This is it. Make No Mistake Who You Are...
4FU 4 Fingers Up 2016 with Mothers Day Bling and 55 Shades of Gray Hair. Yo- Born A Joisey Girl With My Heart In Maine since '69. Ayuh.
5/12/2016 Wow- a year to the date of my last entry. Juggling so many blogs. So much corruption. Let's organize already.
http://bangordailynews.com/2016/05/09/news/midcoast/rockland-mayor-apologizes-for-asking-resident-to-criticize-fellow-councilor/comments/
Whether people are realizing it or not, city councilor form of
government all over Maine is out of control. It is a dangerous, lose,
cronyism form of governing. What the mayor has done here, is done in
many other forms, by others, all over Maine. It should be absolutely
illegal for a city councilors to be able to vote in a real estate tax
rise, without a popular vote. Our budgets are out of control, our
budgets are being abandoned by the state, because the state knows the
city councilor will raise mills for whatever the budget comes to. They
will raise the mills, because they can, it is power out of control.
Agreed. There is no oversight of municipal officials.
Independent oversight committee's by the residents, town to town, to
the State. Time is wasting in posting and blaming. Residents are
unorganized and easy to silence when not unionized. Start Moral Mondays
in Rockland, Rockport, Camden, Belfast, Searsport, Bucksport, Bangor and
Brunswick immediately. Unification undivided.
www.moralmonday.blogspot.com
Laurie Allen
laurieallen55@msn.com
5/12/2015 If there is any interest in meeting for Moral Mondays at the Belfast
City Park Pavilion, send me an email and I'll be happy to help. Since no
one came the last time, it is clear that I am wasting my time. I won't
go there anymore. laurieallen55@msn.com
This is what I
wanted to share with the residents from the Moral Mondays meeting
last night @ 7pm Belfast City Park Pavilion. No one came. Sad, but I
was happy to be there. It is beautiful.
5/5/2015 In
the Belfast City Council meeting tonight, City Manager Joe Slocum is
placing more debt to the tax payer. Over the recent years, they have
depleted the surplus including the mandatory 6 month cushion to cover
operating expenses. In 9/2014, for the first time in over 30 years.
City Manager Joe Slocum pushed through a 4 million dollar tax
anticipation note. City Council voted it right through without ANY
concern or discussion. Even Mayor Ash was shocked that there was not
even a discussion. But, probably part of the ploy that Heil Hurley
uses as well to save face.
Tonight they will
crush us with another bond anticipation note of $1,000,000 and a
later issuance of a general obligation bond NOT TO EXECEED
$2,150,000. This is for the downtown revitalization, Front Street and
clean up of the Maskers building- all being coined as “The
Project”.
Wait until the
new school district, 5 years in the planning and spending with no
saving, hits us in the face. Per the Bangor Daily news 6/2014- The mil
rate for the 2014-15 city budget contained an 8 percent jump in the
municipal budget to $8.66 million. Because of that increase and the
anticipated increase in the school budget, Belfast property taxpayers
can expect the city’s mill rate to rise to 21.91 from 20.8 last year.
The increase will mean an additional $111 in property taxes per $100,000
of valuation.
Current budget is underway that is just stupid. Line by line to cut a
buck on operating expenses and with holding the Cash Cow spending in
executive sessions for wants and greed.
Jay Clement, a team
leader with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Maine Project Office
in Augusta and has 33 years under his belt protecting tax payers
money from corruption. At the 4/21/2015 he made it crystal clear that
Belfast City Hall could care less about it's citizens.
@ 31:35 Jay
Clements to City Council "If that passes the straight face test
with your citizens."
@ 34:53 Jay "All your
decisions are supposed to be reflective of the public interest. YOU
ARE ANSWERABLE TO YOUR CITIZENS."
@
34:35 City Council Heil Hurley "IF WE WANTED TO, WE CAN DO
WHATEVER WE WANT OUTSIDE THE FNP!!!!"
The Feds loaned 10
million dollars of American citizens money to the Front Street
Shipyard in 10/2014.
JB Turner sits on the board of directors at WCGH with a host of
players for the 1%. JB and the owners of the FSS were in many of the
same meetings where I pleaded resolutions that would save the 12
families in the flood zone, flood plain from the forced City water
slaughter. Northport Ave TIF was the answer. City Council gave it to
the Downtown TIF. 80K would have saved us and opened up funding for
grants for infrastructure to build storm sewers that would have saved
all the miles and miles of private properties in the watershed
slaughter path. My property is the last one. I get it all. The
bottleneck that blew a ravine of wild rapids, 9 months after I moved
in. The previous owner, Minister Tarpley and real estate agent Bill
Ingersoll, filled in that ravine and sold the property without
disclosing the slaughter. They set me up, and detoured me from all
other dry listings. From day one I was adamant - NO WATER ISSUES AND
NO STREAMS!! Evil and greedy. Shame is theirs forever with all the
players.
City Hall has known
since early 2012 that those 21 moorings making a profit inside the
FNP (Federal Navigation Project) that are permitted to Front Street
Shipyard and Belmont Boat are illegal and must be taken out of the
FNP. 5 of those moorings don't even have permits. City Hall, Front
Street Shipyard and Belmont Boat intentionally did nothing for 3
years and now they will force citizens with prime mooring locations
out. Planning disaster after disaster. The harbor is the greatest
asset to Belfast yet they spent millions to choke harbor expansion by
building a footbridge. Planning disaster of all time. Way to go
Belfast City Planner Wayne Marshall. That one is not even close to
human. I keep waiting for the skin to peel away and the lizard to
break free.
The City's hiring of
their own surveyor to slaughter abutters private property of the
airport is corrupt. The rail trail abutters are involved in a law
suit. This is just the beginning of the new laws and taking through
the unknown Comprehensive Plan ordinances. The lizard's plan since he
slithered on board in 1999? Betcha Heil Hurley had a slimey hand in
that hiring along with the rest of the lizard pack. .
Heil Hurley slanders
the public again and again and City Hall/Council encourages it. He
threatened Seaview Terrace residents by saying he is sick of
Seaview, let them buy it back, he is not interested in fixing it, if
we don't want the illegal paving job then we won't get paved at all.
Stating that I am wrong, all this water is not passing through my
yard and that I don't have a leg to stand on. One rant of the many
over the past 5 years. I face off with him and he cowers. Never
allowing for a debate. He states that I dominate each time I speak.
Thug, the truth dominates. I want peace, safety and privacy. I never
would have bought this hell and no one would ever my name. Now, I am
the most hated woman in downtown Belfast up to Govnah Chuckie LeRage.
Might as well live up to the expectations. Joisey girl takes on the
greedy the best I can.
The lizards
continue to send more water to private properties in the water shed.
They lie, claiming it was at one time a stream- which is the
loophole they use to coincide with local ordinance. Council can
approve drainage to the nearest natural outlet. Maps on this blog
from 1939 prove that was never a stream running through this have
fabricated as the watershed. The maps shows a stream running above
Congress Street horizontal all the way to Little River. The Rte 1
bypass constructed in the 1960's cut through that stream. That is
where they began the corruption to avoid spending on storm sewers and
send it to private properties. Leaving neighbors to send it to their
neighbor and City Hall slithers away as neighbors sue each other. Or
sell it to another...
They hide and with
hold the public documents that prove the corruption. New site
construction is corrupted with approvals granted months before
construction begins. Appeals close 30 days after approvals and then
months later you see that the site is not being built according to
the approved plans.
The final plans are
locked up in the City Planners office along with the zoning
conditions and an individual has zero chance of getting those final
documents. City Council takes the 5th and the City
Attorney and police dept. step in to intimidate and try to force you
into a legal action. They will bury you with red tape and break your
bank and soul.
The real estate
agents are partners in crime and enjoy the high turnover of the
slaughtered properties. Currently the corrupt zoning is of high
alert. The zoning for the new R1 and R3 was voted in by City Council
in September 2014 according to City Planner Wayne Marshall .
Contradicted by City Manager Joe Slocum who indicates it was in the
October 2014 meeting. Both refuse to update the City Website with the
final zoning maps for R1 and R3. I have been requesting this since
September and receive rhetoric. Since the zoning change, Seaview
Terrace has had 4 homes go up for sale with different zoning's on the
listing. One listed as healthcare, another as R2 and another as R1.
Real estate agents are taking the 5h and referring questions to the
City Manager. He states that Seaview Terrace is R1 but also states he
makes mistakes. Verbal and written responses from City Hall are
worthless. Final documents are the only legal source. FOIA is
useless- the corruption goes right up the ladder to the Attorney
General's office. The FBI will not get involved.
The laws state they
may take our properties for any reason. I have reached out to real
estate agents. JB Turner, Greg Dutch and the downtown business for
support as we support them. Their response was to award City Manager
Joe Slocum, Citizen of the Year.
Inverse
condemnation is a term used in the
law
to describe a situation in which the government takes private
property but fails to pay the compensation required by the 5th
Amendment of Constitution. In some states the term also includes
damaging of property as well as taking it. In order to be
compensated, the owner must then sue the government. In such cases
the owner is the plaintiff and that is why the action is called
inverse – the order of parties is reversed, as compared to the
usual procedure in direct condemnation where the government is the
plaintiff who sues a defendant-owner to take his or her property.
The
taking can be physical (e.g., land seizure, flooding...
Or
will they will take it through
http://www.rudmanwinchell.com/municipal-eminent-domain-authority/
LEARN ABOUT: Municipal eminent domain authority
By Rudman Winchell Attorney
By: Rudman Winchell Attorney Erik M. Stumpfel
Disclaimer
These materials have been prepared by Rudman Winchell for educational purposes only. They should not be considered legal advice. The transmission of this information to you is not intended to create a lawyer-client relationship. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. You should not send any confidential or private information to Rudman Winchell until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established, in writing.
Maine municipalities, especially smaller communities, are traditionally reluctant to exercise eminent domain authority for any purpose. However, occasions arise when a municipality seeks to acquire land or buildings for municipal purposes ranging from roads, schools, or parks to creation of a municipally-owned business park. What does the town do in such cases when the existing owner refuses to sell – either at all, or for what the municipality considers to be a reasonable price? The U.S. Supreme Court's 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 brought new attention to this topic, in Maine and elsewhere.The Maine Revised Statutes contain at least five provisions authorizing municipalities to acquire land or interests in land by eminent domain.Local Highway Law Maine's Local Highway Law, 23 MRSA sec. 3023, 3024 and 3029 prescribes standards and procedures for municipal acquisition of land or easements for local road purposes. Under section 3023, a municipality may take property or interests therein for local highway purposes "if the municipal officers determine that public exigency requires the immediate taking of such property interests, or if the municipality is unable to purchase it at what the municipal officers deem reasonable valuation, or if title is defective." The municipal officers must approve and file a condemnation order with the municipal clerk that specifies the location of the property to be taken by metes and bounds; names the record owner or owners of the property so far as can be reasonably determined; and specifies the amount of damages to be awarded as just compensation for the taking. The municipal officers then serve a copy of the order and the damages check on the affected property owners or, if the power of appropriation rests with the town meeting, the municipal officers submit the order to the town meeting in the form of a warrant article for town meeting approval. The town meeting may amend the damages award upward, but otherwise must approve or disapprove the order as drafted by the municipal officers. If the order is approved by the town meeting, a check in the amount of the damages award is immediately served on the affected property owners. However approved, a true copy of the order must be filed at the local registry of deeds per 23 MRSA sec. 3024, to be effective against any property owners or abutters who have not received actual notice. Title to the property vests immediately in the municipality upon the earlier of service of the damages check or recording of the takings order under section 3024. Appeals are governed by 23 MRSA sec. 3029. An aggrieved property owner may appeal the municipal damages award to Superior Court for a de novo hearing. Either party is entitled to have the damages case tried to a jury. Any challenges to the underlying taking normally proceed by declaratory judgment action, and not by a direct appeal. In addition to roads, the same chapter authorizes municipal use of eminent domain to acquire "bridle paths and trails" under section 3151. An additional requirement under this section is that "no cultivated or improved land shall be taken without the consent of the owner and a 2/3 vote shall be required for the acceptance of such paths and trails by any town." Damages for road takings are governed by 23 MRSA sections 154 through 154-F. These provisions apply equally to road takings by the State of Maine and municipal governments. Under section 154, damage awards must be based on the "highest and best use of the property at the date of taking", minus the remaining value of the property after the taking; both of which are to be based on "fair market value" concepts. Section 154 also provides for payment of "severance damages" when less than an entire parcel is acquired, and the taking diminishes the fair market value of the land not taken – for example, when only part of a building lot is acquired, and the remaining portion no longer meets municipal code requirements. This is an important concept in a variety of contexts. Section 154-A provides that any increase or decrease in the value of the property "caused by the public improvement for which such property is acquired" or by the likelihood of its acquisition for the project concerned, is not taken into account in determining eminent domain damages. For example, if a landlocked parcel with no road access is taken as part of a town road project, damages for eminent domain purposes are based on its fair market value as a landlocked parcel, and not based on its development potential after the road goes through. Section 154-B prohibits coercive action in negotiations to establish a price for voluntary conveyance. Section 154-C allows an owner to require the State or town to acquire the owner's entire parcel, if the proposed taking would leave an "uneconomic remnant". This occurs most frequently when a State controlled access highway project divides an owner's parcel, leaving a remnant parcel with no road access. Finally, Section 154-F allows the assessment of "special benefits" against the property owner, but only allows special benefits to be offset against severance damages awarded to the same owner. This provision assures that, at a minimum, the affected property owner will receive the full fair market value of the land or interests actually taken by the State or municipality.General Municipal Takings Statute Under 30-A M.R.S.A. § 3101, a municipality may acquire real estate or easements for any public use by using the condemnation procedure for town ways. However, when proceeding under this statute, the municipality may not take any land without the consent of the owner if, at the time of the taking, the owner or the owner's family resides in a dwelling house located on the land. Additionally, land taken under this section may not be used for any purpose other than the purposes for which it was originally taken, except that land taken for a public park may be conveyed to the federal government to become part of a national park.Community Development Statute – 30-A M.R.S.A. § 5204 Under Maine's Community Development statute, 30-A MRSA sec. 5201 et seq., municipalities may designate community development project areas or districts and adopt community development programs where there exists deterioration, dilapidation, slum and blighted areas, dangerous buildings and incompatible use of property, which constitute a serious threat to the public health, safety or welfare of the residents, and where the threats are beyond the remedy and control solely by regulatory process in the exercise of police power. The goals of these community development programs are to redevelop and rehabilitate these blighted areas through acquisition and preparation of land and its subsequent sale or lease. These purposes are declared by the statute to be public purposes for which public money may be expended and property acquired. A municipality adopting a community development program is granted enhanced statutory powers within the designated area, under 30-A MRSA sec. 5203(3). Those powers include: "A. Acquisition by purchase or eminent domain of any vacant or undeveloped land and of any developed land and structures, buildings and improvements existing on the land located in designated slum or blighted areas for the purposes of the demolition and removal or rehabilitation and repair or redevelopment of the property so acquired." Section 5204 prescribes procedures for municipal takings under the community development statute. These procedures are similar to, but not identical with, the procedures prescribed under Title 23 for local highway takings. Most significantly, community development takings under sec. 5204 are not subject to the limitations contained in 30-A MRSA sec. 3101 for other non-highway municipal takings.Specifically, a municipality may use the community development statute to acquire owner-occupied residential property, even if the owner does not consent, and use of property taken by the municipality is not restricted to the specific use for which it was taken. However, if the municipality disposes of unrehabilitated property acquired by eminent domain under the community development statute within ten years after its acquisition, 30-A MRSA sec. 5203(3)(E) normally requires the municipality to offer the original owners an opportunity to re-purchase the property for the amount of the original damages award. The statute makes an exception for properties that were acquired for assembly into a larger parcel consisting of what were originally three or more contiguous lots.Municipal Development District Statute – 30-A MRSA sec. 5223(4) This statute allows municipalities to designate "development districts" within their municipal boundaries that meet certain statutory criteria under section 5223(3). Within these districts, municipalities may acquire land or easements pursuant to an approved development program, by purchase or eminent domain. If eminent domain is used, section 5223(4) incorporates the eminent domain procedures of the community development statute, in section 5204.Municipal Revenue-Producing Facilities Act – 30-A MRSA sec. 5403(6) This statute authorizes municipal eminent domain acquisition of "land, rights in land or water or air rights in connection with the construction, reconstruction, improvement, extension, enlargement or operation of revenue-producing municipality facilities." "Revenue-producing municipal facilities" include parking facilities; water systems; sewer systems; airports; telecommunications systems; and energy facilities. Of these, only parking facilities must be located entirely within the corporate limits of the municipality. The other types of facilities listed may extend beyond the municipal boundaries. An unanswered question in Maine law is whether municipalities may use the eminent domain powers granted by this statute to acquire land for revenue-producing municipal facilities (other than parking facilities) if the land is located outside of the municipality concerned. Section 5403(6) does not specify a procedure for eminent domain takings under this statute, so by default the provisions of 30-A MRSA sec. 3101 would apply.Federal Acquisition Regulations Many municipal projects receive grant funding, either directly or indirectly, from federal funding sources. Common sources of federal grant funding include, among others, Federal Aviation Administration Airport Improvement Program grants; community development block grant funding administered, in most cases, through the Maine Department of Economic and Community Development; "Rural Utility Service" grants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (UDAG); Land and Water Conservation grants from the Department of the Interior; and U.S. Department of Transportation grant funding for local road projects, usually administered through the Maine Department of Transportation. Most, but not all, federal funding sources require compliance with the "Federal Acquisition Regulation" ("FAR") if grant funds are expended to acquire real estate or other property interests for grant purposes. In cases to which it applies, this imposes a procedural overlay on the municipal eminent domain authority otherwise granted by Maine law. In general, the FAR requires the municipality to (a) obtain a fair market value real estate appraisal of the property being acquired (sometimes with an additional review appraisal); (b) make a written to the owner offer of not less than the fair appraised market value for the property being concerned; and (c) leave the offer open for the period stated in the FAR; before the municipality may initiate eminent domain proceedings.Constitutional limitations All municipal takings under Maine law are subject to the takings provision of the Maine Constitution. Article I, section 21 of the Maine Constitution provides as follows: Section 21. Private property shall not be taken for public uses without just compensation; nor unless the public exigencies require it. As discussed above, "just compensation" is subject to de novo review in Superior Court. In numerous decisions, the Law Court has held that "public exigency" is a legislative determination, essentially unreviewable by the courts. However, the Law Court has held that the phrase "public use" imposes a substantive limitation on the authority of the State or other public bodies to acquire private property by taking. As summarized by the Court in Blanchard v. Department of Transportation, 2002 ME 96, para. 29,. . . property is devoted to public use only when the general public, or some portion of it (as opposed to particular individuals), in its organized capacity and upon occasion to do so, has a right to demand and share in the use [citation omitted]. The public has to be able to be served by the use as a matter of right, not as a matter of grace of any private party. The use must also be public at the time of the taking, 'not only in a theoretical aspect, but rather in actuality, practicality and effectiveness, under circumstances required by public exigency' [citation omitted]. Under this standard, the Law Court has regularly rejected, as being beyond the State's constitutional takings authority, the use of eminent domain power for purposes such as addressing private title deficiencies, correcting faulty lot layout, or compelling transfer of title to a new private owner. However, in Crommett v. City of Portland, 150 Me. 217, 107 A.2d 841 (1954), the Law Court recognized "slum and blight removal" as a "negative public use", thereby upholding the City of Portland's eminent domain acquisition of the plaintiff's property for the purpose of blight removal. The Law Court further held that the City of Portland's subsequent sale of the property concerned to a new private owner, following removal of the blighted structures, did not defeat the constitutionality of the City's actions, because the "negative public use" for which the property was taken had been fully accomplished. The private and special act under which Portland had acquired the property at issue in Crommett, the "Slum Clearance and Redevelopment Authority Law" of 1951 (P&S Law, 1951, Chapter 217), became the template for the current community development statute. Notwithstanding the Law Court's Crommett decision. Article 1, Section 21 of the Maine Constitution continues as a substantive limitation on municipalities' statutory eminent domain powers and bars the use of eminent domain for the purpose of transferring ownership of property from one private owner to another private owner for a non-public use. In this important respect. the term "public use" under the Maine Constitution must be read much more narrowly than the term "public purpose". Economic development and job creation may constitute a "public purpose" sufficient to justify the expenditure of public funds, but without more cannot justify the use of municipal eminent domain powers to acquire property for anything other than a public use.Kelo v. City of New London In 2005 the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), in which the court held gat the use of eminent domain for "economic development" qualified as a "public us within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment's takings clause. In reaching this result, the Supreme Court declared that, for purposes of federal constitutional analysis, the term "public use" has essentially the same meaning as the phrase "public purpose". The Kelo decision does not address arguments based on the takings provisions of the Connecticut or other state constitutions. The controversy in Kelo arose when the City of New London, Connecticut condemned privately-owned, non-blighted real property so that it could be used as part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan that was intended to create new jobs, generate tax revenue and build momentum for a downtown revitalization project. Significant to the controversy was the City's decision to lease some property to private developers for nominal sums in exchange for agreements by the developers to develop the property. In determining that taking private property for economic development satisfied the "public use" requirement of the Fifth Amendment, the Supreme Court emphasized its longstanding deference to legislative judgments of what serves a "public purpose." The Court explained that it is the takings purpose, and not its mechanics, that determines public use. The Court rejected the contention that the fact that a State immediately transfers properties to private individuals diminishes the public character of the taking. Cf. Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984) (Hawaii statute that took fee title from lessors and transferred to lessees, for just compensation, to reduce the concentration of land ownership serves a public purpose). However, because the focus was on the legislative judgment of what constituted a public purpose, the Court preserved the opportunity for states to define for themselves what constitutes a public purpose and to place restrictions on the state's exercise of the takings power.Post-Kelo Reaction Resulting public outcry concerning the perceived loss of property rights protection led many state legislatures to adopt post-Kelo restrictions on state and municipal eminent domain powers. Although the Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. New London did not alter the Maine Law Court's "public use" jurisprudence under Article I, section 21, of the Maine Constitution, the Legislature and Governor's office were not immune from the temptation to take politically popular action. Despite advice from a number of municipal practitioners that Kelo would have no impact on Maine residents' property rights, the Maine Legislature, in 2005. enacted 1 M.R.S.A. § 816 to read: "Sec. 816. Limitations on eminent domain authority1. Purposes. Except as provided in subsections 2 and 3 and notwithstanding any other provision of law, the State, a political subdivision of the State and any other entity with eminent domain authority may not condemn land used for agriculture, fishing or forestry or land improved with residential homes, commercial or industrial buildings or other structures:a. For the purposes of private retail, office, commercial or residential development;b. Primarily for the enhancement for tax revenue; orc. For transfer to an individual or a for-profit business entity.2. Blight exception. Subsection 1 does not apply to the use of eminent domain by any municipality, housing authority or other public entity based upon a finding of blight in an area covered by any redevelopment plan or urban renewal plan pursuant to Title 30-A, chapter 201, 203 or 205, but just compensation, in all cases, must continue to be made to the owner.3. Utilities exception. Subsection 1 does not limit the exercise of eminent domain by or for the benefit of public utilities or other entities engaged in the generation, transmission or distribution of telephone, gas, electric, water, sewer or other utility products or services.4. Governmental purposes not affected. Nothing in this section may be interpreted to prohibit a municipal or county governing body from exercising the power of eminent domain for purposes not otherwise prohibited by subsection." In subsection 2, the new statute expressly preserves the existing authority for municipalities to use eminent domain for slum and blight removal, as upheld by the Maine Law Court in Crommett. At best, therefore, the statute provides no new protections for Maine property owners, but merely codifies existing case law. However, section 816 also presents the possibility that courts asked to apply the new statute, using the traditional rules of statutory construction, may strive to give the statute independent effect, thereby inferring new substantive limitations on state and municipal eminent domain powers that go beyond the specific public concerns raised by Kelo. Like many laws adopted primarily for show, section 816 may well spawn presently unanticipated consequences.CONCLUSION Whether you are a municipal manager or selectman trying to navigate through the procedural requirements for an eminent domain taking, or a landowner seeking to assure fair treatment and just compensation in taking that affects your land, it is important to have the advice of experienced legal counsel to help you through the process.
************************************
Recently, I tried
again with the corrupt Muck Suck. Back in August the City used
Inland, Fisheries and Wildlife to trick us into thinking it was their
idea to make the Muck a fishing hole through volunteers and at no
expense to the tax payers... using eradication of the goldfish as
reason to drain. Hurley spoke up saying he did not support it. This
is his doing. I contacted DEP, EPA because it will drain down to my
property. It's a toxic dump with heavy equipment in it. Testing is
underway and DEP regulations- tax payers are footing the bill and
Hurley is pushing the project. He is also lying again, he is claiming
the Muck drains through a different path.
I can go on and on
with 5 years of proven corruption. Property taxes are to go to the
schools, resident infrastructure and basic services. It is not. It is
going to the corruption, through hired engineers and consultants, low
balling projects, grants locking us into the project and a landslide
of unforeseen costs, attorney fees, lawsuits, splitting of the
community, implicating businesses, all systems go for economic
development and squeeze us dry and then take us out. Outsourcing
engineers and consultants is the defining corruption of
unaccountability. Honest Belfast City Hall Treasurer, Ricki LeSans
made sure to point out that years ago, Belfast always had a City
engineer on Belfast City Hall staff.
Back in the day before Heil
Hurley pulled Belfast into his cesspool of corruption. Heil Hurley
hales from NJ, same as me. He came to Belfast in the 80's and saw
opportunity for greed. I came to the neighboring town of Northport in
1969 @ 8 yrs old and saw love. For the rest of my life, I gave
all I had to make it my home. Greed makes liars and buyers. It
implicates the innocent into their web and buys allegiance and silence.
I
was born into a family of the same, married the same, my whole life
has been one robbing after another. It all connects from Belfast to
Northport (Bayside) to Skowhegan back to NJ. I thought I got away. I
thought wrong. To steal our lives after all we (my children) have
survived is beyond wicked. For so many to look the other way (in all
those circles- not just Belfast) is what keeps my head spinning. I
will never understand that. It's so much harder to resist helping
each other. Fear allows for terrorism. Allowing any government to
rob and destroy is allowing terrorism. It is playing out in Belfast.
Now retired City Tax
Assessor Bob Whiteley told me 4 years ago that he was shocked at the
City comprehensive plan that would crush many residents. It is
happening. They spent the surplus, Slocum borrowed 4? million in
September, tomorrow he is asking to borrow another 2.6 million and
the none of the projects have been completed including the harbor
walk and all the money is gone. They are currently underway with
massive projects and many unknown. The state is cutting sharing as
Slocum is underway with the window dressing budget- the operating
expenses with no reporting of their train wreck executive session
spending. I tried to get a portion of this spending and they refused.
As usual, telling me I have to pay and pay for information they will
never provide. Here is an example. Sloscum wanted something like $500 up front to begin not to begin. He knows I am below poverty. Scum, slow scum.
I.
NEW STATUTORY FEE WAIVER STANDARD
Prior
to its amendment in 1986, the FOIA provided for the charging of fees
for document search and duplication, and further provided that such
fees should be waived or reduced wherever that was found to be "in
the public interest because furnishing the information can be
considered as primarily benefiting the general public."
5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A) (1982).
From:
laurieallen55@msn.com
To:
ward1councilor@cityofbelfast.org;
laurieallen55@msn.com
CC:
jgiles@penquis.org
Subject:
Public Spending
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 13:39:33 -0400
Councilor Mary Mortier,
As the representative for Seaview
Terrace, I am requesting this public accounting. All of the public
will benefit from the knowledge of where our tax dollars are being
spent. I made this request publicly in the 4/15/13 City Council.
City Manager, Joe Slocum stated he has
given you his budget plan. The 4 year spread will is necessary to
compare spending to the drowning and destruction of Seaview Terrace
since I began pleading for infrastructure 4 years ago to no avail,
just further abuse.
As stated prior, the City Attorney's
accounting for these billings is a minute request. The others are
certainly already on an accounting sheet in Belfast City Hall.
I copied Jayne Giles because Jayne has
spoken at the same budget meeting that I attended. Jayne was very
concerned that residents were being squeezed out of in town. I
understand that Jayne has experience and influence to the workings of
government and banking. That said, I believe Jayne would like to see
these numbers as well. I sent this as message to Jayne Giles
facebook page as well.
Please
provide the following years spread sheet cost accounting, 2011, 2012,
2013 and 2014 to current;
1.
Identify each lawsuit to the City of Belfast including all employees
and include verdict,settlement and all fees.
2.
Identify each and all in-house counsel fees.
3.Identify
each and all costs for grants, including application, if awarded,
City funds contributed, including pending and final cost for each
project clearly identifying total grant cost and monies received, vs.
total City funds spent and those pending or underway to date.
4.
Identify each and all public money consultations/studies for
all (recreation projects scrapped and/or approved, harbor walk, rail
trail, parking, lighting, education/schools, capital projects, etc.)
sart to finish, underway and pending to date.
Certainly
this is valuable information to all with the upcoming budget and
disaster we are facing. To try to extort research wages from me would
be outrageous and a call for public outcry.
Once they start a
project, stopping it is entering their legal arena with corrupt
attorneys and some corrupt judges. They are going full throttle and
the new school district will be an enormous expense. The CASS
corruptly built on wetlands, is sinking, floors are cracking, a new
high school is needed, City Hall is updating all their properties and
looking for a new public works site and building.
Extreme protesting
by the whole residential community is necessary. Organized and
relentless demands for accountability and immediate cease of spending
on capital projects with protests, sit-ins and inundation of City
Council meetings. They use delays to cover up what they planned over
10 years ago. We will not know the extent of their plans until it is
in your home and too late to stop.
Some of the
1% and players of Belfast.
The Belfast Pink,
White and Blue corrupt collars and corrupted players
Jayne Crosby
Giles, Chief Executive Officer, MaineStream Finance, a Penquis
subsidiary. Jayne brings over 30 years of banking experience
and legislative background to MaineStream Finance. She is a Resident
of Belfast and received her under graduate degree from Wellesley
College with a BA in Economics. She is an Honor Graduate and
received her Graduate Degree from Stonier School of Banking. Her
priority at MaineStream Finance is to increase access to affordable
credit and financial services for Maine’s low and moderate income
citizens... Judge Patricia Worth, City Council-Heil Hurley, Mary
Mortier, Eric Sanders, Roger Lee, Nancy Hamilton, Mayor Walter Ash
(Ash also owns AAA provider East Side Garage and rejects my emergency
AAA calls), Jay Davis (tentacles through out- Media, Restorative
Justice and Law Enforcement, Waterfall Arts, etc.) City Manager Joe
Slocum, City Planner Wayne Marshall, Assistant Planner Sadie Lloyd,
Code Officer Tod Rosenburg, Economic Developer Thomas Kittredge,
Director of Parks Norm Poirier, City Attorney's Bill Kelly &
Kristin Collins, Police Chief McFadden, Officer Ward, Planning Board
Members Roger Pickering, Margot Carpenter, Biff Atlass, Russel
Barber, Ex- Paul Hamilton, Wayne Corey, Steve Ryan, Zoning Board of
Appeals Committee-Peter Nesin, Tom Maycock, Michael Nickerson, Daniel
McCarthy, Douglas Smith, Board of Assessment Review - Biff Atlass,
Dana Keene, Roy Rogers, Mary Dutch
City hired Engineer
firms Olver Engineer and WBRC, Real Estate Agency owner Earl Black
and real estate agents Bill Ingersoll, Jan Andrews, Sam Mitchell,
Michelle Ridley, Puzz Caswell and Mary Mortier, DJ Brown Property
Inspector, Dutch Chevrolet, Front Street Shipyard, J&B Auto Body,
Ridge Top Chimney Sweep, Belfast Chamber of Commerce, ALL AREA REAL
ESTATE AGENTS, The RSU20 Regional School Unit Superintendent
BrianCarpenter, Principals Kim Buckheit and Steven Fitzpatrick,
Guidance Director Jim Davis and Counselor Jessica Woods Board of
Directors WCGH, Coastal Mountain Land Trust (see land trust
corruptions and Belfast following Brunswick @
www.freebrunswick.blogspot.com
) more to post, but I don't know them yet. I just moved here 5
years
ago and the same
scabs keep assaulting residents. The untouchables are the festering
foul, I am sure and surrounded by attorneys and/or are/were
attorneys- like Belfast City Manager Joe Slocum, some City Council
and Planning Board and more unknown
DPW Bob Richards
is one of them between blue and white- make him a gray collar. See
Public Works discrimination post where Public Works refused to do
road snow maintenance, skipped my home and did the rest of the
neighborhood. I hesitate to add Director of Public Works Bob
Richards. His family has deep roots in Belfast and I believe he has
to choose bread and butter for his family over slaughter to Seaview
Terrace. The snow plowing is mean and intentional though. That makes
me think otherwise. I had apologized to Bob a few months ago. He had
come to Seaview Terrace with City Manager Joe Slocum and Mandy Olver
of Olver engineering to map out the corrupt paving. I came out of the
house and as Bob Richards drove Joe Sloscum past me, I called them
murderers. I told Bob I was sorry. That it was really meant for
Sloscum. Bob seemed to be sorry too. I wanted to believe he was.
That's my problem. Show me a speck of kindness and I crumble. My
heart can't take anymore.
At the State Level- Governor and
First Lady LePage (accountability/investigation refusal), Attorney
General Office Janet Mills, executive secretary Rose Smith and
Freedom of Information Act Brenda Kielty (deferring complaints of
corruption), Senator Mike Thibodeau (also deferring and avoiding)
DEP- Commissioner Aho, Christopher Cabot, James Rodrique, Mike Morse,
Thomas Gilbert, State of Maine Inland Fisheries and Wildlife -Warden
Chris Dyer and IF Biologist Jason Snyder, Maine Real Estate
Commission- Director Carol J. Lehighton, Deputy Director Karen
Bivins, Field Investigator Jeffrey E. Hill, Maine DHHS- Maine Care
Program Manager Lea Kendall, Rene Bernard Affordable Care Act
Specialist
EPA- Cyndy Mackey- At one time I found this person
as a Maine EPA contact and sent several emails requesting
investigation of polluted illegal runoff (from miles of Rte 1
highway, 15? business sites (parking lots and roof) local roads and
according to DEP Commish Aho -more that she approved and that I may
never know. DEP has corruptly deemed 50 ft of my private property
MANMADE drain ditch as wetlands. Giving them the power to destroy and
drown. PINK & WHITE COLLAR GENOCIDE )that the City of Belfast was
forcing to my property and into the ocean. I never got a response.
Recently, I tried
again with the corrupt Muck Suck (above tab) No response from Maine
EPA. Another EPA Super Fund official replied and copied EPA Cyndy
Mackey, Rafael DeLeon and Mary McCullough. I began researching Cyndy
Mackey and she is an attorney and thick into EPA HQ Washington DC,
Brownsfield Assessments (big in Belfast)... Mackey's name does not
appear on State of Maine EPA anymore, in fact, that site is very
vague. Oh boy.
And of urgency is
Govnah Chuckie LeRage trying to hire his own attorneys to over ride
the Attorney General and push through his dangerous wants and greed.
Trampling the poor and beautiful.
Update 5/5/15- Seems
Chuckie got his henchman.
4/30/15 Belfast City Hall is moving quick with take overs. Thought I'd try to get the community together to act one more time.
I'll gladly take a back seat. I could not save Seaview Terrace. I will help anyone that I can.
Monday, May 4, 2015 7pm Belfast City Park Pavilion. Community activism. If no one shows by 7:30ish, I'll be back the following Monday and so on. Weather and schedule pending. Will advise here. Any can email me @ laurieallen55@msn.com.
