Only 20 years ago, the property that Shipyard sits on was for sale for only $1. Why? Because it was a top toxic property identified by the EPA.

It was stipulated (before it became politically correct to be unaccountable) that the new property owner would clean up the property at their expense (millions) and resolve numerous “areas of concern” that “to date” still threaten land, water, foliage, animals and humans within the four-mile swath downstream of the site.

The city assumed liability for the property when it demanded the Crosby Laughlin Foundry clean up its mess in accordance with the EPA and DEP, consequently forcing what had been Munjoy Hill’s largest employer to abandon the property.

It’s no wonder the city gave Shipyard a great TIF to get some company – any company – to buy it and release Portland (and Shipyard) from its liability to its Munjoy Hill neighbors and Old Port restaurants.

As for Shipyard’s sewer bill travesty, the city would be better advised to suck up the loss from their oversight and be careful not to open up a Pandora’s box that would release devastating culpability that still lingers from the Crosby Laughlin days.

Louis Philippe

Advertisement

Westbrook

Pony up, Fred. Ed Suslovic is dead-on straight about Shipyard Brewing’s low ball water bill (“Councilor: Get independent probe of sewer billing error” Feb.13). Fred Forsley, being the astute business man that he is, surely had his finger on the financial pulse of his company. So did he look at this as a financial windfall for Shipyard Brewing? Or was he planning to do the right thing; the ethical thing, and contact the city about the under-assessment?

If not, then how about lowering the prices on your products?

Either way, you owe Portland citizens and fellow taxpayers.

Dennis Gervais

Portland

Advertisement

World should speak out against Iran discrimination

When I left my home country of Iran 17 years ago to pursue my education, I was young, rebellious and full of hope. I wanted to go to college and build myself a better future.

As Baha’i students, the highest level of education we could have was a high school diploma. In response to this oppression against Baha’i students, the Baha’i Institute for Higher Education was founded in 1987, and the delivery of education was based on a correspondence system. I studied in this institute for five years. While the government of Iran did not recognize the BIHE in Tehran, here at the University of Southern Maine in Portland, all of my credits were accepted and transferred.

BIHE has always been a focus for oppression. It has been forced to operate anonymously and under the radar and the Iranian government has refused to recognize this worldwide known university and its degrees earned by its Baha’i students.

Recently, there has been a mass arrest of faculty members, professors and students related to this institute, and many have been sentenced for years of imprisonment. What are they guilty of? Being a Baha’i and wishing to have a higher education, or serving as a Baha’i in this institute is their crime.

After years of being away from Iran, I ponder in amazement. Is access to a higher education a right or privilege? Should it be given to some and denied for others based on religious or other discriminations? I believe that access to education is a right, and should not be denied based on any discriminations.

Advertisement

I am writing to urge you to make a difference in the lives of many hopeful Baha’i students whose right to education is being denied. For more information please visit www.bihe.org.

Roya Hejabian

Cape Elizabeth

North Woods land-use bill contains troubling flaws

Legislation affecting land use in 10 million acres of Maine’s North Woods will be heard today in Augusta. LD 1798, an Act to Reform Land Use Planning, was supposed to improve planning and permitting efficiencies for the unorganized territories; instead, it will fragment planning, politicize land management, limit access and degrade water quality.

The bill’s most serious flaw permits counties to opt out of the new planning commission. This is equivalent to abolishing planning for the territories, most of it wilderness and home to Maine’s irreplaceable “gem lakes.” Opt-out would produce different standards for different places, and degrade the pristine lakes for which Maine is famous.

Advertisement

Resulting sprawl would limit public access for fishing, paddling, swimming, sightseeing, ski-mobiling and hunting. Opt-out will also load new costs on residents as county governments create capacity to handle planning, permitting, enforcement and appeals from scratch.

All commissioners are to be appointed without legislative review, six by county commissioners who may name themselves to the position, and three by the governor. No other Maine state regulatory board has members elected by local constituencies. Commissioners should be appointed by standard procedure: gubernatorial nomination, legislative committee hearing and Senate confirmation. No qualifications for appointment to the commission are stated. Candidates must have expertise in permitting and planning, commerce and industry, fisheries and wildlife, forestry and conservation.

The bill also shifts responsibility for permitting large projects to a government agency (DEP) that doesn’t have the capacity to review development impacts on the character, scenic values and existing recreational uses of the North Woods or impacts on businesses reliant on the territories’ natural resources.

Maine Congress of Lake Associations, a statewide membership organization representing over 15,000 lake users, urges legislators to remedy these troubling provisions.

Maggie Shannon

Belgrade


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.