Selectmen, Town of
Dear Selectmen, Town of
Lloyd and Betty Jordan
Everett and Cyndi Grant
Selectmen
Town of
Selectmen Murphy, Stevens and Batson:
As
owners of property on the West Branch of the
On
March 9, 2004, following very brief discussion and inaccurate information,
Article #28 of the Town Warrant was passed with 66 yes votes and 61 no votes.
The article read:
To
see whether the Town wishes to restore tidal flow to the West Branch of the
Pleasant River, subject to the provision that the Town bear no financial costs
in excess of $5000.00, that the Town landing be protected and upgraded, that
private homes, wells and septic systems be protected and/or upgraded, and that
the final plan be approved by the Selectmen of the Town of Addison.
The West Branch Study Committee, an entity appointed by the selectmen is
not considering any option other than the removal of the tide gates. This being
the case we fear that proper consideration is not being given to the desires of
landowners within the area of potential flooding. This is reinforced by the fact
that the committee has failed to ascertain and document the desires of those
potentially affected property owners. By focusing 100% on removing the tide
gates, the Study Committee shows no consideration to the inherent rights of
private property ownership.
During the discussion prior to the vote on said Article #28 selectman Thomas
Batson stated that they would get landowner approval before proceeding. We have
enclosed the results of our survey of landowners that we actually conducted some
time ago but have hesitated to publish in the hopes that the Study Committee
would eventually perform a survey of their own thereby fulfilling the promise
made by selectman Batson. The enclosed survey results concludes that at least
82% of the acreage involved is owned by people opposed to any actions that would
change the current status or usage of their property. We do qualify the survey
results by letting you know we did not survey 100% of the landowners, but did,
indeed, receive survey results regarding 82% of the total acreage in
We
are concerned that the Study Committee continues to receive financial support
for their ‘study’ of only one side of this issue, which puts the landowners at a
distinct disadvantage. For the landowners to defend themselves and their
property from this unwanted change, personal assets would have to be expended,
potentially creating financial hardship for citizens who merely want to have
control of their private property.
We
hope that the Study Committee would be interested in knowing which landowners
would prefer not to have their land flooded in light of the statement made by
Selectman Michael Murphy immediately prior to the town vote in March of 2004.
Selectman Murphy made the statement that any landowners that did not want their
property flooded could have it protected by a dike, built at no expense to the
landowner. We believe this to be a crucial issue as the timing of the statement
likely contributed to the passing of an article in a very close vote. It would
be of interest to us if this may also influence the willingness of other
agencies and organizations and financial supporters to participate with the
Study Committee in pursuing this project. Without determining exactly which
landowners wish to have their property flooded, the Study Committee may be
investing vast resources in a project that ultimately results in very few acres
actually being involved. By not quantifying the actual flooded acreage they
thereby are making erroneous claims about any possible benefits this project
could have for the
It
is disconcerting that the affected land has been reported at various times via
notes and correspondences to be roughly:
·
2000 acres
as stated in notes from a meeting at the salmon hatchery in
·
1500 acres
in an undated letter
from selectmen Batson and Stevens to the USDA NRCS
·
1000 acres
as referenced by Department of the Army dated July 1999
·
500 acres
as listed in the Preliminary Restoration Plan from Department of the Army in
correspondence dated January 2004
·
196.3 acres
in Addison and 94.8 acres in
We
must emphasize that of the 196.3 acres in
We
ask that before public resources are expended, the Selectmen suspend the
activities of the West Branch Study Committee until said Selectmen have
independently determined landowner interest in this project and have an accurate
assessment of how much acreage is involved.
Sincerely,
Lloyd Jordan
Betty Jordan
Cyndi Grant
Enclosures
Cc:
US
Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Dept. of the Army
New England District, Corps of Engineers
MDOT, Devin Anderson
Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnership\
February
24, 2006
Lloyd and
Betty Jordan
PO Box 81
Addison,
ME 04606
RE: West
Branch Study Committee
Dear Mr.
and Mrs. Jordan,
The Board
has reviewed your letter dated 2/8/06 and the attached materials. The concerns
expressed in the letter have been reviewed with the West Branch Study Committee.
The committee has provided the Board with a response to your letter. A copy of
the response is attached.
Members
of the committee were present at the Selectmen’s meeting on 2/22/06. They gave
the board a review of their response to your letter and were questioned by the
Selectmen and other citizens that were in attendance.
The
Selectmen received a letter from the Columbia Selectmen requesting that the
committee’s activities not be suspended.
It has
always been the intent of the Selectmen that the committee looks at all options.
We feel that the committee has reaffirmed their commitment to look at all
options. We have charged the committee with the additional responsibilities of
looking at landowner rights and what effects, if any, a change from fresh water
wet lands to salt water marsh land will have on the land values and land use.
It is
very important that the committee continue to have the opportunity to receive
public and private funding to be used for scientific research and engineering
work. We need to do hydrologic and hydraulic modeling. Without grant money these
studies would not be possible. The information received in the studies will
provide the landowners with valuable information about their properties and both
towns with valuable information about the West Branch.
Replacement of the Dike Bridge and rebuilding of Point Street will be major
capital improvement projects that will need to be done regardless of whether or
not the gates are removed. The DOT could request that the town pay 20% or more
of the cost of the project. This is the current match requirement that DOT has
requested on a proposed local road reconstruction project on the Basin Road.
Point Street needs to be rebuilt in the area where it crosses the brook.
Jordan
Letter, Page 2
This
sections floods now when we have a major rainstorm. The State does not have the
funds available for it’s share of the project cost.
Where will the funds come from? Restoration grant money could be one
source.
We encourage you and the
other landowners to join the committee. If you do not want to join the committee
as a member please consider attending the committee meetings.
Please
remember that this is a study. No
decisions are being made. The
committee estimates that it will be another two or three years before they have
the information necessary to pull together a list of options.
This study is extremely important, not only for the information that we
are receiving, but because it enhances the likelihood that we will have some say
with the DOT when they decide to replace or renovate the Dike Bridge.
Sincerely,
Board of
Selectmen
CC:
Everett and Cyndi
Grant
West Branch Study
Committee
Selectmen Town of
Columbia
USDA, NRCS
Dept. of Army, Corps of
Engineers
MDOT, Devin Anderson
Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnership
NOAA Restoration Center