#1 2009-04-23 11:33:22

Anyone got a photo of David Smith? ;-)

Offline

 

#2 2009-04-23 15:05:20

I just got a spiffy haircut, so I'll be sure to send you one :)

Offline

 

#3 2009-04-23 18:13:05

BillW:
Can you put a big ole dunce cap on it when you get it? I just read his editorial and I am not sure he lives on the same planet I live on or if he is hoping for a job with the rag.
I can agree to disagree with him but he did zero research on the nitrogen article, if he had he would know that this article is specifically designed to hamper ADM development, as per Jane's comment 3 weeks ago that this article would force ADM back to the table. Why are we forcing a developer back t the table? Shouldn't we be buying them dinner, we need a commercial tax base LUNATICS. In addition, the measurable standards are not even achievable by today's technology and the STATE has even expressed that until further data is available communities should not rush into these types of by-laws. By the way, where was that further study, 3 meetings doesn't constitute further study.
I won't even get into the issue of the Moderator, who David, last year allowed only one side to be heard to postpone TM for three weeks, that was one for wifey.
Finally, TM has approved the overlay district 3 times and yet the BOS continues to make life difficult for ADM, is it asking too much to let the body review the 2 million dollar patch of eel grass and decide what we want to do with it or are the taxpayers fine with giving Bruce beachfront property? Because I am not, there isn't even a bathhouse there, that's all the article says is what should we do with our 2 MILLION DOLLAR PATCH OF EEL GRASS.
God help us all, I'm calling a realtor.

Offline

 

#4 2009-04-24 00:09:50

iliveinazoo wrote:

BillW:
Can you put a big ole dunce cap on it when you get it? I just read his editorial and I am not sure he lives on the same planet

"I really can see both sides here."

Editor's notes: Stuck between floors

We know he didn't attend the meeting, see the broadcast, watch any recording or hear a word I said when he called here last Saturday.

I took one photo and Brenda made "the call." The disfiguring, disturbing and disruptive flash injury excuses all came after the fact. And a disturbance is still whatever the Selectmen say it is.

What a place.

Offline

 

#5 2009-04-24 07:41:12

ILIAZ…your argument against the nitrogen article has unfortunately elevated your ERA to the point where you’d probably have a tough time making the local little league team…

Let’s eliminate all the technical,  mind BOGgling scientific mumbo jumbo that is so often used to try and  make us common folk think we are just too stupid to understand the issue…simply google “effects of nitrogen on humans“…If you need look any further than your own family to find one of the many detrimental effects,  you just may be living on some other planet‘s town of Wareham, because it‘s certainly not this one…The issue is no longer whether or not we need to reduce the overloading of nitrogen in our environment,  but who is going to pay for it…if it’s a choice between a rich developer or the rest of us, hopefully the “rest of us” will finally win one when it comes to passing the by-law…one small  bit of  advice…if you’d like to take them to dinner locally, I’d bring my own bottled water …

Offline

 

#6 2009-04-24 08:37:01

Scientific mumbo jumbo? Oh my. Are you saying that we should ignore science and not do the best we can to make sure we do this right? Call the head of the Board of Health. Even he says he doesn't support the article. He has no staff to enforce it either. So, looks like the taxpayers will be on the hook for that--hiring more staff. And if you don't know what I'm talking about, maybe you don't know both sides of the issue.

Oh, and the people/businesses who rent/buy properties that the "rich" developers have brought to town? Small business people and families looking for a good place to live. But why come to Wareham? Why not go to the other towns in the watershed that have no nitrogen program and let those people pay their taxes to those towns. And their nitrogen will continue to pollute the bay. And we will lose the taxes paid by those businesses which help keep your taxes down.

Don't be short sighted because this bos hates Makepeace. Another vendetta. This one has been going on for years, and since you are so new to our town, maybe you should get the whole story before you speak.

Listen to both sides and if you think the science should be ignored, go for it. But don't say you are doing it to keep the nitrogen out of the bay, because this won't do it. Sorry if science boggles your mind. Where would we be without good science? Oh right, not on this blog since science got us here too.

And the town's water committee? They met a couple of times, did no research and put an article on the warrant. Sorry, but that's not science to me. I will listen to both sides of the argument. But I have to say, my faith is in science, not a water committee that hasn't done its job. If the water committee can convince me that these systems work, that we have enough people at the board of health and a plan to enforce and inspect the systems as required, that the other towns are also making their developers do the same thing, I might change my vote. Otherwise, back to the drawing board.

P.S. Watch the Dr. Costa video on channel 9. Even he says the DEP says it won't work unless these programs include all towns in a watershed. If you listen to what he says, he makes the case against this article. Listen to the science folks. Not the voodoo.

Offline

 

#7 2009-04-24 10:37:58

Of course all towns in the watershed should take action, but the suggestion above seems to be that Wareham should wait until the other towns do something. What's wrong with taking the lead? Nitrogen is a problem. How long do you want to wait? This sounds so Bush administration...Is global warming a hoax too? Besides, Makepeace has shown a willingness (Tihonet) to go out of its way to work on environmentally-sensitive development. You can wait until every last minute bit of scientific data is analyzed and understood, but what will the water be like then? There is enough info out there already.

The post above would suggest it's more important to have people move to Wareham (which adds to the cost of services, by the way) at the expense of the environment than to be responsible stewards.

Offline

 

#8 2009-04-24 11:42:09

Iliveinazoo:
"I won't even get into the issue of the Moderator, who David, last year allowed only one side to be heard to postpone TM for three weeks, that was one for wifey."

"The role of the town moderator, when performed properly and legally, is not a position of immense power."

That quote sounds like a Donahue dig if you ask me

Offline

 

#9 2009-04-24 11:47:26

Molly…please allow me to clarify a few of your assumptions, as well as some of my comments you have happened to misconstrue…

I am not new this town …I was born and raised here…for almost half a century ...

Even if it weren’t absolutely idiotic to believe that the BOS has a personal vendetta against Makepeace, it would not influence my opinion in any way regarding this by-law…I know Chris Makepeace personally…have been a guest in his home…he is a wonderful man and I hate the fact that he happens to own the company that would be the first affected by the passage of this by-law, thus throwing ADM in the spotlight of this debate…but with the passage of this by-law, someone has to be the first…the good thing is, ADM would only be the first…

I commend the town’s water committee for their ability to draft a by-law that finally has at least a chance of passing this time around after only three meetings…

I did not say science should be ignored, just KISSed…keep it simple stupid…stop using it to confuse the issue…the effects of nitrogen are poisoning us all…this by-law may not be an end all for the solution but it is a start and a start is better than no attempt at all…I never want to be the mother that has to explain to a chronically ill child, or better yet, terminally ill, that I didn’t do everything within my power to keep them safe, the very least being that they didn’t have the cleanest water possible because I would have had to pay additional taxes for it…
 
That being said, I have just realized what an absolute waste of my time it is to argue my viewpoint with someone who is basing their entire argument against something on money….I am sorry but I care way too much about my family, friends and neighbors to argue with anyone who tries to put a dollar figure on their health…

Offline

 

#10 2009-04-24 17:31:25

Ms. Lilly, et al:
I think it important that the science of the issue be duly noted, it is great to be a leader but if our efforts simply cost money and have no real impact then no matter whose money it is it has been wasted.
Making Wareham attractive to responsible development is important, it is a revenue source that we desperately need.
Now, as the parent of a child who had chronic medical problems, I will take some offense Ms. Lilly because you know, walk a mile please. The library was a great source of assistance to parents trying to research options for their kids but now that it is de-certified the access to information is drastically decreased. So, please don't sound the alarm. My kid participated in every medical study available and the condition was never traced back to nitrogen.
Nitrogen is an issue that goes well beyond Wareham and it is important that our neighbors also cooperate in ensuring that everyone has clean water. That needs to be done responsibly, forcing the cost off on "rich" developers is not the answer to the problem and will only hurt Wareham in the future as those same developers choose to develop in another community.
You see, in my eyes, the issue is about the big picture. I hope everyone asks themselves:
Will this Clean Water Bylaw have a real impact on the issue of nitrogen? Is the technology available and can it be properly enforced? If there is any doubt then it should go back to the drawing board because passing a bylaw for the sake of saying, see we did something, makes zero sense if it can't accomplish what it set out to do.
If someone believes that the answer to the above question is yes then they need to ask themselves, how will this bylaw impact the community as a whole? Does the end justify the means.
As for ADM, the under lying zoning in the overlay district is residential, they can just build a bunch of houses for nice young families to move in and add lots of kids to the schools. Or, maybe they will just get tired of all this bs and decide 40b is the way to go, that will certainly improve the future for us.
I don't know the Makepeace family, and I have been around here long enough to know that the company today is not what it once was. I don't think anyone needs to force something down their throats. They just sealed an amazing deal with the state, thanks to Carver and Plymouth with the development transfer rights, and Wareham will benefit from that but only by virtue of geography, not because we did anything to deserve it.
If Wareham wants ADM to help with the nitrogen issue why don't they just ask them? Finally, this bylaw is intended for ADM, both Jane and Bruce have publicly commented to that effect.
By the way, before the economy crashed I was a rocket scientist, so don't question my IQ.

Offline

 

#11 2009-04-24 20:33:15

http://warehamobserver.com/uploads/459_davidsmith.jpg

Offline

 

#12 2009-04-24 22:21:07

ILIAZ…you’re offended?  How dare you arrogantly assume you are the only parent dealing with a child with a chronic illness, especially here…just consider yourself very fortunate that you speak in a singular tone,  not plural…

If the medical studies you have participated in has ruled out nitrogen as a contributing factor, I hope it is because you have a definitive diagnosis with a cause…good for you and your family…that can be a major part of the battle sometimes, even overshadowing the illness itself at times…I’m sort of familiar with medical studies too….only recently becoming familiar with one utilizing a totally different approach to what I have become accustomed to…without divulging too many details (I hate spoiling surprises)  it has to do with a Boston geneticist, mothers of chronically ill children and ground water…I promise to keep you posted…

The next time I’m commanding a space shuttle mission, I’ll put in a good word for you …

Offline

 

#13 2009-04-24 22:35:04

Wow..it is amazing that in such a small group as we have posting here that there are at least two, if not more, posters who have experienced the heart break, disappointment and saddness of a seriously ill child... sometimes life can be cruel.

Offline

 

#14 2009-04-24 23:01:23

Mixie...even though children with chronic illnesses (i.e. asthma, diabetes, lupus, lung disease, etc) can be seriously ill, there can be a substantial difference between the two...I don't consider my son with asthma to be seriously ill...they all suck regardless...that's why its so important to have people like you around here...a smile, audible laughs, and even breaking out with a tune at times...billy, don't be a heroooo...oh crap...

Offline

 

#15 2009-04-24 23:33:37

Mixie wrote:

Wow..it is amazing that in such a small group as we have posting here that there are at least two, if not more, posters who have experienced the heart break, disappointment and saddness of a seriously ill child... sometimes life can be cruel.

Cruel and unimaginative. The user names below have identical IP addresses; several have the same email. I could easily block it I suppose but it betrays endearing, if inept, fuckery, doncha think?

WhmWench
WarehamWatcher
outtahere
David R. Smith   
crazytown

Offline

 

Board footer

warehamwater.com