Noise pollution in Lime Rock

The recent war of words between Lime Rock Park owner Skip Barber and some nearby residents has escalated into a weekly show. Letters to the editor of this newspaper are followed by more letters from the two parties and their supporters. Both sides have taken out half-page display ads featuring photos of the park before and after the cleanup of the waste that prompted the spat. It has surely come to the point that the two sides should be communicating directly, rather than indirectly through the media, in order to efficiently resolve their disagreements.

As is often the case in such tit-for-tat disputes, it is difficult to get at the truth. But a few things seem clear: The debris has been cleaned up and, except for one minor infraction, Lime Rock Park has not violated the law. However, if not for pressure from the Lime Rock Committee, some of the hundreds of tires, dozens of 55-gallon drums and piles of debris that littered the northeastern corner of the property would likely still be there. For that, the committee is to be commended.

But beneath the committee’s insistence that Barber simply follow the law lies a troubling agenda. In a letter to the editor in last week’s Lakeville Journal, Salisbury Selectman Peter Oliver, who has visited the site several times in recent weeks, charged that the committee’s real aim was to harass Barber to such an extent as to put him out of business.

That charge is supported by the words of Lime Rock Committee secretary Kathy Lauretano, a regular letter writer to this newspaper, who said in a recent appearance on WHDD-AM radio, "The gratuitous burning of fossil fuels for the entertainment of the wealthy and people who can’t think of anything more serious in this world has got to stop."

Would it make Lauretano feel any better if the drivers of the race cars and the people watching them were poor? The environmental impact would the same, so injecting class into the mix is at best a diversion and at worst, demagogic.

If the Lime Rock Committee has solid evidence that Barber is violating the law, then it is perfectly within its rights to protest and demand enforcement. And if Barber attempts to alter the terms of a 1959 court injunction against Sunday racing, as he announced he would two years ago, then local residents are free to try to stop him. After all, they bought their homes in good faith knowing they would have at least one quiet day a week.

But complaining about the existence of a 50-year-old race track is simply trying to have it both ways. If you buy a home at a lower price because it’s near a noisy race track and then attempt to rid yourself of the track, you have lost a great deal of credibility.

And what if the people who want to shut down the track succeed? What other uses might the 350-acre property have? A golf course and condominiums for the "the wealthy"? An East Coast NASCAR track for the middle class? How about a home for the new Salisbury-Sharon transfer station? Better yet, a trash hauler could surely make a fortune by turning the bowl-shaped property into a badly needed construction and demolition dump. It’s a commercial property, and while some of these uses may not be on the books now, they could be in the future.

Lime Rock Park is mostly a good neighbor that plays by the rules. When it’s not, neighbors should hold Barber’s feet to the fire. But don’t try to destroy a legitimate business that was already in operation when you bought your home. That’s not playing by the rules, either.