Freedom – June 5, 2009 – Saying they want to “support the ZBA,” Freedom’s Board of Selectmen this week voted 3-0 to appeal the Ossipee Lake Marina boat storage case to State Supreme Court, according to a report in the Carroll County Independent.
This time, however, marina owner Kevin Price says he will pay the town’s legal bill.
On May 18, Price appeared before the selectmen to ask them to appeal the case. Price told the board he thought the Superior Court “had made some assumptions” in overturning the ZBA.
After being asked by board chairman Les Babb how much he was willing to pay toward a town appeal, Price said he would take the financial burden “off your shoulders.”
In its Thursday issue, the Independent reported the town has already received $2,000 from Price, which officials said would be “put in escrow.”
The 2007 ZBA ruling allowing an unlimited number of boats at the business has been overturned twice by two different judges in Superior Court.
Perhaps taxpayers could also escrow their tax payments until such time as the State audits Freedom’s accounts and conducts an ethics review of the Freedom Board of Selectmen appearance of intimacy with Mr. Price?
Imagine Freedom is a publicly traded corporation (FRE). The selectmen are the senior management team, the zoning board is an important operating division, and taxpayers are the shareholders. The head of an outside company has convinced the operating division to change its strategy to one that favors his business. Shareholders object, a judge says the change is illegal, and management appeals. A second judge agrees with the first judge. FRE has now lost twice in court and the shareholders are angry, saying valuable time and significant funds have been diverted to defend the operating division’s bad decisions instead of creating shareholder value through investments in the core business. The head of the outside company then appears at an FRE shareholders meeting and offers to write a check to management to take the case to court again. Management accepts the check, files the appeal and announces its decision is to support the good decisions being made at the operating division. Shareholders are left wondering who is running FRE and who is really paying for what. If you owned this stock would you buy more or sell it fast?
Mad Money’s Kramer says SELL SELL SELL!
So, the marina has given the town $2k — how much has this whole ridiculous thing cost the town since 2007?
Is it even legal for a private 3rd party to bankroll municipal litigation and appeals involving the 3rd party’s business? How can that be legal? Where does the town’s legal duty lie? Especially a town that’s now arguing the exact opposite of an issue it previously litigated and WON.
And who is advising the town that these appeals are worthy? Where is his duty? This appeal will LOSE, like the others.
What is the cost so far for this, who has paid it, and to whom?
He should be able to store as many boats as he wants.
who cares how many boats he stores as long as it is not a danger to anyone?
How about this? We need a Freedom voter(s) to start a petition demanding that the Supreme Court uphold the ruling. Both year round and seasonal residents would be able to sign the petition to show their anger with the Selectmen. It’s the only way for seasonal people to be heard. How about some input from any lawyers out there? Is this possible?
How much has this cost to date, and who’s paid for it?
Answers: (a) A lot. (b) No one knows
Are these the same people that wanted to use our tax money to build themselves a new municipal center? Now this?
How much have they spent to get the exact opposite result than the town won in court just a few years ago?
Ho much has this cost, who paid for it, and to whom?
I would like to see more trees on the shore line. These mansions the rich people build on the lake make me sick. As far as the marina goes who cares how many boats he stores out side. Drive by any marina in the country and you’ll see boats .
How much has this case (and appeal, and appeal of the appeal) cost, who has paid for it, and to whom?
Who will pay for it if the SC sends it back to a lower court? Will the marina pay the costs of re-arguing the whole case? Did anyone even think of that? As it stands right now it’s settled: the marina lost *AGAIN*. That’s TWICE.
The marina simply ignored the court’s decision (wish we could all do that) and now the town has spent an unknown amount of money re-arguing the exact opposite side of the case it already won — no one can explain why, but that’s what happened. How much has it cost? And who paid for it? And to whom?
The marina says it will pay for this appeal. But how much, total, has been spent? How much money has been spent, by who — and who got it?
Who will pay for it if the SC remands it back to the lower court? It WAS settled – twice – but now it’s open again, and could cost the town an unknown amount of money on top of the unknown amount of money that was already spent.
Will the marina abide THIS TIME by the court’s decision if the SC upholds the decision? If not, who will pay to enforce compliance?
Did the town even make compliance by the marina a condition of filing this appeal? If not, WHY NOT???? Why in the world would the town agree to file this appeal on behalf of the marina without getting a guarantee that the marina WILL ABIDE BY THE DECISION IF IT LOSES AGAIN???