<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Paul Goldberg and I went to the Kittery Port Authority meeting last night, and were disappointed in the comments from the Authority members relative to our moorings. This issue arose because they thought the Corps of Engineers had ruled that our moorings were in the Federal Navigation Project (“FNP”) and needed to be removed. We had previously met with the harbormaster and showed him the resolution letter from the COE, and he presented this to the board. Unfortunately this opened a can of worms There were several comments from members, specifically Steve Lawrence indicating that they thought they should take our moorings. I did speak about the history, and clearly indicated that we were in compliance with the COE’s regulation as we were grandfathered.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Unfortunately this did not settle the matter, and they have scheduled a discussion at the next port authority meeting (June 12<sup>th</sup>) . I did speak to the Chairwoman, Kelly Philbrook who indicated that she did not think they had the authority to simply “take” the moorings, and she didn’t think they had the votes to do so. I indicated that while we were more than willing to work with the Port Authority, I had an obligation to take appropriate action, including legal action, to protect the rights of the members of PYC.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I will add this to the agenda for our next meeting, but in the meantime, I have asked P/C Goldberg and P/C Gebow to begin looking into our options, including an informal conversation with our lawyer about how to approach the matter. I suggest that an appropriate approach would be to ask Dana Bisby, our Lawer to draft a letter to the Port Authority asking them to specify the rules or regulations under which they could “seize” our moorings, and to put them on notice that we are prepared to defend our rights under law to whatever extent is necessary. I do not think a “soft” approach will work at this point. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Former Port Authority chairman Milton Hall was also in attendance and spoke in our defense and warned the authority that this matter would likely end up in court if they tried to act illegally. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Please let me know y our thoughts on this matter and let’s discuss it on Thursday.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><br><br>Dan<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>