Randy Seaver — journalist and former PR pro — blogs about politics, media and his struggles with mental illness.
Author: Randy Seaver
Randy Seaver is a veteran journalist who has been covering news and politics in the city of Biddeford, Maine for nearly three decades. He may be contacted at randy@randyseaver.com
One of the biggest threats to human existence is simply the crippling, exponential increase in human population. The have-nots will eventually wage war on the haves over limited natural resources. (It’s happened before)
Simply put, more people will be scrambling for a finite number of resources. This age-old battle is what resulted in colonization of yesteryear. It’s why indigenous people were slaughtered, and their land taken from them.
It is happening today in Africa, throughout Europe and in South America. The haves are equipped with the better military. But the have nots are equipped with an increasing, and never-ending supply of troops.
Sure. Of course, climate change is also a threat to our survival, impacting crops and other environmental resources.
It is important to remember, however, that climate change has been one of the few constants over the last 4.53 billion years of Earth’s existence. (Science)
Climate Change was here long before us; its impacts already wiped out several species and changed the very face of our planet over the past few billion years. (Science)
Relax. If you’re one of the “haves,” (and you are, since you are reading this on your own computer) you’ll be fine. The ‘haves’ are equipped with military might to defend themselves and to keep the “have nots” at bay.
The “haves” generally talk a good game about natural resources but will be the only ones able to afford “carbon credits,” when push comes to shove.
Of course, there a millions and millions of people who truly believe that the government (or governments) can solve the very real climate situation. They will accomplish these goals by punitive means. Governments will grow and create new agencies to address the problem. Taxes will increase in order to “fight” the climate.
People like John Kerry, the special Presidential envoy designated to tackle climate change, will talk a good game about fossil fuels. But he will continue to fly on private planes. Apparently, the climate is not bad enough for special people like former Senator Kerry to use mass transit or fly commercial.
The “have nots” will soon realize that the late comedian Sam Kinison was right. “They don’t need money. Food doesn’t grow in deserts. They need luggage, not our prayers. They will go where the food is” . . . eventually.
Historically, the “haves” are not too keen on the idea of global sharing. Sure, they talk a good game while sipping a Capaccino and surfing the web at their favorite cafe. They will tell you that you need to use less for the good of our planet.
In fact, a recent editorial in the Washington Post advised, that Americans should start getting used to taking cold showers and baths because hot water heaters contribute to carbon emissions.
While we are at each other’s throats, screaming about preferred pronouns and other very important things, the crisis we don’t want to talk about will keep growing. And growing.
No one ever said that humans would be a permanent species on Earth. That’s just our collective arrogance. We have only been part of the ecosystem for 2 million years (Science).
Two million years may certainly seem like a long time, but compared to our planet’s life span of 4.5 billion years, it’s basically a drop in the bucket. Do the math.
The massive ice sheet that once covered Canada melted away about 1.5 million years before the invention of the combustion-engine. The Earth is gonna do what the Earth is gonna do.
Yes, climate change is real. And I see nothing wrong with pursuing renewable energy sources. But at the end of the day, all of our best efforts are not going to amount to much.
Climate change is real. It is a threat to our existence. But I wonder why we ignore the much larger and significant threat. You know? The one we can actually do something about.
We have seen the enemy, and it is us. The rest of it is just feel-good, self-righteous bullshit. It’s about the haves and the have nots. It always has been, and always will be that way.
The rest of it is basically bread and circuses.
Never miss another installment of Lessons in Mediocrity! Subscribe for free today
“It’s time we stop Hey, what’s that sound? Everybody look, what’s going down?” — Buffalo Springfield
About a dozen Primadona college-age kids descended on downtown Biddeford today to exploit people who are living in one of the city’s most visible homeless encampments on Water Street.
These self-righteous “protestors” who are upset about events in Gaza mostly arrived on scene driving late-model SUVs and followed instructions issued from organizers to wear a mask.
A lame excuse for a protest on a warm summer day. Randy Seaver photo
Fortunately, there was no media attention given to these nitwits as they tried desperately to link the city’s homeless population to the atrocities now taking place in Gaza.
The pro-Hamas kiddos sent out a fancy press release about their demonstration. They wanted attention, that’s it. I didn’t see a single person in their ranks who has been involved in volunteering or actually trying to help our homeless neighbors over the past few months.
Believe it or not, I was young once. I understand their self-righteous outrage. When I was in my early 20s, I spent summers working for the Maine Peoples Alliance; I joined Monument Square protests in Portland for nightly candlelight vigils to protest the U.S. Arms race. I was a member of PAUSICA (Portlanders Against U.S. Involvement in Central America). Remember the Sandinistas and the Contras in Nicaragua?
These brave young folks who were forced to sip their lattes under a scorching sun this afternoon really believe in their cause, which is sort of interesting because they don’t rally around the genocide now taking place in Uganda. They apparently are not concerned about the plight of Ukraine.
Instead, these impressionable young people are rallying in support of an expanded Palestinian state where theocracy is in vogue and democracy is dismissed; where homosexuality is not tolerated and where women can be arrested or even killed for not dressing properly.
But my biggest beef with these clowns is the misinformation they are trying to spread about my hometown. The city has committed more than $1 million for a pilot program to actually assist our unhoused neighbors. We are expanding and coordinating more resources to actually help people.
I haven’t seen any of these punks at any of the countless meetings or participating in any discussions about how to move forward.
My community is actually doing something positive to restore dignity for those on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder.
These kids? They just want their 15 minutes of fame. Disgusting! Exploitation 101.
Never miss another installment of Lessons in Mediocrity. Subscribe now for free!
Biddeford Mayor Marty Grohman said this week that the city may not be included in the review process of a new pier that the University of New England wants to build on the Saco River.
According to city ordinances, such a project generally must first be approved and facilitated by the city’s harbormaster before any other regulatory agency can conduct its own review of the proposal, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Saco River Corridor Commission.
However, because of actions by the city’s harbormaster and the chair of the Biddeford Harbor Commission, Grohman said the only way for a “fair review of the application” might now include the city withdrawing itself from the review process entirely.
“At this point, they [UNE] are holding all the cards,” Grohman said. “I don’t know how we can get them back to the table.”
On Friday, John Schafer abruptly resigned his position as chair of the Biddeford Harbor Commission.
Schafer told Saco Bay News that he felt “shackled” in his attempt to provide “clarity and transparency” to the discussions surrounding the university’s proposal.
Schafer admits that he should not have played an advocacy role in the review process, but says he was angered by the university’s threat of litigation against the city if their new pier and its specific location is not approved.
According to documents obtained by Saco Bay News, the university began raising threats of litigation months before their pier proposal was formally submitted to the city in June.
“Talk about putting the cart before the horse,” Schafer said. “You had UNE bullying the city with threats of litigation even before they submitted their proposal.”
Several months before the university formally submitted its proposal, Ron Schneider, the university’s general counsel and vice president of legal affairs, sent a letter to the city’s attorney, arguing that the proposed location for the pier was already a “settled issue.”
“It is our position that the planned location of the GMSC Pier is a settled issue,” Schneider wrote. “Mr. Lariviere, and by extension the city, is estopped from reversing course at this time and mandating a different location for the pier.”
In his letter, Schneider says that both Lariviere and former harbormaster Marshall Alexander “specifically told university representatives” in 2015 that the proposed pier should not be built in the location that Lariviere is now suggesting as a more appropriate location.
Lariviere denied Schneider’s assertions about the location of the pier. “That is a complete fabrication,” he said. The harbormaster also says the city’s ongoing actions in removing him and the assistant harbormaster from the approval process violates several state laws.
Grohman says the situation has become a “real mess for the city,” and is causing “unfortunate delays” for the university.
“I’m not sure how we can proceed from this point,” the mayor said during a telephone interview on Sunday.
“There’s really nothing in our ordinances about how to proceed in this situation,” Grohman said. “We have been put into a difficult position.”
Although City Manager James Bennett has previously declined to say whether the university has threatened the city with possible litigation, two letters from Schneider to City Attorney Harry Center make clear that the university is prepared to use litigation if the city does not approve their proposed location for the new pier.
In his Feb. 13 letter, Schneider wrote that Lariviere’s “continued inappropriate obstruction would result in delay that would adversely affect Biddeford, would cause project delay, and would significantly increase expense to the university.”
“It is our sincere hope that UNE is not forced to resort to litigation to avoid the delay and expense that will result if Mr. Lariviere were to insist on obstructing the building of the pier,” Schneider wrote.
Schneider said the university “cherishes its relationship with the city and its people and only wishes to continue being a valuable member of the community.”
Grohman said the University of New England is one of the top-ten academic institutions in the world in field of marine research.
“What they are hoping to do with their pier will result in a lot of positive outcomes,” the mayor said.
As part of his resignation letter to the mayor and all members of the city council, Schafer included a brief video he produced that affirms what the city’s harbormaster, assistant harbormaster and others have been saying about the river depth where the university wants to build its pier.
In the video, depth measurement equipment clearly shows that the river is, in fact, deeper closer to the shore than in the location proposed by the university.
Lack of adequate mooring depth has been one pf the primary concerns raised by Biddeford’s harbormaster in connection to the university’s proposal.
UNE representatives, however, say the water depth is better in their proposed location, citing research from engineering firms they hired to study the issue.
Grohman said he has a high opinion of Schafer and his abilities. “I am sorry to see him step down, but I do think it was the appropriate thing to do,” he said.
“The best and fairest way to move forward may be to have the city withdraw from the approval process and see what other agencies have to say about the project,” Grohman said. “One way or another, we have got to get this thing figured out.”
Although somewhat overshadowed by the 2024 presidential campaign, I have noticed that the DNC and their left-leaning partners (Act Blue, etc.) are really hammering on class resentment this cycle.
In my Facebook feed, I come across dozens of pleas from “working-class” candidates for fundraising help. In every single one of these ads, coming from eight different states, the core and only message is this: wealthy people are bad.
New York Times image
These ads (fundraising pleas) do not talk about issues such as abortion, climate change, LGBTQ+ issues or gun control, they just focus upon how hard it is to run for Congress without billionaire and multi-millionaire supporters.
Regardless of your political perspective, there is no denying that wealth inequality is the backbone of the Democrats’ hopes of taking back the House and holding the slimmest of margins in the Senate.
I understand the tactic. I also think it’s effective. And I also think it’s baloney.
For example, look up Nancy Pelosi’s net worth. She is a multi-millionaire. Take a look at all the A-list personalities (actors, musicians) who are pitching in significant contributions. And what about all the run-of-the-mill billionaires contributing to the Biden campaign?
My point? Just because you’re a billionaire or able to contribute thousands of dollars to a congressional campaign, doesn’t mean that you are automatically a MAGA Trump supporter.
Whipping up emotional class warfare is despicable, especially when our nation is facing so many serious problems including an erosion of civil liberties, a creeping theocracy and an economy that is placing a heavy burden on working class and low-income people, not to mention an unsustainable debt load.
I get it. Democrats believe that wealthy people should be paying more in taxes. I agree with them. I also would like to see new and younger voices in Congress, absolutely! Regardless of their political affiliation, we need fresh voices in Congress.
Closer to home, right here in Maine, Rep. Chellie Pingree shows no signs of being ready to step down. Speaking of age concerns, both Senator Susan Collins and Senator Angus King are way beyond retirement age. Why aren’t they willing to let some younger, energetic voices be heard on the floor of the senate?
As I said, whipping up class resentment is a solid political tactic, especially while so many Americans are struggling to stretch their paychecks.
But it is also blatant hypocrisy,
If you’re a waitress, a pipefitter or a public-school teacher hoping to win a Congressional race, the odds are stacked against you, regardless of your political affiliation. But if — by miracle — you do defeat an incumbent, you’ll never return to waiting tables.
There is only ONE thing that EVERY politician wants: another term.
Never miss another installment of Lessons in Mediocrity! Subscribe for free here:
Although he wears many hats, Richard Rhames of Biddeford could probably best be described with just three words: authentic, passionate and persistent.
Rhames, 78, is a well-known commodity at City Hall. He is an outspoken member of the public, a former city councilor and a tireless member of the both the city’s Conservation Commission and Cable Television Committee.
Richard Rhames/ Seaver photo
Over the last four decades, Rhames has developed a reputation as someone who means what he says, and says what he means. He rarely pulls punches when criticizing local leaders and their policies; and he is always willing to fight even when he knows the odds are insurmountably stacked against him.
Today, Richard and wife Pat own and operate Shady Brook Farm on outer West Street. That 80-acre farm has been in Rhames’ family for three generations, and the land represents one of the last family-owned farms in the area.
Rhames, who serves as president of the Saco Valley Land Trust, laments the loss of small farms, but keeps his hands firmly on the plow in a time when farming has pretty much become a corporate enterprise.
“If farming was easy, everyone would do it,” he said with a wry grin. “Let me assure you, nothing about farming is easy.”
To the casual observer, it seems that Rhames is always willing to do things the hard way. He dismisses the notion of going along to get along.
Sticking to his principles and beliefs has cost Richard some friends and his seat at the table of local power, where he was widely considered a thorn-in-the side of the Chamber of Commerce types.
Richard was an at-large member of the Biddeford City Council when the September 11 terrorist attacks occurred. Within days, the council had decided to place miniature American flags along the council dais. There was one flag in front of each councilor.
At the beginning of the next council meeting, Rhames used his arm to move the flag to his side as he was spreading out paperwork. A fellow city councilor expressed outrage, and a reporter from the Journal Tribune wrote that Rhames had “shoved the flag away.”
The public was largely unforgiving. It was a time of hyper-patriotism and there was little tolerance for anything deemed to be “un-American.”
Rhames had already been long criticized for his questioning of U.S. policies in the Middle East, including Iraq. He was unapologetic. Just a few weeks later, Biddeford voters showed him the door.
“I never shoved the flag,” he said. “But the damage was done. The political class was not happy with me, and they gladly grabbed onto a piece of red meat.”
Rhames never stopped sharing his political views. He wrote a regular column in both the Journal Tribune and the Biddeford-Saco Courier. Much of his written work focused on labor issues, workers’ rights and conservation issues.
He is a long-time advocate for single-payer healthcare and says if the city is serious about the issue of affordable housing, the best weapon to bring to that fight is municipally-mandated rent control.
He is also a fairly well-known musician, playing rhythm guitar with two different bands throughout the area.
What got you involved in local government?
“It was the airport. Back in the ‘70s, they started pushing a plan to build a cross-wind runway. They intended to buy the George Fogg property, which was between the paved part of Granite Street Extension and the town line. That’s always been the wet dream – – the cross-wind runway.
“I started going to Planning Board meetings and council meetings. I was probably the only guy in town who had actually read the master plan. I mean, who are we kidding? Master plan? Fuck that. It was supposed to be a done deal. The powerful people, the people with connections; it was what they wanted.
“Because Mayor [Babe] Dutremble was pissed that some of his political friends had been moving forward behind his back, he shut it down all by himself. It was in the papers, the York County Coast Star and the Journal.
“Then about 10 years later, in the mid-1980s, it came back again, with a vengeance. The new plan was even more grandiose. It would have Biddeford become a reliever for the Portland Jetport. We were going to get the freight shipments; it would have included 60,000-pound aircraft. They dream big, here in Biddeford. The FAA loved it, you know? And they thought they had it.
“We fought it. They wanted to change the zone to Industrial. That’s back when wetlands were just dismissed as swamps. We got some other people riled up and involved, and at one of our first neighborhood meetings we came up with a name at the supper table: NOISE (Neighbors Organized In Stopping Expansion).”
You have often complained about the fact that there is so little public participation in city meetings.
“In order to know what’s going on, you got to be there all the fucking time. And you’ve got to have no life, which is ideal for me. (Laughs)
But it’s not just local issues that get you fired up.
“Yeah, well you know. If I’m pissed about something, I’m going to stand up and say something. I don’t know any other way to be. I have this bad attitude, right?
“When I was younger, I could have gone back to teaching (public school). I was no longer 1A. I didn’t have to fight the draft anymore. When I grew up, I remember watching television and all the incessant propaganda. The whole mantra: the Russians are coming; the Russians are coming. The constant beating of the drum. The propaganda. The free world.
“I grew up in the ‘60s. I mean we were all drinking from the same propaganda trough, but it was the draft that literally forced a lot of young people to start recognizing what was happening, even though I went to a little white-bread Midwest college.
“I was as unquestioning as anyone else back then, until all this shit started happening. We had access to libraries and learning opportunities. We did this bus caravan thing. We went to Midland, Michigan, the home of Dow Chemical.
“We were all white bread kids; nobody had long hair; we were wearing suits at the march and the locals hated us because we had a rally in the park (Laughs).
“But we were earnest, and we had been looking into this a little bit. Most of us had some idea about the history of southeast Asia; how we took over for France in Vietnam. There was a history there that the newspapers never reported, but we came to understand that it was really fucked up; and why would anybody want to die for that?
“But to openly resist meant costs. Most of us were banking on what we were taught since elementary school: that we had some kind of career waiting for us in regular society.”
Do you ever get tired of fighting the good fight?
“I’m pissed, and I have been pissed for a long time. I don’t find that hope is terribly motivating. You gotta be pissed. It wasn’t right. It wasn’t right what we did on the grand scale.
“Even today, as much as the whole thing in Palestine is wrong, the Israelis, the Zionists, are pikers compared to the United States of America. The body count that we have rung up during my lifetime is really fucking impressive.
“Nobody talks about it, but if you want somebody killed, call us. We’ll either provide you with the weapons; better yet, we’ll do it ourselves. We’re really good at that. Spending a trillion dollars a year on the military? That’s easy.
“But if you speak up, they come after you. It’s dangerous, Randy. Why did they come after me the way they did after 9/11? Why have they come after me, including you, . . . why was I such a target? You know? This unassuming clodhopper with the big words and all that shit, you know? Why was I the target?
“Because I was willing to stand up and say this shit.”
What do you think about all the changes as Biddeford becomes a destination community?
“We were last in line. We had the incinerator [MERC]. They stopped pulping in Westbrook and that city began to gentrify almost immediately, and Westbrook isn’t placed nearly as well as we are. Against all the political odds . . . and the only reason that we got rid of the incinerator is because they wanted to leave . . . they [Casella Waste Systems] were ready to go.
“It always kills me, I guess it shouldn’t — when Alan [Casavant] expresses surprise, disbelieving; and talks about how quickly the shift started, how much things changed once we got rid of MERC. It would have happened anyway, but you had this whole Heart of Biddeford gentrifying, national advertising campaign. The whitewashing of Biddeford culture.
“We created a myth of what Biddeford is in order to entice new people to come here and exploit us, which they are doing.
“But we haven’t learned. The political class is still bending over backwards to subsidize private development.
“I keep telling them: Isn’t it time to pump the brakes a little? You don’t have to beg people to come here anymore. There’s no incinerator anymore. We’ve got all this ocean frontage, river frontage and all these old buildings from when Biddeford was the Detroit of New England.”
You are one of the most strident and vocal supporters of public access community television, even as the city slides further away from televised meetings to online forums.
“When we started with public access, there was some good stuff on the channel, but the political class was always uncomfortable. It frightened them because they couldn’t control the message.
“We used media for public education, to pull back the curtain and give information that you really couldn’t find anywhere else. It was good stuff, and I was never home.
“We were doing advocacy for ordinary people. You don’t generally find that on the airwaves. Who wants to do research to make a point? T.V. is something done to you now.”
Any thoughts on running for office again?
(Sighs) “I’m too old. My time is over. I understand how the world works. I’m not the one. I’m just not the one.”
Never miss another installment of Lessons in Mediocrity! Subscribe for free today!
It’s that time of year again. Summer is beckoning, and we will soon be celebrating Pride Month, an international observance celebrating members of the LGBTQ+ community during the month of June.
Right on cue, you can expect to see a lot of push-back about Pride Month on social media platforms such as Facebook, X and Instagram. Those lamenting the celebration of Pride Month will sing an all-too-familiar refrain:
“Why are they shoving this stuff down our throats?”
“Why isn’t there a celebration for heterosexual people?”
“I don’t mind gay people, but why do they have to make a big deal about this stuff?”
“It’s immoral and against my religious values.”
Since I am a happily married heterosexual, I thought it might be useful if I attempted to answer those questions from the perspective of someone who doesn’t “fly the rainbow flag.”
What is often overlooked is the fact that Pride Month is a celebration for everyone, even us grumpy, older straight people fit on the rainbow spectrum.
The point of Pride celebrations is the joyous relief that no one – no one – has to live in fear of retaliation or even violence just because of their gender, orientation, skin color, cultural heritage or anything else.
Violence. you say? Really? That’s just an exaggeration to illicit sympathy for social deviants, right? Ummm, . . . here, hold my beer.
Join me now for a trip in the Way-Back time machine. Actually, we’re not going too far back in time.
It is October 6, 1998. We are standing in a sprawling pasture not far from Fort Collins, Colorado. We can see a long wooden fence with blood stains.
This is the spot where college student Matthew Shepard was beaten and tortured by two other men.
Mathhew had been strapped to one of those fence posts. His attackers took their time brutally attacking him, celebrating their uncorked rage and hatred. They beat him relentlessly until he lost consciousness.
Matthew’s attackers left him there alone to die in an open field, his body shattered and still bleeding. Matthew died a few days later in a hospital room.
What was Matthew’s crime? Why did his attackers hate him so much? Why did they feel the need to take his life? What terrible thing had he done to spark so much anger, so much hatred?
Matthew was gay.
That’s it. Matthew was an adult male who loved another man. That’s it. That’s all.
Simply because he loved another man, Matthew’s attackers felt it was their God-given, righteous duty to mete out their own version of justice.
During their trial, one of the attackers told the Court that Matthew had made “sexual advances” toward him. Some people even expressed sympathy toward the two men who killed Matthew Shepard.
Now, with that out of the way, let me now try to answer those four questions.
Why are they shoving this stuff down our throats?
Well, for starters, having a parade and flying a flag is far cry from “shoving something down anyone’s throats.” Gay people have been around just as long as straight people, but have always been in the minority. Always made to feel that thy are “queers” and not worthy. Defective, immoral people: faggots and dykes.
It has been this way for millennia. Homosexuality has been condemned in literature, films, popular music and even religious texts including the Bible and the Quran.
Remember high school? Imagine if one of your classmates brought another boy to the prom? How would that have gone over? Imagine that girl living down the street giving another girl a Valentine’s Day card.
In reality, — until very, very recently — heterosexuality is what is crammed down every kid’s throat from birth onward.
What bothers you so much about seeing a rainbow flag or seeing gay people openly and proudly marching in a parade? Why are you so easily triggered by seeing people now able to express their love and identity? Don’t we all have the right to life, freedom and the pursuit of happiness?
Why isn’t there a celebration for straight people?
Seriously? Every other month except June is basically a celebration, honoring heterosexual people. It’s Mr. and Mrs. Claus, not Mr. and Mister Claus, right?
If you’re a straight person, odds are that you have always enjoyed the relative safety, comfort and acceptance of being straight.
You were never asked to live a lie, to hide your true feelings. To remain in a closet out of sight, and out of my mind.
Up until just a few years ago, gay people were expected to stay out of view. They were not allowed to marry the person they loved and cherished. They were not allowed to serve in the military. All that is slowly changing. That is why gay people can now – finally – celebrate the fact that they are gay.
I don’t mind gay people, but why do they have to make a big deal about being gay?
For starters, refer to point No. 2. Are you married? Ever been to a wedding? Know someone who is married? Marriage ceremonies are a really big deal and represent a multi-billion-dollar industry.
Why do straight people make such a big deal about their weddings, engagements and anniversaries? It’s all-over social media: Straight people celebrating their kids, sharing pictures of their honeymoons and their dream weddings.
Who we love IS a big deal and cause for celebration, straight, gay or whatever.
It’s immoral and against my religious values.
Many people are quick to say that homosexuality is a sin, an affront to God, the creator. I’d like to know what exactly is wrong with consenting adults loving each other. What bothers you so much about adults being able to live their own, authentic lives?
“Well, it’s prohibited in the Bible,” some folks say.
Yes, it is. In fact, the Bible has some very specific language describing homosexuality as abomination. (Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13, not to mention other passages in the New Testament.
The Book of Leviticus offers the following: “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable, and “If a man lies with a man as one lies with woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”
I wonder if the two men who attacked and killed Matthew Shepard were thinking, “hey, we’re just following what the Bible says.”
It should be noted that the same book of the Bible also prohibits tattoos, eating bacon, lobster, clams and oysters.
The book of Leviticus also offers helpful advice for the proper rules of selling a slave and advocates the death penalty for adultery.
So, do we follow the Bible or just the selected parts we like?
I can almost hear some people screaming about transgender persons using public restrooms and the “unfairness” of athletic teams that allow biological men to compete on women’s teams.
I don’t have all the answers. But I do have faith. I believe a nation that figured out how to put a man on the moon can probably tackle and solve these controversial issues.
Remember, less than 75 years ago it was still quite fashionable to complain about Blacks using the same water fountains as their white counterparts.
Are some members of the LGBTQ+ community a bit too extreme and in-your-face? Yup. Being gay or trans does not necessarily exempt you from being an asshole or stop you from being obnoxious or rude in public.
But 99.9 percent of the LGBTQ+ community are just like you and me. They just want to heave a sigh of relief and celebrate the fact that they no longer have to remain hidden from view.
As far as I know, celebrating Pride Month is not a compulsory obligation. If Pride celebrations really bother you, don’t go to the parade or flag-raising ceremony.
But maybe ask yourself this: what exactly are you afraid of? Do you view homosexuality as a disease? Are you worried that if your kid reads a book about another kid with two dads, then your kid will decide to become gay. Really?
When, exactly, did you decide that you were straight? Did you get it from a book, a movie or a parade?
If you’re gay, you’re gay. If you’re straight, you’re straight. It’s not any more of a choice than your eye color or your height. It’s how you were born. It’s who you are. It’s not a choice. You don’t choose to be tall or short; to have blue eyes or brown eyes. You don’t choose where you were born. It’s really okay for us to be different and to be decent toward people different from ourselves.
You always have the choice to just be kind and respectful. If a rainbow offends you, simply turn away. Scroll past.
Relax. July will be here before you know it. And then we can ALL celebrate our freedom by waving flags, marching in parades and lighting fireworks. Remember, we are ALL equal, not just us straight, old, grumpy white guys.
Peace!
Subscribe for free, and never miss another installment of Lessons in Mediocrity
Although the University of New England earlier this month formally submitted its plan to build a new pier on the Saco River, that plan still remains mired in controversy.
Both the university (UNE) and Biddeford’s harbormaster seem to have their heels dug in regarding how the pier should be built.
Before the pier can be built, the plan must first be approved by the city of Biddeford’s harbormaster. The plan will then also require review and approval by several other agencies, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and the Saco River Corridor Commission.
As of press time, it remains unclear how the city will be able to review the proposal because City Manager James Bennett removed both the city’s harbormaster and assistant harbormaster from the review process in May.
Bennett said he removed the harbormasters because he felt they were biased and would not be able to objectively review the application.
In May, Bennett said he would appoint a harbormaster “Pro-Tem,” specifically for reviewing the university’s plan. Last week, Bennett told Saco Bay News he has not yet been able to find a temporary harbormaster to review UNE’s proposal.
“It is taking a bit longer than I anticipated, but we are going to continue our search in order to ensure that the university’s proposal is handled fairly and objectively,” Bennett said. “There are not a lot of people with that kind of experience. So, we need to go back to the drawing board.”
According to documents obtained by Saco Bay News, Bennett reached out to and was then rebuffed by the Maine Harbormasters’ Association when he asked that agency for guidance and suggestions about someone who could review the university’s proposal.
In a June 4 email response to Bennett’s inquiry, Daryen Granata of the Maine Harbormasters’ Association, said Bennett’s desire to appoint a temporary harbormaster was “unprecedented” and would likely be a violation of state law.
“Our board is unaware of any precedent for such a position,” Granata wrote. “Review of the relevant state law contains no provision regarding such a position. To do so would be inconsistent with the explicit state law.”
“The Maine Harbormasters Association discourages you from pursuing a ‘protem’ harbormaster as it is inconsistent with the prevailing law. Instead, we recommend that you work within the review hierarchy laid out in your harbor ordinance.”
Bennett said both he and city attorney Harry Center disagree with the legal opinion given by the association.
Bennett would not say whether he contacted Saco’s harbormaster to help review the application.
Dan Chadbourne, Saco’s harbormaster, said he was told that he should not comment on the controversy surrounding UNE’s proposed pier.
“All I can say is that channel is a joint jurisdiction between the cities of Biddeford and Saco,” Chadbourne said. “At some point, the city of Saco will be involved.”
Why the controversy?
UNE wants to build a pier jutting away from the shore in a perpendicular design and into the channel with a T-shaped configuration. The new pier will be used to dock the university’s marine research vessel in close proximity to their Marine Sciences building on the Biddeford campus.
Biddeford Harbormaster Paul Lariviere said the university’s plan would have a significant impact on existing moorings, navigation and public access. Last year, he shared an alternative proposal with UNE officials.
Lariviere’s alternate design runs parallel to the shore, without jutting into the channel. The university has dismissed the alternate plan, raising concerns about water depth during low tide.
But Lariviere says water depth at low tide is actually deeper closer to the shore in that specific location.
Lariviere says he has nothing personal against the University of New England, and is not attempting to block their attempts to build a new pier for their research vessel.
“They [UNE] have been talking publicly about their plan to construct a new pier for a few years now,” Lariviere said. “My concern has always been about following existing laws, regulations and city ordinances. I took the time to do some research in order to offer them a plan that would better meet their needs and have fewer impacts on public access, navigation, existing moorings and water depth.”
While university representatives maintain that their design is the only one that will give them adequate water depth for docking their research vessel, Lariviere and others say that’s simply not true, pointing to recent data they collected.
“The way the river runs, they (UNE) would be much better off with the alternative I provided them,” Lariviere said. “At mean low tide, there is actually better depth closer to the shoreline than further out in the channel.
“Frankly I don’t understand their adamant objection to the alternative plan we developed,” Lariviere said. “It would probably cost them less money to build, meet all of their stated needs and offer better depth for their vessel. The alternative plan I showed them would have no impacts on existing moorings and would remove concerns about public access and navigation.”
Lariviere said that over the past several months, many people have asked him his thoughts about the university’s plans for a new pier.
“I have just been answering questions people asked me,” Lariviere said. “Of course, I told people that their plan – as presented – would never fly. It’s simply because their plan does not meet existing standards and regulations. It’s not bias. It’s common sense.”
What UNE Says
According to Sarah Delage, a spokesperson for the university, the university’s proposal was rigorously reviewed and designed by engineering and environmental consultants.
Delage said the location of the proposed pier was chosen after expert marine engineers looked at nine potential locations and considered potential impacts to mooring, navigation and environmental concerns.
In their application, the university altered the harbormaster’s proposal. Their design adopts a starting point at a shore location almost identical to what the harbormaster suggested. But the university presented a T-shaped perpendicular design that juts out from that starting point on shore well more than 150 feet into the river, at odds with the harbormaster’s recommendation.
Delage said the alteration was designed to point out the necessary depth that would be required for docking their research vessel.
Although Delage said “there is no physical map or design to represent” the harbormaster’s alternative, the university’s application does include a reconfigured drawing of the harbormaster’s alternative.
Delage says the university was first made aware of the harbormaster’s alternative during an informal meeting at City Hall in October 2023.
That meeting was attended by City Manager James Bennett, Harbormaster Paul Lariviere, UNE President James Hebert and John Schafer, chair of the Biddeford Harbor Commission.
“This was a verbal conversation,” Delage said. “The harbormaster never provided us with a physical alternative design.”
Based on the verbal feedback, Delage says the university then created a diagram of a pier in the location suggested by the Harbormaster to show what a pier would look like if it were designed to reach sufficiently deep water.
“With the assistance of the marine engineers, UNE understood that a pier hugging the shoreline would not reach deep enough water,” Delage said.
Lariviere disputes the claim regarding low tide depth, pointing out that he and several others conducted rigorous depth surveys in that location.
Furthermore, If the university were to adopt the harbormaster’s alternative, Delage said such a pier would have “to be about twice the size” of the alternate design that Schafer shared with the media.
Delage said the alternative plan would be more disruptive to the harbor and unable to accommodate both the university’s research vessel and the city’s fireboat.
“The bathymetric survey information relied on by the engineers to establish water depths comes from work done by Statewide Surveys in 2015,” Delage said.
Delage added that the shoreline elevations are further “corroborated by low-tide aerial imagery available from Maine Office of GIS and an additional imagery service used by GEI (Nearmap), which depict an intertidal zone along the shore, and the low-water location in close agreement with the location identified by on-the-ground land survey.”
Delage said the university’s research was summarily rejected by the harbormaster during another informal meeting at City Hall in January. She said that UNE’s design team and other staff, the city manager, City Councilor William Emhiser and Lariviere and Schafer all attended that meeting.
The cart before the horse?
Even before the regulatory review process has started, the university sought and received commitments of federal funding to help pay for the construction costs.
The university and city manager say that both Lariviere and Schaeffer should not have been making public comments about the proposed pier before the plan was even formally submitted.
Delage said there was a joint meeting of the Harbor Commission and the Shellfish Conservation Commission in February that was not publicly noticed.
“There was no agenda published, and no minutes are obtainable from the city’s website,” Delage said.
In addition to the lack of public notice, Delage says the university did not receive any notice of this meeting, despite the fact that their pier proposal would be discussed.
“Again, UNE has never received a drawing of any kind from the harbormaster specifying his preferred design and location,” Delage said.
Delage says that Schafer, chair of the city’s Harbor Commission, sent email messages to multiple people, including city councilors, indicating that he agreed with the harbor master.
Those actions are the basis of why Lariviere was removed from the review process, according to City Manager James Bennett and City Attorney Harry Center.
The Harbor Commission is the body to whom an applicant must appeal any adverse decision by the harbormaster, Center explained. “You simply cannot present yourself as able to review an application if you have already publicly stated an opinion about that application,” Center added.
“It is my professional opinion that the city would be unable to defend itself in a court hearing if the applicant decides to appeal a decision that was pre-determined before the application was submitted,” Center said.
Schafer said all meetings of the Harbor Commission are open to the public. He also said he rigorously prepares meeting agendas before each meeting and also provides minutes of every meeting to a long list of people at City Hall, including City Clerk Robin Patterson, the designated staff liaison for the Harbor Commission.
Schafer provided Saco Bay News with copies of emails he distributed before and after the joint Feb. 21 meeting with the Shellfish Commission.
“I specifically sent the detailed minutes of that meeting to a whole bunch of people,” Schafer said. “I am a strong supporter of open and transparent government. When I heard that UNE might be considering litigation against the city, I made it my mission to relay what our commission heard from the harbormaster at the Feb. 21 meeting.”
Schafer said every monthly meeting of the Biddeford Harbor Commission includes a standing agenda item entitled “Harbormaster Summary.”
“I had no idea what Paul [Lariviere] was going to say ahead of time,” Schafer said. “But I sure as heck made sure that everyone knew what he said during that meeting. We have never had a meeting without an agenda or detailed minutes.”
According to the meeting minutes that Schafer shared with Mayor Marty Grohman, all members of the city council, Police Chief JoAnn Fisk and the city clerk, Lariviere said he would not be able to approve UNE’s proposal simply because it did not conform to existing regulations.
“Yes, people have asked me questions and my opinion about the university’s plan,” Lariviere said. “There has been a lot of talk about this pier dating back to 2008. People have questions. I have been consistent with my response.”
During a prior interview with Saco Bay News, Alan Thibault, vice president of operations at UNE, said the university’s pier design was included in a master plan that was approved by the Biddeford Planning Board several years ago.
Delage says the university is only asking to have its proposal reviewed fairly and objectively, like any other applicant that goes to the city for an approval.
“No member of the community should have to be concerned that their applications would be rejected in advance,” Delage said.
If the harbor commission has already stated a position, any appeals by the university could be considered futile acts, Delage said.
“In my opinion, a lot of errors have been made,” Schafer said. “But I think it is absolutely critical to remind everyone that no one – – no one – has said that UNE cannot or should not have a new pier. This entire conversation is about where that new pier should be located. That’s it.”
Tensions about a proposed pier that the University of New England wants to construct on the Saco River prompted Biddeford City Manager James Bennett to remove the city’s harbormaster from the review process of UNE’s proposed pier.
The pending application from UNE has also prompted a former city councilor to raise his own concerns, demanding that the university addresses a “landfill with 23 buried cars” on the school’s campus near the Saco River.
In his May 22 letter to Harbormaster Paul Lariviere, Bennett said the harbormaster has been biased in his review of UNE’s proposal as evidenced by “several” public comments he has made outlining his steadfast objections to the project.
“These comments and other actions have raised the issue regarding your ability to perform your duties objectively,” Bennett wrote in his email to the harbormaster. “It is my conclusion that allowing you to be the administrative hearing officer on the anticipated application would be a mistake.”
Bennett has also removed the assistant harbormaster, Randy Desmaris, from the review process because he was “trained by” Lariviere.
“I am striving for complete fairness, Bennett told Saco Bay News, and I have to err on the side of abundant caution to protect the city, its representatives, residents and the applicant. My goal in all of this is to protect everyone and to ensure the fairest possible review of the application.”
Bennett says he will choose and appoint a special ‘Harbormaster Pro Tem’ for the sole purpose of hearing and deciding on the anticipated application from the university.
According to Alan Thibeault, vice president of operations at the University of New England (UNE), the university is expecting to submit its application directly to the city manager’s office within “the next few days.”
Thiebeault said the proposed pier, which would be located near the university’s Marine Sciences Center, is not something that was recently envisioned.
“This project has been discussed in various aspects for more than a decade,” Thibeault said, pointing out that the pier was part of the university’s master plan, which was first approved by the Biddeford Planning Board in 2008.
Thibeault described the proposed pier as a “vital part to our ongoing marine research program.” He said the university has spent several years rigorously evaluating at least nine different sites for the location of the new pier.
Before UNE can submit approval applications to any other agencies, the project must first be approved by the city’s harbormaster. Although approvals from the planning board, the state and even the federal government will be required, nothing can happen until the harbormaster grants approval.
Lariviere said his objections to the pier are based solely on well-established review criteria when a project could impact navigation, fishing or fowling in a federal channel. Lariviere says he developed an alternative plan for UNE’s pier, but says UNE has “made up its mind.”
At the base of his objections, Lariviere said UNE’s proposal would “encroach on existing moorings.”
Thibeault said he was aware of the harbormaster’s misgivings about the pier, but also said the university was “never presented with any objections or alternatives in writing” from the harbormaster.
Lariviere said he was deeply disappointed by Bennett’s decision and is especially irked by the city manager’s directive, which orders Lariviere “to make no further comments in this regard, public or private.”
Lariviere issued his own press release, and said he will not comply with Bennett’s “unconstitutional order.”
“Did either the mayor, the city attorney or any city councilor authorize the manager to order a Biddeford resident to keep his mouth shut about public business?” Lariviere asked.
Although he is still officially the city’s harbormaster, Lariviere described Bennett’s move as a “purge” on behalf of the university.
“I know Mr. Bennett is working hard for UNE, “Lariviere said. “But now that he’s executed his purge, who will look out for the people of Biddeford?”
Lariviere said he has been aware of UNE’s desire to have a pier on the Saco River since the idea was first discussed several years ago, but says for the time being he will make no further comment about the university’s plans.
“I do plan to be in touch with the mayor and the city council about Mr. Bennett’s attempt to intimidate me,” he said.
Asked what his next move will be, Lariviere shrugged his shoulders and said, “Right now, I don’t know.”
During a telephone interview Wednesday morning, Bennett defended his decision and said he had little choice in the matter. He stressed that the city could not afford even the appearance of impropriety. Bennett also said his removal of Lariviere was “not a disciplinary action, but rather a proactive move to make sure “that all persons, including the applicant, are treated fairly.”
What to do about an old landfill?
Meanwhile, UNE is now facing increasing pressure from a former Biddeford city councilor to address what he claims is a “former landfill with 23 buried automobiles” on the banks of Saco River.
Pieces of buried automobiles can be seen protruding from the shore along the Saco River, just below a parking lot at the University of New England in Biddeford. (Seaver photo)
Kyle Noble, a longtime Hills Beach resident and former city councilor, says the university should take “immediate steps” to remedy that site before any other pier proposals are considered for approval.
Earlier this year, Noble contacted the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to voice his concerns about the site where automobile tires, automotive fenders and other metallic pieces of scrap can be seen protruding from the ground below a parking lot.
According to both Noble and Thibeault, a representative from the DEP came to Biddeford earlier this year to inspect the area where it is obvious that scrap materials were used for fill decades ago.
Both Noble and Thibeault participated in the site walk, and both men say that the site walk did not seem to trigger any significant concerns by the DEP.
As of press time, representatives from the Maine DEP were unavailable for comment.
Thibeault says the university is not ignoring nor trying to “cover up anything about something that happened many, many years ago.”
In fact, Thibeault says the school is actively in the process of developing a remediation effort that will include creating a natural barrier between the landfill and the marshy area of the river bank.
“Frankly, I’m a bit perplexed by Mr. Noble’s press release,” Thibeault said. “He was with us during the site walk with the DEP. I think the timing of his press release is a bit questionable.”
But Noble said he sees the upcoming application for UNE’s new pier as an ideal time to address something that has been ignored for a long time.
“Given the university’s prominent role in trumpeting its own dedication to protecting the Saco River, I would like to respectfully suggest that UNE delay no longer and work diligently to remove the 23 cars that are buried just feet from the Saco River,” Noble wrote in a letter he sent this week to UNE president James Herbert.
Noble said he is not interested in retroactive fines or punishment, but wants to ensure that UNE will live up to its self-described status as a champion of the environment.
“I’ve held my tongue long enough waiting for the correct response,” Noble said. “Now I feel an obligation to let the people of Biddeford know about this. It’s been kept a secret too long.”
Noble said the cars were buried in a “makeshift landfill, unknown to almost all Biddeford residents, is near the town landing and owned by Biddeford citizens.”
Lariviere said he personally witnessed some cars being buried near the spot in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s.
“I’m not too concerned about the buried cars,” the harbormaster said. “But I am concerned that we observed pools of oil sheen on the water near that site during heavy rainfall events.”
Thibeault said the DEP has found no evidence of leaching materials, and said the agency did not consider the site to be a landfill. He did acknowledge that some erosion has occurred over the years, but stressed that any direct remediation effort could negatively impact the surrounding area.
“We can’t just go in and start digging up debris,” Thibeault said. “We are taking a more comprehensive approach, and we’ll be working closely with the DEP, the Saco River Corridor Commission and possibly the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to address and remedy this issue.”
Town Versus Gown?
Biddeford Mayor Marty Grohman said he supported the city manager’s decision. “It’s not something that any of us are thrilled about,” Grohman said. “But we have to ensure that everyone is treated the same, that everyone can get a fair hearing.”
Grohman acknowledged past tensions between the city and the university, saying many of the same tensions can be found in communities with college campuses, including Colby College in Waterville and Bates College in Lewiston.
“I think we have come a long way over the past few years,” Grohman said. “From where I sit, it appears me that the university is more than willing to work with us. We all know that relationship has not always been smooth, but I am reasonably confident that we can work together.”
Thibeault agreed with Grohman.
“We want to be an active and engaged neighbor in this community,” Thibeault said. “The university is absolutely committed to working with the city to address any concerns or issues. In my time here, I have seen tremendous progress over the last 30 years.”
For his part, Lariviere said he felt pushed by Bennett to approve UNE’s proposed pier.
“He called me on my cell phone after one of our meetings with UNE and asked ‘is there any way we can make this thing work?”
Bennett adamantly denies ever saying that or applying any pressure whatsoever for an approval from the harbormaster.
“I did remind him of his statutory duties and requirements, which are the same requirements that I have to follow as a city representative,” Bennett said.
Bennett said before making his decision he consulted the city’s attorney and extensively reviewed court cases in which municipalities lost legal battles because of allegations regarding bias and unfair treatment toward an applicant.
“My job is not always easy or pleasant,” Bennett said. “But it is my job to protect the city and to make that every member of our staff acts in full accordance with all federal, state and local regulations and ordinances. It’s not personal.”
Based on their television commercials, the Corona beer company is now on “a mission to end plastic pollution on our beaches.”
Wait. What? Really?
Despite the message Corona is shamelessly selling, the plastic bottles DID NOT “pollute the beaches.”
Certain humans caused the problem. Lazy, stupid humans are the ones who did not bother to recycle and left their litter on the beach or tossed their plastic containers overboard. It’s littering, not pollution. But that message doesn’t serve Corona’s needs very well.
I get why Corona is on this “mission.” Don’t drink Coca-Cola at the beach, drink our beer in glass bottles instead. It’s rather shameless and somewhat perfunctory PR.
If you want to help clean beaches, great! That’s awesome! Too many assholes litter on beaches, parks and roadways.
But let’s call it what it is. It’s not pollution. It’s littering.
Peel back the curtain. Corona is just trying to change what you drink. Imagine that. A beverage company spending millions of dollars in advertising to talk smack about other beverage companies. Who would have thought?
The wait is over. Biddeford Mayor Marty Grohman is expected today to formally announce his nomination to fill one of the two vacant seats on the city council.
According to multiple sources, Grohman has selected Neva Gross to take over the Ward Five council seat that was vacated by the resignation of former Councilor Julian Schlaver last month.
Neva Gross/Facebook
Schlaver, who ran unopposed for the seat in the Nov. 2023 municipal election, announced in April that he would be stepping down for “personal reasons.’
On Tuesday, May 7, the council voted unanimously to officially accept Schlaver’s resignation.
Ward Five includes the city’s downtown area, including the sprawling complex of renovated mill buildings and densely packed neighborhoods near the city’s core.
Gross, 49, said she is excited to serve on the council. She has lived in Biddeford for roughly 18 months and resides at the Lincoln Lofts. She graduated last year from the University of New England’s School of Pharmacy and holds a doctorate’s degree in pharmacology.
Grohman said he was pleased that several people expressed interest in serving on the council.
Others who expressed interest in the Ward Five post include Syed Zafar, a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals, Assessment Review Board and the city’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Committee; and Dominic Deschambault, a former School Committee member who now serves on the board of directors for the Biddeford Housing Authority.
According to the city’s charter, the city council must vote to confirm the mayor’s nominee. The council is expected to vote on that nomination this evening during a special council meeting.
The appointment of Gross to the city council will still leave one vacancy on the council, however.
On April 9, former Ward 4 councilor Bobby Mills resigned his seat roughly 48 hours after he was arrested and charged with operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol.
The timing of Mills resignation triggered the need for a special election.
According to the city’s charter, if a member of the council resigns within 180 days of the last election, a special election must be held to fill that vacancy. That election will take place on June 11, the date when voters will also decide whether to approve the school budget.
Schlaver’s resignation, however, was not formally accepted until this week, giving the mayor the power to appoint a replacement councilor.
Although Mills told Saco Bay News in April that he was interested in running to capture the seat that he resigned, only one resident actually turned in nomination papers with the required number of signatures to be on the ballot.
Dylan Doughty/Contributed photo
Dylan Doughty, who was appointed earlier this year as an alternate member of the Biddeford Planning Board, said he is “looking forward” to serving on the city council.
Doughty, 32, is a native of Arkansas who relocated to Maine three years ago for his job. He said he “loves the city of Biddeford” and is “excited about the opportunity to represent his neighbors.”
Doughty is employed as a senior buyer at General Dynamics in Saco. He has an MBA degree from Western Colorado University.
During a brief interview on Wednesday evening, Gross said she has “fallen in love” with the city.
“I came here during a blizzard to interview at the university, and I just felt instantly connected,” she said.
Over the past few months, Gross says she has been working to connect with her new hometown, including volunteer work with the Seeds of Hope Neighborhood Resource Center.
“I don’t have any political bias,” she said. “I like to be transparent and fair-minded. I know I’m stepping into a process that is already moving forward, but I do have the energy to jump in and see how I can help.”
Grohman said that he and Council President Liam LaFountain have personally interviewed each person who expressed interest in the Ward Five seat over the last two weeks.
“It’s gratifying to see the level of interest in community service,” Grohman said. “I look forward to working with [Gross] over the remainder of the term,” Mayor Grohman said. “Her unique experiences, like her work in the field of unhoused services, managing a popular restaurant here in Biddeford, and her service in the US Army, will bring a new and valuable perspective to our city council.”
LESSONS IN MEDIOCRITY | OUTLAW JOURNALIST 