07 May 2013: Petitioner’s Response to PPM request for additional time to comment

haha-transparentI’ve sent my formal response to yesterday’s request by Pleasant Pond Mill LLC for an extension of time to reply to the material released by the Department on 9 April 2013. It was the most enjoyable letter I’ve had the pleasure of writing in months. I suppose I should thank Paul Kelley for the opportunity to put it out there for the world to see just what I think of him and his shenanigans but as much fun as it was, it was a waste of my and everyone else’s valuable time. I don’t take kindly to that. Neither does DEP. I am confident they will tell Paul Kelley what to do with his request for additional time to comment.

Petitioner’s response to PPM request to delay comments

Ironically, Paul Kelley will have to download my response from this web site unless Anthony Buxton is nice enough to forward emails sent to the service list to him, as he is still the official contact for Pleasant Pond Mill LLC.

2 thoughts on “07 May 2013: Petitioner’s Response to PPM request for additional time to comment

  1. Steve Viti

    What’s the likelihood a breached dam, at Hurricane Irene’s hand (which I remember as more of a big blow), would be more of someone else’s responsibility than our poor, problematic mr. kelly?
    If you really want to walk away, just go and leave us to repair the damn and rid ourselves of your memory and two years of heartache.

  2. George Fergusson Post author

    Would that he could Steve. He’s got a little problem called a mortgage… and until he can get out from under that, and deliver the dam with the flowage rights, he’s stuck with it. Which is OK with me. The State will place a water level order on it this summer, and the clock will start ticking.

    That said, I share your frustration. But I do see an end to this fiasco, sooner rather than later.

Comments are closed.