Manchester Mooring Dispute Finally Breaks After 18-Month Feud

“You should be ashamed!” Jim Starkey told Manchester’s town counsel in Monday’s joint meeting of the Select Board and Harbor Advisory Committee.

Photo: Erika Brown

Harbormaster Bion Pike (left) hears the legal opinion of Michele Randazzo of KP Law, who serves as Manchester’s Town Counsel.

Photo: Erika Brown

Posted Thursday, October 9, 2025 11:38 am

Don’t say we need more time .... The time has come to put a cork in the bottle.”

By Erika Brown

After nearly two years of simmering accusations and political strain, Manchester’s long-running mooring controversy may have finally hit its turning point Monday night.

In a joint meeting of the Select Board (SB) and Harbor Advisory Committee (HAC), attended by town counsel Michele A. Randazzo of KP Law, the board confronted the issue that has dominated local harbor politics since early 2024: whether Harbormaster Bion Pike acted improperly when he approved a change in Manchester Marine’s mooring configuration.

The answer, according to both legal counsel and the town’s new administrator, was clear. By law, Harbormaster Bion Pike acted within his authority as Manchester Marine secured local and state permits to expanded its docking slips and then converted its moorings to a new “bow and stern” format.

“In my opinion, it’s very clear that the statutes confer the authority to promulgate authority of temporary moorings to the Harbormaster,” said Randazzo. “And that’s appealable only to the MA Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP).”

A Long Shadow Over a Popular Harbormaster

For more than 18 months, Pike has been the target of repeated accusations from one resident — former Harbor Advisory Committee and Dredging Committee member Jim Starkey — who alleged that the harbormaster bent or ignored rules in managing the town’s moorings, including those at Manchester Marine. His claims, often echoed by his wife, SB Chair Ann Harrison, have consumed meeting time, prompted three internal reviews, and spawned a pending complaint, filed by Starkey, with the state’s Inspector General’s office.

Each review — including by the HAC, former Town Administrator Greg Federspiel — found no wrongdoing. Yet the allegations persisted, amplified on social media and in public comment, to the frustration of residents who broadly support Pike, a 13-year veteran of the job credited with securing more than $2.5 million in harbor-related grants and maintaining Manchester’s working waterfront.

On Monday, for the first time, the Select Board faced the issue under the steadying influence of Town Administrator Tony Barletta and legal counsel. The meeting’s tone was markedly different: less about accusation and more about resolution.

The Narrow Question: Manchester Marine

The night’s discussion centered on a single agenda item — the 10 “provisional moorings” assigned last year to Manchester Marine after the marina converted its single-point moorings to a bow-and-stern system.

That conversion was not optional. It was required by the state’s DEP as part of the marina’s 2023 Chapter 91 license to expand docking slips. The state-mandated change improved navigation in the harbor’s main channel and required new floats and mooring gear paid for by the marina.

Barletta outlined the facts at the beginning of Monday’s meeting: the moorings were not “new” but reconfigured, the process followed local review through the HAC and Select Board, and every assignment on Manchester Marine’s new floats went to residents on the town’s waitlist — the same public list managed by Pike’s office. This last “solution,” called the “provisional moorings program” was a temporary fix created last March.

Randazzo confirmed that interpretation. Under state law, she said, mooring permits fall under the authority of the harbormaster and ultimately the DEP — not the Select Board. Any person aggrieved by a harbormaster’s decision has 30 days to appeal to the DEP, not to the town.

“The state, not the Select Board, is the appellate body for mooring decisions,” Randazzo said. “That’s the law.”

Her opinion undercut the central argument advanced for months by Harrison and Starkey — that Pike had no authority to issue the additional permits, and certainly not to Manchester Marine. Instead, they should have automatically been made available to boat owners on the town’s mooring wait list. And, said Harrison, the provisional mooring program allows Manchester Marine to rent those moorings seasonally, for a market rate fee, as opposed to the less expensive public town’s annual mooring fee. That, she said, isn’t fair.

The board agreed to accept Barletta’s recommendation: take no further action on Manchester Marine’s moorings and, instead, seek an opion on the moorings from the governing authority, the DEP. Then, he recommended the SB and HAC work together to update the harbor regulations to update the “Provisional Mooring Program” language.

Residents Applaud, Critics Bristle

For many in the room, the decision brought relief. Pike, who attended the meeting quietly, received warm support from several Harbor Advisory Committee members, including Chair Carl Doane, who reiterated that the entire committee has stood behind the harbormaster throughout the ordeal.

Not everyone agreed. During public comment, Starkey again challenged the town’s legal counsel, declaring, “It is law, madame. You should be ashamed!”

A Broader Reckoning

The Manchester Marine dispute has long served as the flashpoint in a broader, more personal feud. Since early 2024, the Starkey framed the issue as a fight for transparency in mooring assignments. But their campaign — part procedural, part political — has ruffled feathers and left one of the town’s most visible public servants under an unrelenting cloud.

The board agreed to follow up on these with the HAC, and resolve it once and for all. The motion to do so came from the SB’s Jeff Delaney.

“I think it makes sense to cover the allegations (made by one man) that have been made against the harbormaster in public, on social media, in public meetings. I think we need to address that,” he said. “People in town want to know, are there problems? Is the Harbormaster acting appropriately? We owe it to the harbormaster and the community.”

“I think it’s incumbent on this board to clear the air about allegations made against any town employee,” agreed the SB’s Brian Sollosy. “From my perspective, I owe you an apology for not stepping up sooner. We all owe you an apology.”

“Don’t say we need more time,” said Doane after SB member Cathy Bilotta suggested waiting until after the state weighs in. “The time has come to put a cork in the bottle.”

Bion Pike told the board that in the 18 months since Starkey’s initial accusation, there’s been a cascade of other accusations. And it’s gone on too long.

“I have not had an opportunity to have those accusations aired, to address them, to speak to them in a public forum,” said Pike. “And I would welcome that happening at the earliest convenience.”

The board endorsed a review of the allegations and promised a following up joint meeting with the HAC for one purpose: resolution.

Monday’s meeting may have finally changed that narrative. With legal counsel’s guidance, the board acknowledged that Pike acted within both state and local rules. And the process is in place to formally air and process all the moorings management accusation against Harbormaster Pike. Resolution on this is expected by January.