Although the selectmen in Lyman have stayed out of the headlines of late, voters at a Special Town Meeting last week made some waves.
Voters approved paying resident Margery Sanborn $18,500 to settle her claim of property damage from alleged contamination of her well caused by the town’s road salt, albeit with a caveat that she cannot seek further restitution from the town.
While their intentions may be to protect taxpayers, inserting such language will not likely offer much protection for the town and is not a neighborly action to take against Sanborn.
It seems that if residents were not pleased with the terms of the agreement, they should have voted it down and had the settlement revised ”“ and get Sanborn and her lawyer to sign off on the change.
Sanborn is a resident of South Waterboro Road, where the town’s salt shed is located. She claims salt seeps into her well with the movement around the salt shed and town’s property. She plans to install a 500-foot deep well instead of the 75-foot deep well she currently uses, but has no guarantee from the drilling company or town that the salt will not contaminate that well also.
Going forward, if salt problems continue to plague Sanborn she may decide to pursue further legal action.
The text of the warrant article stating that Sanborn cannot pursue further damages may not keep her from doing so, and certainly would not protect the town from paying legal fees to defend challenges.
Also at issue was who may be liable for the salt intrusion in Sanborn’s water supply.
Resident Roger “Buzzy” Grant proposed that the town attempt to get restitution from the contractors who bring the road salt to the shed, for spilling it where it could contaminate the area, but an amendment he proposed failed ”“ and rightfully so.
The town would have difficulty proving that salt issues are from spills and probably does not have any documentation to support such an assertion.
While legal issues like this are unpleasant, they are a reality, and it seems leaving the specifics to attorneys is Lyman’s best bet. And if voters are not satisfied with a proposal brought forward, they should vote against it and send town officials back to the drawing board.
Going forward, the town may also be well served to invest in a better salt shed and containment equipment rather than paying costly legal and restitution fees if the new well is not the answer to Sanborn’s problem.
Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ
Today’s editorial was written by City Editor Robyn Burnham on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski by calling 282-1535, Ext. 322, or via e-mail at kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
