The confusion surrounding Pleasant Pond Mill LLC’s petition for release from dam ownership or water level maintenance continues despite the Lincoln County News‘ attempt to bring clarity to the situation with this most recent article on the issue. The confusion even extends to the Department of Environmental Protection where uncertainty over whether Kelley’s petition is new, old, or improved is complicating processing. Dominik Lobkowicz tries (heroically) but fails (inevitably) to explain it all in his article:
So, I was told by Ms. Howatt last Friday afternoon, the 27th of September, that Kelley had NOT filed a new petition but instead had requested a 180 day extension. Now it appears that Kelley really did file another petition, with a different date even. Ms. Howatt claims it is same petition and that his notice of intent to file was merely an attempt to remedy deficiencies with his original notice. Huh. Sounds like a different petition to me. For one thing, how would filing late notice correct the problem of having filed late notice to begin with? Kelley seems to believe it is a new petition which begs the question why did Kelley ask for a 180 day extension to his original petition? Are there 2 petitions for release from dam ownership now?
And why should any of this matter? Well for one thing, if it’s a new petition then by law the towns of Whitefield and Jefferson will be required to hold public meetings (again) to “consider and act” on the issue of dam ownership. If the old petition has been extended, then the towns are off the hook and Kelley need not hold the public meeting he’s scheduled for October 15th. It would be nice if the Department of Environmental Protection could get a firm grip on this situation and nail Mr. Kelley’s feet to the floor.