Dear Editor:

I, for one, am not convinced that John O’Connell’s comments published 3/14/22 in this newspaper regarding the Eastside Waterfront Park’s actions are accurate. Enthusiastic, yes; but accurate, no. I do not believe, for example, that the Boothbay Harbor Waterfront Preservation team’s plans have been completely “transparent.” I am at a loss as to how this project will be properly maintained in perpetuity with the relatively small maintenance budget that has been allocated. Does the team really understand how much money it takes to run and maintain a splash pool based water park, in particular in the harsh Maine environmental conditions? And If the maintenance budget falls short, then where does the burden fall? 

Nor do I agree that the plans have been consistent. I understand the plans have changed several times (e.g., splash pool size and location). And it is now my understanding that Maine DEP has repeatedly warned the Planning Board that this project is non-compliant in regards to shoreline zoning.

Finally, there has not been much published or discussed about liability. Is the Waterfront Preservation team prepared to shoulder the liability costs when the first person “from away” sues Boothbay Harbor for $1M? And the next? And the next?

I completely support a beautiful park with green grass, trees, picnic tables and the like (and with commensurate lower operating costs, maintenance costs and lower liability exposure). But I am not on board with a splash pool-based park. I hope others can see this logic as well.

Matt Crandall 

South Portland