Dear Residents,

On Jan. 14, Planning Board Chair Minerich denied Boothbay Harbor Waterfront Preservation's request for his recusal. A second Planning Board member then made a motion to disqualify Minerich. The remaining two members voted against the motion, and it failed two to one.

Despite having had a month to review the matter, Preservation's allegations regarding Minerich's personal abuse of the Land Use Ordinance (LUO) were unaddressed. The sole exception was a comment by one board member that, whether or not the allegations are true, they are irrelevant to Minerich's participation in this case. That conclusion overlooks the central issue raised in the motion.

The alleged violations occurred while Minerich was simultaneously acting as general contractor, building permit applicant, and Planning Board member during construction of his primary residence. If the allegations are true, Minerich either does not understand the LUO or has demonstrated abject disregard for it. Either circumstance is disqualifying.

By ignoring these allegations, the Planning Board's vote undermines the integrity of the review process and creates an appearance of hypocrisy that a "sweep-it-under-the-rug" approach inevitably produces. Can Minerich now credibly inform an applicant that an application is incomplete, or that a roof or basement is illegal? All comment from Preservation and the public was disallowed, preventing this issue from being emphasized. Chair Minerich had the authority to allow public comment.

On Dec. 16, the town manager was formally notified of egregious LUO violations at 51 Union Street. The complete motion, including photographic evidence, is posted on Preservation's Facebook page. The alleged violations include unpaid and dramatically underpaid permit fees, an illegal roof, an illegal basement, multiple floodplain violations, a grossly incomplete application, and missing permits. Photographs show an excavator trenching through the floodplain for drainage installation.

No evidence of a DEP/NRPA permit or a local Floodplain Development permit was located.

While this was happening, Preservation was in the midst of a six-month stop-work order for an erosion-control retaining wall that barely encroached into the floodplain. DEP and FEMA were promptly involved.

When LUO violations are brought to the town's attention, the code enforcement officer has a duty to investigate and act under LUO provisions 170-101.11 1(2)(a) and (b). Preservation is well acquainted with these provisions. For three of the past four years, Preservation has been under formal stop-work orders-or under threat of them-if work proceeded.

In contrast, the town has shown no apparent inclination to investigate or act in the case of Minerich. After three years, the building permit for 51 Union Street expired on Jan. 10, 2026, pursuant to LUO 170-101.11 (F). Nevertheless, contractor vehicles continue to appear at the site. Has the DEP been notified of the violations?

This reflects the starkly disparate application and enforcement of the LUO that Preservation has observed since August 2021, when an abutter began repeatedly demanding stop-work orders at the Park.

An immediate stop-work order and a new building permit application are warranted at 51 Union Street.