#7 (cont.)




To see if the Town will vote to amend the Town of Wareham By-laws and place in the appropriate place the following addition: The Preservation of Historically Significant Buildings.
FALL TOWN MEETING WARRANT


PShooter

Last edited by PShooter (2009-09-19 22:05:37)

(11 to 21)


FALL TOWN MEETING WARRANT


PShooter

Last edited by PShooter (2009-09-19 22:06:16)

Article 22 (cont)

FALL TOWN MEETING WARRANT


PShooter

Please forgive me if I bump this, in order to keep the Warrant Articles on the front burner, and go to TM as informed voters. If we're too busy, or tired, or whatever to read through them. I'm hoping we have the stamina to listen for five minutes at a time. Thanks.

PShooter

You make me so proud, son!

thank you bob....
To the editor:

Where to begin ?

It’s been a number of years now since the elected officials of Wareham, Bruce Sauvageau in particular, have persisted in bringing forward the "proposal" of developing affordable housing (senior, assisted, you name it) on the site known as Westfield in the West Wareham/Carver town line area off of Charlotte Furnace Road.

To sum it up, that continued effort has failed miserably every time, not because the good citizens of Wareham don't want to provide housing for those in need, but because the process by which it's been proposed has been severely lacking.

Let's start with the location. As some know, the "Westfield" site (70-plus acres) was acquired back on June 30, 1977, when the developer (Campanelli, Inc.) gifted the land to Wareham in lieu of taxes owed. It was.voted on and approved unanimously at a Special Town Meeting and recorded in the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds together with the Order of Taking dated Aug. 9, 1977, in Book 4313, pages 191 and 192. A subsequent Order of Taking was recorded in Book 4323, pages 111-113, which conditioned the entire certain parcel for "school or municipal buildings, and/or recreational, playground and park purposes.”  NOWHERE in those conditions does it allow for any housing development. That was recorded Sept. 7, 1977.

In the late -‘80s and early-‘90s, efforts were being made by recreation committees to develop a portion of the site with various playing fields for the children and families of Wareham. Those efforts slowed as financial constraints curtailed continued development.

Nevertheless, the projects are still valued and needed in our community. As leadership and management changed, together with the continued financial woes, so did our priorities.

In 2004 and 2005, Wareham paid for a study with CPF (Community Preservation Fund ) money and a grant to assess our housing needs. That report can be viewed at www.wareham.ma.us/Public_Documents/Ware … S006AE4C7.

It’s a 40-plus-page document that identifies our housing needs and makes recommendations.

Pay special attention to pages 9 and 10. It notes that our existing senior housing (Agawam Village and Redwood Park) are in dire need of rehabilitation. To my way of thinking, that's where we should be concentrating our efforts and resources -on behalf of our senior population instead of WASTING time and money on a site that hasn't been approved by the voters for any housing development.

To date, we've encumbered over $50,000 for a consultant and have spent numerous hours on Town Meeting floor and various other meetings to slam this development proposal down the throats of Wareham citizens. It’s evident to me that this current BOS have no business in housing development. From the research I've been able to gather, the process has had little or no input from our Housing Authority.

I urge the good citizens of Wareham to attend Town Meeting Oct. 26 at 7 p.m. in the high school auditorium and defeat Article 2. Vote NO on Westfield, one more time and for good.

Bob Brady

Wareham



PS. I'm not the one dividing our community. I'm trying to reunite it. Please help.

Here's the link, in case you want to leave a comment. Way to go Bob!

Letter: Westfield housing proposal ignores deed restrictions

and here's the link Bob refers to in the letter:

study with CPF (Community Preservation Fund ) money and a grant to assess our housing needs.


PShooter

Last edited by PShooter (2009-09-28 13:39:16)

You don't suppose they are pushing Westfield because it would be so much fun to play around with that $30 million dollars that gets mentioned pretty regularly?
Shame on me for even suggesting it.... And for even for a fleeting moment wondering if this is the assignment of their most recent legal/political consultant?   My bad!!

I wonder if you can declare the Westfield property historical?
That would be interesting. It would be protected by the wishes of the Town Meting that acquired and protected it in 1977.
Maybe this is how to beat these idiots. My opinion, of course.

One word describes the proposal: BULLSHIT!

PShooter wrote:

ARTICLE 2
To see if the Town will vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen, pursuant to G.L. c. 40, s.15A , to lease the care and custody of the real property and improvements thereon known as Westfield Site, more specifically located at Charlotte Furnace Road, consisting of 18.5 acres, more or less, and identified on Wareham Assessor's Map 105, Parcel 1001 and Assessors’ Map 105A, Parcels 107 through 130 and Parcels 162 through 175 and Parcels 198 through 213 and Parcels 215 through 221 and Parcels 229 through 238 and Parcels 259 through 287, and described in the instrument recorded with the Plymouth District Registry of Deeds in Book 4314, Page 189, said portion containing 24.49 acres, more or less, being the premises shown as Westfield Overall Plan surveyed by G.A.F Engineering on May 11, 2006,  to be placed under the Selectmen’s care and custody for the purposes of continuing and expanding the use of the parcel for affordable senior rental housing and further, to authorize the Board of Selectmen, if the Board of Selectmen so vote, to lease or convey said property and improvements for the purposes of improving, expanding and the perpetual management of the property for affordable rental housing pursuant to the requirements of G.L. c.40, s.3 and G.L. c.30B, et seq.  and upon terms and conditions acceptable to the Board of Selectmen and pursuant to the authority granted the Board of Selectmen by G.L. c.44, s.55C , and further, that if the Board of Selectmen is to lease for a maximum of 99 years said property, that lease be subject to the prior placement of a restriction on said property, including but not limited to that found at G.L. c.184, ss.31-33,  ensuring that all dwelling units constructed thereon be restricted for affordable housing purposes in perpetuity; or take any other action thereon or to do or act in any manner relative thereto.



Inserted by the Board of Selectmen

PShooter

Line 17 above states:  for affordable senior rental housing 

Line 20 above states:  for affordable rental housing

Line 32 above states:  for affordable housing purposes

Does this wording change, in any way possible, what the BOS say about affordable senior housing.  Just curious.  For some reason I thought that you carried the exact wording through the entire article or contract.  Can anyone answer this?

You do have to carry the same wording all the way through because that is what you are voting on. So if tm votes this article, the selectmen can put any affordable housing in there. They can have 3 or 4 bedroom units full of kids. This will go a long way to keeping the over 55 group interested.

I tried to go through the video and get the votes of the BOS & FinCom. I figured I'd put them here. This is just what I think I heard, If you hear differently, please let me know, thanks.

FA=Favorable Action  NA= No Action   FS= Further Study

Article       FinCom               BoS

22)           NA 5-3-0             FS 3-2   
1)             FA 8-0-0             FA 5-0
2)            "reconsidering"     FA 5-0
3)             FA 5-2-0             FA 3-2
4)             FA 6-1                NA 4-1
5)             FA 6-2                FA 5-0
6)             FA 6-0-1             FA 5-0
7)             FA 7-0-1             FA 4-0-1
8)             FA 7-0-0             FA 5-0
9)             FA 5-3-0             NA 5-0
10)           FA 8-0-0             FA 5-0
11)           FA 8-0-0             FA 5-0
12)           FA 8-0-0             FA 5-0
13)           FA 8-0-0             FA 5-0
14)           FA 7-1-0             FA 5-0
15)           didn't say           FA 4-0-1
16)           didn't say           FA 4-0-1
17)           FA 7-0-0             FA 3-0-2
18)           FA 7-0-0             FA 3-0-2
19)           FA 7-0-0             FA 5-0
20)           FA 7-0-0             FA 5-0
21)           FA 7-0-0             FA 5-0
23)           didn't say           NA 5-0

Discussion from the 10/6/09 BoS meeting on the Warrant Articles, begins at (2:20) of part 4 and finishes at (30:00) of Part 5.

FALL TOWN MEETING WARRANT

PShooter
TAKEBACKWAREHAM

Last edited by PShooter (2009-10-12 01:16:20)

Come to Town Meeting!!!

I made up this short video that can be linked to by email, if you want. Here's the vid, and the link you can copy and paste is underneath. (You may want to include the links I added to the vid to the body of your email, and suggest they pause if it "goes to fast"). If you want the actual file to attach and forward, email me. Thanks.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ1zBAFJDSg
*you need to follow the link and copy that url, copying the "link" above will not work, since what you see is actually only part of the whole url (link).

PShooter
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
pshooter59@yahoo.com

Last edited by PShooter (2009-10-19 00:14:12)