NORTH YARMOUTH — After demolishing a historic house without a permit, the Yarmouth Water District is trying to make amends with the town and has offered an apology and $4,000 compensation.
It doesn’t appear to have worked.
The town has hired an attorney, who said that while it’s doubtful the case will go to court, there is “plenty of room to negotiate.”
“I’ve been in touch with the legal counsel of the water district,” said John Lloyd, the town’s Brunswick-based attorney, who was expected to meet privately with the Board of Selectmen on Tuesday night. “The next step is to negotiate with the water district to come to an agreement.”
He said enforcement is difficult and that it is hard to predict what the outcome of the legal process will be.
The president of the North Yarmouth Historical Society said the district’s proposal was not “entirely satisfactory.”
Under state and local laws, the water district could face fines of up to $2,500 per day after the ordinance was violated, which was about 40 days, Lloyd said.
William Reinsborough, chairman of the water district, said the district made a mistake, but he was hoping to keep the legal costs low because the payment of the fines will ultimately be footed by the ratepayers and taxpayers of Yarmouth and North Yarmouth.
“We’re trying to be realistic about the fines,” Reinsborough said. “The longer lawyers are involved, the more expensive it will be. It’s one government agency against another government agency and neither one of us has any money.”
A six-page letter written by Reinsborough details what led to the demolition and offered a settlement proposal. He said the district wanted to establish better communication with the town and offered to provide access for the North Yarmouth Historical Society to conduct an archaeological dig.
The Baston Road home was a center-chimney Cape, Greek revival-style post-and-beam house, and was likely one of the oldest in town, North Yarmouth Historical Society President Katie Murphy said.
The title can be traced back to 1854, but Murphy said it probably goes back even further.
“What happened was not just the destruction of the house without a permit, but a piece of history of the town,” she said.”It’s not that amazing old artifacts were lost when the house was torn down. The house itself was an historic artifact.”
The Beckwith home, which was named after the family that previously owned it, was purchased by the district in June. The sale of the property followed the death of the previous owner and included 17 surrounding acres.
The district bought the property because of its close proximity to three town wells and because it was concerned development on the property might lead to water contamination, Reinsborough said.
The historical society and the town are working together to assess appropriate compensation, according to Murphy, who said the district’s proposal was “not an entirely satisfactory settlement.”
“I think the town is looking for not just financial compensation, but also ways to enhance education and preservation efforts,” she said, so that this situation doesn’t happen again.
The Board of Selectmen is not expected to publicly address the proposal until next month.
So the water district has owned the property since June, and neither town or the historical society notified them that they could not tear down the house? What a private individual had purchased the property and destroyed the house? Would they be subject to these intense fines? I just don’t think the water company should be held accountable in this particular situation.
A private individual would have applied for a PERMIT! The water company knew better…… didn’t care.
What made the water district folks think that they could do this without a permit? If they had applied for one they would have found out about the historical factor. Perhaps they suspected this potential problem to their agenda and sought to get around it by not applying for a permit. Everyone has to have permits for things these days. A government agency knows this, so their arguments are less than satisfactory. And now their outrageous behavior has destroyed historical artifacts that cannot be replaced with money or apologies. A sad commentary on our public officials lack of forethought and respect for rules.
Fines will ultimately be footed by the ratepayers and taxpayers of Yarmouth and North Yarmouth. Kind of like go ahead make my day…:)
It’s easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission.
The historical societies really rub me the wrong way. Just because something is doesn’t mean it has “Historical significance”. They’d rather see a building sit empty then turned into something that provides jobs.
We have an old factory building on our town that has been empty for years. People want to develop it but to make the HS happy they’d have to pay roughly 10x more to keep the historical qualities intact. It’s a old factory, what doesn’t need to be preserved. It’s like saving an old walmart or best buy.
In the case of this house there is a town ordinance requiring notification of the historical society before demolishing any structure of a certain age.
It doesn’t mean that all old houses will be saved. It just gives the historical society a chance to record information about the building before that piece of history is gone forever.
Whatever your stance on historical societies is, the real problem here is that the water district and the demolition contractor performed this work in violation of the law.
I suppose the BDN just ran this story as a “filler”, but if there is a reporter who wants to do a bit of work, there is much more to this story than is included here.
From other sources:
………..” the District obtained a private loan from an abutter to do the work, and for the land purchase. How often does that happen? (how about ‘never’). Some speculate the reason for the strange financing was to avoid triggering a Federal rule on old structures, and if so, this situation smells even worse”………
………”The abutter, who made this “loan” now has an unobstructed view…..in perpetuity, achieved at virtually no cost, and by going around the back side of the towns rules………..truly amazing”……….
………”The contractor is just as suspect in this instance as the Water District. With over 30 years in the business, he had to know the rules required a demolition permit, but instead, he spent weeks stripping the old house of the valuable center beam, flooring, and other materials, then razed the structure. He never pulled a permit for any of the work”…………
……..”I don’t know who hatched the scheme but it is very clever. An abutter provided short term financing so the ‘legal’ review wouldn’t be triggered and, when it was all said and done, wound up with an unspoiled view, in perpetuity. The contractor walked away with any and everything that might have been of interest to the historical society. The water district got it’s land at an acceptable price without wasting time or paying tribute to the historical society. Oh! They got a headache they weren’t counting on, too. Someone knew what was going on every step of the way. NYWD’s lawyer would like to clear things up and SOON! The difference between $4k and 300K soon”……….
This is from people who live in the area and know more about the situation than the rest of us would. I am not suggesting that all of what I have presented is necessarily the whole truth, but there is certainly more than enough “heresay” present already, to lead a reporter to a good story I think. I have no stake in the game as it means nothing to me……..other than the fact that I dislike “corruption and cronyism” every place I see it and like to see those who committed the malfeasance be punished for it!
one of those good folks should call the paper, be willing to put a name to the hearsay. why blame the paper? should they read people’s minds? if there is wrong doing, then we the citizens, need to make the call.
I agree with you 100% cronyism and petty corruption is horrible, those who abuse the public trust should be punished.
You are 100% right about punishment . I think everyone elected to office in Washington D.C should be in jail……everyone !
William Reinsborough, chairman of the water district, said the district made a mistake, but he was hoping to keep the legal costs low because the payment of the fines will ultimately be footed by the ratepayers and taxpayers of Yarmouth and North Yarmouth.
And that is how you get away with something, pull out the tax payer card.
“It was my first day”
The people who made the decision to tear down the building should bear the brunt of the costs, NOT the rate payers, otherwise, the only winners are the lawyers
Or at the least receive pink slips.
I believe the abbuting property owner, who loaned the money, and the water district officials who were a party to the scheme, should be the ones to be punished and pay retribution, not the ratepayers who had nothing to do with it.
the ultimate end is the rate payers will foot the entire cost of the fine and the town council should shut this peeing contest down flat and save the ratepayers this unjust rate hike.
This ” mistake ” wasn’t made by the ratepayers , the people in charge should pay the costs !
IIt’s an old building bfd mulch it and move on historic hags take a hike
Was this house on Baston Road opposite from Strayberry lane? I did a google map search and and was curious if this had been the house. Thanks.
Tear down the dams in the river and I will be happy.
“William Reinsborough, chairman of the water district, said the district
made a mistake, but he was hoping to keep the legal costs low because
the payment of the fines will ultimately be footed by the ratepayers and
taxpayers of Yarmouth and North Yarmouth.”
This is why any fines should be levied personally against Water District Superintendent Bob MacKinnon, who has claimed responsibility for authorizing the demolition, and demolition contractor Scott Dugas, who received a significant paycheck plus salvage rights while performing the demolition without a permit.
They should also foot the cost of building a full scale replica on the same spot ! Exact in every detail !
Too bad.. They cleaned up an eye sore…..Time to move along..
Cleaned up an eyesore…….and rewarded a crony with a lovely view! Is that what you’d call win-win?
Yessah……