Category Archives: Petition News

News about the Clary Lake water level petition

17 April 2014 Lincoln County News: Clary Lake Dam representative says he’d ‘bail’ if Whitefield assumes responsibilities

Paul Kelley attended the Whitefield Selectman’s meeting last Tuesday night to see if the Town would be willing to assume responsibility for the operation of the Clary Lake Dam and its water control features in the event of an emergency. You may recall that finding a designee is was requirement “H” of the Water Level Management Plan called for in the Clary Lake Water Level Order. The Order suggested that such secondary designees may include but are not limited to the Town of Jefferson, the Town of White​f​ield  or the Clary Lake Association. As usual, Lincoln County News reporter Kathy Onorato was there covering the excitement:

Clary Lake Dam representative says he’d ‘bail’ if Whitefield assumes responsibilities

Continue reading

20 March 2014: Order For A Stay Of Civil Proceedings

The Attorney General’s office sent me a copy of an Order for a Stay of Civil Proceedings in the matter of Pleasant Pond Mill LLC and Aquafortis Associates LLC v. Maine Department of Environmental Protection, Docket No. AP-14-1. The parties jointly requested this stay so that they can pursue mediation under the Land Use Mediation Program pursuant to Title 5 §3341. What this means in ordinary speak is that the administrative appeal of the Department water level order is being put on hold while the parties engage in mediated discussions in an attempt to resolve this matter. At the conclusion of mediation the results, or lack thereof, will be reported back to Superior Court.  Continue reading

05 March 2014 Lincoln County News: Clary Lake Dam Owners Seek to Have Water Level Order Vacated

There is an article in this week’s Lincoln County News about the appeal filed by Pleasant Pond Mill LLC in Lincoln County Superior court. The article, written by Dominik Lobkowicz, does a pretty good job of distilling the 27 page filing into something manageable. I spoke to Mr. Lobkowicz yesterday afternoon shortly after receiving word of the filing but before I’d had a chance to look it over. I sent him some of my thoughts on it in an email last night, a few of which made it into the paper. Those that didn’t are probably best left unpublished anyways.

Clary Lake Dam Owners Seek to Have Water Level Order Vacated

[Archived Copy]:
Clary Lake Dam Owners Seek to Have Water Level Order Vacated

04 March 2014: Pleasant Pond Mill LLC files suit in Superior Court, Lincoln County

kelley-profile-picPleasant Pond Mill LLC and Aquafortis Associates LLC, represented by Anthony Buxton of PretiFlaherty, have filed an appeal of the Clary Lake water level order in Superior Court, Lincoln County. The sole respondent is the Maine Department of Environmental Protection. I received a copy of the appeal today by certified mail. It is dated 26 February 2014. I can’t say as I am surprised by this move; when Kelley failed to file an appeal with the Board of Environmental by the deadline (last 26 February) I figured he was heading for Superior Court. Here’s a copy of the filing:

Pleasant Pond Mill LLC Appeal of Clary Lake WLO

I guess the best thing about this latest development is that neither the Petitioners nor the Association need to do a thing, we can just sit back and follow the proceedings and we don’t need to spend a dime defending anything. Kelley is not so lucky: you can bet that having PretiFlaherty represent him in court is going to cost him a lot of money.

I’ll undoubtedly have some additional comments when I’ve finished reading it.

06 February 2014 Lincoln County News: A Little Perspective

Here’s my Letter to the Editor which appeared in this week’s Lincoln County News. It is pretty much the same as what I already posted except this of course has been published:

A Little Perspective

Mr. Kelley is going to have to start coming to terms with the reality of his situation. From what I’ve heard lately, it doesn’t appear he’s begun that process.

01 February 2014 [REVISED]: A Letter to the Editor and thoughts on the Water Level Order

I have sent the following missive off to the Editor of the Lincoln County News with the expectation that it will be published in next week’s paper. I’m posting it here, now, because I don’t  want to wait that long to get my opinion out in the open. I also want to get a few more of my thoughts down on paper, so to speak, while it’s all fresh in my mind.

The latest Lincoln County News article “Water Level Order Enacted for Clary Lake” is a great article, but a few things contained in it have been bugging me ever since I read it, especially this statement since it suggests a reason as to why Mr. Kelley has been loathe to offer up the dam to us despite all his posturing to the contrary:

“If it was clear what my company owned and who was likely to sue my company if we sold something that we don’t own, then I would be more inclined to have discussions with the lake association with their interest, their purported interest, in the property,” he said. 

Continue reading

29 January 2014 Lincoln County News: Water Level Order Enacted for Clary Lake

There is an article on the front page of this week’s Lincoln County News about the recently issued water level order for Clary Lake. I was interviewed at length yesterday morning by the reporter, Dominik Lobkowicz and I gather from statements in the article that he also subsequently interviewed Paul Kelley, who continues to posture and complain as if people still cared about what he thought:

Water Level Order Enacted for Clary Lake

[archived copy of article]

I have to comment on several things. First, Mr. Lobkowicz expressed surprise when I told him I thought Mr. Kelley would keep fighting this Order as long as he had the energy to do so. Surely Mr. Kelley will want to cut his losses? Well, numerous statements in the article clearly indicate that Kelley has no intention of simply “giving up” this battle even though the battle is over, and he has lost. Continue reading

29 January 2014: Announcing the Clary Dam Project, a computer mediated discussion group

Now that the State’s Water Level Order has been issued, the dam owner faces a number of daunting tasks and a challenging time line to complete the work of bringing the dam property into compliance with the Order. The Clary Lake Association has made it publicly known that we are ready and willing to assist the dam owner in completing this work but to date they have not expressed any interest in having us help them. It also remains to be seen just how willing the Membership really is to help Mr. Kelley with his problem. Nonetheless the Clary Lake Association is confident that sooner or later we will be asked for help or even asked to take over ownership of the dam completely and feel therefore that it is in our current best interests and long term goals to start acting like the stewards of Clary Lake that we claim to be.

Complying with the Water Level Order will involve a lot of money and a daunting amount of work on the part of many people and while we may all personally relish the prospect of this work, it is daunting nonetheless. Success depends on a committed and coordinated group effort which in turn requires organization and planning. Failure is not an option. It is our belief that full adherence to the conditions specified in the Water Level Order and implementing the water level regime contained therein are crucial steps to meeting the goals of the Clary Lake Association of protecting and preserving Clary Lake, now, and into the future. To this end I have setup the Clary Dam Project. This is a collaborative, interactive, computer-mediated discussion group for the express purpose of facilitating the exchange of information and ideas between like-minded people with a common goal. Continue reading

28 January 2014 Kennebec Journal: State issues final plan for Clary Lake in Whitefield

There is an article in today’s Kennebec Journal about the issuance of the Final Clary Lake Water Level Order. While it contains a few mistakes, it’s pretty much factually accurate and contains a link to the actual ORDER document. I did speak briefly with KJ correspondent Paul Koenig about the order, shortly after it was issued. I gave him a few choice quotes which apparently he found not to be particularly quotable…

[2:40 PM] Sorry I just realized I used a broken link for the online newspaper article. It’s fixed now. Also would like to remind everyone that the KJ supports reader comments 🙂

State issues final plan for Clary Lake in Whitefield

[archived copy] State issues final plan for Clary Lake in Whitefield

I would like to make one observation. Apparently Mr. Koenig also spoke to Paul Kelley before writing the article:

“Kelley pointed out that although the department originally requested parties respond to the draft order in less than five full business days, the DEP took three weeks to review comments before issuing essentially the same order.”

So Paul Kelley is accusing the Department of providing him with less than the legally mandated 5 business days to comment on the Order. Really? Let’s see: the DRAFT order was issued on Thursday December 19th and the comment period was to end at the close of business on Monday December 30th. Counting on my fingers that is… Gee: 6 business days, not including Christmas.

27 January 2014: DEP Issues FINAL Clary Lake Water Level Order!

At a little before 2:30 PM this afternoon the Department of Environmental Protection issued the FINAL Clary Lake Water Level Order. I have scanned it quickly as have a couple of other people and we can’t see any changes between today’s final order and the Draft order issued back on December 19th. I will be reading it over carefully again shortly.

Here is a link to the FINAL order; it’s over 6 megabytes in size. As soon as I get a chance I will print out the relevant sections of the order into separate PDF files for easier consumption.

Final Clary Lake Water Level Order

Final Order Only (just under 3 megabytes)

I’ve gone through the order pretty carefully and I’ve only found a few minor changes:

1) The Final order includes Standard Conditions for Water Level Orders.

2) Per Senator Chris Johnson’s suggestion, the word “Insure” has been changed to “Ensure” 🙂

3) They refined the requirements for water level measurements. In the draft order this was daily “during times of rapid water level rise and on a monthly basis at all other times.” This changed to “Beginning June 1 through September 30 of any given calendar year, the level of the lake and the gate opening status shall be logged every other week and on a daily basis during times of rapid water level rise. At all other times, the level of the lake and the gate opening status shall logged on a monthly basis.”

That’s it as far as I can see.

10 January 2014 Lincoln County News: Dam Owner Cries Foul With Comment Process

I’ve been a little busy this week so I’m just now getting around to posting about the latest article in this week’s Lincoln County News. This one covers the recently submitted final comments on the Draft Clary Lake water level order and it is presumably by Dominik Lobkowicz though there is no byline on it. Like the KJ article earlier this week, the focus is primarily on Paul Kelley and his complaints about the draft order:

Dam Owner Cries Foul With Comment Process

Here’s a locally archived copy:

[ARCHIVED]: Dam Owner Cries Foul With Comment Process

 

08 January 2014: Additional Comments on the Draft water level order

At my request, Beth Callahan has forwarded me a compilation of all the comments received by the Department on the DRAFT Clary Lake water level order. These include 3 emailed comments sent directly to Beth Callahan that, through understandable oversight, never made it to the Service List.  These include emails from Senator Christopher Johnson, Steven Sheppard of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and Jeff Murphy of NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service.

Upon review it is easy to see why these “comments” were not forwarded to the Service List. Steven Sheppard of the USF&W’s comment consisted of the single sentence “The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service supports the provisions of the Draft Order.” Likewise, Jeff Murphy of NOAA asked a simple question and got a simple answer. Senator Johnson’s comment consisted of pointing out a grammatical error.  Still, as trivial as these comments were, everyone is entitled to read them. Regarding Chris Johnson’s comment, I should point out that I was carbon-copied on Chris’s email to Beth Callahan and it never dawned on me that by all rights and purposes it should have been shared with the Service List.

I’ve separated out the extra comments into 2 files:

Comment by Senator Christopher Johnson on the Draft Clary Lake water level order

Agency Comments on the Draft Clary Lake water level order

Here’s the compilation of ALL the comments received by the Department

All Comments Received on the Draft Clary Lake water level  order

Here are links to the comments I’ve already posted:

Petitioner and Clary Lake Association comments

Pleasant Pond Mill LLC comments

Thomas Gillette comments

06 January 2014: Pleasant Pond Mill LLC files comments on the DAFT water level order

cliff-coyote_0Well Mr. Kelley did finally submit his written comments at 4:40 PM this afternoon, but only to a subset of the addresses on the Service List which incidentally didn’t include my address or the addresses of a number of other people. I’m sure this was a mistake and I would prefer to think that Mr. Kelley is just email-challenged rather than that he intentionally left a number of people off the distribution list.

Without further adieu:

REPLY OF PLEASANT POND MILL LLC TO THE MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PROPOSED DAFT FINAL AGENCY ORDER

I have only scanned it, I will read it more carefully shortly. I did print off a copy and noticed the reference line… the question is, is Mr. Kelley’s characterization of the water level order as DAFT a typo or intentional?

06 January 2014: Petitioner’s comments and Clary Lake Association comments submitted to DEP

bugsI have submitted comments to the DEP On behalf of the Petitioners on the Draft Clary Lake water level order issued by the Department on December 19th. Originally due on 30 December, the deadline was extended one week to today. I’m still waiting to see what Mr. Kelley will submit. He has until 5 PM to get them in. Ellis Percy also prepared comments which were sent in this afternoon:

Petitioner’s comments on the Draft Clary Lake water level order

Clary Lake Association comments on the Draft Clary Lake water level order

Earlier today Mr. Kelley sent an email to most of the Service List (below). I say most of the Service List because my address was conspicuously absent. It was only because someone forwarded me a copy with comments that I got the message at all. I’m sure it was an oversight: Continue reading

06 January 2014 Kennebec Journal: Whitefield dam owner denied additional time to comment on lake plan

read_all_about_itThere is a  new article by Paul Koenig in yesterday’s Sunday January 5th Kennebec Journal about Pleasant Pond Mill LLC’s travails in obtaining more time to comment on the Draft water level order.  I was interviewed for the article by Mr. Koenig on Friday. I didn’t get a Sunday paper but a few people who did said they didn’t see it in the paper so it may only have appeared online. In any case, here it is:

Whitefield dam owner denied additional time to comment on lake plan

To refresh everyone’s memory, the Draft Clary Lake water level order was issued on 19 December and provided for an 11 day comment period ending on Monday, 30 December. They extended the comment period 1 week to the end of business today, January 6th. Continue reading

02 January 2013: DEP Responds to PPM motion to reconsider

bam-customThe DEP responded in record time to Pleasant Pond Mill LLC’s motion to withdraw, reconsider, or elucidate sent to the Service List earlier this morning. I expected a quick response, but I didn’t expect them to dismiss it so perfunctorily and with so little fanfare. They did not bother with a procedural order, they simply sent this short email:


Dear Mr. Kelley,

Thank you for your submittal, dated January 2, 2014 containing a Motion for Withdrawal/Reconsideration/Elucidation of the Department’s Procedural Order #9.  The Department has reviewed and considered your Motion and determined that Procedural Order #9 will not be withdrawn or reconsidered.  The ruling issued in Procedural Order #9 stands on its own merits.  The deadline to receive comments on the draft Water Level Order remains as Monday, January 6, 2014.

Sincerely,

Beth Callahan
Project Manager
Division of Land Resource Regulation
Maine Department of Environmental Protection


It is pretty clear to me that the Department of Environmental Protection is tired of Mr. Kelley’s quasi-legal maneuvering and have had enough. One has to wonder whether Mr. Kelley has gotten the message.

02 January 2014: Pleasant Pond Mill LLC submits Motion for Withdrawal/Reconsideration/Elucidation to DEP

kelley-headshotAt 9:33 AM this morning Paul Kelley of Pleasant Pond Mill LLC sent a message to the Service List in which he filed a 5 page Motion with the Department of Environmental Protection addressed to Hearing Officer Heather Parent and Project Manager Beth Callahan. If anyone had any questions as to whether Paul Kelley was going to quietly submit to the Department of Environmental Protection’s water level order, this should dispel them. I certainly didn’t have any. The Motion is as follows:

MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL/RECONSIDERATION/ELUCIDATION OF THE MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (“DEP”) PROCEDURAL ORDER #9, ISSUED DECEMBER 27, 2013; AND FURTHER INCORPORATING ADDITIONAL MOTION(S) FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO REPLY TO PROPOSED DRAFT WATER LEVEL ORDER AND OTHER PROCEDURAL MATTERS.

I haven’t read it yet.  I will shortly and will comment later. Here’s the 5 page Motion:

Here is the accompanying email:
Continue reading

29 December 2013: Reflecting on the past and looking to the future

hard_work_aheadLong about this time of year it is customary to reflect on the past and consider what the future holds so I thought I would do just that. It makes even more sense now considering we’ve reached not just the end of another year but for all intents and purposes, the end of the Clary Lake water level petition initiative as well. This is a huge milestone that seemed almost unattainable just a few short weeks ago. It’s amazing how one’s outlook can change so quickly.

The water level petition was filed back on January 3rd, 2012.  At that time we’d already been working over 2 months collecting signatures, drumming up support, making plans, and preparing the actual petition application. I knew at the time that it wasn’t going to be an easy process but I had no idea how much of an ordeal it would turn into nor did I think for a minute that it would be every bit of 2 years before our efforts finally came to fruition. While I didn’t know exactly what I was getting myself into, I have no regrets and would do it over again in a heartbeat. Continue reading

27 December 2013: DEP Issues Procedural Order 9, Denies PPM request for 30 day extension

denied-customAt 2:15 this afternoon, Beth Callahan sent out the Department’s Procedural Order 9 being their response to Pleasant Pond Mill LLC’s recent motion requesting a 30 day extension to the deadline for comments on the DRAFT Clary Lake water level order. PPM’s motion was DENIED. Also denied was his request that the Department make available staff and data prior to his submission of comments. The Presiding Officer did however incidentally grant an additional week to prepare comments due to the inclement weather we’ve had this past week. The new deadline for submission of comments is Monday 6 January 2014. The Order is totally worth Reading:

Procedural Order 9

Frankly while I don’t need the extra week, I will make use of it. I was without power for 3 1/2 days this past week and was unable to work at my computer. I did compose some notes on paper with pencil only to find that I can no longer read my own hand writing.

The message sent by this Procedural Order is clear: they are done playing games, and the hammer is about to fall.

In addition to issuing the procedural order, they sent along a revised SERVICE LIST, the only change being a new email address for Clary Lake Association Counsel Robert Rubin.

27 December 2013: Petitioners object to PPM request for extension to comment period

just-say-no_0After much consideration and after re-reading the motion several times, I decided that I must object on principle to Pleasant Pond Mill LLC’s request for an extension to the comment period. To that end, I have just sent Petitioner’s objection to the Service List. It’s time for these delaying tactics to stop. That said, I fully expect Ms. Parent to grant an extension, but not for 30 days.

Petitioners Objection to PPM request for comment period extension

I’ll post the Hearing Officer’s decision on PPM’s motion when I receive it. I expect it will be sometime today.