Hearings stopped too soon

We have now witnessed eleven days of public hearing testimony regarding the proposed DCP Midstream Liquefied Petroleum Gas Tank and Terminal in Searsport. The last day, Monday, Feb. 25, brought up some concerns.

We have recently discovered that DCP Midstream’s Chesapeake, Va., facility — after years of importing — has exported propane, described by a DCP executive in their fourth quarter earnings teleconference as follows:

“I'm excited to report that we've successfully exported 6 million gallons of propane out of our Chesapeake terminal on January. Further work is required to export purity products on an ongoing basis. However, we are encouraged by the commercial results and will continue to explore this opportunity."

This is no secret. There is a shift to exports and we have good reason to believe that DCP plans to export America’s abundance of propane to other parts of the world. Interested party questioning of the planning board’s technical consultant, Neal Frangesh, was cut short after about ten minutes by the Planning Board. Mr. Frangesh has for his entire career been hired by industry for his services. This appears to be the first and only time he has consulted for a town regarding a pending application. We would have liked the opportunity to hear what Mr. Frangesh thought of that activity, especially after being told that exporting could be done, but it would be too expensive to convert Searsport.

Later during the hearing, we learned in 2007, then-Governor John Baldacci did not ask DCP Midstream to bring this project to Searsport. He has written a letter clarifying his role and has been interviewed on Maine Public Broadcasting to set the record straight. Baldacci asked for help from suppliers to deal with a propane distribution problem due to a very cold winter and set of unusual circumstances which interfered with delivery to the state and nothing more. That his role has been portrayed by DCP Midstream as more than that is fabrication.

On Feb. 25, 26 speakers were on record against the project. No one spoke in support. The hearing was shut down at 9:30 p.m. with many still in line and many more wanting to speak presumably against the tank. We had heard Planning Board assurances on many occasions that "everyone who wants to speak will have the opportunity to do so." This did not happen Monday night. Further, since the hearings began last November, 67 public speakers opposed the tank, seven spoke in favor of it — of which 4 were from the same family. This figure does not include the 65 small business owners, retirees, real estate professionals and other professionals who spoke against the project on panels delivering testimony.

Recently, I’ve had the opportunity to read through all letters sent to the Searsport Planning Board through Feb. 13, 2013. Out of 190 letters submitted, only 3 were in support. What has become abundantly clear is the overwhelming majority of people in the community are now firmly opposed to this unwanted, unneeded, dangerous project.

Ken Agabian

Searsport

Approving tank would be 'folly'

To put the proposed LPG tank in Searsport, a well-populated area, an area already containing many storage tanks holding millions of gallons of gas, would be the utmost folly. We have been told not to worry. A mechanism will vent excessive gas from the LPG tank and a flame will burn that excess off harmlessly. There will be no build-up of gas, no possibility of an explosion.

I lived through the ice storm of 1998. No power for days. I live in Belfast, just down the road from Searsport. If that LPG tank is installed, I certainly would not live through the next ice storm, nor would anyone else within many miles of the epicenter of the explosion.

Karen Saum

Belfast

A Future You Can Predict

I was particularly interested in some comments by made by Neal Frangesh, consultant to the Searsport Planning Board, at the hearings on Feb. 25. He used that tired old “state of the art” technology argument that is inherently false. Technology is constantly moving forward. We all know that. What was ”state of the art” 5, 10, 15 years ago is already outdated. What was “state of the art” 25, 50, 100 years ago is obsolete. Everything that can be described today as “state of the art” will one day in the future be obsolete. The “state of the art” defense of the safety of a project is a fallacy.

Mr. Frangesh also said — I believe that this is a direct quote — that it is “very difficult to predict the future.” Now there is a true statement. It is very hard to predict the future in many ways, especially when one is talking fuel, transportation, commerce and the economy in general.

One part of the future that one can predict with absolute certainty, however, is the human need for nourishment in open spaces, for recreation, which literally means to re-create a part of oneself. Why do people go on vacation? Why do they drive hours to sail on Penobscot Bay? Why do people build simple camps in the woods? Why do they drive hours to hunt and fish in the wilderness of northern Maine? Why do they seek out places to ski or hike and go snowmobiling? Why do families drive from Bangor and Augusta for a day at Sandy Point Beach? Why do people simply take a ride after dinner to watch the sunset from a particular hill in Prospect or drive down to Sandy Point Beach to watch the moon rise over the river?

For eons, for the entire history of humankind, people have had a need for recreation and spiritual nourishment. They did in the past. Literature bears that out. They do now. Testimony at Monday’s hearing bears that out. They will in the future. The hard wiring of human beings guarantees that. That is a future you can predict, one that the Searsport Planning Board disregards at everyone’s peril.

Lorna Russell

Stockton Springs

Jobs won't go to locals

If DCP is successful in obtaining the permit from the Searsport Planning Board and is successful in building the tank they will bring 12 to 15 well-paid jobs to Searsport.

What DCP hasn’t told the residents of Searsport and beyond is that they will also bring most of the people who will get those jobs.

During the Public Hearings conducted by the Searsport Planning Board, DCP was asked multiple times to provide the job descriptions for the proposed plant. They finally did on the last night of the hearings and that delay guaranteed they would not be questioned about their previous “promises” to the residents of Searsport. A review of the 7 job descriptions submitted reveals that it is highly unlikely that any current Searsport resident will qualify for more than two of those jobs. That is because the other positions require previous experience working for DCP or similar companies.

The five other jobs include the following requirements — one from each of the 5 positions — “Minimum 3 years experience as a Propane Operator II,” “Completed DCP Midstream Process Fundamentals,” ”Minimum of 2 years’ experience with maintenance associated with gas gathering and compression,” “3 years’ experience leading and coordinating PSM and RMP activities,” and “Minimum 2 years’ experience working in a gas gathering system or processing plant.”

The promise of jobs is the reason that some residents are in favor of the tank.

If a company promises 12 to 15 jobs without information about the job requirements, do they care about the community? If a company stages a Job Fair to reinforce unrealistic expectations of multiple jobs, do they care about the community?

I believe the answer to both these question is “no.”

The promise of jobs enthusiastically accepted and welcomed by a portion of the population and with skepticism on the part of others about the reality of those claims is one of the causes of the deep rift within our town today. Do we really want to do business with a company that is the cause of this appalling situation? I believe the answer to that question is also “no.”

Joanne McNally

Searsport

Treat Planning Board with respect

I am neither for, nor against the proposed tank project here in Searsport. However, I have read every letter sent to our Planning Board, have heard and read every bit of testimony for and against the tank and have come to the following conclusion:

1. Both sides have good reason to take the stand they have presented. Many people just don’t want to hear it and don’t want the project approved. Much of the anti-tank information is based on rumor. The Town of Searsport did not solicit DCP to come to our town and build the facility. DCP came to Searsport with the plan. Once they delivered the proposal, the Board then took the normal steps it is required to take with such a project and followed State, Federal and local laws. They could not just tell DCP to go away!

2. The statement that the members have already made a decision to approve the application and grant a permit is absolutely false. They are gathering all the required information in order to make a decision based on the facts. Everyone seems to think they are “on the take” or “in the pocket of DCP.” How dare anyone make such an inane statement! If you have been told these falsehoods, you are being lied to.

3. Making threats to the members has rankled my feathers since my wife is (unfortunately) on the board. The police presence at the meetings was suggested by me because of the rude, obnoxious and outright demeaning people opposed to the project. It was also because of the threats being made. The board is doing what it is supposed to do and what it is required to do as per the law! Like it or not.

4. The majority of the letters imply that the board should tell DCP to take a hike. They have no other recourse, but to follow through with the process and make an informed decision. Know this, that if the application is approved it was an informed decision by the rules. They must be impartial and vote either way. That is the law! It then would be passed on to the courts to decide.

5. Did you know that some tanker trucks passing through town carry JP5 jet fuel? To imply that the board (and again, my wife) is taking bribes or getting promises or gratuity from the applicant is just the dumbest thing I have ever heard. They have spent endless hours reading and studying the thousands of pages of testimony and statute requirements with little gratitude. Some, like I sense you are under the impression that they are neglecting to listen to the wants of the very vocal (and again, very rude) protestors.

At the last hearing a woman got up and started yelling at the board for even listening to applicant. Another person running for the Board of Selectman — and granted, this was told to me second hand — has said that the board was being bribed for that approval. This attitude is not acceptable. It was at this meeting that my wife had enough and simply walked out. She, as well as the rest of the board do not deserve the indignity, false accusations, negative comments, and threats.

After being a Planning Board member for over twenty years, my wife is considering hanging up her statute books, and calling it quits. It is just not worth being treated like they have been treated.

Richard S. Horowitz

Searsport

Don't spoil Searsport's coast

My concern over the proposed construction of a mega LP gas tank on the Penobscot Bay is rooted in my family history.

I was born in Bangor to a family who for generations had made a living by cutting ice from Maine's once pristine waters. I attended Bowdoin College at a time when the threat to human health of planetary pollution was beginning to be widely recognized.

I raised a family in a state polluted by acid rain, mercury in the water, and even smog as air pollution cause by coal burning in states to our west reached Maine. Now I am horrified to hear of plans to permanently ruin Penobscot Bay by building a large, dangerous storage facility for LPG — one that will spoil forever the scenic beauty of the Searsport coast.

If we let a few wealthy individuals decide that Maine is no longer Vacationland, we are fools, and our grandchildren will disrespect our memory. The Searsport Planning Board holds the future of Maine in its trust. I sincerely hope that it proves equal to the occasion.

Lisa Savage

Solon

Small business owners against tank

This letter was sent to the Searsport Planning Board and copied to The Republican Journal.

We are residents of the town of Searsport and operate a small business from our home. We are writing to express our great concern with the safety and security impacts of the proposed DCP Midstream LPG Tank and Terminal development.

As many other residents of this pristine and tranquil coastal town and the beautiful Penobscot Bay region, we are opposed to this project. We urge you to save the mid coast region by promoting environmentally safe and sustainable projects and thereby denying the LPG mega tank project.

As you are well aware, the tourism industry is the primary economic engine of coastal Maine. This development can have an immensely negative impact on tourism, greatly damage our clean air and environment, destroy our precious coastline and further lower our property values. In addition, it is no longer viable economically. LPG/LNG import structures are no longer being utilized due to over abundance of existing LPG/LNG in our country.

Please stand on the right side of history and consider the potential for irreparable harm and devastation associated with the approval of this project. Say no to ConocoPhillips, DCP and their lobbyists. Refuse their application. It is not worth your consideration or the safety and security of our region.

Kent and Farinaz Osborn

Searsport

Concerned with Frangesh testimony

This letter was sent to the Searsport Planning Board and copied to The Republican Journal.

My name is Carol Yee and I live in Swanville. In 2009 I realized my life-time dream of moving myself and my small plant nursery to Maine. A big part of why many of us make this move is to escape the ugly and dangerous clutter of Urban America. It is with the utmost incredulity that I realize that this beautiful, safe space I have found is now threatened to become infinitely worse than where I came from. My home is ten miles from the proposed site, well within the catastrophic Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion (BLEVE) blast zone and exposed on all sides to the frequent high winds that will carry vapor pollution for many miles in all directions.

I have a huge concern with your choice of Neal Frangesh as your “independent” technical consultant. I was there when Mr. Franesh referred to the mile long pipeline from tanker to tank as “our” pipeline. I must say I turned to my neighbor and whispered in amazement “Did he just say OUR pipeline?” I’m glad I was sitting down and didn’t get hauled away as poor Ben Crimaudo did for the same reaction.

Mr. Frangesh sat at the DCP table giving testimony as to the safety of the tank, clearly with the assistance and support from the DCP attorneys. Was it really that hard to find someone not connected in any way with DCP? I find it unbelievable that he sits on your board!

Though I feel that you did an overall fair and balanced job of keeping the many hearings on track, your refusal to keep the final public comments allotment open leaves a bitter taste and unfortunately taints the whole process. Some folks traveled for hours to voice their opposition. The dire consequences that loom over us made it imperative that we speak directly to you. Letters just don’t do it. In retrospect another forty five minutes would have made moot the huge uproar now flooding the Internet, Facebook pages, blogs and news media.

As you saw and heard many times over, your decision will not just affect the town of Searsport. It is a life and death issue for thousands who live in, and love Maine the way it is. I beg you to deny this application.

Carol Yee

Swanville

Deny the tank for all Penobscot Bay

This letter was sent to the Searsport Planning Board and copied to The Republican Journal.

I am a Bayside resident, and have lived in Waldo County for more than ten years. I work in Belfast, on Route 3 at the top of Hayford Hill, at my own practice where I offer therapeutic massage, Reiki and oncology massage.

Any increase in commercial traffic would directly impact the profitability of my office, which depends on an overall feeling of tranquility and safety to assure client relaxation and healing. Hundreds of propane tanker trucks barreling past my office — which is less than 500 yards from Route 3 — would ruin the ambiance I have worked hard to create.

I am grateful the Searsport hearings happened and that you are willing to take input from the surrounding community. I understand making this choice is terribly difficult.

That said, the breathtaking lack of regard that DCP has for the Midcoast — its community, environment, economy, safety and, dare I say, happiness — is apparent from the fact that DCP even approached your town. This is not a good match. It is like watching a close friend be courted by a womanizing tycoon, who truly doesn’t care about your friend, but makes it seem like she’s just what he’s always wanted.

The idea that somehow a DCP LPG tank is not a regional issue — that it’s nobody else’s business — is wholly ludicrous. If this was a tank that only sat within Searsport borders, relied only on the town residents in emergency, affected the roads and waters of Searsport alone, and impacted Searsport business exclusive to the rest of the area, I would say go ahead and god bless it. It would be yours to enjoy and yours to mourn should anything go wrong, much like any questionable marriage.

But it’s not. It’s Penobscot Bay, and everything surrounding it, that will be adversely impacted. Hardly any aspect of this tank is Searsport exclusive — except the money behind it.

Speaking of god, here's a little food for thought from St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 12: 14-16, and 26: "For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, 'Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,' that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, 'Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,' that would not make it any less a part of the body. If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together."

We are all members of the same body, those of us who live on the earth that hugs Penobscot Bay; those of us who travel Route 1 and 3; those of us who breathe the fine sea salt air of Midcoast Maine. Searsport makes a choice now and all will either suffer or rejoice.

Please deny the application from DCP.

Kristen Burkholder

Northport

Say 'no' to DCP

This letter was sent to the Searsport Planning Board and copied to The Republican Journal.

My name is Diana Newman. As a longtime former resident of Belfast and a current resident of Southwest Harbor, I am writing to express strong opposition to the Searsport LPG application. Searsport not only stands as a vibrant, attractive community and premiere tourist destination in its own right, it serves the broader region as a splendid gateway to Acadia National Park and multiple destinations Downeast.

Clearly the overwhelming majority of people attending the public hearings provided articulate, relevant testimony against the project. The decision before you will reveal how much respect you are willing to extend to the clear will of the many engaged citizens who call this place home. It is entirely appropriate in a democracy that so many engaged citizens of Searsport have taken their responsibility to help safeguard their community seriously.

Saying “no” to this ill-conceived leviathan of a project is not radical. Saying “no” is a position of dignity and strength. Saying “no” keeps the door wide open to exploring safer and more sustainable choices for the future of both you and your neighboring communities. Saying “no” in the face of pressure, including subtle and covert intimidation from corporations, may be uncomfortable and frightening in the short term but will be essential if the integrity of the region and the will of its concerned citizens is to be upheld and not compromised.

Your citizens will thank you for putting their diligent fact-finding and heart-felt interests before the interests of a strident corporation with a checkered safety record. We do not want “business at any cost.” In return for your exercise of prudence and courage in saying “no,” the opponents of this tank will surely be willing to stand with you, if need be, as good neighbors in defense of the safety and spiritual integrity of the community and region. Saying “no” allows us all to say “yes” to a more equitable and sustainable future. Saying “no” allows us good standing in a world that has to courageously meet the challenge of transitioning into low impact, highly sustainable economies.

When all is said and done the earth will move in alignment with natural law. There is a poignant, cautionary Cree Proverb that speaks its wisdom across all time to all relations.

“Only when the last tree has died

and the last river been poisoned

and the last fish been caught

will we realize we cannot eat money.”

Diana Newman

Southwest Harbor

Protect us all, stop the tank

This letter was sent to the Searsport Planning Board and copied to The Republican Journal.

because it is totally beyond my ability to believe that you intelligent and educated people would still want the tank — especially after all that has been learned through the recent process of discovery — I can only imagine that you must feel there is no way to save face if you were to now change your minds and agree that yes, the tank is a very bad idea for the entire Penobscot Bay Region, and especially for Searsport.

To that end, I offer that if you do not accept the overwhelming evidence that the tank would have a devastating effect on the whole area, that if you continue to hold your position in favor of this development, one can guarantee that you will have lost the faith of all whose welfare you have been entrusted to protect.

Resume your dutiful positions to protect the health, safety and welfare of all of us and stop the tank!

Dorie Klein

Camden

Respite Care for the well-being of Maine

There is a bill currently in the Maine legislature, which will have a notable impact on Maine families. That bill is LD 62: An Act To Provide Additional Funding for Respite Care for the Elderly and for Adults with Disabilities. The bill aims to provide additional General Fund appropriations to the Department of Health and Human Services for adult day services programming.

In Maine it is estimated there are 230,000 informal caregivers, providing support to the elderly and adults with disabilities. With the population in Maine aging, this number is bound to increase. An increase in respite funds to reflect this increase in the elderly population only makes sense. It is needed to support the caregivers of the elderly and disabled, helping to ensure that while these caregivers are trying to meet the needs of their loved one, they have time to meet their own needs and life responsibilities.

A majority of these caregivers balance their caregiver role along with full time jobs and various other family responsibilities. The burden of being the primary caregiver to an aging or disabled individual is great, and it is also a noble and selfless act.

A caregiver’s role becomes more intensive, as the one they are providing care to ages. As a loved one’s medical or mental condition deteriorates a caregiver must spend more and more time handling the medical concerns of their loved one.

Respite services, especially adult day programming, is a vital resource for caregivers of the elderly and adults with disabilities and allows for caregivers to get their basic needs met, for example getting a haircut, going to the doctor, and going grocery shopping. It also allows for caregivers to maintain essential aspects of their life for example, keeping a full time job.

With the population in Maine aging it makes sense that an increase in respite funds to support the caregivers of Maine’s elderly and disabled adults would occur. This increase in funding for respite care will help to ensure that the general health of Maine families and Maine’s economy is maintained by providing the resources needed to allow caregivers to carry out their many life and work responsibilities, while continuing to be the primary caregiver of a loved one.

Kenneth Harvey

Winterport