Mike Zboray. Steven Juskewitch. Annlinn Kruger. Charles Sidman.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR POLICY

We always welcome letter submissions to The Bar Harbor Story.

For details on our policy, please visit our about page and scroll down or just visit here.

As with all newspapers, the beliefs, opinions, and viewpoints expressed by the writers of letters to the editor and included here do not necessarily reflect the beliefs, opinions, and viewpoints or official policies of The Bar Harbor Story.

Similarly, we do not fact check those beliefs, opinions, or viewpoints that are espoused in letters to the editor.

We do not have an exclusive submission policy. That just means if your letter is published here, it is fine by us if it’s also published in other places and vice versa. We will print letters related to local elections that involve candidate discussion only up to one week prior to that election.

All the past letters to the editor can be found on the Substack site here.

A recent poll of our readers showed that most respondents prefer just one letter per letter writer a month. This is now our policy.

---

THE AOS 91 REORGANIZATION VOTE

To the Members of the MDIRSS/AOS 91 Community:

First and foremost, I want to express my deepest gratitude to the past and present members of the Reorganization Planning Committee (RPC). Throughout this complex process over the past two years, each member came to the table with an open mind, tireless dedication, and an unwavering commitment to keeping our students as their north star. The time, energy, and care they invested on behalf of our schools and towns represent public service at its finest.

While the outcome of the vote demonstrates that this specific proposal is not the path forward our communities chose, the results underscore an important reality: the conversation about our shared educational future must continue.

The challenge before us remains how to design an educational system that is nimble, efficient, and resilient enough to meet the challenges we face head-on. Our core goal has never wavered: ensuring that every student across our coastal island communities receives the high-quality education and support needed to thrive in high school and beyond, while ensuring that similarly situated taxpayers are treated fairly and equitably in sharing the cost of education.

Before the RPC concludes its work and officially disbands, the committee will prepare a final report. This document will detail the insights gained throughout this multi-year process—capturing what went well, what could have been communicated better, and what key questions remain. We hope this record will serve as a valuable foundation and roadmap for our town select boards, school boards, and community members as future discussions take shape.

Thank you to everyone who attended meetings, asked thoughtful questions, and participated in this vote. Engaging in these important conversations is vital to the health of our towns, and your continued voice and involvement will be essential as we work together to support our students and our schools.

Respectfully,

Mike Zboray, Superintendent of Schools

---

THE 2026 DA ELECTION

I’m grateful to my family and to everyone who voted regardless of how they voted!

Despite differing opinions, I am confident that my campaign focused positively on me rather than negatively on him. Congratulations to him. I hope the constructive criticism during the campaign will help with fulfilling his duties and responsibilities in the future even if it means making some changes. Best wishes and good luck!

Despite press criticism, I continue to believe that every election should involve at least two candidates for each office. My belief is always irresistibly stronger when I am the better candidate.

Thank you all, critics included.

Steven Juskewitch, Esquire #272

Ellsworth

---

PLATNER PAVED THE WAY

As Democrats celebrate Troy Jackson’s senate win, thanks are due the Graham Platner campaign for paving the way. Platner’s New Deal message resonated with a broad spectrum of Mainers, his indefatigable campaigning brought volunteers across the state into the process, and his staff’s determined ground game got out the vote to deliver the largest Democratic senate primary win in Maine history. After the campaign was derailed (and in the absence of national, state, and local Democratic party organization) Platner staff and volunteers worked to hold the coalition together and keep up the momentum in their communities. The evolution and effectiveness of this people powered movement deserves recognition.

Annlinn Kruger

Bar Harbor

---

RESPONSE TO BAR HARBOR STORY ARTICLE OF NOVEMBER 4

This letter is written not to dispute with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) a possible motion that has been announced but not yet filed by the Town of Bar Harbor for dismissal of our water rate complaint. Rather, it is meant to reassure fellow citizens who were alarmed by the incomplete article in the BHS based solely on the transcript of a recent PUC session and reflecting primarily the remarks of the Town’s attorney. In brief and to my neighbors (as well as the Town), the impending motion to dismiss cannot succeed in any rational or legitimate universe, so “Bring It On!”

The Town’s attorney, Mr. Jonathan Dunitz of Verrill Dana, stated that dismissal will be sought on grounds of “whether there’s actual standing” for myself and the other complainants, and “the fact that there’s – nothing has been provided to prove that the division’s rates are unfair or inequitable.” Both claims are blatant distortions and manifestly untrue.

Regarding the first issue (that of legal standing, that our Town routinely resorts to, wastefully and with citizens’ own money, whenever it is in trouble and seeks to avoid rather than address the merits of a dispute), PUC’s rules for our 10-Person Complaint require only “10 individuals with separate utility accounts.” Nothing enables the Town and its lawyers to manufacture additional categories or criteria, and then hold complainants answerable to their own inventions.

On the second issue (the claimed lack of evidence that the division’s rates are unfair and inequitable), nothing further needs to be produced. The Town’s own figures demonstrate variances in the cost of water per unit to selected accounts of .016 to .113 (7.1x) in the past, and .034 to .152 (4.5x) going forward under their proposed new rates. Further, our officials readily admit that the residential 70% of water customers account for 23% of total water use, but have paid 40% of the system’s costs in the past and still supposedly 36% going forward. What more is needed to document unfairness and inequity, and by what standards? If citizens and their government disagree, voters should decide in an election!

To the enduring “credit” (or otherwise) of our Town officials, their lawyers and law firm, it must be recognized that attorneys are allowed enormous latitude to fabricate, distort and misrepresent on behalf of their clients in our legal system (even if all clearly do not do so.) Do our elected or employed officials have the same carte blanche? Last week’s election would seem to indicate not, so everyone please stay tuned and know that we will continue to hold our Town officials’ feet to the fire, on multiple issues.

Charles Sidman

Bar Harbor