Name disappointment
We agree with Lowell Kjenstad’s letter that including the word “insurance” as part of the name of the new Bangor center is very disappointing. The generosity of Woodrow Cross and his business is certainly acknowledged, but wouldn’t it be more appropriate if the center were named either The Woodrow Cross Center or The Cross Center? Perhaps a plaque on the inside of the new facility could acknowledge Cross Insurance and its contribution.
Our family members and many in the community feel the same way about this.
Joseph and Nancy Taylor
Bangor
Enjoy Maine lobsters
I’m shocked by the words, “local lobstermen and local wholesalers who purchase lobsters from Connecticut and Rhode Island waters say ‘buyer beware’ when dealing with soft shells from Maine” as quoted by Alex Nunes on the front page of the BDN, on July 31, in “Conn. lobstermen warn consumers about Maine soft shells.” No Maine lobsterman or wholesaler would ever say anything like that. Somebody is misquoting somewhere.
Could this knock on the Maine lobster be coming from competitors from Rhode Island and Connecticut?
Oversupply of Maine soft-shell lobsters is not because of poor quality, as implied by competitors. To start, we can thank our clear ocean water and global warming, which causes the lobsters to thrive and shed earlier. We have laws in Maine to protect the female lobsters. These “eggers” have notched tails to ensure that they always return to the ocean to carry on the tradition of lots and lots of lobsters in our Maine waters.
There’s also an oversupply of lobsters this year due to a Canadian market that wasn’t there to buy up Maine shedders. Canadian lobstermen set early (they normally don’t fish in the spring), and they were able to catch a lot of those earlier-than-usual shedders.
Locals and visitors who have eaten Maine lobster rolls know how sweet and succulent they are, better than any old-shell lobster from Connecticut or Rhode Island.
We’ll take a Maine lobster roll every time.
David Glass
Steuben
Home questions
Two hundred jobs and power for 85,000 homes has been cited over and over when reporting anything about First Wind’s industrial turbine projects. Are these 200 new jobs for Mainers? Or are they the same jobs that build all projects? The Reed and Reed employee who testified at the Land Use Regulation Commission public hearing in Ellsworth when the Bull Hill project was being permitted stated that if LURC gave the OK the crew would move right over to Bull Hill after Rollins Mountain.
Are the 185 megawatts that are quoted as being produced by First Wind’s projects the capacity on paper or the actual production? In Maine, wind projects typically produce approximately 14 percent of their total capacity. This would then actually provide energy for far fewer homes.
Where are these homes? In Maine?
What does it mean to state “enough energy for 85,000 homes”? All the electricity they’ll use in a week? A year? Ever? It’s too vague a statement to be printed without clarification. These “facts” are reprinted with almost each news item covering wind projects in our area. Please find the answers for us.
Mary Ann John
Eastbrook
Wind sales
The Maine media bias in favor of wind development has been obvious for some time. A recent BDN article served as a perfect example. The story of the truck losing its wind tower load in a ditch went the extra mile for the industry by devoting much of its space to promotional data for First Wind and the industry in general.
I don’t recall other stories reporting truck accidents including favorable factoids about the company or industry involved. When a logging truck loses its load, the related article doesn’t tell how many jobs were created by the logging job the truck was working. We don’t hear how many homes will be built by the company’s timber products.
But, with a wind tower in a ditch, we get a wind power sales pitch.
On top of that, the promotional data is misleading. The article said that First Wind’s projects in Maine could supply the “energy needs of 85,000 homes.” Hardly. Wind turbines supply electricity only. Maine homes use a variety of energy sources other than electricity, especially for things such as heating. Supplying all their energy needs with wind electricity would make the 85,000 figure much smaller.
The Maine media’s pro-wind bias might not change, but the objectivity and accuracy of the reporting should. A 2010 University of Maine poll showed that 79 percent of Mainers get their information on wind energy from newspapers.
With this type of reporting, it’s no wonder the Maine public’s wind energy IQ is so low.
Kay Michka
Lexington Township
Secret life
Like all conflict-of-interest codes, it is rarely the commission of an act that causes trouble. It is the perception of what we could have done that creates the most turmoil.
For those who did not react when given a glimpse of Rev. Robert Carlson’s deepest secret, it’s their time to admit their guilt.
The mandated reporting law leaves little leeway in how we are supposed react when we encounter any knowledge of domestic or sexual abuse. By not taking action, we enable the perpetrator to continue the abuse.
The Maine State Police report on Carlson’s secret life shows there were some who knew of accusations against him. Had they come forward at that time, how many future victims could have been saved from abuse?
It’s time for those who enabled Carlson’s secret life to face their own judge and jury — the public. They may not have committed a crime, as District Attorney R. Christopher Almy said in a BDN interview printed in Saturday’s edition, but they certainly committed an act of omission. Their lack of concern caused as much damage at the perp did.
If they hold a high-level position within state or local government, where an individual’s credibility is critical to leadership, they can help the healing process by resigning.
Joe Brooks
Winterport
Our Auditorium
Whatever possessed the powers that be to allow the word “insurance” on our beautiful new arena?
What will out-of-towners think when they see “insurance” on the building? Will they know it is our entertainment establishment and not a business building?
Just another faux pas for Bangor. Enough said. Am I alone on this?
Catherine Larkin
Bangor
Mr. Glass, this subtle attack on the Maine lobster industry is part of a campaign by conservative
so-called Christians who insist that every word in the Bible must be obeyed. Since Leviticus denounces both eating shellfish and male homosexuality as abominations, the “Christian” right is both fighting gay marriage and fighting the eating of lobster.
Good one!!!!!!!!!
What a joke. Trying to recruit the lobster-men to take up the homosexual cause? You’re a real politician. Do you really think most people care what it says in the bible? The religious fanatics are just icing on the cake.
Must there be a homosexual twist to every subject that the news reports on?
Conservatives are the usual instigators.
removing the word ‘instigators’…inserting the word ‘problem solvers’….perfect, thanks….
No I would say instigators fits nicely, along with oppressors, and obstructers, with a helping of Christian zealotry tossed in for good measure.
yes, Christian Zealotry too….I forgot that one…..for those 12 people who think that exists…
You don’t think there are Christian zealots? we a few right on these threads.
Having family members who are lobster fishermen I am aware of proposed changes to the fees they pay. The proposals include increasing the price of licenses and the price of tags. These costs are to be absorbed by the fishermen, not the buyers, not the processors, not the retailers or the consumers. Prices of fuel, supplies and bait have risen and the pay for help the fishermen hire has risen. The price the buyers are paying for the lobsters has steadily gone down. All of these things affect the fishermen and have in the past and will in the future put these guys out of work…… self-employment will no longer be an option. As the number decreases we will see the commercial fishing industry take their place and will most likely drive more self-employed fishermen out of business. They will be unable to compete. To some this is “problem solving”, to others it another nail in the coffin for small business and making an honest living.
Especially the current multi-state plan to solve the democratic voter problem!
It is puzzling that you cannot enjoy an obvious satire.
I don’t know ….. seems the meme of many religious conservatives or conservatives who are religious or religious conservative politicians make statements about lots of issues and bring in the Old Testament and even Leviticus when it comes to restricting, denying and punishing law-abiding American citizens. You just choose to ignore it …..Dominionism is alive and thriving in religious communities and sadly it is making it’s way into the Republican party …. of course you won’t admit it till it directly effects you and it is too late.
What about the gay lobsterpersons? Don’t they count???!??!?
Only if they catch gay lobsters.
Ha!! Gay lobster marriage is next!!!
I have a pot in which they can conduct the ceremony.
Nope.
Sigh…..what a meanie.
Would you please stop this bogus argument? Acts 10:9-16 states that God rendered all foods to be clean. And it doesn’t matter what a conservative Christian thinks, unless his or her beliefs align with those of the Catholic Church. Jesus Christ supplanted the Jewish religion with the Catholic religion, and gave Catholic leaders the same teaching authority that he had as Son of God. The Catholic Church does not ban the eating of shellfish. All other religions were founded by human beings, so what they believe counts only in a human way, and not in a divine way.
Hmmmm…”stop this bogus argument.” It’d be great if both sides could stop bogus arguments. ESPECIALLY the ones that equate gay men with pedophiles. Or that people marry only so that they could have children. Or that we have no use for faith. As well as arguments that talk about spirits in the sky, the book of myths, or that all people who don’t support SSM are hateful bigots.
So every word in the Bible is not to be believed? Sadly, nowhere, to my knowledge does the New Testament outlaw slavery.
Wow, so many different arguments packed into such a small space!
You write, “Jesus Christ supplanted the Jewish religion with the Catholic religion…” God made a promise to the Jewish people, and God keeps the promises that God makes. Judaism always was and still is a valid religious path, and God’s covenant with the Jewish people still stands. God doesn’t break promises.
You contrast the idea that God “gave Catholic leaders the same teaching authority that he had as Son of God” with “All other religions were founded by human beings.” Many churches claim to be the only true religion, including the Mormons. All of those churches claim divine authority, yet all, including the Catholics, are man-made and fallible.
There are lots of good Catholics, but no perfect ones.
You suffer from the sin of pride.
As the state police have said in the past, these cases (like Mr. carlsons) go along way for area law enforcement to see and learn all the ways pedophiles operate. It becomes a training tool…..What?…no training tool here? How come?…oh, yes..it was so heavily redacted, true. Why was it so heavily redacted? Because, the perpertrator took his own life and there fore all the holes could not be filled in to paint a complete picture of the crimes, victims and lessons of how pedophiles exploit thier victims. Yes, if only the initial investigation could have been completed ending in an immediate arrest of Mr. Carlson and a subsequent confession, along with the victims who then could come forward without fear, could this document be whole…
But why wan’t the initial investigation completed?..um…you’l have to ask a long time faithful servant of Penobscot County and the people of Maine who had a momentary lapse in judgement which derailed the normal process of the State Police. There are massive holes in this tragic case that have nothing to do with the Maine State police and thier awesome work. You don’t bring down a man who has built himself a pillar of a community, without evidence….and the worst of pedophiles make sure there is none of that left lying around.
The guilty man killed himself, unless their were other accomplices working to also exploit youth, the rest are victims.
I was a mandated reporter when I was a teacher We were under the distinct impression that mandatory meant that we must report suspected neglect, physical, emotional and sexual abuse of a student. Apparently the AG is unsure of what the word mandatory means. Seems to me that when the mandated reporter legislation passed someone dropped the ball and forgot to build into it a consequence for not reporting.
I couldn’t agree with you more. I am a mandated reporter and have have made three phone calls in 25+ years. I never knew there was no penalty assigned to the law for failure to report. In my book it wouldn’t matter one way or the other because it is all about protecting those that either cannot protect themselves or speak up for themselves. But I guess (sadly I might add) for some people a penalty might be the motivating factor to report child or elder abuse.
I think you mean the DA, Chris Almy. I don’t believe the AG has weighed in on this one.
One would think the mandated reporters who failed in their duty and allowed this predator to go unchecked would be so ashamed of their dereliction that they would resign from the positions they hold.
I am still curious as to why investigators did not seize Carlson’s computer as part of the investigation. I realize Carlson was dead but I would’ve wanted to check to see if there was evidence of a ring, etc.
Mandated reporters who fail to act, I believe can have issues with thier professional license, but there are no crimes or penalties unless that person is labeled an accomplice.
Yes I did mean Almy. I have difficulty with there being no legal consequence tied to being a mandated reporter who does not make a required report. They should have called it “if you choose to” reporter ….. which is the way it had always been.
Mary Ann John
The answers to all your wind related questions are as elusive as the reporting of Angus King’s poor stewardship of the Maine ship of state when he was in charge.
These answers are out there, but you won’t find them in this or any other mainstream media outlet.
http://tinyurl.com/ces7y66
Catherine Larkin,Grow up.
Yeah, really Catherine…….are you having trouble accepting that this is the 21st century and our democratic republic has been replaced by a fascist plutocracy? Having a little difficulty with the commons being usurped by a few sociopathic tycoons. Struggling with the privatization of all that used to be public. Sheesh! Get over it! Insurance is good……(for the insurers).
If you don’t like insurance than don’t get it. Oh wait, you have to. Just like other government controlled socialist countries.
look around the country. Naming rights have been given to public arenas for decades now. There is nothing new here except for the objections of a mush head or two. Public venues seek to sell the name to benefit the public coffers. It’s a good deal for my city. The fact that you never learned the true purpose of Insurance further highlights the mushineadiness of your position.
Enron Field comes to mind…….
Yes and The TD BankNorth Garden not to mention the Bank Of America Stadium where the Democratic party planned to hold some their convention events in Charlotte NC.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Then there is Fenway. Named after the section of Boston it was located in…. by the owner. Given back to the people. No wonder they love it.
Really, though-so what? Since it IS so common around the country, why do you think that people will single out Bangor for being tacky by letting Cross Insurance buy the naming rights and putting their name on the building? And when did the economy become so great that we can scoff at $50,000 a year?
I doubt people love Fenway park because it’s named after a place instead of a sponsor.
When they were talking about tearing it down there was a huge public outcry. They love THEIR park. And, I think it has everything to do with a sense of ownership. But we can agree to disagree. There are probably as many opinions about this as their are people to think about it.
Would there have been a different reaction if it had been named the NYNEX stadium?
The Detroit Tigers play in Comerica Park (named for a bank), and Wrigley Filed in Chicago was named for the maker of Wrigley chewing gum. Don’t the Cardinals play in Busch Stadium, named for the beer? That’s how you get the very wealthy to spend money on your project — let them name it after themselves or after their business.
And the fans don’t seem to care about this or high player salaries because they keep going to the games at these stadiums watching these players. They feed the teams that demand bigger and better stadiums and I’d rather Comerica and Wrigley pay some of that than let it be all on the taxpayers of the cities.
Exactly! Nothing new and original. Would have cheered if Bangor City Council or Cross had dared to be different.
Actually most grown ups do not need their name in big bold letters splashed across a public building.
Marketing your name is a normal part of business and both Cross Insurance and city have already benefited by the naming. The fact you can’t see that doesn’t surprise me.
Please, $50,000 a year for 15 years is hardly any benefit at all and visitors and residents will have this tackiness to marvel at day after day for 15 years. Some benefit. What I do see is good ole fashioned philanthropy lost in the grab for brand notoriety and self-aggrandizement. Look at me, look at me, look at what I can do for me. That is what I see. There is no more public interest. Only self-interest. This is a perfect case in point. You see what you want to see, I see what is. A brand on a building claiming it as its own. For a very insubstantial investment, they get a substantial return, I will give you that. And that makes good business sense. But fails woefully short of magnanimous citizenry.
Mr. Cross simply purchased a tombstone, albeit a big one, but still a tombstone. He has a long ways to go to catch Mr. Alfond, the undisputed king of tacky tombstones.
Which ones are tacky? And you ignore Alfond’s non-“tombstone” legacies and contributions.
They are all tacky, if you believe, like I, that charity is only truly charity if it is done anonymously. Anything else is highly suspect and rife with ulterior motives.
I agree and at this point I wouldn’t be surprised if they added the Cross Insurance phone number and web page under their name as well on the new arena.
When does the dorm open up?
as soon as you get there…
Catherine you are not alone.
I think that most people coming to Bangor to go to the auditorium will know that it’s not an office building. I don’t think that having the word “insurance” on the building is as much of a travesty that people are making it out to be. Are people forgetting that we have a wonderful and beautiful new arena in town? The business name is “Cross Insurance,” so why shouldn’t the name be on there?
This is not a faux pas. Most people who live in cities know that company names are on arenas and fora just like on this one. There are worse things happening in this area. “Cross Insurance Center” doesn’t rank on that list.
Cross did not build it. Hollywood Slots built it. Or, at least the city’s share of proceeds from them and downtown tax increment financing district funds. Cross purchased the naming rights. Cross is going to give $50,000 a year for 15 years for upkeep for that right. In selling the naming rights the Bangor City Council, you are correct, followed the lead of many city councils. Too bad they weren’t more original. But it will save the taxpayers $50,000 a year in upkeep costs. Wonder what that will save taxpayers? Well, it will be a savings of $1.50 per year citizen? Wow. Would rather see the community involved in selecting the name. Too bad Cross did not sponsor a naming contest. THAT would have been noteworthy. This is not.
I didn’t say that Cross built it.
We need to continue to a leader in developing wing power, especially offshore wind power. It needs to be expanded. We need to get off foreign oil. There isn’t a single perfect form of energy. But clean renewables are the longterm answer, and developing them must continue. Enough of this backwards anti-wind nonsense. It is just foolishness.
When one is an elitist, one doesn’t need the facts. Just arrogance and ignorance.
We use virtually no oil to make electricity, but there you go again.
What’s more backwards? Making exaggerated, unfounded claims like wind power will get us “off foreign oil” or asking a question and expecting an answer with a rational explanation.
If you can show me in numbers how wind power in Maine will get us “off foreign oil”, please do. (And remember, less than one percent of New England’s electricity is currently produced with oil.)
It’s not about being anti-wind power. It’s about being logical and honest about what wind power can and cannot do – something that doesn’t happen much in Maine. I’ve got nothing against wind power itself. I do have something against wind power evangelism fueling the development of wind power in places where it’s not wanted, needed or appropriate. I do have something against our legislature giving away some of our best assets to a single industry without asking a single thoughtful question.
David Glass: good letter.
Joe Brooks- I unfortunately do not believe anything will happen to any of the people who either knew or suspected they knew about Carlson as that would require work from the DA and let’s face facts- it’s really not in Mr. Almy’s best interest to actually DO anything about any of these people. My profession is one of the ‘mandated reporter’ professions and we are REQUIRED to have mandated reporter training so I find it very odd that other professions are not required to have mandated reporting….I’m not sure I believe that…I think it is far too easy to not want to get involved and pretend you really didn’t know anything. I think Mr. Almy should do his job. They managed to deal with the Penn State mandated reporters who didn’t report, but then again their DA was motivated to DO their job.
from my understanding First Wind is clever at saying things that sound good but having spoken with people who have wisely voted in wind ordinances and done their research these benefits are words..not actual- they are also good at paying off opponents who do not have a huge lobby behind them in Washington and silencing them,it has made me very disappointed in the promises our President made – the jobs are mostly short term construction and little else..while Angus and others get very wealthy and the towns benefit a little perhaps but do not receive the power from the wind..and in some instances taxes have increased..
Call it what they may. It’s The Paul Bunyan Entertainment Center.
Drive by. Paul not livens up and enhances the building, he’s our insurance against having the building lost in a long, inappropriate title.
When people stop and ask where the Bangor Auditorium is, just tell them: Down Main Street by the Paul Bunyan statue.
How’s that, Babe?
Not too involved in city goings on are you?
I like it. That is exactly what Bangor residents should do. No mention of cross once. Perfect.
And you don’t think naming it after an kitschy statue of a character from Quebec that was used in advertising a century ago isn’t tacky?
The only reason the wind industry is alive in Maine is because of the billions it receives in subsidies. Wind is not reliable, nor is it cost effective. And after Maine is ruined by these monstrosities and the subsidies run out, they’ll be left to waste away in place, because it will be too expensive to remove them or repair them.
Wake up, Mainers. You’re being scammed. The billions in subsidies will go with First Wind and other groups when the industry goes belly-up. And we taxpayers will be left with the bill.
I take it you live next to a hill?