8/2011 and 9/2011 Lying Emails From City Manager Joe Slocum

The Chamber is a BUSINESS network- Joe Slocum batters residents infrastructure with lies. corruption and when cornered he takes the 5th, orders Council to take the 5th and brings in the City Attorney to protect them. Business and residents that support him and City Hall do not want to see the corruption. Maine is 4th in corruption and here is proof of Joe Slocum corruption. Thousands of hours and dollars and abuse in the ongoing cover up. 

Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 16:50:47 -0400
Subject: Re: FW: 17 seaview/city storm f/u
From: citymanager@cityofbelfast.org
To: xxxxx 
CC: councilors@cityofbelfast.org; planner@cityofbelfast.org; publicworks@cityofbelfast.org

Ms. Allen,

Good afternoon. I regret that I have been away for two weeks because of two family emergencies. 

The road could indeed use some work and will be addressed in conjunction with our regular road program which calls for attention in areas about every 10 years. The road has alligator cracking because the ground underneath is wet. The present existence of a couple of culverts underneath the road which transfer some water from the higher land across the street to your land on the North side are an attempt by the City to have the road not act as a dam to the natural flow of gravity and also to preserve the asphalt on the road itself by eliminating standing water on the road edge or underneath it. We have these culverts all over the City and you will indeed find them all over the State.I will ask my Public Works Director, by copy of this email to let us know in what year your road might see some resurfacing. . It will not be this year. At this time there are no funds or plans to install storm sewers along your road We like many municipalities have have many roads without these amenities. "THIS CAP SECTION IS NOT PART OF JOE'S EMAIL- IT IS MY COMMENTARY AND THEN GOES BACK TO JOE'S LIES AND COVER UPS. HERE IS WHERE HE DOWN AND OUT LIES ABOUT THE STREAM BEING HERE FOR 100 YEARS- HE AND CITY PLANNER, WAYNE MARSHALL HID THE ORIGINAL 1965 DEVELOPMENTS PLANS FOR SEAVIEW TERRACE THAT PROVE THIS IS NOT A NATURAL STREAM IT IS A MAN MADE DITCH- CLEAR TO SEE. THE CITY HAS NO RIGHT OF WAYS OR EASEMENTS TO DUMP ALL THIS RUNOFF TO OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY. WE ARE A FLOOD ZONE THAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO PROTECT AND DIVERT WATER FROM US. INSTEAD THEY ENDANGER, DROWN, DESTROY AND BULLY. ORDINANCE IS TO DRAIN INTO A NATURAL OUTLET- WE ARE NOT A NATURAL OUTLET!! HE LIED AND BROKE THE LAW BY CITY WORK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OF 23 SEAVIEW TERRACE. DIGGING TO DRAIN MORE RUNOFF INTO MY PROPERTY. ALLOWING BUSINESSES TO BREAK THE LAW BY NOT REMOVING PLOWED SNOW WHICH MELTS TO US AND CAUSED HUGE FLOODING AND PROPERTY DESTRUCTION IN 2009 AND 2012. HE WITHHOLDS ALL THESE DOCUMENTS, TRYING TO MAKE ME LOOK INEPT.ALL ON MY BLOGS. REALTORS SELLING CORRUPT PROPERTIES AND NOT DISCLOSING DISASTER." 
My observation suggests to me that the stream behind your house has been there for a hundred years and has acted as the watershed for everything above it including your entire street. The City is not responsible for changes to the land or for the constructions of buildings, the expansions of lawns or cutting of vegetation done by every home owner- including your predecessor which has had an impact on surface and sub surface water in your neighborhood. The very ditch that is maintained between you and your neighbor is a good example of how you and your neighbor channel your water to the stream behind your house that is the natural drainage way. This stream and the water the water your entire neighborhood adds to it, simply goes behind other peoples houses down grade from you and in fact goes right into our City Park where it empties to the Sea. Some of your neighbors across the street want more surface water drained toward your side. The State suggested allowing more plantings to grow and absorb some of the water. The City noted that if we were ever to get involved we would want the neighbors to be cooperative and provide legal easements to the City so our actions are not seen as improper as you have suggested they were in the past. 

While I was away I learned that there was a meeting held on site by Wayne Marshall from the City, and we had State DEP representative Chris Cabot there along with a member of our City Council. I understand that you were there as well. To my knowledge-nothing came from that meeting to suggest that the City has somehow caused all this water to be in your area. Since I do not see the harm caused by the City I have no plan to enter upon your property to do any bank stabilization that Mr. Cabot said he would be receptive to permit if requested by the individual neighbors.

ANOTHER HUGE LIE-THIS IS ILLEGAL AND HE KNOWS IT- FIRST THEY SAID THEY NEVER DID THIS, THEN I PROVED THEY DID, THEN THEY TRIED TO SAY IT WAS 8 YEARS AGO AND OVER THE 7 YEAR LIMIT, THEN I PROVED IT WAS DONE IN 2009 AND NOW HE IS USING ROAD MAINTENANCE, DISGRACEFUL LYING CORRUPT BULLIES
It appears that in the past the City crews did indeed enter upon a neighbors property to clear growth from an existing ditch with permission to get water away from the road. As far as I know this is not a City owned ditch anymore than the one which runs along your property.

As for the drainage:

1. I will come and take pictures to document your concern and I will share them with the State. Please let me know whether you wish to be present when I take them . I am presuming that you are going to allow me access through your property so I can do this properly. If this assumption is incorrect please let me know. Otherwise the pictures will be taken next week. 

2. I have not seen anything in the erosion or in City practice which suggest to me that the City is responsible for your erosion so there is no practice for us to terminate. I can not and I do not plan on spending City tax dollars to provide drainage controls for private property. 

3. There is indeed some signs of erosion within the stream sidewalls and I did see an area about 2 square feet in size where you placed large stones to fill in a part of your bank where some erosion apparently occurred. I do not see anything in this erosion which would indicate it is anything other than a natural occurrence associated with seasonal and unpredictable weather conditions. It appeared to me to look like every stream bed I have ever walked. 

Finally, if you continue to believe that the City is the party responsible for your damage then please send me your reasons and I will present your legal claim to our insurance company to see if they see this matter differently than I do. 

Absent new information this is my final response to this matter. I am sorry that I could not find a way to agree with your conclusions. 

Most sincerely, 

Joseph J. Slocum 

City Manager

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 19:59:13 -0400

Subject: Re: FW: 17 seaview/city storm f/u

From: citymanager@cityofbelfast.org

To: laurieallen55@msn.com

Ms. Allen,

I am taking your concern seriously but unfortunately it is not the only concern that I have to address right now. I am taking the liberty of sharing this email with Belfast City Council.

 I spent over an hour at your house Tuesday and walked the stream and listened to every concern that you have raised.  I see no sign of imminent danger to your property and as such I can not justify treating this matter as though it was an emergency and push my other responsibilities to the side. The stream itself is about 4 feet deep and about 8 feet wide and was essentially dry. It has the same shape and level of erosion along its banks at every point where I observed it. It is essentially dry and  I saw one - one inch puddle in a 100 foot walk that I took through it You identify no damage or threat to your house but you are very upset by the erosion in your back yard. I saw this erosion and while there is some there, the scale and scope of it  was far smaller then I imagined from reading your emails.

You have raise multiple concerns and it is very clear that you are extremely focused and upset by both the erosion situation itself as well as the treatment you feel that you have had at the hands of the City in responding to your concerns. Your letter today is indicative of your anxiety and expectation of immediate need for answers which is  not consistent with what I said to you on Tuesday.  I advised you that I was going to look into this and that it would take some time.  I told you that I would attempt to summarize your concerns in the next day or so. That is -I was going to make sure I had a complete list of your questions and concerns. I never said I would resolve all of your issues in a day and a half. I said I would get back to you and I am sorry if 48 hours is worse for you than 36 hours.

When I told you that I would get to the bottom of this and that I would be thorough-you asked me how far I had to go in terms of information gathering to get this resolved.  I said right there that I could not see anything-- based upon my visit  that day-- that suggested to me that the City had done anything to harm you in any way. I absolutely did see some erosion along the stream bed which in my personal opinion is the same condition I would see along any stream bed and which in my experience such erosion often happens if there is an unusually large storm or runoff like the ones we have had in the last several years. Secondly I told you that would have to go deep into City records to find whatever I could that would help bring all the truth to this issue that I could find. I said that no City record was a secret and I would try to find them and make them available to you. I also reiterated what you said Wayne had mentioned to you previously---  If you feel that the City has in any way caused you damage then please send me a letter or note identifying what you believe to be the extent of your damages and I will be pleased to promptly send your claim in to our insurance carrier who might also investigate this claim and provide their perspective.

Here is where I am on your issues:

1. The Culvert under the road which brings the stream from one side of the road was simply installed to allow the road to go over the stream.

2. I do not believe the City created this stream.  Before I left I suggested to you that it looked like a natural stream to me and the fact that DEP has jurisdiction -as you advised me -over this stream  means  to me that this is a natural stream.  Natural streams have flows that vary with the weather which based upon conditions can cause erosion. This is true of every river and stream I have ever seen.

3. I have now seen aerial  photographs of your area before the road and houses were built on your street and the stream is clearly visible. I can show them to you at any time.

4. I am working on getting you a copy of the framed map in the Planning Office that you have asked for which shows this and other protected streams. I may have to have it professionally reproduced  and I will do that at City expense and get it to you as soon as I reasonably can but that could take some time- I do not know at this point. In the meantime the copy we have is not going anywhere and I can give you access to it at any time until you get your own copy.

5. I have not had the chance to meet with Bob Richards on this matter from Public Works since I met you Tuesday to find out whatever he can tell us about culvert history etc. I will let you know everything I find out. This relates to your concern that the City has taken a series of actions which have unnaturally increased the flow in this stream that you believe is the reason you have some erosion. The stream is about 75 feet behind you house. The only indication of potential City contribution you showed me is a couple of culverts crossing underneath the road which would clearly carry some surface water from the south side to your north side and which if significant in volume would reach the stream by following what appear to me to be human made ditches that run along the westerly line of your property and to along another property uphill and west from you. I did step into the ditch along your property in my loafers and found no evidence of water or even mud in this ditch. I do think we have to ask ourselves where this surface water all went before there was a subdivision? My thinking is that it puddled where flat or ran downhill into the lowest point in this area which upon my inspection is this stream.

6. You told me that all the houses on your street have water issues, This tells me that the ground water is close to the surface so when it rains there is more surface water to address because less can be absorbed. I would expect both groundwater and surface water to work their way into this stream.

7. Regardless, I will inquire about any information the City has about letting people ditch or drain to the stream or of people just doing it themselves. When you told me that your house was nice and dry because you had a good drainage system and sump pump I assumed that since there are no storm drains on Seaview Terrace that your building and property drains also go into this same stream.

7. I do not know what all the rules are for private people sending their surface or ground water into natural streams but I do not think the City is responsible for what private people do. I do think the City has the right to maintain its road and to use its right of way to get water away from the road in order to protect it.

8. Where to from here? Speak with Bob Richards, identify any records we have that you want a copy of and get them to you. Identify anything I can which leads me to agree with your assessment. Presently I am unable to do this and if that is where my review concludes then I will not support the City doing remediation on any private property for harm or damage that we did not cause. I want to speak with the State DEP. They called me likely at your suggestion but I have not had a chance to speak with them yet. I welcome their inspection, input and perspective.

9. Seaview Terrace is a City road and I need to find out how wide our right of way is.The City does have the right to shed water away from its roads to protect them from the kind of damage we saw Tuesday. I may also call the City Attorney to secure his advice.

10.  I did not plan on taking any pictures of your stream or your erosion but I am thinking that now that would be a good idea so that we can have a good record of the extent of your concern. I will call and find out when there is a time that will work for you. I am not going to send Ned Lightner based upon what I saw with my own eyes and what a regular camera will readily confirm.

I understand that in not immediately agreeing with your concerns that this is causing you some distress. It may well be that given the intensity of your frustration and concern that I may not be able to meet your expectations.

If you need an answer today as to whether the City will pay or fix the erosion in the back of your yard then my answer would be "No" for all the reasons recited above. If you are willing to be a little more patient then I will continue to investigate for any City activity which makes us liable for you damage.

 I will talk to Wayne Marshall about some site visit that he had previously scheduled and perhaps we can make that happen in the next few business days to clear up as much as we can. Next Wednesday I have to attend a family emergency in another state where I plan to stay for a week. After that I have a training conference when I get back. If we can't conclude this matter by Tuesday I will be unable to get back to it until the 29th.

 Again I will leave it to you as to whether you wish to file a claim with our insurance company.

Thank you.

 Joe Slocum 

____________