Dear Editor,

Here's yet another reason to eat veggie burgers instead of hamburgers: The Topps Meat Company recently recalled 331,582 pounds of potentially E. coli -contaminated beef that was distributed nationwide.

Twenty-one people in eight states, including Connecticut, Maine, and New Jersey, have reported illnesses that may be connected to the tainted meat. Studies have shown that when contaminated meat is recalled, only about half of it is actually recovered—the rest remains in grocery stores. You can protect yourself and your loved ones from E. coli , campylobacter, listeria, and other bacteria that live in the intestinal tracts and feces of animals by always leaving meat and other animal products at the grocery store.

Most farmed animals are crammed into filthy sheds and slaughtered on killing floors that are contaminated with feces, vomit, and other bodily fluids. These unsanitary conditions have led to a rise in food borne bacteria. Plant-based foods, on the other hand, don't normally harbor E. coli or other fecal bacteria. In fact, according to the USDA, 70 percent of food poisoning is caused by contaminated animal flesh.

When fruits or vegetables do become contaminated with E. coli , it is because animal manure was used to fertilize crops or leaked into waterways. Cross-contamination can also occur when fruits and vegetables are placed on the same surface as meat. As more and more people adopt a vegan diet, our dependence on cows and other farmed animals will diminish, therefore lessening the threat of E. coli contamination—and saving human and animal lives. For more information, veggie burger recommendations and vegan recipes, see www.GoVeg.com .

Sincerely,

Heather Moore

People for the Ethical Treatment

of Animals

Editor's Note: a copy of this letter to Edgecomb's planning board chairman, Katherine Braid, was sent to the newspaper.

Dear Ms. Braid,

This letter is to commend the town of Edgecomb for their efforts in working with the developers of Davis Island to create economic opportunities while maintaining the charm and quality of the region.

As you are well aware, there are many economic challenges facing the midcoast region in the coming years. The closure of Brunswick Naval Air Station, rising costs of housing, and changing tourist demographics and demands will impact the future of the midcoast. Whether our communities survive the change or struggle depends on their ability to attract sustainable investment now.

The town of Edgecomb and the entire region are fortunate to have a partner in the Edgecomb Development Group that is dedicated to positioning Edgecomb to lead the future of the entire region. Your partnership in the short term has brought modern water and sewer conveniences to Davis Island, which has supported modernization and redevelopment of first class hotel rooms.

It has also brought development of high-quality housing that is affordable to working families in the region, which is vital to helping employers keep access to their skilled workers. The next phase of high quality senior housing will fill the need for seniors in the region, and future phases could make Edgecomb the new gateway to the Boothbay-Damariscotta region.

Roger Bintliff and his associates have been remarkably consistent with the principles of sprawl-preventing "smart growth" and have also been consistent with the demands of the community to maintain a high quality of life. Their efforts to minimize their footprint on the island, while maximizing impact have quickly become a model for other communities across the state. As of now, Edgecomb Development Group has created over 60 well paying jobs, many with full benefits. This is a tremendous achievement for them, and a tremendous asset for the region.

As plans move forward on the next phases of this project, I want to urge you to continue to work closely with the Edgecomb Development Group to ensure this project will provide maximum benefit to the town and region as a whole. I am certain that the next phase of senior housing will be built with the same attention to detail and commitment to the community as the first two phases, and I urge you to support getting this major investment off the ground.

In closing, the town of Edgecomb is in an enviable place right now, and holds the keys to long-term success of the entire Boothbay region. Edgecomb Development Group has already proven that it is committed to working closely with you to ensure mutually beneficial development, and I urge you to continue to support the long-term plans for Davis Island.

I appreciate your consideration.

Sincerely

John Richardson, Commissioner

Maine Department of Economic

and Community Development

To the Editor,

International Life Chain Sunday will be held on Sunday, October 7 this year. A chain will form in Wiscasset on Route 1 in front of the town office from 2-3 p.m.

What is a Life Chain? It is a group of people coming together for an hour to pray for an end to abortion on demand in our country. Participants hold signs that read Abortion Kills Children; Abortion Hurts Women; Adoption: The Loving Option; and Lord, Forgive Us and Our Nation.

Earlier this year the survival of pre-term baby, Amillia Taylor, in Florida, at 21 weeks gestation made the news. Amillia was the youngest known child to survive premature birth. ABC anchor, Charles Gibson, made the account of Amillia's survival the top story on World News Tonight. "A tiny miracle that raises big questions in the debate over abortion," said Gibson of Amillia's birth.

Abortion on demand is hurting our nation, killing our children, and wounding their mothers. Come stand for those who cannot stand up for themselves. Signs are provided. The chain will form rain or shine. For more information contact me at 882-9640.

Mary Rose Pray

Wiscasset

Dear Editor

Dr. Seuss's "Lorax" (Random House, 1971) begins, "At the far end of town…and the wind smells slow and sour when it blows, and no birds ever sing excepting old crows… way back in the days when the grass was still green and the pond was still wet, and the clods were still clean."

The Once-ler tells the story of when he first came to this place, of the creatures that once lived there and Truffula trees that once grew before he used them all up to make thneeds.

["A Thneed's - a fine - something that all people eed."]

The Lorax tries to warn the Once-ler, saying he speaks for the trees, for they have no tongues. He tells the Once-ler he is crazy with greed. The Once-ler cannot be stopped. He had to grow bigger. "So bigger I got. I biggered my factory. I biggered my roads. I biggered my wagons. I biggered my loads. And I biggered my money."

At the end, there are no more trees, thneeds or jobs, but on a pile of rocks is a sign that says, "UNLESS." The Once-ler can't guess what it could mean, but "now that you're here, the word of the Lorax seems perfectly clear. UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not."

The proposed coal gasification plant is not a thneed factory, but there are parallels. Wiscasset and the surrounding land is not inhabited by brown Bar-ba-loots, Humming Fish or Swomee Swans, but it is inhabited by the Hermit Thrust, Eastern Wood Pewee, Barred Owl, Canada Mayflower, Trailing Arbutus, Pine, Oak Hemlock, moss, fern lichen, Spring Peepers and Wood Frogs, small mammals, reptiles, fish and invertebrates. It is a place of quiet nights and dark skies full of stars. There are days with clear blue skies and sparkling white snow. There is clean, abundant fresh water. These have no tongues. I would hate to see them fouled and they might. UNLESS

Bronda M. Niese

Woolwich

Dear Editor:

We all need to take a serious look at the reality of our energy situation and national and local economies before we dismiss the Twin River project. We can't have everything we want or need without making compromises.

The United States imports vast amounts of oil from the Middle East which has numbing effects such as increasing our dependence on unstable countries, driving up our energy prices, volatility in the market and what's perhaps most frightening - funding the very terrorist organizations that threaten our national security and our lives.

Our domestic supply of coal is projected to last more than 250 years and is ready for electric generation and transportation fuel production. That amounts to more energy than the Middle East has oil. Coal mining has made tremendous environmental and safety advances over the past 25 years. Yes, there are tragedies in coal mining, as there are in every major industrial setting, they are very sad indeed. However, this country continues to strive for improvements in the safe harvesting of raw materials and we all hope to avoid any loss of life or serious injury for American workers. We must remember and be honest about the fact, however, that coal is a national industry that employs hundreds of thousands of Americans and supports countless families and even entire communities. If the United States stopped using coal we would not only severely hurt the national economy, we would financially devastate hundreds of thousands of families across the U.S.

Energy experts agree that coal is a realistic and viable resource that will continue to play an important role in our energy portfolio for many decades to come. Renewable sources offer no short-term solution to our energy problems. The next generation of low emission coal gasification power plants must be very seriously considered and explored as a significant part of a comprehensive energy strategy both regionally and nationally. Oil and natural gas are obviously not long-term answers. The environmental impact of building renewable energy facilities at the scale needed to meet today's energy demands is out of the question. Wind turbine would litter every mountainside in the U.S. and still not supply enough energy to meet demands. There simply has to be a compromise.

The doomsday environmentalists focus only on one aspect of fossil fuel power plants and completely fail to consider the economic realities of our energy crisis. Rising energy prices and supply vulnerability are having dramatic negative effects on our global economy. Energy demand and energy costs balanced with responsible environmental stewardship are very diverse challenges that require innovation. Without investment in the next generation of technology the old, dirty high-cost energy producers remain in operation. If we continue to do what we've always done, it certainly isn't going to get any better. Waiting and hoping for a mysterious new silver bullet solution doesn't make a lot of sense either.

Our future cannot rest solely on closed minds and stubbornness, but needs to rely on the companies and innovative people working to develop new technologies like coal gasification. I agree it shouldn't be the final answer to our goal of low cost, low impact energy. Coal gasification isn't the silver bullet. But it is progress in the right direction which is how every modern country, and particularly America, has made improvements over time. We can't expect to skip to the end and solve our problems over night. We can, however, move steadily in the right direction and continue to improve and make new discoveries. It's about balance, determination and realistic forward thinking.

I believe we will all benefit from the construction of the Twin River Energy Center for of the reasons above and many more. The plant will provide near term solutions for our energy diversification, national security, and economic growth not to mention a much needed boost to the regional economy and local tax base.

Sincerely,

David Hall

Dear Editor:

The governor's proposal to take over the Two Bridges Regional Jail (TBRJ) requires close scrutiny by the taxpayers of Lincoln and Sagadahoc counties. The current arguments on the proposal reflect the inequity in funding and question the financial benefits to taxpayers. The debate so far is unable to focus on whether one unified system, as six states have; or a regional or county system, as the remaining 44 states have, is more efficient. As with any decision there are advantages or disadvantages to either system. If the funding and tax savings questions can be answered then perhaps we will hear the benefits and pitfalls of each type of system.

The governor's plan on the surface would lead you to think you will save money on your taxes. Will this be true? Even if the state finds savings for themselves, what will be the result be on your local property tax bill? To find the answer, the issues below need to be answered by those officials endorsing the proposal:

• Maine Department of Correction administration scheduled a two-day meeting with TBRJ staff on September 18 and 19 to find out all expenses related to the cost of operation, weeks after the governor's projected savings was publicly announced.

• The counties' Freedom of Information request yielded no backup data or analysis to support the governor's figures. The state agrees their assumptions are changing and will continue to change as they visit the counties and learn actual costs.

• Where's the proof the state will run it more efficiently? What is the state's record on cost savings related to the consolidation of DHHS and the schools?

• How long will the promise last that the state will not increase the counties' assessment to cover increased operation costs? The promises of one governor or Legislature do not bind future Legislatures and we all know the state's record on school funding.

• TBRJ's financial plan informed the taxpayers of Lincoln and Sagadahoc counties that revenue from selling beds to other jurisdictions would help offset the counties' debt service payment.

• Revenue loss by the state takeover in current budget would equal $1.4 million to the counties, estimated to increase over $2 million in the next budget year. The counties would continue to pay the debt service, but would no longer have the revenue.

• The hostile takeover of the facility requires our two counties to fund the construction costs for the benefit of all other counties who have no financial investment in the facility.

• The largest expense of any jail is the operating costs over its life. Is it reasonable to believe that future costs, the year 2018 for example, will not require the counties to have to increase their assessment to the state?

• If the savings as estimated by the state fail to materialize, will the counties be required to increase their assessment?

• There is no evidence in the governor's plan that funding is included to continue the diversion and alternative sentencing programs implemented by the counties.

• The counties' loss of the state funded Community Corrections funds will eliminate the source to continue these programs; and since the counties will not be responsible for corrections, there is no incentive for them to continue them.

• The loss of these programs on an average day will add 70 to 80 inmates from Lincoln and Sagadahoc who will now have to be incarcerated and thus add to the overcrowding problem.

• Since the governor's plan does not include transportation of inmates, it is expected the counties will be required to continue funding this operation above the capped costs.

• For Lincoln and Sagadahoc counties the funding will need to increase because the state will require the counties to move our inmates to other facilities around the state because mental health and Waldo County inmates will move in TBRJ and utilize beds originally planned for Lincoln and Sagadahoc inmates.

• For jails that close under the governor's plan, the county will have to continue to fund the jail expense without the jail, but will have increased costs to establish a full-time booking facility and transportation unit.

• Who will transport inmates during emergencies, and off hours, if the county transportation staff are not 24 hours?

• What will the state do if counties are unable or unwilling to meet the transportation needs the state will have?

• What facilities will have 24 hour/ seven days a week booking facilities?

• How far will municipal and sheriff's officers need to travel to bring arrestees to jail?

• Will the counties be forced to create booking and transportation facilities and staff so law enforcement officers aren't tied up with arrestees and leaving their patrol jurisdiction uncovered for long periods of times? If so, what will this cost the counties (above the capped assessment to the state for their former jail)?

• If the catalyst for the governor's plan is overcrowding in the state system, then how does removing beds from the system by closing four jails help?

• How long after the state controls all facilities will it be before there are no longer any beds statewide? What is the state plan once they utilize all the current beds?

• Did the state close a 64-bed housing unit in the state system after the counties began housing state inmates? If so, is the real issue a staffing issue on the part of the state?

• What is the state's plan to retain staff since they are unable to adequately staff their current facilities?

• What is the state's plan for staffing and training TBRJ employees, as the current TBRJ staff is not prepared to deal with the mental health population?

• TBRJ is designed for eight crisis stabilization beds only. The remainder of the facility is not adequately designed for this population; therefore, what construction plans does the state have to safely and effectively manage this type of population?

• Does the host community (Wiscasset) have the resources and services to manage these individuals who will be released in our rural setting of Wiscasset?

The Lincoln and Sagadahoc Multicounty Jail Authority voted unanimously to strongly oppose the Governor's proposal due to the negative effect on our two counties.

Colonel Wayne R. Applebee

Correctional Administrator

Two Bridges Regional Jail

Dear Editor,

At last week's Selectmen's meeting, I made a big stink about the fact that we didn't get a chance to vote on using money from reserve accounts this year to offset taxes.

By not setting up a time to vote on this, the Selectmen in essence made the decision for us that this year we were not using reserves to offset taxes.

Since we have been using reserves in the past years to offset taxes, I felt the decision to stop the practice should be up to the people, rather than one or two Selectmen.

I'm glad that as a result of the discussions last week, the Selectmen voted to hold a special Town Meeting on October 4 to vote on whether on not to use money from reserves to offset taxes this year.

At the June Town Meeting, we already voted to use some reserves to purchase a fire truck and other equipment. The amount already used is about equal to last year's earnings on the reserve accounts.

I think it's admirable to say it's time people were taxed at the true rate of spending. It's also admirable to say reserves should only be used for capital expenditures and not to offset ongoing spending. For years when I was on the Budget Committee, I always said reserves should only be used for "one-time" expenditures.

As I see it, the real issue is should we stop using reserves to offset taxes this year when we also have to absorb the impact of a complete re-valuation.

Some properties will be getting tax bills that are substantially higher that last year's, due to the revaluation. By not using reserves, those increases will be compounded.

The Selectmen all agree that there are discrepancies in the new valuations. They have vowed to immediately start working to identify these and eliminate as many as possible.

My feeling is that if we want to discontinue using reserves to offset taxes, it makes more sense to start next year when the revaluation has settled down.

Let's not give the people a "Double Whammy" this year.

If voters want to have a say on this issue, they have to go the October 4 meeting at the Community center.

Dick Grondin

Wiscasset

Dear Editor:

Thank you to Amy and Mike, owners of the Alna Store,

I have finally found a moment to sit and share my thoughts on the folks at the Alna Store. In this time of BIG BOX stores and on-line shopping, it is easy to feel like just a number. Sadly, as a society we have forgotten the importance of the little general store, the place where the community comes together to share good times and bad.

From the moment I met Amy and Mike about two years ago, I have greatly appreciated the role they play in the Alna community. Every time I go there, I feel welcomed, they take time to say hello and ask me how my family and I are doing. As we become more removed from our communities - traveling for work, shopping, and play, we lose touch with our neighbors and those around us.

What a comfort to have a store like the Alna store. To be able to purchase supplies, find out about local events, meet our neighbors, and just hang out. Lastly Amy and Mike have definitely gone above and beyond; not only in their smiles and friendly demeanor but also in all the organizing of events such as craft fairs, gardener's markets, and Halloween fun for the kids.

Thank you to everyone at the Alna store. We think you are great!

Coreysha, Michael, and Halena-

Bryant Lothrop

Alna

Dear Editor:

I am in support of the Twin River project because, in addition to the economic benefits, it is an environmentally responsible, cutting edge clean coal technology. 

The new technology of coal gasification to produce both electricity and clean diesel fuel lowers emissions and will reduce regulated pollutants five fold in Maine. The traditional ways of making electricity from coal or fuel from oil that most of us know and hear about seem to be the source of a lot of misunderstanding.  They're just not the same.  In fact, they are worlds apart in very important ways.  As more and more people learn about the major differences between this new clean technology and the old technology, I hear more people every day support this project. 

Beyond the technology, Twin River Energy's proposed power plant  on the former Maine Yankee land will provide many desperately needed local benefits such as good jobs, cheaper electricity, cheaper and cleaner diesel fuel and significant tax revenue. It also has the promise to make significantly positive changes on the national landscape. 

Coal is our country's most abundant energy source. The proposed Twin River Energy Center gives us all the opportunity to put Wiscasset and Maine on the forefront of advanced and responsible energy production from this vast resource.  It also points our country in the right direction of weaning ourselves from foreign oil sources and reducing the geopolitical and national security challenges that come with foreign oil dependency.

This opportunity is a major stepping stone toward the much needed energy diversification in the state and will create a downward pressure on the cost of electricity in Maine.  Natural gas power plants today produce more than 50 percent of our electricity with actual prices far higher than originally projected during the construction of these plants.  Without an alternative source of energy, the price of power will only continue to rise and Maine electricity prices are already 43 percent higher than the national average.

It is equally important for our state and region to provide high paying quality jobs instead of simply watching them evaporate and head to other places around the globe.  Midcoast residents already know the tremendous benefits of working for a large utility and the financial security that it provides our families. 

If built, Twin River would bring an estimated $1.5 billion of investment to Wiscasset and Lincoln County without the need for any public investment to help with construction.  Based on current property valuation, Twin River would pay more than 75 percent of our local taxes.  As for jobs, there will be the 200 at the plant and who knows how many more small businesses will thrive to support the operations as they did during the Maine Yankee days.

And why here?  The 430-acre site was formerly owned by Maine Yankee and is the ideal location for this use.  It was and remains an industrial property.  Across the street is home to more than 600 tons of nuclear waste that will most likely never leave our town.  The site characteristics [vegetation, topography, location] will provide significant buffers and reduce the potential for noise, light and visual impacts.

There are passionate arguments against the construction of the power plant, which I understand and respect; however, I strongly believe we must not reject major opportunities out of hand without keeping an open mind.  Sadly, we have done this over and over in our state and we are all paying dearly because of those choices.  Instead of repeating history and eroding our state's economic future, we should take a long, hard look at the real value of this project. 

This is an opportunity to restore our tax base, create jobs for our children and their families, diversify our energy portfolio, improve our national security and provide the next generation of responsible energy production.

Sincerely,

Katharine Martin-Savage

Wiscasset

Dear Editor,

I am writing to support the new Twin River Energy project in Wiscasset. I have some real familiarity with Wiscasset and the proposed site as I was involved in the design and startup of the former Maine Yankee nuclear plant adjacent to their site. I also participated in some of the major retrofits to the plant later in its operating life, including replacement of the main condenser.

In my many visits to the site and the surrounding communities I got to know the "character of the place," one I continue to respect to this day, particularly the beautiful Sheepscot and Back rivers. The folks there looked upon the nuclear plant as a way to produce energy as long as it was done safely, and appreciated the economic prosperity it brought to the midcoast region.

I'm an engineer that has been employed in the power generation and energy industry for over 45 years. As a graduate of the US Naval Academy, I am also well aware and very respectful of Wiscasset's and Mid Coast Maine's deep maritime history and tradition. I would never support any development that would harm the river or any person or industry that is dependent upon it.

A long time friend and colleague who resides in Lincoln County also supports the project and has kept me up to date by sending me articles and press releases. He asked me to evaluate it and write to you.

One consistent theme I have seen in the news reports is that questions are not being answered. I disagree. Even from 3,000 miles away, I have found answers to most questions that have been raised about property values, water use, noise, odors, lighting, traffic and emissions. I found the answers in the information available to all on the proponent's Web site, in newspaper stories, and press releases. If I can find answers to these very legitimate concerns, so can the locals!

Based upon the public hearings already held and the many more to come, it appears that there will be ample opportunity for the local community to get even more information about the Twin River Energy Center. The state of Maine DEP folks who have appeared are already saying that they will give the project a very thorough review, and that approval is not guaranteed in advance. That is exactly as it should be done. From my personal experience, I can assure anyone who is concerned that this will be the case in Maine as it always is in any energy project of this size. After all, that is why states have environmental and technical experts employed to regulate and control every aspect of the environmental impact of projects like Twin River. That is their job!

In that context, I see the concerns already expressed such as the additional river traffic associated with building and operating the plant being addressed with appropriate restrictions from both sides, those who now use the river, and those who wish to add new uses to the river. A balanced approach to regulation and permitting has a proud history in Maine and I see that continuing with the approval process for this project. I am certain that the fishing and lobster industries will find ways to work along side commercial traffic as they always have.

The project proponents appear to have taken into consideration the needs of the community in siting the facility. That is why there is minimal visual impact and little truck traffic, as has already been shown. They are also setting up a project to serve Maine's needs, not one that will take advantage of Maine's attributes while exporting the project outputs to other states.

I reside in the state of Washington. I am quite familiar with our new law to limit CO2 emissions to less than 1,100 lbs of CO2 per megawatt hour. Twin River has shown that they meet our new law because they produce fuels and electricity using the same process, so there is only a single source of CO2. When they take credit for the equivalent of the fuels produced (100 percent legitimate by both technical and legal standards in Washington), they have shown that they are well below our standard, and also California's, the first state in the nation to regulate CO2. Not an easy limit to reach using coal and biomass fuel. Those who dismiss this fact out of hand should really take a better look at the technology used by Twin River, their co-production concept, and also check many of the references they cite which do not apply to what is being proposed in Wiscasset.

As I have advised my friend, my opinion is that the Twin River Energy Project is exactly what Wiscasset, Maine and the USA needs to address our energy needs. Super clean, low cost energy that actually reduces harmful air emissions and restoration of jobs and tax base, I find it hard to be against that.

I wish I had this well conceived project in my back yard!

Sincerely,

Allen R. Kasper, PE

Oak Harbor Washington

Dear Editor,

Thanks for the letter to the editor in last week's edition from Skip Taylor, titled "Great Entertainment at Wiscasset's Selectmen's Meeting."

First of all, I applaud this man for his ability to let us all know what's going on in and around town, and second, for doing it in a truly great and factual manner.

Third and last is his ability to present the facts in a very humorous manner. I must say, I have not laughed so hard in a long time.

We must all understand that his letter was indeed factual and deserves merit. The area of concern that particularly provokes me is the one Selectperson that can't vote because she needs to tuck her children in for night-night. A resignation would be accepted at this time.

Art Ethier

Wiscasset

Dear Editor

The Sheepscot Valley Conservation Association (SVCA) mission is to conserve the natural and historic heritage of the Sheepscot Watershed, which encompasses 320 square miles in midcoast Maine. As stewards of this remarkable ecosystem, we view with gravest concern Point East's proposed Twin River coal gasification plant.

This project would be massive, one of the largest industrial undertakings ever proposed for the midcoast region. Especially because of its scale relative to the small town, tourist and lobster fishing economy of the region, such a refinery is likely to produce a variety of major environmental effects on the river - both upstream and downstream pollution and navigation conflicts with fishing, aquaculture, recreation and other traditional uses of the river.

Based on similar refineries of comparable size, such a facility can be expected to have significant impacts on air and water quality in Wiscasset and beyond as well as on native fish, wildlife and human health from almost daily shipments of large quantities of coal to the site, export of produced diesel from the plant as well as from the on-site production of mercury and other hazardous chemicals.

At a time when most communities are already concerned about climate change, the developers are proposing a plant that would produce thousands of tons of carbon dioxide (a global warming gas) with no realistic plan for capturing it. In addition, potential water use for cooling and the gasification process is estimated to be eight and a half million gallons per day with no specific sources yet identified. It is also extremely disturbing that there is as yet no operator for the refinery and therefore prior performance history cannot be evaluated.

Absent the information needed to permit careful evaluation of the full impact of the refinery, residents of the midcoast face the prospect of allowing what, on its face at least, is the wrong type and scale of project for our treasured region.

While sympathetic to the economic needs of Wiscasset and the state of Maine, the SVCA believes there are so many unanswered questions about the refinery that it would be enormously risky, if not irresponsible, to take any action enabling the proposed project.

Honor Fox Sage

President, Board of Directors

Sheepscot Valley Conservation

Association