700 feet before evaporating and defy the laws of physics by sinking 25-35 feet before able to enter the intake valve (this appears to be their one and only argument against the boat launch being replaced). Yes, I realize that mandatory training probably won’t occur anytime soon, but it would be nice if those who decide to serve on different boards and committees at least took the time to educate themselves. I would make a plea to the Greg Brawn and the other members of the board to demonstrate how gas can somehow sink in water. That is assuming it could drift 700 feet before evaporating. I would also make a plea for them to demostrate how having boats passing under the bridge and coming within feet of the intake valve is somehow safer for the drinking water than having it 700 feet away. As far as I can see, the decisions made by the Utility District Board of Trustees has not only harmed the economy and image of Dexter, but also the water quality. Fortunately, there are more of us residents who have grown weary of the horrible decisions that have served special interest and have ultimately been to the detriment of the community. Unfortunately, we still need more people. I would ask those of you who care about Dexter and its future to attend meetings, write editorials, run for office, or simply begin talking to those around you. By doing this, you will do something that the trustees of the Utility District have neglected to do, become informed. As for the Utility District itself, here is a list of the current trustees with their contact information and when their term is up. If you have a desire to see Dexter improved and wants to make decisions that improve the entire population instead of the few elite, or simply want to employ basic science in your decision making process, please consider running for office. Hartland Cushman (924-7076) 1/08-12/10David Giles davidleegiles@gmail.com www.downtownmaine.tv To The Editor: I have this to say: I would think that the Water District would welcome a ramp 861 feet away from the intake, instead of routing all boats from the ramp on the little lake directly over the intake. Any boat launched at the new ramp would head away from the intake pipe instead of directly over it. But that would make sense. the Water District's adamant objection to the ramp just doesn't make sense. I think that the District would concern itself with the pollution of the lake generated by the snowplows blasting their sand and salt laden snow load directly into the lake waters all winter long, rather than worrying about perceived dangers of an upgrade to the existing ramp, holes in the floors of ice fishing shacks and if the shacks are 100 yards from shore. I find the chairman's assertion that, …”those who think a one foot lowering would harm the lake do not know what they are talking about” to be a disservice to the State Fisheries Biologist, and another example of the Board's, “don't confuse me with facts, my mind's made up” mentality. They have consistently been unwilling to provide any scientific evidence of their claims, and have resorted to disinformation, scare tactics and stonewalling to impede the project. They refer to information provided by the Maine Rural Water Board as evidence of the danger of “oil gas a human contagion contamination.” Sounds like an official State regulatory agency doesn't it? In actuality, it is a private non profit corporation based in Auburn, whose stated purpose is to “protect” the inland waters. Can anyone smell tree huggers? The statement that the Department of Human Services, you know that agency that deals primarily with families, child abuse and such very important issues, recommends that all boat ramps should be located at least two miles from an intake is interesting. That would be fine on a lake that has no development along its shoreline, but really has no bearing on a ramp that has been in existence for years, that has been slated by the State for an upgrade. Why haven't they pursued an opinion from the EPA? Maybe they have, and it wasn't what they wanted to hear. I find amusing the statement that 90 % of the boat traffic on the lake is comprised of small boats and that any large boat can usually gain access at other points on the lake. Translation: if you are friends with a private owner on the lake who has a private ramp, you can gain access to the lake if that person gives you permission to use his ramp. There are no other access points on the lake. What I don't find amusing is the veiled threat of having to shut down the Water plant (Sand Filter) if there were an accident (spill) at the ramp. I want to know how gasoline and oil, an EPA rated class one spill, will make it 681 feet laterally and down around 25 feet vertically, get to the intake. By the way, EPA's recommended action for this type of spill is to simply let it evaporate. Depending on wave action this usually takes about an hour. One last comment, since when is it the Planning Boards responsibility to develop plans for a project? That is the responsibility of the developer, not the Planning Board's. The Planning Board's responsibility is to determine if the project is in compliance with the town's existing ordinances, Comprehensive Plane and Shoreline zoning. I believe they did just that. Jeff Nicholas To The Editor: We have an 18' Sea Ray bowrider that barely fits under the bridge at water levels currently maintained. It has a fairly low rise windshield. We have no doubt that a slightly larger boat couldn't get under the bridge. The Water District's comments regarding lowering water levels are comical. We would invite anyone to come down to our camp and take a look at the erosion caused by artificially high levels maintained in the lake going back about 2 or 3 years. Our family has owned property on the lake since 1955 and their was a small beach area at the family camp in Waldheim where the water is now 1.5' deep. We've spoken to friends in Dexter who raised the water level and erosion issue when it was happening and they were less than politely brushed off. Now they are offering to keep the levels lower? We don't believe nor trust them to keep their word. Assuming that a lowered water levels will allow greater boat access we offer this. Why is it that boats using the present ramp passing within 200' of the intake when entering the big lake is a good thing but a boat ramp over 600' away is bad? It seems to me that keeping boats farther away from the intake would be a good thing and the new ramp would help to accomplish this. In addition, the proliferation of private, unregulated boat ramps promotes unnecessary shore erosion which could be avoided by a properly constructed boat ramp. Despite pronunciations to the contrary, it is clear that the Water District is attempting to restrict or eliminate boats on the lake. There is no other conclusion to be made. Opposing a free (to the Town of Dexter) boat ramp, offering no solid evidence why it shouldn't be built is the height of arrogance. The sad part is that the town must expend precious resources to fight this lawsuit. Sincerely, To the Editor; I can remember boats being launched from the “informal launch” site going back 40 or more years. I always remember the lake to be so clear you could see bottom through 25 feet of water. We all knew that the lake was clear because of the many springs that fed the lake kept it that way. The lake was always our water supply, cold and crisp. In those days, most all the structures on the lake were summer cottages that drew their water from the lake and their sewerage systems were questionable at best. But, they were summer homes. You could check the phone book and find many entries that listed “summer residence Lake Wassookeag”. We all shared the lake and life was good. Then things changed. The first sign of change was some of the family summer cottages were sold or inherited and soon became year round residences, but the lake stayed clear cold and crisp, and people continued to use the launch site. And we all shared the lake with no conflict. Soon, most of the summer homes became year round and with that came the start of, “My Lake” syndrome. We never had one before, but soon we needed an organization to protect “our lake.” And the lake remained Clear Crisp and cold as it always had. Before you knew what was going on, the ice fishermen were no longer welcome on “our lake”, so ordinances were passed that “protected” the lake by not permitting holes in the bottoms of fish houses and they could not be placed closer that 100 yards from shore. The lake remained clear, cold and crisp, but we were not sharing the lake anymore. Now we have our lake protected by our lake organization and The Water District. They are afraid that those nasty, noisy boats that are using that ramp might discharge some gasoline and two cycle oil into the lake and pollute the water supply. Of course in the 40 years of my memories of the lake, this has never occurred, but that doesn't matter, it COULD happen. In reality it is far more likely that a motor vehicle would run off the road in that area. Most boaters I have known myself included have a great aversion to the sinking of their boats and try vigorously to prevent that from happening. But it could happen, when all those boats are trying to get out of a storm and converge on the bridge to get back to the ramp on the little lake. And the lake remains clear cold and crisp. And now we have gotten so far away from sharing the lake that we have the Water District, funded by the taxpayers, suing the town Council and Appeals Board, funded by the tax payers, over improving, or closing the ramp on the big lake. An arbitrator has been hired at over $300 an hour to help settle this squabble, again paid for by the tax payers. The Water District says they will accept compromise, but in reality they want the ramp closed, which has the effect of denying the people of Maine access to the lake. Another solution offered by the Water District is for the State to purchase water front property to construct a ramp with 6 parking spots away from the water intake. This would limit non- waterfront Wassookeag home owners to a very limited access and generate another round of “Not in My Backyard” by adjacent landowners of any site that was available. Comments Such as, pollution is not likely from the landowners ramps, don't hold up to scrutiny. Are they all running electric motors? If they are electric, what about the acid in the batteries? Is anyone monitoring if the ramp owner takes his boat to another body of water and then returns it to the Lake? If the Water District has the money, provided by the taxpayers, to sue over this, why haven't they considered spending the money to extend the water pipe away from the ramp area? What it boils down to is this. The State DOT offered to provide a Free State of the art ramp to the citizens of Dexter, and special interest groups have pulled everything they can come up with to prevent or stall the project. Just remember folks, that if the ramp access is closed and blocked off with boulders. it not only prevents you from launching your boats on the big lake in the summer, it removes your ability to place your “no holes in the floor” ice shack a minimum of 100 yards from shore from that site. And the lake remains Clear Cold and Crisp and Inaccessible. To the Editor; Selectman Perry has inferred that Selectman Edgerly is abusing the town's trust. In effect, she's casting serious doubt on his honesty, integrity and forthrightness. Sadly, this attack on his character is doing nothing but causing dissent and injury to the Town of Dover-Foxcroft. I know – I've been getting the phone calls. Many people of this town know Elwood Edgerly as an upstanding citizen, a Boy Scouter and a friend to all in need. He's always willing to jump in to help where help is needed. For instance, he loaned his heavy equipment to the town for some local sewer/water work. It didn't cost the town a penny. In another instance, he traveled all the way to Bangor to purchase a piece of equipment to be used at the Morton Avenue project, knowing full well that the cost would be much less in Bangor. And never charged the town for his time or travel purely in the interest of the town's fiscal problems. What did it actually cost the town? Only the purchase price of the needed equipment. I suppose we could have bid this out but more than likely, at a substantially higher cost and an extended delay in time and time is money. As Clerk of the Works for the Morton Avenue project, he has charged the town absolutely nothing. Clerks of the Works generally charge a minimum of 10% of the total cost of the project. For many nights he's spent hours babysitting the boilers in the Morton Avenue project because they were untested, not working well and needed close scrutiny. What did he charge the town for the hours spent mothering the boilers? Zip, zero, nada. Who but Elwood, possessing the needed expertise, would make this offer of his time and trouble? Dover-Foxcroft is a town of volunteers. Most citizens belong to one organization or another – sometimes many organizations. I myself belong to many organizations all of which require some form of volunteerism. If Selectman Elwood Edgerly is guilty of something, it's his volunteerism to the town of Dover-Foxcroft and his dedication as a concerned citizen. Because of this, he must answer to charges that he's unscrupulously taking from the Town's coffers, without warrant, and with the help of the Town Manager. Nothing could be further from the truth. And believe me, the Town Manager is way beyond suspicion. He's a truly honest man. It would seem to me that any unauthorized expenditures would surely show up in an auditor's report. Unless, of course, the auditor is in cahoots too. The only charges of time Selectman Edgerly has made to the town is for his son's wages. Selectman Edgerly, as well as many of us in agreement, can't expect one's partners to volunteer hours of labor without recompense. If Selectman Perry is in earnest about her accusations, it's been suggested that she take her information and send it to the Sheriff's office or the State Police for thorough investigation. These are the only proper channels for independent investigatory procedures. To expect a local organization or the Town's Charter Commission to belabor these accusations is way beyond their expertise. It seems her latest tack is to forward her information to the State Attorney General, the District Attorney, the Town Auditor and the Town Attorney for action. Hopefully, her information, one way or another, will bring resolve to the upheaval in the town's politics. However, in the past the Town Attorney has recused himself from this type of process indicating that he represents the whole town and not just the interests of an individual selectman. At each meeting, the Select Board receives a list of vouchers in their meeting packages. At any time questions from the Board could be asked regarding a questionable expenditure. Having personally been responsible in my previous duties, such as Finance Chairman of a school board and a scrutinizer of state budgets, I have found nothing questionable in the Board's voucher list in my brief tenure as a Select Board member. But that's just me. None of the other Select Board members have questioned suspicious expenditures either. Regarding Selectman Edgerly's vouchers, I'm informed that they are for material or equipment purchases for the town. Going out to bid for every conceivable item purchased by the town is not in the best interests of the town in time, money or expedience. The only requirement for expenditure is approval by the Town Manager. However, many projects have gone out to bid and outside contractors have done well by the taxpayers. Please keep in mind that Dover-Foxcroft has no ordinance regarding bidding. Therefore, bidding out every project is moot. From what I understand, the $177,000 Select Board member Perry questions, is from bills submitted by Select Board member Edgerly going back several years and not only charges made to the Morton Avenue project. So where do we go from here? It seems to me, so far, that there are too many accusations and no positive proof about the implications that unearned money has exchanged hands to benefit Selectman Edgerly. I congratulate Selectman Joyce Perry for her concerns about the town's welfare. I feel certain that she is only trying to do what's best for the town and its citizens in her own mind. But this is Dover-Foxcroft, Maine not Boston, Massachusetts. In Massachusetts money and taxes are not a problem. Here, in Dover, what really counts is that a person with a certain expertise is willing to offer that expertise on a purely voluntary basis. There are many of us in town and Elwood Edgerly is one of those people. Sincerely, To the Editor; Lake Trout: The lake trout population in Wassookeag is a naturally occurring species that uses shallow rock shoals and shoreline to maintain their numbers. In Wassookeag they use the water near the causeway and adjacent shoreline and other suitable and similar habitat around the lake in the reproductive act to deposit their eggs from mid October to mid November. After the eggs hatch the resulting lake trout fry usually move out to deep water usually about May 1. With that in mind the Department stipulates that water levels in lake trout waters not be permitted below the October 1st water level until May 1st of the following year unless other concerns are noted, and Wassookeag has other fish species that require maintenance of stable water levels. Smelt: The smelt population at Wassookeag is also a naturally occurring fish species important as forage and bait fish production. Many fish species and particularly the salmon, lake trout, and brook trout rely on smelt for food. Smelt require access to the tributaries of Wassookeag in addition to scattered shallow water areas around the lake for maintaining their numbers through reproduction. Their act of reproduction occurs close to ice out and has been noted at Wassookeag to occur from early April to May 1st or even later. The eggs are scattered on all substrate and usually hatch within three weeks depending on water temperature. Although the Department does not have a policy with regard to water level maintenance for protection of spawning smelt populations it is recommended that waters that have smelt should be maintained for access to tributaries and water level maintained until eggs have hatched. Bass species: Bass are also a naturally occurring species that uses shallow to somewhat deeper areas for reproduction with male bass guarding the nest after the deposit of eggs. Bass species spawn when mean water temperatures approach 60 degrees F. If water levels are manipulated either up or down during the spawning season nest abandonment often occurs and that results in egg and fry loss at the bass nest. Our department stipulates that water levels for lakes and ponds with bass populations maintain a stable water level from May 1 to July 1 to insure bass reproductive success. Summary on fish populations: The proposal to lower the water levels in the spring would result in hardship to many fish species and result in inconsistent and possibly poor resulting fisheries. Wassookeag is unique in that the good water quality for salmonid fish species provides a drawing of enthusiastic anglers. It would be a detriment to the those interested in the fishery at Wassookeag if the fishery were not maintained, and there are many good reports of those who make Wassookeag their destination. If action is taken that is deemed detrimental to the fish populations of Wassookeag Lake then it will be necessary to petition the Department of Environmental Protection to determine proper water level management. Access Concerns: The site at the former picnic area is used for both open water and ice fishing access, with the majority of open water anglers using the old club site on Little Wassookeag when water levels are such that watercraft can maneuver under the Route 23 bridge. Ideally a better site on Big Wassookeag would be best. At the present time concern for use at the picnic area site is suspect because of water quality concerns for the Utility. In my lengthy tenure with the Department I have observed that on many regional waters individual access sites on private lands are invariably being maintained and upgraded to the detriment of water quality more frequently then should be allowed. This practice is being ignored by the DEP and the legislature at many waters in Maine. All inland water over 10 acres in size belong to all the citizens of Maine and not to the individual who owns a small portion of the shoreline. It should be noted that Wassookeag Lake is very similar in use to many waters in Maine and access denied would result in a heritage that many are not willing to give up. Sincerely, To the Editor; You see my husband and I are looking for our "quiet haven" home to retire in. We are looking for a home on a lake or pond in Maine a state we have fallen in love with for the past 14 years. Before we were to see a new realtor, who would show us properties we decided that we wanted to take a drive by ourselves and check out the town of Dexter it was out of the area we were looking at, but I loved the name. As we drove onto Maine Street in Dexter that warm feeling of being home fell into my stomach I can't explain it. That feeling was making me want to get out of the car and walk the short streets of Maine streets and explore them. Seeing that little custom gift shop on the corner, looking through the windows of the coffeehouse and seeing people enjoying that hot cup of coffee getting caught up on the local gossip. You see this wasn’t even Christmas yet, it was the Thanksgiving Weekend where we all gear up for the upcoming rush of trying to get all of the holiday tasks completed before the big day. Finally we met our realtor, for the first time, and set out to go back to the area surrounding Dexter. Our realtor Lea diffidently loved Dexter, after all it is her hometown so she drove us around the area and lake. She told me of the good people in Dexter and what pride she felt about the Town. Well, sadly we didn’t find a property this trip. But I am writing this to, I guess everyone who does have the privilege of living in Dexter. Keep safe the feeling of your Town, keep the warmth and charm. Maybe someday when it snows enough, no traffic can move, I can come back to Dexter, steal away and get a sleigh and master that oh so very steep hill leading into Main streets down from the Brewster Inn. I’ll be the one with the huge smile on her face and screaming all the way down stopping in front of the coffeehouse and getting a quick hot cocoa to go. Please be kind to the kooky out Sider who envies all that live in Dexter. My husband and I could only wish to be blessed to call this small town home. With Regards, To the Editor; As for the meeting itself, the DUD's only valid concern about the launch that I could see, dealt with idling boats and the discharge of fuel into the water. My only argument concerning that, and the argument the council failed to bring up, was that of all the other boats that the lakeside owners have that idle around the lake all summer long. Wouldn't that be a much larger concern to the water quality than a few boats each day using a properly built boat launch? Another issue that should have been raised but was not has to do with all of the improperly constructed boat launches that exist around the lake already. During the first mediation meeting it was brought up that over 20 different launches exist around the lake. I would argue, and I think that most valid scientific study would argue, that those boats going in and out of the water pose a much greater risk to not only the drinking water, but the ecosystem itself. Think of all the erosion that is being caused by the lake side owners who decide to simply back their vehicles into the water to launch their private boats. How about the increased threat of an invasive species or plant life invading the lake? Wouldn't a central boat launch for all to use be much safer to the water supply and easiser for monitoring boats being launched? Has there been a survey conducted by the DUD to see if a single boat launch is being used on other water supplies? I will be willing to bet that there are such bodies of water in Maine. Unfortunately these concerns and others were not brought up. It seemed to me that most of the council, with a few exceptions, came to the meeting with the intent of extending the stay on litigating that now exist instead of finding a permanent solution. In my opinion that by the end of the meeting the DUD led them, as by a leash, to the exact place that they wanted the council to be. Personally, I feel that a final solution should be brought up sooner than later, even if that means litigation. The longer it takes to come to that solution the less chance there will be of the State paying for it. Dave Pearson brought up in the meeting that the fees that the State set aside for legal expenses dealing with the boat launch has already been tapped into. How much longer is it going to take with the budget crisis the State is facing before the funds set aside to build the launch will be depleted? I think the DUD understands this concept much better than the council and are more than willing to "play out the clock". David Giles To the Editor; Moving the intake pipe is a non option because the Water District has yet to prove that the new ramp would cause any pollution. Artificially controlling the level of the water in the spring without studies to determine what, if any, negative effects this will have on the ecosystem. What happened to the instructions to the Water District by the arbitrator to bring back proof of any danger to the water supply? The Water Districts stubborn stand on this issue makes one wonder if the contamination is the true issue with the ramp. The Town Council owes it to the taxpayers to hold out for that proof. The answer to this is simple. If there is a serious potential for pollution of the water intake pipe then the project should be scrapped. If there is no pollution issue, the Town council should proceed with the State's plan. As I write this, the meeting is in progress. I'm betting on the adjustments to the lake level. To the Editor; I grew up on the Williams Rd in Newport. I have relatives buried in the Weeks Cemetery in Corinna. It has become a concern of mine that the town of Corinna has allowed a hunting cottage to be built on the site of the cemetery.This year there has been added a camper trailer. I am wondering if this is to become a camp ground. Corinna town officials have no response. I am also wondering if any Dexter people have family buried there. It would be nice to have a article on this matter. The cemetery also contains Civil War veterans. I feel it should be an honored site and respected. In my family it is also believed that knoll is also an Indian burial ground. What are people thinking today. I wish someone would investigate this, visit the site and take photos before it gets any bigger. Thank you. To the Editor; Some might think she deserved what she got. After all she chose to be with another man and he found them together, but that doesn't justify murder. By the sounds of it she had her own addictions but who's to say he (Jeremy) wasn't part of the reason she ended up with these issues? She was born innocent and developed into the person she became through the experiences of her life. If he was not satisfied with their relationship he could have chosen to leave. Instead he chose murder. Perhaps because he felt that she was his property and he had the right. Now in 4 years he has the possibility of being able to walk the streets and attach himself to another woman. I can't help but feel that this sends a message to men that they really can get away with murder. In this age of concern about homeland security we should also be more focused on this threat to our homeland, the true security of our homeland; the very lives of our mothers, daughters, sisters, aunts, cousins, children and families. Have you ever wondered what it must be like to not even be able to feel secure in your own home? How does the effect of that, shape our development as we grow? How does that affect the safety of the community when a lot of the people live in constant fear. I feel it gives big meaning to the phrase “Be it ever so humble there's no place like home”. Sincerely, 
Copyright 1997-09 The Daily ME, All Rights Reserved * Owned & Operated by Judy Craig Consulting Updated: May 7th. Powered by Points South |