Chief clears air on vehicle donation

To the editor:
    I recently read the letter apparently written by Mr. Philbrick in the Aroostook Republican. In this letter I believe that Mr. Philbrick and at least one other person felt they were “clarifying” the donation of a vehicle to the town of Limestone.     The 2003 Chevrolet Blazer, which was given to the town of Limestone by the Loring Development Authority, was involved in an accident last year during a whiteout storm. With this in mind the vehicle was not worth the $1,500 that was listed, this vehicle had already been requested by me to be replaced in the spring due to the mechanical issues of the transmission and the mileage on the vehicle being approximately 115,000. From my experience a vehicle with that mileage and mechanical issues at bid might possibly sell for $1,500 if not wrecked. So an amount paid by the insurance company of $3,600 was far more than the actual value of the vehicle.
    The 2006 Ford Explorer that the department is currently running has an approximate value of $12,000. Yes, the vehicle had been “wrecked,” but was not turned over to the town wrecked as implied in Mr. Philbrick’s letter. It was turned over cosmetically completed and mechanically sound. Was there a savings to the community with this agreement? Yes, a savings of approximately $8,000 and with these hard economic times we are facing I think that was a benefit to the town.
    As for the “rolling billboard,” every vehicle that is from a dealership has had their decal on the back – Caribou Ford, Cote’s Auto and Augusta Ford are a few I can remember this department having. As for the front plate issue, the original registration plate was destroyed in the accident and the department is continuing to wait for the replacement from the state of Maine. Was there a donation? Yes.
    You can look at something any way you want and make is seem right or wrong. A donation is a donation either complete or partial. Would the community rather spend $24,000 on a new 2008 Ford Explorer or have the chance to receive something just as good for far less. I think the reasonable citizen would agree with what was done.