I just got off the phone with a resident of Fryeburg – the town that’s been under legal assault by Nestle/Poland Spring for the last six years. The news isn’t good.

After a lawsuit and four appeals, Nestle’s legions of legal talent finally succeeded in overturning the citizen appeal of the town’s original planning commission permit (written largely by a lobbyist for the trucking industry who later recused himself from the board and was caught passing information to Nestle via email).

You can download a .pdf file of the court’s decision here (look for the Nestle vs Fryeburg cast in mid-page).

I can’t tell you if this is the end of the road for Fryeburg’s citizen partisans, but I can tell you that where Nestle Waters goes, local control of water, roads and zoning seemingly disappears. More to come.

Invest 341 seconds of your day and watch the hard-hitting trailer for Tapped – a bottled water documentary. Note especially the references to Fryeburg and Nestle-branded bottled water (Poland Spring, Arrowhead, etc).

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72MCumz5lq4[/youtube]

The money quote? Jim Wilfong of Maine lays it on the line:

“We are the children of revolutionary war solidiers, and we are not going to give this up without a fight”

When you’re done, make sure to forward this trailer to others.

I just sent the February issue of the StopNestleWaters.org eNewsletter, and if you haven’t signed up for it yet, consider doing so (simply use the sign-up box in the left sidebar).

Those who haven’t signed up can see the February eNewsletter here.

This issue’s a short one, and profiles what lies ahead for Nestle-affected communities like McCloud, Shapleigh, Fryeburg and others.

Also, it makes note of an upcoming broadcast on a popular fly fishing show focusing on the McCloud River – and Nestle’s threat to the blue-ribbon trout fishery (full disclosure; I appear in the episode, as does some footage from Nestle’s disastrous “community” meeting in McCloud). It should be fun (Outdoor Channel, Friday 2/13; 9:30 PM).

With Nestle/Poland Springs facing growing opposition in Maine, you knew the self-righteous whining was sure to follow. And sure enough, it has.

From the Portland Press Herald: Challenges piling up for Poland Spring

After 146 years of doing business in Maine, Poland Spring is fighting battles on three fronts these days — over test wells in Shapleigh, a proposed tax that would cost the company $7 million a year, and a state Supreme Court case over a pumping station in Fryeburg.

Actually, there are a couple more fights in progress, and that’s ignoring the looming fight over truck/traffic issues that will eventually (mark my words) come to the fore.

Still, that doesn’t prevent Nestle’s operative on the ground from voicing a regrettably amusing lament:

“Where have we done harm or where have we caused issues that have caused people to take drastic steps like this?” asked Mark Dubois, natural resource director for Poland Spring, a subsidiary of Nestle Waters North America.

We’re going to speak slowly here so our friend Mark can follow.

Mark, your company is slow-roasting the town of Fryeburg with your five-suits-and-counting legal assault (and because you can afford expensive attorneys, your predatory multinational could easily strip the town of control over its own development).

In several instances you’ve apparently tried to cut water extraction deals before citizens could notice.

In fact, I compiled a list of reasons why small towns don’t trust Nestle (though you’ve created new reasons you frisky corporate types, and I haven’t updated the list yet), and perhaps you’d like to review that list here.

Still, it’s hard not return to the subject of Fryeburg, where your predatory company acts as if it’s entitled to build a truck loading station in a residential despite what the town’s planning commission and citizens seem to want.

In fact, Mark, I’m going to make a bold prediction here; if Nestle wins it suit and forces itself on the tiny town of Fryeburg, your troubles in Maine – and I say this with a great deal of sincerity – are only beginning.

I received this via email – the story of Maine residents suffering an often-ignored impact of Nestle/Poland Spring’s water bottling plants, and the indifference of Nestle/Poland Spring’s representative.

That impact? Truck traffic. Lots of it. But I’ll let them tell their story:

****************************

I am writing to express our concern regarding more trucks and traffic generated by Poland Springs. We have read with interest the articles regarding the legal battle that Western Maine Residents for Rural Living is fighting against more Poland Springs activity.

Almost all the publicity that we have seen is focused on Fryeburg and its immediate surrounding area. My husband and I live on Rte. 11, Steep Falls, Cumberland County.

When Poland Springs tanker trucks are using this route to the Hollis bottling plant, we have trucks passing at least every half hour, 24 hours a day. In the summer, when I assume water demand is greater, we have at least one truck pass by every 15 minutes, occasionally every 5 or 6 minutes, 24 hours a day.

Our little stretch of road is Main Street in the village of Steep Falls, with a speed limit of 25 mph. Most houses are over 100 years old and are no more than 15 to 20 feet from the narrow road bed. We have no sidewalks. If two trucks cross the bridge in opposite directions it gives them 12″ of clearance on either side.

Often they will air brake to a stop, because two vehicles of that size cannot cross the bridge at the same time with that little clearance. Frequently there are crews out repairing the bridge that was built in 1936.

This has been an ongoing problem for us and our neighbors, as well as our neighbors on Rte. 113. I have had several meetings and phone conversations with Mark Dubois who makes many promises, but rarely delivers.

After three plus years of calling, and tracking the speed of the trucks with our own calibrated speed gun, we have finally gotten most of the Poland Springs trucks to travel at the speed limit, at least when they think someone may be watching. At night, the speed increases.

We are terrified that if Nestle wins this battle, we will have even more truck traffic rattling our houses, cracking our foundations and ceilings and causing a danger to any pedestrian on our street.

We wanted to say that the traffic problem is quite widespread beyond the Fryeburg area, and that other communities are unhappy with the truck traffic as it is now and, of course, the possibility of even more commercial truck traffic on our very narrow rural roads.

If we can be of any help in your battle against the Nestle Corporation increasing its hold on our small towns and lifestyles, please let us know.

Sincerely,
Janet and Michael Blanck

The folks of Fryeburg aren’t enamored of the idea of a 24/7 truck loading station in a residentially zoned area, but when Nestle Waters of North America is involved, local control over water, streets and lifestyle dies not with a bang, but with a lawsuit.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47_e3VWKJgc[/youtube]

As is often the case, the argument ultimately doesn’t revolve around what’s right or reasonable (I’m suggesting a 24/7 truck loading station in a residential area – running 50 trucks per day – isn’t a particularly reasonable land use).

Instead, it revolves around interpretation of of ambiguous passages of the law – a practice similar to divining the future via goat entrails.

What’s clear is Nestle’s “good corporate neighbor” PR spin is a facade; a truck loading station returns little to the town of Fryeburg save a small bump in property taxes. Yet the downside is clear; Fryeburg “enjoys” trucks rumbling along at all hours of the day or night, diesel fumes, the noise, etc.

Nestle knows this, and it’s treating Fryeburg in the same manner it treats other small, rural towns who don’t roll over and play dead – they release the legal hounds, who are better funded than their citizen counterparts.

No matter how the decision goes in Fryeburg, the real lesson has already been learned.

Nestle Waters/Poland Spring continued their campaign against the tiny Maine town of Fryeburg, arguing the town had no right to block the permitting of a 24/7 truck loading station in a residentially zoned area.

While the outcome of the arguments won’t be known for some time, the effects of Nestle’s suit (and four appeals) are already being felt; Fryeburg’s plight has been cited by many who contend Nestle isn’t the good corporate neighbor they suggest they are – especially when it comes to usurping local control of planning and water decisions.

This story via the iStockAnalyst:

Anderson, an attorney for the group Western Maine Residents for Rural Living, said the Planning Board made a mistake when it granted the approval in 2005.

Anderson said the proposed pumping station clearly does not conform to the comprehensive plan for that section of town, which calls for low-impact uses such as in-home businesses.

“This is a 24-hour-a-day, 365-day-a-year trucking operation,” Anderson said. “The company was trying to fit a round peg into a square hole.”

Our best to the citizens of Fryeburg.

It’s a couple of very big days for Nestle Waters of North America (and those who oppose them).

Tonight (the 12th), the McCloud Services District’s agenda includes an item from Nestle proposing the district once again enter into contract negotiations with Nestle (at the end of this post, we included the statement presented by the Save Our Waters Coalition).

Despite the fact that Nestle has completed no flow studies and almost no environmental monitoring, they’re trying to rush back into negotiations for water – when nobody knows how much water is really available.

The problem, of course, is that Nestle believes the water that enters Squaw Creek and the world-renowned McCloud River is “wasted” – the kind of thinking guaranteed to make a real fisheries biologist soil his shorts.

After Nestle’s disastrous public meeting in McCloud (to read about that nightmare on wheels, click here), Nestle announced they weren’t going to bother with any further meetings, a move which suggests Nestle’s newfound “committment” to community involvement in the negotiation process is – like its committment to stewardship of the watershed – largely illusory.

Big Day for Freyburg

Tomorrow (the 13th), Nestle’s suit against Fryeburg – where Nestle’s trying to force its 24/7 truck loading station into a residentially zoned part of Fryeburg – will be heard again in Maine’s State Supreme Court.

Those who are counting along at home just ran out of fingers; this is the fourth appeal of the original lawsuit (that adds up to five), and we can only guess that Nestle’s aim wasn’t so much to win the legal case as it was to bankrupt their opponents, winning not by being right, but by default.

You’ve got to believe a loss for Nestle here would be the end of the line for their loading station, but they’ve made some mind-boggling moves in the past (in a prior suit, they argued their right to grow market share superseded Fryeburg’s right to say no).

In truth, Nestle’s incredibly heavy-handed legal maneuvering in Fryeburg has become something of an embarrassment for the company – a recent ad in a nearby newspaper largely pretended the whole affair simply wasn’t taking place – yet another triumph of Nestle’s PR over reality.

Hopefully, we’ll hear from folks at both events, and as soon as we know anything, we’ll pass it along.

**********

Oops, forgot to post this after I said I would:

Statement the Protect Our Waters Coalition to be read at the January 12^th 2009 McCloud Community Services District Board Meeting

Honorable Board Members,

Tonight I urge you to think about what is in the best interest of McCloud. We all want prosperity and a thriving community without sacrificing our area’s magnificent natural resources. Fortunately we now have a clean slate and can determine what is truly best for McCloud.

Good things are happening in McCloud right now. In the past few months while we’ve had the chance to breath we’ve started talking to each other and working together. We are coming up with good ideas and real economic opportunities. From the Chamber hosting Willits, to the Michael Shuman community meeting, to the Business Idea Contest to JEDI’s survey–good things are happening.

But then we come back to the Nestle issue and with it the feeling of our community being divided.  While the Kearns and West meeting was uncomfortable, the statements from the meeting, and their meeting summary show that our community does not have enough information to begin negotiations on a new contract with Nestle now.  How could we make a commitment to contract details right now?  We don’t know any more now about the impacts of a plant on our community than we did 5 years ago.

McCloud has a second chance to explore whether the idea of a Nestle plant in our community is a good one, and a second chance to do it the right way – with real public process, good science, and sound economic analysis of its likely impact on our community. We have other economic opportunities for this town’s future as well.  Saying No to Nestle now would enable us to build upon those opportunities as a united community.

Going into a negotiating process with Nestle now is premature.  Nestle should complete background studies on our water, air quality, historic preservation, and traffic among other issues, and let those studies inform the project description they present to the community.  We shouldn’t waste MCSD time now on discussing a contract negotiation process with Nestle when we lack so much information.

If it were me, I would just say ‘no thanks’ to Nestle now, like other communities have across the country, because mistrust of Nestle is the big ‘elephant’ in the room. Considering Nestle fired Kearns and West and is planning to host their own meeting about their revised project description it seems they are going back to business as usual.  It is hard for me to see the trust issues going away.

But at least, I would give our community time to discuss what we want, and tell Nestle “don’t call us, we’ll call you.”

It’s rare when a Nestle Waters of North America spokesperson speaks in a public forum where their conclusions can be questioned, but Nestle/Poland Spring operative Mark Dubois posted several comments to this Maine blog – including one where Nestle’s spin plays out in all its glory.

He positions Poland Spring as a Maine company (it’s been a Nestle “brand” since the company was purchased by Nestle), and mischaracterizes opposition to the Fryeburg loading station thusly:

Any suggestion that Fryeburg has repeatedly said no to a truck loading station ignores the fact that the planning board approved our application in 2005 after a lengthy process and thoroughly written decision after numerous public hearings. The appeal of that decision by
a small number of opponents in town is what has triggered the series of appeals since that time. The matter is now pending in the Maine Law Court and everyone is hoping that the Court’s decision will put this matter to rest.

My response to Nestle’s spin?

First, the original permit was issued in a way that suggests poor public process (which follows Nestle around like a shadow). It was written by one person on the planning commission – the same person who later secretly advised Nestle what was happening in the town via email – a relationship Nestle/Poland Spring (wasn’t it you, sir?) denied even
existed before a reporter produced the emails.

The original appeal was hardly the work of a “small number of opponents” (the same characterization used by Nestle elsewhere to minimize opposition). Those opponents “won” that appeal because a truck loading station doesn’t belong in a residentially zoned area, and further, that victory didn’t somehow “trigger” a string of appeals – Nestle/Poland Springs filed a lawsuit and four subsequent appeals (the fourth is being heard right now).

And yes, Nestle has lost every one.

If anyone wishes to see YouTube video of Nestle/Poland Spring’s lawyers arguing before the Maine Supreme Court that their right to grow market share superceded the town’s right of local control, then simply go here.

Finally, Mr. Dubois, as for your statement that: “The matter is now pending in the Maine Law Court and everyone is hoping that the Court’s decision will put this matter to rest.”

This could have been put to rest a long time ago if Nestle hadn’t tried bully the town of Fryeburg through legal means, and yet you act as if your multinational corporation somehow has no choice in the matter.

This could all end right now, Mr. Dubois – if only Nestle/Poland Spring would drop its lawsuit. Nobody’s forcing your multinational to continue its lawsuit, and what’s clear is that Nestle is willing to use extraordinary legal means to deny Fryeburg the right to say “no” to a truck loading station in residentially zoned areas.

If anyone has anything to add to Mr. Dubois’ perspective, feel free to visit Seavey’s blog, read the string of comments, and leave one of your own (respectful) comment.

nestle, nestle water, nestle waters of north america, poland spring, maine, fryeburg

Powered by ScribeFire.

In an attempt to protect its up-for-reneweal well permit in Denmark, Maine (the town next to Fryeburg and the source of the water Nestles wants to pump to a Fryeburg loading station), Nestle/Poland Spring have taken to running regular advertising, a close look at which is illuminating:

Note the use of “local” throughout the ad. It’s a recurring theme with Poland Springs: “We’re a Maine company” or “we’re a local company” messages abound, ignoring the fact that Nestle is the world’s largest food and beverage corporation.

Make no mistake; the profits from the sale of the water extracted in Denmark don’t stay local – they flow directly to corporate headquarters, and the town’s water resource is practically given away in return for… well, not even jobs in this case (it’s a well).

Defining $26,000 as “significant” tax revenue is a stretch, even by
small town standards. In truth, wells and loading stations deliver few
benefits to local economies (unless you define truck traffic, noise and
diesel pollution as “benefits”).

Our pick for “Nestle’s Most Astonishing Doublespeak of the Day?”

Given that one town away – in Fryeburg – Nestle/Poland Spring are actively trying to usurp local control through extraordinary legal means (they’ve sued/appealed the Fryeburg Planning Commission’s “no” decision five times).

At one point they argued that their right to grow market share superseded the town’s right to say “no.”

Respecting local control?

Only when it’s Nestle pulling the strings.

nestle, nestle waters, nestle water, bottled water, Poland Spring, maine, denmark, fryeburg

Powered by ScribeFire.

If a Hollywood movie was ever to be made about Nestle Waters of North America, the tiny town of Fryeburg, ME would nicely fill the role of a compelling underdog – the tiny town that stood up to the predatory multinational.

Nestle has sued the rural town of Fryeburg five times in an attempt to install a truck loading station in a residential area, and while Nestle never intended to do so, they’ve created an Alamo-esque rallying point for those fighting Nestle’s depredations in other areas.

They’ve also created $39,000 in legal costs, $21,000 of which need to be paid off. From the Water in the News blog:

At each and every board or court appearance (click for Timeline), Western Maine Residents for Rural Living has countered Nestlé’s legal army with reply briefs. We are forced by Nestlé to engage them in this arena which by both its complexities, costs and time would be overwhelming for most. We have stood our ground and have stayed the course. We have been fortunate to have one of the best law firms in Maine representing us, Verrill Dana PLLC and its partner Atty. Scott Anderson. Forty months of litigation and no permit issued.

Western Maine Residents for Rural Living have done much more than just fight a local land use issue. Their persistence has brought attention to a nationwide battle with Nestlé. Momentum, resolve, persistence and commitment–whatever you call it–Fryeburg has demonstrated it can be done.

In the past, I’ve suggested that Nestle’s bizarre, over-the-top
string of lawsuits against Fryeburg weren’t so much designed to win a
legal challenge as they were to bankrupt those opposing their
residentially sited truck loading zone – and to serve as a warning to
other small towns thinking of opposing Nestle.

Today, I stick by that analysis, and fear that unless some money is quickly raised, Nestle could win this one.

If you want to help, this is the contact information posted in the original blog post:

Checks should be made payable to: “Verrill Dana, PLLC”
Please note in the memo: “WMRRL”

Mail to:
T.Scott Gamwell
30 Hemlock Bridge Road
Fryeburg, Maine 04037

Thank you. Contacts: (207) 935-3811 and librarianef@hotmail.com (Emily Fletcher, Fryeburg).

nestle, fryeburg, bottled water, nestle waters of north america

Powered by ScribeFire.

In an ad run in the Bridgton News (no online edition), Nestle Waters of North America tries to pretend its lawsuit and four subsuquent appeals (including a hearing before the Maine State Supreme Court) against the rural town of Fryeburg

I recently posted a story about a residents’ meeting in Denmark, where Nestle’s well permit is up for renewal. (Denmark is the source of the water Nestle wants to pump to a loading station in a residential section of Fryeburg, the permit for which has been repeatedly denied by the town).

Nestle – unhappy with the growing opposition to their wells in Denmark – bought an ad in the newspaper, suggesting they alone had a grasp of the “facts,” while opposition information was “fiction.”

To get a sense of their grasp of the facts, look at #5 in the ad below:

To paraphrase Nestle, “the facts are” that Fletcher’s statement is accurate, if a little forward-looking. Nestle’s permit for a loading station was first approved by Fryeburg’s planning commission, but then rejected because there’s no way you can pretend 100 heavy truck trips per day wouldn’t have a substantial impact on a residential area.

Nestle’s lawsuit and four subsuquent appeals – one of which was argued in front of the Maine Supreme Court – can’t be construed as anything but suing the town five times, and as Fletcher noted, another appeal is likely.

Finally, in #6 in the ad above, Nestle characterized opposition to their loading station as being the work of a “vocal minority” – an assertion which ignores the moratorium on bulk water export passed by Freyburg’s voters 467 to 304.

By what math does 467 to 304 work out to a minority?

Perhaps in Nestle’s corporate world, pretending something isn’t happening is good enough, but rural, small town America has a little more common sense than that.

If any of our Fryeburg/Denmark area readers has feedback about the ad’s reception in either town, feel free to post it in the comments section below. We’d love to hear from you.

We leave you with YouTube video of Nestle/Poland Spring’s argument before the Maine State Supreme Court, where they apparently suggest their right to grow market share supercedes local control of water, planning, noise and traffic:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glKQlsTdrFk[/youtube]

nestle, nestle waters of north america, fryeburg, denmark, bottled water, poland spring

Powered by ScribeFire.