Select Board Meeting ~ June 23, 2026

2026-06-23 · Select Board · 2:00:12 · watch on YouTube →

The Select Board's organisational meeting after the municipal elections, which began by electing a chair and vice chair and then spent most of its length on the administrative consent agreement with the operator of the Jaden gravel pit. Two residents spoke against the agreement, arguing the $15,000 fine is far below the value of material taken from the unpermitted area, that noise, buffer and aquifer violations are not addressed, and that enforcement documents requested under the Freedom of Access Act had not been released. The board amended paragraph 7 to bar the operator's vehicles over 23,000 pounds gross vehicle weight rating from Rabbit Road outright, debated adding the town's legal fees on top of the fine before withdrawing that motion when the operator's counsel said his client would not agree, and then approved the agreement as modified with one member opposed. The board also selected a town auditor, approved the final employee handbook, and heard the town manager's report that not all retailers will have pay-as-you-throw bags in stock by the August 1 start. In board reports the chair said the budget committee produced documents at town meeting that the board had never seen and that his request for them was called harassment; he agreed to resubmit the records request as a private individual.

No written minutes could be matched to this meeting. The transcript records that the speaker changed but never who was speaking, so any name attached to a statement below is inferred from context and is marked (?).

What was discussed

1. 0:02
   Opening

   The chair explained that after the municipal elections the board must first vote for a chair and vice chair before taking up the agenda.

2. 7:53
   Election of chair and vice chair

   Joe Roy was nominated and seconded for chair; the transcript records three in favour and one abstention, and the chair stated the motion carried. Josh was then nominated and seconded for vice chair, with a count read out and one member abstaining.

3. 7:53
   Public comment: Joe Keith on the consent agreement

   Joe Keith of 24 Christmas Tree Trail (?) asked the board to reject the consent agreement, saying the $15,000 fine is not significant enough and would set a precedent. He set out market prices for aggregate of $15 to $37 a cubic yard and calculated that one inch of depth over the roughly 10 acres cleared beyond the permit is worth $20,000 to $49,000, so the fine amounts to a fraction of the economic benefit and can be treated as a cost of doing business. He cited section 14.9 of the land use ordinance, which refers to state regulations allowing penalties up to twice the economic benefit.

4. 13:08
   Public comment: buffers, noise and the aquifer

   Joe Keith (?) said the natural buffer strip along the eastern boundary of lot 60A is only 29 to 45 feet wide in places, that the survey shows his neighbour's well rather than his own, and that the revegetation plan does not cover the full area cleared. He said noise measured at the property line four feet above ground ran consistently at 60 to 65 decibels against the 55 decibel limit in section 5.19(A), and asked for a professional sound study before work resumes. He also said section 10.2 limits clearing to 50 percent of the portion of a lot in the groundwater protection district and that satellite imagery shows more than that was cleared.

5. 13:08
   Public comment: process, safety and standards

   A second resident, speaking for others who could not attend, said she had made freedom of access requests for the revised stop work order and the enforcement documents and had not received them, and that the town's attorney had told her directly she would be informed if a consent agreement was to be discussed. She reported another crash that morning at the intersection of Rabbit Road and Hallowell Road, said Maine DOT has never done a focused safety assessment there despite the crash history and pit traffic, and called the agreement's traffic language inadequate.

6. 18:10
   Request to table the agreement

   The second resident asked the board to table the agreement until the enforcement documents and plans are released and the traffic protections strengthened, or at minimum to state on the record that the agreement does not prejudge the expansion and does not relieve the planning board of applying its full checklist under articles 5, 7, 10 and 14.

7. 18:10
   Minutes

   A motion was made to approve the minutes of May 12 and June 1.

8. 18:10
   Consent agreement taken up

   Jerry (?) said the agreement was prepared by the town's attorney and the operator's attorney. The town's regular attorney, Kristen, was not present; an attorney from her firm attended in her place, introduced in the transcript as Gray Lewis (?), along with counsel for the operator. The chair opened a general discussion before any motion.

9. 23:34
   Whether a noise study is required

   The attorney appearing for the town said no noise study has been done by the town or the firm and that the issue had not previously been raised, but that the board may make noise reduction a condition of entering the agreement. Calvin (?) said lot 57 was permitted by the planning board and the board did not require a noise study then, and that the measurements referred to were taken with an iPhone rather than professional equipment. Board members noted noise limits sit in the land use ordinance and that the unpermitted expansion brought operations closer to houses.

10. 28:51
    Restricting trucks on Rabbit Road

    The attorney confirmed the board has authority to impose traffic restrictions such as a weight limit on public roads, with a rational justification, and that this sits separately from the agreement. Members discussed that Rabbit Road carries trucks from five or six pits, is rutted and was never built for that traffic, while Route 9 and Route 136 are built to a higher specification. One member raised the law of unintended consequences given the school, the fire department and the alternative routes.

11. 34:00
    Ambiguity in paragraph 7

    Josh (?) said the wording barring vehicles "from using Rabbit Road to enter or exit the property" read to him as only prohibiting an entrance from Rabbit Road, and said he would not support the agreement with that ambiguity. The operator's counsel confirmed the intent was that the operator's own trucks would not use Rabbit Road at all. The 23,000 pound threshold was explained as the point above which trucks make significantly more noise, and the operator cannot control customers' trucks.

12. 39:44
    Motion to modify paragraph 7

    A motion was made to amend paragraph 7 so that the property owner will bar any of its vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating exceeding 23,000 pounds from using Rabbit Road, full stop, and will request that all contractors refrain from using Rabbit Road, with the words "to the extent possible" removed. The operator's counsel said her client consented to the change.

13. 39:44
    Walk through paragraphs 1 to 3

    Paragraph 1 has the property owner acknowledge the unpermitted work was in violation and waive appeal rights against the May 7 and May 21, 2026 stop work orders. Paragraph 2 replaces all preceding stop work orders on the two lots. Paragraph 3 sets the $15,000 fine, held in escrow by the operator's counsel and released on ratification by the select board.

14. 45:10
    How the $15,000 fine was reached

    Jerry (?) said the town's attorney considered $15,000 reasonable on the basis that a fine should be commensurate with the cost to the town of bringing the property back into compliance, the goal being compliance rather than punishment. The attorney pointed to the $100,000 performance bond in the agreement, which secures remediation and can be increased at the code enforcement officer's discretion if it costs more, describing it as a $15,000 fine and a $115,000 fix. The operator's counsel said the $15,000 figure was proposed by the town, and that her client had lost contracts and been out of work while the stop work order was in force.

15. 50:17
    Board members' objections to the fine

    Members said $15,000 is hard to swallow when the operator was excavating where it had no permit and describing losses in the hundreds of thousands, and that the town's record on gravel pit reclamation is poor. One member noted the town budgeted about $15,000 in total for legal services for the year and that this matter was not anticipated in that line. Jerry (?) said he had asked the town attorney whether legal fees should be charged on top and was told they were meant to be covered within the $15,000.

16. 55:48
    Proposal to bill legal fees separately

    The chair argued the $15,000 should cover code enforcement, planner and staff time, with the town's legal costs recouped separately, so that taxpayers are not funding legal work tied to one property owner's case. Members discussed how far forward such a liability would run and noted section 13 already makes the property owner responsible for the town's reasonable attorney's fees in a dispute arising out of the agreement.

17. 1:00:57
    Motion to amend paragraph 3

    A motion was made and seconded to add to paragraph 3 that the property owner shall pay legal fees incurred by the town not to exceed $15,000. The mover explained he picked a figure he believed was above what the town would actually incur.

18. 1:06:15
    Operator declines further changes and the motion is withdrawn

    The operator's counsel said her client is comfortable with the $15,000 the town itself proposed but is not willing to agree to additional undefined fines even with a cap, and that wholesale changes would need to go back to negotiation. She said profits during the stop work order period were around $2,000 and that she could not give a figure for the unpermitted area. The mover withdrew the motion, saying the fee structure may need further discussion between the two legal teams.

19. 1:11:19
    Litigation timelines

    Members and counsel discussed what would happen without an agreement: civil cases in Androscoggin County can take years, expert studies would be needed, and there is no guarantee of the outcome. The attorney suggested comparable cases take six to eight months but that this one is more complicated.

20. 1:11:19
    Lot 60A permitting, noise and traffic studies

    The operator's counsel said her client intends to continue the permitting process for lot 60A, which the planning board rejected as incomplete on May 6 and for which a new checklist was issued. That process will require a third-party traffic study, noise information, boundary setbacks, natural buffer zones and reclamation. The lot is referred to in the transcript both as 60A and as 68.

21. 1:16:32
    Vegetative buffer on the eastern boundary

    Joe Keith (?) said the green shaded areas of the plan calling for revegetation stop short of the section along his boundary, that no note requires replanting there, and that no flags or 50-foot line had been placed as of 5 p.m. that day. Calvin (?) walked the board through sheets C-20 and C-22, said DEP found no violation on that stretch, and explained that the setback encroachment on 57A arose when the operator built a berm to deflect the noise of a loader's reversing alarm. The board asked for a second set of eyes on that boundary.

22. 1:26:36
    Approval of the consent agreement

    The chair asked that Calvin (?) read the residents' written comments and make sure their concerns are addressed or answered. A motion was then made to approve the administrative consent agreement as modified in item 7.

23. 1:26:36
    Town auditor

    Jerry (?) said three proposals were received, from firms in Chicago, Florida and Maine, and recommended the Maine firm as the least expensive, saying an audit is an audit. The budget for audit services is $22,000. Mark, the town accountant, said he had been an audit partner at that firm before going out on his own and that the people managing the audits know the work.

24. 1:31:43
    Employee handbook

    The handbook was the last piece of work from the HR consultant engagement, with the board having approved the non-fiscal elements over three or four meetings and the wage tables having gone to town meeting. The only change since was an AI policy and wording that had to wait on the town meeting vote. A motion was made to approve the final employee handbook as written.

25. 1:31:43
    Manager report: pay-as-you-throw bags

    Jerry (?) reported that Get and Go (?) is fully set up, Food City has confirmed but is still setting up its account, Shaw's corporate expects to be set up before July 13, and Market Basket has confirmed. Retailers are being encouraged to order three weeks before August 1, but with 12 retailers involved he does not expect everything to be in place by then and put September 1 as the realistic date for bags being available at multiple locations. The board asked for a written report on July 14 before deciding whether to move the start date.

26. 1:37:00
    Communications and start date

    Members asked for the bag information to go in the news blast and on the website from the following week, with a dedicated area listing locations, and for a text message each time a retailer has stock. It was noted August 1 falls on a Saturday, so the start would in practice be a few days later; the transcript gives conflicting days for that.

27. 1:37:00
    Economic development committee

    Jerry (?) said the town has signed a contract with GPCOG for a $75,000 grant to look at economic development, so a committee needs forming, with members drawn from the planning board, conservation commission, agriculture committee, the select board and one at-large resident with business experience. The board agreed to put out a call for volunteers, with the scope of the committee to be drafted first, and to take it up on July 14.

28. 1:42:06
    Goal setting workshop

    GPCOG has begun offering facilitated goal setting for select boards. Because GPCOG provides one free workshop a year, the board asked Jerry to confirm the cost before committing. Dates were discussed for late July, with both the 21st and the 28th mentioned, to be settled at the July 14 meeting once GPCOG sends details.

29. 1:42:06
    Chair's report and the budget committee documents

    Joe Roy (?) thanked members and staff for town meeting, said the agriculture committee returns on July 14 on waiving fees for greenhouses, and raised documents the budget committee introduced at town meeting that the board had never seen and which he said contain inaccuracies. He asked the budget committee chair for the documents and the minutes and emails behind them and was told the request was a form of harassment. He then filed a records request, realised he had sent it from his town email rather than his personal one, and asked the board whether it should stand.

30. 1:47:10
    Whether the records request comes from the board or an individual

    Members said the request should come from him as an individual because a board request was not on the agenda and would have to be voted on. One member said the relationship between the budget committee and the board has become antagonistic and that he saw no problem with the committee producing documents. Others said the material was never in the public packet, the committee's meetings are not recorded and its minutes do not show the documents being approved.

31. 1:52:22
    Records request resolved and Josh's report

    The chair said MMA advised that crafting the material outside a public session is against the law, and agreed to withdraw the request sent from his town email and resubmit it from a personal address, forwarding the results to the board. Josh (?) thanked Jessica for the work on the elections and noted someone bought and delivered dinner for the election workers.

32. 1:57:34
    Bandstand, consent agenda and close

    Deb (?) reported meeting Tia and another member of the Historical Society about the bandstand, with a resident Eagle Scout joining a lead team of three and a list of residents interested in the renovation; the Historical Society would like it restored as a historic monument rather than for use, because of ADA compliance, and it would stay in its current location. On the consent agenda, a municipal release deed was explained as discharging a 2015 lien that the resident paid off but the town never discharged at the registry. Upcoming meetings were listed as conservation commission June 24, planning board July 1, agriculture committee July 8 and select board July 14, and the board adjourned.

What was decided

• 7:53
  Nomination of Joe Roy as chair, recorded as three in favour with one abstention. The chair stated the motion carriespassed
• 7:53
  Nomination of Josh as vice chair. A count is read out and one member abstains, but no result is statedoutcome unclear
• 18:10
  Motion to approve the minutes of May 12 and June 1. Stated as passingpassed
• 39:44
  Motion to amend paragraph 7 of the consent agreement so the property owner bars any of its vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating exceeding 23,000 pounds from using Rabbit Road, and requests that all contractors refrain from using it, removing the words "to the extent possible". Stated as passing unanimouslypassed
• 1:00:57
  Motion to amend paragraph 3 to require the property owner to pay the town's legal fees not to exceed $15,000. The mover withdrew it before any vote after the operator's counsel said her client would not agreeoutcome unclear
• 1:26:36
  Motion to approve the administrative consent agreement for the Jaden gravel pit as modified in item 7. The transcript records one opposed and the chair stating it passespassed
• 1:26:36
  Motion to appoint the Maine-based firm, named in the transcript as Royal Advisors and Accountants (?), as town auditor. Stated as passing unanimouslypassed
• 1:31:43
  Motion to approve the final employee handbook as written. Stated as approvedpassed
• 1:57:34
  Motion to approve the consent agenda, including a municipal release deed discharging a 2015 lien. The chair called for opposition and recorded none, but no result is statedoutcome unclear
• 1:57:34
  Motion to adjourn. The chair called for opposition and recorded none; the end time is given as both 8:22 and 8:28outcome unclear

An outcome reads "unclear" where the recording does not state it plainly. The recogniser drops short words, and "the motion does not carry" is one missing word from its opposite.

Worth knowing

• 7:53
  Joe Keith (?) told the board the $15,000 fine is a small fraction of what the operator gained. Using aggregate prices of $15 a cubic yard for sand up to $37 for crushed stone, he put the value of a single inch of depth across the roughly 10 acres cleared beyond the permit at $20,000 to $49,000, and said the fine equates to about 30 to 75 truckloads of material.
• 13:08
  A second resident said she had filed freedom of access requests for the revised stop work order and the enforcement documents and had received nothing, and that the town's attorney had promised to tell her if a consent agreement was going to be discussed. She reported another crash that morning at Rabbit Road and Hallowell Road, said Maine DOT has never done a focused safety assessment of that intersection, and asked the town to request one.
• 1:31:43
  Pay-as-you-throw bags are due to start August 1, but the town manager said not all 12 retailers will be ready. Get and Go (?) is set up, Food City and Shaw's are still setting up, and he expects bags to be available at multiple locations by September 1. He will bring a written report on July 14 before the board decides whether to move the start date.
• 1:42:06
  The chair said the budget committee handed out documents at town meeting that the select board had never seen and that contain inaccuracies, with no record of the committee approving them. When he asked the committee's chair for them he was told the request was a form of harassment. MMA advised that producing such material outside a public session is against the law.

Motion language found in the transcript

Located by pattern matching, with no model involved: "I move that", "I'll second", "all those in favour". This is an independent check on the summary above: 11 passages of motion language, against 10 decisions summarised.

Elsewhere

← 2026-06-01 Select Board2026-07-14 Select Board →All meetings