I am disappointed that the article “Frye Island aims to overturn Raymond board’s parking area ruling” leaned so heavily on the motion filed by Frye Island for much of its content without providing balance. I would expect the court motion to be biased against the Raymond Planning Board decision, but I would also expect The Current to provide some balance to that viewpoint from those who support the RPB decision. Foster, the Raymond Planning Board member quoted as another source for the article, was a strong supporter of the project.

Why did Frye go straight to the courts and circumvent the Raymond Zoning Board of Appeals? Is this out of the norm? As a Frye Island resident who has made no secret of my opposition to the project in its current form, I have asked Frye officials this question and have been met with silence. Will The Current ask this question?

Now there is a larger principle at stake. Will the Raymond Board of Selectman support their own Planning Board and defend the appeals process that exists to protect the residents of Raymond? If not, who will speak for those in Raymond who believe the RPB decision was appropriate? I watched all of the meetings online and attended a number of the meetings in person in Raymond. I was impressed by the careful deliberation the RPB gave the project (not to mention hours and hours of their time) and was at times embarrassed by how they were treated by those representing Frye Island.

On the Frye side, another principle is at stake. Voters capped the amount of money in October that the Frye Island Executive Committee could spend to complete the Raymond application process. This cap was exceeded during the time period between October and March before the appeal was filed. Some islanders have no problem with this and I do not claim to speak for all islanders, but if spending caps can be ignored, what practical power do the voters have? What is the justification for ignoring this cap?

Betsy Gleysteen

Frye Island