Amtrak MLF Site Location: Lessons in selective memory and selective compliance with…..oh well, whatever sounds good at the moment you need it to sound good.

                    

Other Siders:  Not too long ago we suggested that ‘the fix was in’ on building the MLF at Brunswick West, adjacent to Bouchard Drive, because of the decision sequence (and related dates) associated with doing so.  We said it here:

http://othersideofbrunswick.blogspot.com/2014/03/amtrak-mlf-are-bouchard-drive-residents.html

We erred in how we arrived at that conclusion, and we profusely apologize for our careless reading of the record.  We had thought, due to inadequate study, that the siting decision was part of the EA report released this past September, and hence, was not official until such time as the EA was released.  Yet the property had been purchased years before, and a contract was let to begin design and construction work for the MLF before the EA was released. 

As we saw it, regardless of what the EA concluded, NNEPRA had already decided what they were going to do, and initiated the work to do it, regardless of whether the assessment concluded it was an acceptable site or not.  And before the public had a chance to see the EA and submit comments.  And before the Federal Railroad Authority had reviewed the EA dated September 2013 and adjudicated the public comments submitted the following month, in order to reach their decision of whether to issue a FONSI or call for an EIS, per NEPA process regulations.

(See “Liking trains….and doing it right” at: http://othersideofbrunswick.blogspot.com/2014/04/loving-trainand-doing-it-right.html  to refresh yourselves on the terminology and process.)

                            

Once we realized our error in understanding the juxtaposition of the various dates and events, we came to a clearer understanding of how the dots of the process connect in their path to where we are now.

                                                                                                                                              We apologize again for our carelessness.  And we hereby correct our view of things to this: it still looks like the fix has been in.  Let us explain why we say that.

Background Materials:

The following documents will be used to back up our assertions, and to serve as general references for what we have to say:

• Brunswick Layover Environmental Assessment (EA) September 2013:

http://www.nnepra.com/sites/default/files/Brunswick%20Final%20EA%20-%20%20091213_0.pdf

• Downeaster Layover Facility Project Siting Report, by Parsons Brinkerhoff for NNEPRA, August 18, 2011.  This is listed as Appendix B in the above EA:

http://www.nnepra.com/sites/default/files/Appendix%20B%20-%20Downeaster%20Layover%20Facility%20Project%20Siting%20Report_1.pdf

• In addition, we are in possession of a letter from Pan Am Systems, dated April 4, 2011, to the Brunswick Zoning Board of Appeals, in which they request a variance for the Brunswick West property.  The letter includes this passage:

Pan Am Systems (Pan Am), parent company of the Maine Central Railroad, is in the process of negotiating a sale of the Property to NNEPRA for use as a layover facility for the Downeaster service.

• Furthermore, we are in possession of a PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT dated June 2, 2011, by and between Maine Central Railroad Company and NNEPRA for the property commonly referred to as the Brunswick West site.

Let’s begin by looking at Page 5 of the Siting Report (Appendix B):

Utilization of the Naval Air Station (NAS) site would require construction of a new grade crossing across Bath Road, in conjunction with a steeply graded connecting track from the existing rail corridor across Bath Road into the NAS (See Appendix A for site layout). Moreover, development of a railroad storage and maintenance facility on the NAS site may not be viewed as being in conformance with redevelopment plans for the NAS. For these reasons, it was determined to eliminate the NAS site from further consideration.

(emphasis ours)

Notice the deep concern expressed by Parsons Brinkerhoff, acting on NNEPRA’s behalf, for conforming with other party’s ‘redevelopment plans.’  We always appreciate respect for what others have done to lay out their plans for a desirable future.  Notice also the effective use of the passive third party: (“may not be viewed.”  And “it was determined.”)

Let’s move on to Page 12 of the Siting Report (Appendix B):

Brunswick East:  The undeveloped site is located with the Cook’s Corner Zoning District, which allows a mix of retail, office and residential uses. Industrial uses, such as the layover facility, are allowed only by special permit. The Cook’s Corner Master Plan establishes a vision for a mixed use commercial hub in this area, and Town staff has indicated that a layover facility would not be consistent with current zoning nor the vision established by the Comprehensive Plan and Master Plan.

(emphasis ours)

Here again we see PB/NNEPRA deep concern and respect for the zoning, Comprehensive Plan, and Master Plan of Brunswick, apparently because Town staff had stated there would be a conflict.

Let’s see what we find in the Siting Report (Appendix B) regarding the Brunswick West site, also on Page 12:

Brunswick West: This site was previously developed as a rail freight yard. One siding track remains in use today. Properties to the north of the site are primarily a mix of industrial, commercial and residential uses, including a fuel storage facility. An industrial park is located to the west across Church Road. To the south, the site is bordered by a residential neighborhood, which has concerns for potential impacts associated with air and noise emissions from the facility in addition to visual impacts of the layover building. The site is zoned Commercial 1 and 2, and Mixed Use 2- Intown Railroad Corridor. Continued use and development of this site for
railroad transportation activities is consistent with the Town of Brunswick’s zoning and with its Comprehensive Plan; the contemplated layover facility is deemed to be a permitted use by the Town.

(emphasis ours)

If you’ve been following the discussions all along, you know that the site was zoned for buildings of 20,000 square foot max.  And that a variance was applied for to increase that to 39,560 square feet.  The Zoning Board of Appeals approved that variance.  Only to be told that Amtrak has pre-emption rights and can ignore zoning.  And they they increased the planned building size to 60,000 square feet, or three times town zoning regulations.

                             

Anyway you want to look at it, claiming in the August 2011 Siting Report that the site is ‘consistent with the Town of Brunswick’s zoning is’ Brunswick Sausage. 

As to the Comprehensive Plan? We know this: The Downtown Master Plan, adopted by the Town Council in January 2011, prioritizes “Visual Quality” and “Neighborhoods” in “Our Downtown Vision.”  You can find this plan here:

http://www.brunswickme.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Adopted-Downtown-Master-Plan.pdf

Here’s what it says about Neighborhoods:

Downtown residential neighborhoods are an economic asset to Brunswick, providing tax revenue and pedestrian traffic to downtown businesses and attractions. Housing options are increased, while preserving valued features of neighborhoods.

   

We similarly conclude that the claim that the Brunswick West site is “consistent with the Town of Brunswick’s Comprehensive Plan” is flying fast and loose with the facts.  Someone needs to look ashamed, and it’s not us.

We think it’s time to ask the audience tuning in to our report to show by their applause whether the siting report is consistent in it’s principles, accurate, ethical, and unbiased in reaching a conclusion that the site already purchased is the best choice.  So Feniman, turn on the applause meter, and let’s see what we get.

                    

Looks like the audience is pretty unanimous in their finding.  Maybe those involved would like to “take a meeting” on the subject.

          

===================================================================

Before we close our discussion of the topic for right now, we want to provide you with this reference material that we’ve extracted from the EA document, and highlighted the passages that seem appropriate to our case.

Remember that the siting report was issued in August 2011.

Backup reference materials, from pages 43-45 of the September, 2013 Environmental Assessment Report

(Emphasis added is ours)

Agency and Public Involvement

Correspondence with agencies regarding technical aspects of the proposed project are detailed in relevant sections of this document and are compiled in Appendix A.
The project proponent, NNEPRA, has coordinated with the public and federal, state and local agencies throughout the development of the proposed project. This included NNEPRA Board meetings and three public meetings held in Brunswick to describe the proposals and solicit public feedback. The public meetings were well attended and publicized in the local media (newspaper, cable television). In addition, an advisory group comprised of officials from the Town of Brunswick, the Brunswick Town Council, the MaineDOT, Amtrak, and members of the Brunswick community was convened in December 2011 and has met on three occasions.

A summary of public and agency meetings is presented below.

April 21, 2011 – Brunswick Zoning Board Meeting

NNEPRA Executive Director Patricia Quinn, NNEPRA Project Manager James Russell and NNEPRA attorney Nathaniel Rosenblatt attended the public Brunswick Zoning Board meeting to request a dimensional variance for the construction of a layover facility. Ms. Quinn gave a PowerPoint presentation about Amtrak Downeaster service and outlined the initial concept to construct a layover facility at the Brunswick West rail yard. The variance was granted, though the Town subsequently determined that the proposed facility would be exempt from local zoning requirements and that the variance was therefore not required.

Recall that the siting report said the site is consistent with Brunswick zoning, yet here we read of NNEPRA management seeking a variance.

April 25, 2011 – NNEPRA Board Meeting

Ms. Quinn reported that the dimensional variance for a layover was granted by the Brunswick Zoning Board and that NNEPRA staff would begin the process of developing design specifications for a Brunswick Layover facility.

The variance was granted (for 39,560 sq ft, not the current 60,000 sq ft figure) and the design process would begin, even though the site selection report was not complete and issued for review.

May 23, 2011- NNEPRA Board Meeting

Ms. Quinn reported that a procurement process for an engineering consulting firm to assist in the design and development of a layover facility in Brunswick had begun. Brunswick residents in attendance at the meeting asked if other sites had been considered. Ms. Quinn responded that the engineering firm to be selected would be responsible for site evaluations (including consideration of alternatives), environmental assessments, and facility design development. She also stated that once a firm was retained, it was NNEPRA’s full intention to hold public meetings to discuss plans for the facility to get input from neighbors. When asked specifically about a site in the industrial park, Ms. Quinn reiterated that a preliminary evaluation of other sites had been conducted, but that the engineering consultant would be responsible for a full site assessment, including alternatives.

We’re confused; are you?  Chicken?  Egg?  Site selection?  Design contract?  Alternative reviews? 

June 23, 2011 – NNEPRA Hosted Public Meeting, Brunswick, Maine

NNEPRA provided an overview of the layover facility project, and introduced the consultant team from Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB). The PB project manager discussed the consultant’s scope of work and schedule for the project. Mention was made of NNEPRA’s intention to “stand down” from proceeding with advanced design of the layover facility, and instead provide an opportunity to consider alternative sites and review the basic facility configuration and operating needs with the public and elected officials at a series of meetings. Consultant staff called attention to the fact that because presently there was no federal involvement with the layover facility, a formal environmental assessment under NEPA would not be required. However, the Consultant’s scope of work included preparation of an Environmental Report, which would be performed in a manner akin to a federal environmental document.

The overall operating needs and functions of the layover facility were explained by the consultant team and by the Amtrak General Superintendent, emphasis being made as to the overnight storage and servicing function of the facility, with traditional maintenance, inspection and repair work being performed by Amtrak at established remote locations such as Boston. It was explained at the meeting that PB would be performing an analysis of potential site locations during the next ten weeks, and Brunswick residents were provided an opportunity to ask questions and present their thoughts and opinions about the facility. Many questions addressed the process and schedule, which were responded to by staff with an indication of alternatives analysis lasting through August 2011, with site recommendation and a transition to design occurring in September 2011. Meeting participants were encouraged to contact NNEPRA and PB staff with suggestions for potential sites. A follow-up public meeting was scheduled for July 14, 2011.

Remember, the purchase and sale agreement was made on June 2, 2011.  We really are starting to wonder.

                       

June 27, 2011 – NNEPRA Board Meeting

Ms. Quinn provided an overview of the June 23rd meeting and explained that once a site was selected, an environmental review including noise and air quality analyses would be conducted.  Brunswick residents attended the meeting and had an opportunity to ask questions and state concerns.

July 14, 2011 – Public Meeting, Brunswick, Maine

The PB Team provided an overview of six potential sites for a layover facility within a four mile vicinity of the Brunswick Station. During PB’s presentation, consultant staff outlined the potential footprint of the facility and the land requirements. By virtue of being a railroad yard with its required track work geometry, the layover facility has a long, narrow rectangular configuration and needs to be adjacent to the railroad main line. PB staff noted that they had investigated several potential sites including those identified by real estate representatives of the present owners.
Based on further analysis, four sites were eliminated due to unsuitable configuration of the available/offered property and the resultant need for additional property takings and relocations. It was explained that the three sites remaining after this initial screening; East Brunswick, Brunswick West and the Brunswick Industrial Park; would be evaluated in greater detail and that PB would provide their recommendations to the NNEPRA Board and the public for review and comment.

Public comments and questions centered on the specifics of Amtrak maintenance facility operations and on how non-quantitative issues, such as quality of life, would be addressed in the recommendation process and on the manner in which NNEPRA would act on the recommendations. The materials presented at this meeting were posted on the NNEPRA website for public review.

August 17, 2011 – Press Conference

A Press Conference was held at the NNEPRA office in the afternoon to publicize the release of the Brunswick Layover Siting Analysis Report prepared by PB so that it would be available to the public in advance of the next public meeting.

August 18, 2011 – Special NNEPRA Board Meeting, Brunswick, Maine

The NNEPRA Board hosted a special meeting in Brunswick at which time the PB consultants provided a PowerPoint presentation, directed to the public and the NNEPRA Board, of their findings and recommendation that the Brunswick West rail yard was the best location for the Amtrak Downeaster layover facility. The presentation was a summarization of a “Siting Report” and included a listing of design, operational and environmental issues, renderings of the facility at each proposed site and a set of project evaluation criteria. The presentation also included a two-part narrated video presentation which provided an on-site overview of existing Amtrak Downeaster layover operations at Portland and an on- the-ground tour of each of the three Brunswick sites still under consideration. The public was provided the opportunity to comment and ask questions of the NNEPRA Board, staff and consultant staff. The entire proceedings were broadcast over local community television.

So they recommended the Brunswick West site, but three sites were still under consideration.  OK, we think we’ve got it now, but who’s on first?

August 22, 2011 – Regular meeting of the NNEPRA Board of Directors, Portland, Maine

The NNEPRA Board voted unanimously to accept the PB recommendation to continue with the development of a layover facility at the West Brunswick rail yard location. The Board also voted to establish a Building Advisory Group comprised of officials from the Town of Brunswick, the Brunswick Town Council, the MaineDOT, Amtrak, and members of the Brunswick community to participate with NNEPRA and PB on the development of a layover facility at that location.

Voted to continue with development at Brunswick West, as in it had already begun, before the Site Selection report was issued?  And before an Environmental Assessment of the project had been performed?  And commented on?  And reviewed?  And a decision reached on the outcome?

                      

About the only things we’re sure of at this point is that we aren’t going to have eggs for breakfast tomorrow, and we aren’t going to have chicken for dinner.  We don’t want to look at either right now.

Technorati Tags: Amtrak,MLF,Brunswick West,NNEPRA

Ah, yes. The always reliable, always accurate Ostrich

          

Here’s yet another example of why you can always trust what you read in The Ostrich.

McEvoy’s nomination to rail board approved in House

The Times Record

AUGUSTA Brunswick resident and Downeaster Maintenance Layover Facility opponent Robert McEvoy’s nomination to the board that oversees the passenger train line was unanimously approved by the Maine House Transportation Committee.

 

And expect them to be a ‘watchdog of government.’  As rural folk like to say, “that dog won’t hunt.”

Well, at least they got the Augusta thing right; we wouldn’t have been surprised to see them report the story as occurring in Auburn.  After all, both cities start with an A and have two u’s in their name.  How often does that happen?

If readers didn’t already know on their own, our report on the McEvoy approval yesterday filled you in.  This nomination was not ‘approved in House.’  And the vote was not taken by the ‘Maine House Transportation Committee.’

The hearing and the vote were by the Joint Standing Committee on Transportation.  You can find the details here:  http://www.maine.gov/legis/house/jt_com/tra.htm.

All the legislative committees that we know of in Maine State Government are “Joint” in nature, meaning they are comprised of members from both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

If you’d like to know more about the subject, you can read the material here: http://www.maine.gov/legis/house/jt_rules/jtr_3.htm.

Within five minutes, you can know more about the subject than the Ostrich staffer trusted to report on such matters, and the editors who oversee and ensure the accuracy of their reporting.

                              

We could point out some more nits in the print bite above, but why bother? 

We’ll just let the work speak for itself.  And remember what the recently departed Managing Editor said: 

“Times Record readers are some of the best-informed, most influential people in Maine,”

Too bad he couldn’t say that about his staff, himself included.

As for Side, we hope you’ll think of us as ‘a dog that will hunt.’  And reward us appropriately.

Whatever you decide to do, we’re glad the Ostrich gave Side a chance to LOAO on a Friday afternoon.

                   

Technorati Tags: Ostrich,Brunswick,journalism

And Proudly Shall She Wave…..

                              

The other day in this post - http://othersideofbrunswick.blogspot.com/2014/04/a-few-tidbits.html – we reported that a tattered and torn American Flag was flying above the town mall.  A concerned “Other Sider” had contacted us about this, and we promised to look into it.

We meant to do it yesterday, but our busy schedule did not allow for it.  Today, however, we followed up.  Looks like our reporter in the field may have made a mistake, and if he did, we need to apologize to you, our trusting readers.

Why do we think the report might have been a mistake?  Because when we stopped by on this sunshiny day, the flag atop the mall pole looked brand spanking new to us.  It’s in perfect condition.

Our staff photographer was not available, so we were reduced to using our cheapo little point and shoot camera, and we had no choice but to point at the sky to capture the flag we saw.  Please excuse the quality of the photo; but in spite of it’s haziness and over-exposure, we think the fine condition of the flag is discernible.

                                  

We know from ample experience that the current Chair of the town council is a serious, competent photographer.  Perhaps he can take a photo that captures the flag with due fidelity and send it our way to replace the one we took.  He might even get the FD to elevate him on the ladder truck so he can take it straight on.

Assuming he can’t get the town’s photo capable remotely controlled drone to do it for him.  It’s the same one that catches you running red lights.

                                                             

Technorati Tags: Brunswick,Flags

Other Side News Flash: Committee Unanimously Forwards Nomination of Bob McEvoy for NNEPRA Directorship to the Full Senate

This is a direct, eye witness report.

This afternoon, Thursday, April 3, 2014, the Maine Legislature’s Joint Standing Committee on Transportation unanimously approved the Governor’s nomination of Bob McEvoy of Brunswick to the position of Director on the Board of the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority, in spite of vociferous opposition by TrainRiders Northeast.

The nomination now moves to the full Senate for final approval, and is expected to receive overwhelming confirmation there, finalizing the appointment.

The Governor’s representative did an excellent job presenting the nominee to the Committee.  The nominee himself made a thorough and compelling case for his nomination, and his desire to perform this public service.  Senator Stan Gerzofsky added a highly effective endorsement of McEvoy’s candidacy.

                                    

Opposition to the nomination came from TrainRiders Northeast.  Saint Wayne of TRN (http://othersideofbrunswick.blogspot.com/2014/03/ms-quinn-excuse-me-maam-we-have-question.html) avoided damaging his brand by sending his hired consigliore to the podium to do the dirty work.  His minion repeatedly soiled himself by raising issues of Kool-Aid Konsistency with other NNEPRA Directors, inferring that they are there to serve as rubber stamps.

This comes as no surprise, since Saint Wayne made contact with the Governor before the hearing to let him know that the way things work is that TRN puts forth three candidates that suit them, and the Governor picks one to put forth as a nominee.

Committee members, to their everlasting credit, did a great job of challenging the consigliore’s protestations as irrelevant to the issue before them.  It didn’t take long to become apparent that he had been sent forth as a sacrificial lamb, and how Davis avoided major public, personal embarrassment by doing so.

                     

The other major voice of opposition was extra-terrestrial Jeff Reynolds, who recently claimed to be living on a different planet than members of the Brunswick West Neighborhood Coalition.  Apparently he’s moved back to this planet, since he claimed to be ‘a neighbor of the nominee.’

                                                        

He also claimed he isn’t a member of TrainRiders Northeast.  All we ask is that he establish his bona fides by proving he’s not.

For those of you who might get a kick out of watching Reynolds and his organization’s attorney pontificate on an issue not being considered, you can watch this painful video.

Oops: we’re having technical difficulty integrating the video into the post, and will work to provide it tomorrow.  We’re going ahead and publishing this report now, without waiting until we solve the problem. 

Technorati Tags: Amtrak,NNEPRA,Brunswick

A few tidbits….

We’re currently pre-occupied with other things, and we live in a ‘target rich environment’ for those of us who like to ‘post’ on various incongruencies in local affairs.

So cut us some slack for this very short and hasty post.

Item 1:  a reader called a while ago to report that the flag flying in the town mall, which we assume is the responsibility of municipal government, is tattered and due for honorable disposal and replacement.  As the reader said, if we can spend $60 million or so a  year on what goes on around here, including $35 million or so on schools, can’t we find a way to replace this flag with honor and decorum, at a cost of say, $100?

We bet that loyal citizens would gladly chip in to buy a new flag.  Just for the pleasure of seeing the current one taken down and the new one hoisted.

We told the reader we’d stop by tomorrow and take a photo of the tattered flag and post it here.  We hope we remember to do so.   We owe that to you.

Item 2:  Given the departure of the latest Managing Editor, we’re wondering why we haven’t heard from The Ostrich regarding his replacement.

                                                          

He was, as we see it, a small man.

And we sincerely hope that Gina Hamilton, currently the opinion page editor at said head-in-sand media outlet, is not in the running for the job.  Btu given their apparent death wish, she may well be the pick.

Mentzinger left the local fray with a mournful statement, which we linked in an earlier post, about the business challenges facing a small town newspaper.

It caused us to think back about the circumstances that pertain.  We concluded that HAD The Ostrich truly focused on serving the community in the truest sense, they might have been able to rally town support to keep them alive and viable business-wise.

But the truth is that Bob Mentzinger ran the paper to serve his partisan agenda, not the town.

Gina Hamilton did the same thing when she ran the Coastal Journal, and eventually found herself ‘seeking new opportunities.’  She’s doing so now on the opinion page.

We have no sympathy for either, especially since they both seem genetically incapable of learning from their experiences.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.  It turns out we’ve learned from their experiences even if they haven’t.

Technorati Tags: Brunswick,Ostrich

Mentzinger targets the gag reflex

 

News release: Mentzinger departs Times Record for campaign season (March 31, 2014)

BRUNSWICK

Bob Mentzinger announced today he has departed the top newsroom role at The Times Record to restart his public relations firm in the run-up to the 2014 elections.

“This is a unique year in Maine politics and several candidates have reached out,” Mentzinger said. “It’s going to be exciting.”

Through his PR firm Writing Maine, Mentzinger served as media adviser to Cynthia Dill, a state senator from Cape Elizabeth who captured the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate in a statewide election in 2012. Other clients have included MaineShare, Friends of the Maine Woods and Breathable Home, a small home energy-efficiency contractor.

Recognized last year by the Maine Press Association as the best editorial writer in Maine in 2012-13, Mentzinger was elected to his local school board in 2012 and was mentioned as a future Democratic candidate in former Maine House District 83 in 2013.

His departure caps a 17-year newspaper career that began as a news aide at The Washington Post while in college in 1986. In Maine, his 10 years of day-to-day newsroom management included a wide-ranging Kennebec Journal investigation that implicated a small-town municipal official and her husband in contract rigging, misuse of federal funds and extortion, leading to federal corruption indictments. He also wrote an award-winning column on Maine’s ski industry for two years and coached two of the last three Maine Press Association Bob Drake Award winners recognizing the best young journalist in the state.

“Newspapers continue to be an important community touchstone, and Times Record readers are some of the best-informed, most influential people in Maine,” Mentzinger said. “It’s my great hope the company and the industry survives what continues to be an extremely difficult financial environment.”

Liking trains…..and doing it right

We’re clearly in the run-up to a sizable local foo-frah over the question of locating an Amtrak MLF in Brunswick West, and the process associated with doing so.  We’ve posted the Governor’s recent letter to the Federal Railroad Authority, and commented in numerous other posts.

Recently we’ve also observed the presence of schadenfreude: taking delight in the misfortune of others.  And a related attitude, which is ‘you should have known better; buying a place near railroad tracks guaranteed this would happen.’

Poppycock.  We remind you of the lobster boat vs. LNG tanker analogy we posted.

             

Demonization beyond ‘you should have known better’ is now rampant.  TrainRiders Northeast and their acolytes, devotees of NNEPRA and the Church of Saint Amtrak, are labeling those who want a more thorough environmental study process as ‘train haters.’

As we see it, this discredits their sincerity, and diminishes their opposition to the stance of the Brunswick West Neighborhood Coalition (BWNC.)

If the BWNC are, in the words of their opposition ‘train haters,’ should it be acceptable for BWNC members to call their opponents ‘neighbor  haters?’   How about if the discussion this coming Monday begins by a cadre of folks getting up and saying just that – that Brunswick West MLF proponents ‘hate their neighbors?’  Or their fellow town residents?

Who would stand for that?  Would the council chair allow the debate to proceed with such language?  We hope not.  But if the debate proceeds with accusations of ‘hating trains,’ it will be just the same as if he did.

So let’s get to the heart of the matter.  As we’ve said before, we can’t recall a single public statement from anyone saying they ‘hate trains,’ or demanding that the trains be ordered to cease and desist from their travel through town.

In fact, just the opposite could be said.  The BWNC likes trains, including all forms, and want them to be leveraged for a far greater good than just an unproven boost to local, tourist based economic activity.  They want taxpayer investments to pay off with a multiplier effect in area and regional economic development.  They want to “Do It RIght.” 

Do those that oppose them also oppose these advances?  If so, why?

NNEPRA and Amtrak have no interest beyond carrying passengers back and forth between Brunswick and Portland, and by extension, points south of Portland, where the bulk of ridership takes place.  Brunswick and Freeport are ‘boutique stations;’  they don’t have the draw to generate substantial and sustainable revenue for the Downeaster.  It’s our understanding that the ‘money stops’ are in New Hampshire and Massachusetts.

In view of this background, we want to do our best to clear the air on what’s going on.  First and foremost, the current public discussion is not about whether the Downeaster continues to run.  The discussion regards the process used to validate the plan currently proposed to build the MLF at Brunswick West.

Here’s where the confusion lies, and you need to study the details so you can understand, instead of buying into the demonization, schadenfreude, and just deserts rhetoric.

The controlling authority is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); this is what the specified process looks like:

The situation at the moment finds our circumstances in Box 6.  An Environmental Assessment has been completed, and submitted to the Federal Railroad Authority (FRA) with documented public comments.

The FRA is currently at the decision juncture just below Box 6, or as we think of it, the ‘fork in the road.’  They are evaluating whether to choose Box 7, and issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), or to choose Boxes 8/9, which is a decision to call for a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

The letter submitted to the FRA by the Governor, and the letter the BWNC requests the Town Council send to the FRA, simply request that the option calling for a more thorough evaluation of environmental consequences be chosen.

Note that each path in the flow chart ends up at the same final step: “Implementation with Monitoring as Provided in the Decision.”  And that each choice adheres to NEPA Regulations.  There is no box labeled ‘stop the trains,’ or ‘cancel the proposal.’

This is about being thorough, responsible, and transparent.  One could ask what those who oppose such obvious virtues are worried about. 

Let us be blunt; claims of ‘hating the trains’ are wildly misguided, inappropriate, and frankly, appear driven by a desire to inflame.

Now let’s take a look at the ‘dialogue’ already appearing in the media.  Just today, a letter appeared that opens this way:

I am a new Host for the DownEaster. I have been a supporter of rail for as long as I can remember. I believe the comeback of rail is essential to our country's economy and the wellbeing of its citizens.

This language leaves us concerned about the writer’s objectivity and understanding of economics, and its effect on ‘wellbeing.’  Apparently he missed the news that passenger rail disappeared because of the laws of economics, regardless of ‘support.’  And best we know, the laws of economics have not been rewritten recently.

The writer ends with a summary that reflects ‘soft’ schadenfreude combined with ‘you had it coming.’

So the inhabitants of this neighborhood should understand that "when one hangs around a barbershop, eventually one may get a haircut.". When one makes his bed, he needs to sleep in it.

How neighborly.  We refer you to our prior posts comparing passing lobster boats to mooring super-tankers.  We don’t think the writer lives on the waterfront, but we bet he knows several folks that do.

Would he express the same sentiments to them?  We hope not, because we don’t think that would be very charitable, or enlightened.

He could just as easily have said “when one hangs around a dentist, eventually one may get a root canal.”  But we digress; forgive us our transgression.

                

And ask that those you know on either side of this issue stick to the relevant factors, while avoiding claims and accusations that will not further public understanding or lead to rational decisions.

                 

Let’s keep things on the rails, you could say.  And our wheels on our axles.

Technorati Tags: Amtrak,EIS,MLF,Brunswick

Humility and The Ostrich

A friend just passed along a soliloquy from Mr. Mentzinger, who closes by reminding us that he:

“was recognized by the Maine Press Association in 2013 as the state’s top editorial writer.”

When you think about it, that’s faint praise, if praise at all.  The year’s “Best Movie” isn’t by definition great; it’s simply the ‘best’ this year.  Suppose we had a “Best Brunswick Street of 2013” award; do you think it would be a velvety soft ride, reminiscent of a magic carpet?  With no gritty sand to plague your driveway, garage, and mud-room?  And no washboard/frost heave character?

We think not.

You can read the rest of his self-homage here, though it pains us to link to it.

http://bobmentzinger.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/oped-nonprofit-financing-only-way-out-for-newpape

After reading his ‘piece,’ we were reminded of what we posted in 2009, seemingly four plus years ago:

Breaking News: Other Side wins Brunswick's top honor!!

P. C. Poppycock, reporter for "The Other Side of Town," earned the prestigious Brunswick Blogger of the Year Award for 2009 from the Brunswick Omelet, Donut, and Marching Society at their annual gathering held recently at the Frostys Donuts Convention Center on Maine Street. The award is often referred to by national media outlets as the NoBell Prize in Irrelevance and Futility.

We’re pleased to tell you that in contrast to ‘traditional print medial,’ our ad revenue is undiminished, and our staff is happy to continue working for us.

The Ostrich, of course, played a prime role around here as ‘government watchdog.’

While you may not have noticed, we’ve done our level best not to follow their example.

                              

We can’t wait for the upcoming awards banquet.  Got your ticket? 

Technorati Tags: Oh,please,Ostrich,Brunswick

Requesting an MLF EIS: an insightful letter

             

We recently obtained a copy of this letter sent to the Town Council by a very thoughtful resident of the Bouchard Drive neighborhood.

As you read and absorb the thoughts in it, think about what the corner of Stanwood and Pleasant Street looked like before the properties were torn down to provide a location for the new Police Headquarters.  That doesn’t happen over night, but in the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t take long for a neighborhood transitioning to absentee ownership/rental property to see such changes.

                             

‘Pride of ownership’ becomes irrelevant, and decay proceeds on a slippery slope.  We might even ask prominent local real estate professionals to comment on the phenomenon.

                                 

Herewith the letter:

Why the Town Council Should Request an Environmental Impact Statement

My name is J. Maurice L. Bisson, and I have lived in Brunswick for all of my sixty-seven years except for four years during which I served in the U.S. Air Force. I reside at 51 Bouchard Drive.

I am a certified public accountant having been in professional practice for forty years. Additionally, I am a part owner in Pleasant River Lumber Company, a sawmill operation located in four Maine communities employing nearly 200 Maine people with good pay and benefits. I have been involved in public service for many years, beginning as the Treasurer for Angus King’s gubernatorial campaigns, and I now serve as the Treasurer for his senate campaign. I have served as a member of the Finance Authority of Maine (FAME) Board. I briefly served on the BDC and resigned because of issues I could not support. I am a founding member of the Brunswick West Neighborhood Coalition and currently serve as its Treasurer.

I heartily support Amtrak service to Brunswick. My wife and I built our home in 1979 fully expecting train traffic. We did not expect a building that is in excess of two football fields long perverting our neighborhood. So if an MLF is to be constructed in our living room, we’d best be very sure that it’s the right place for all affected stakeholders.

The reason I am writing to you today is that every resident within 1,000 feet of the proposed MLF, and the Blueberry Hill Nursery School (formerly J.A. French Printing), will be adversely affected because of pollution, vibration, noise and reduction in property values.

It is the latter to which the Town of Brunswick should be concerned. The Town of Brunswick is a stakeholder because the proposed MLF has already directly and significantly adversely affected property values and they continue to deteriorate. Accordingly, if the MLF is constructed at the current planned site, there will be collective applications for property tax abatements by many of the affected property owners. The BWNC coalition is already preparing to engage a consultant to assist in this effort.

The Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared by NNEPRA is fundamentally flawed because it does not contain a professional assessment of the socio-economic impacts from the out-of-scale garage and from the project as a whole. It is the equivalent of the fox in the henhouse reporting on the safety and security of the chickens. Rather NNEPRA's socio-economic impact section of the EA is merely an ethnic profiling of only some of the total project impact area. Just the fear of this massive project that violates the Town's Comprehensive Plan and associated zoning standards has already adversely affected nearby property values and has changed the occupancy mix of the nearest residences from owner-occupied to owner-rented properties. Properties for sale have increased and sale prices are depressed. Even some Seller-Brokers do not disclose to prospective buyers details of the MLF project plans for fear of loss of sales and or reduced prices. Rather, the position is that it is the Buyer's and their Buyer-Broker's responsibility to research the area for disclosure of any major plans such as the proposed MLF.

                   

In response to the EA, the BWNC prepared a comprehensive, detailed analysis and commentary submitted to the Federal Rail Administration (FRA). A copy of this document is available for review at Resource Systems Engineering. The document took an enormous amount of time and technical and research expertise and is available for review. An Environmental Impact Statement would provide an objective, impartial analysis of the facts.

The MLF will not provide any new taxable base to offset the devaluation of over 500 homes. Additionally, most of NNEPRA’s major purchases will be from wholesale contractors most likely not located in Brunswick (fuel, cafe car supplies, maintenance parts, waste disposal, etc) and no new jobs as these union contracted services will be imported from the current location in Portland.

The MLF has no relationship to train service to Brunswick. Our detailed analysis of ridership indicates that after fifteen months of operation, ridership exceeds 10% capacity approximately 10% of the time. In other words, ninety percent of the time, ridership is less than 10% capacity. More train trips to Brunswick because of an MLF will not increase ridership.

The MLF should be located closer to the hub than to end of the line if its purpose is to serve the needs of trains going to Brunswick and Lewiston-Auburn.

The FRA is the only remaining federal regulatory agency that can perform an EIS resulting in an objectively developed and established, complete, independent, Socio-Economic Impact Analysis with the full, formal and direct participation of all stakeholders; including The Town of Brunswick and severely impacted residents.

This is a legacy issue for the Town Council. The proposed MLF does not comport with the Town Master Plan¹. If the worst case scenario comes to pass and the town council chooses to remain on the sidelines; it will be remembered for decades.

Thank you for taking the time to consider this matter.

1 Downtown residential neighborhoods are an economic asset to Brunswick, providing tax revenue and pedestrian traffic to downtown businesses and attractions. Housing options are increased, while preserving valued features of neighborhoods. Because of their livability and convenience, downtown neighborhoods are easily marketed and attract new families and individuals.

=========================================================

You can find the Downtown Master Plan here: http://www.brunswickme.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Adopted-Downtown-Master-Plan.pdf

Make sure you read “Our Downtown Vision” on page 7 of the document, which prioritizes, among other things, “Visual Quality” and “Neighborhoods.”

And don’t forget that when valuations decline in one area of town, the property tax burden shifts to areas where the values have not declined.

        

Technorati Tags: Brunswick,MLF,Amtrak,EIS,valuation

Breaking News: Bleeding at the “blood stained local rag”

In early February of this year, we started a post with these words and graphics:

Here’s a riddle for you: what do you get when you cross an ostrich with a junkyard mongrel?

                                        

                

You can read the rest of the post here:  http://othersideofbrunswick.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-local-rag-is-blood-stained.html

The post was largely about one Bob Mentzinger, who managed to make quite a name for himself as managing editor at The Ostrich.

Now comes word that there may be more than one junkyard dog involved in our little story.  Over the transom just a short while ago arrived a report that said Mr. Mentzinger is no longer with The Ostrich.

We’re seeking follow-up confirmation on the story from our trusted sources.  Meanwhile, be careful not to step in any pools of blood.

In that earlier post, we made this comment:

Mentzinger is, in many ways, the antithesis of an ‘unbiased journalist.’  Some might even suggest that he is a hack, a political mercenary.

He has certainly confirmed that since.  Which makes his comment earlier accusing us of slander and ‘hiding behind a pseudonym’ all the more meaningful.

While we’re looking into the details, here’s a comment we did receive from a respected journalist:

                     

We don’t know what’s up next for Mentzinger, but he could always check with GoJo to see if he needs anyone to help with his next clean election campaign.  We think he’s proved himself more than qualified.

Technorati Tags: The Ostrich,Brunswick