When the Wareham Selectmen have used particular language in acquiring land in the past: such as in 2003, when the wording was " to acquire by Gift, Purchase, or Eminent Domain" in the published an Article relative to the  five Acres of Swifts Beach private property, they ignored implications of Gift and Purchase - detroying Cretified Mail containing the owner's offers - and went straight for Eminent Domain at the earliest time possible - and voted to TAKE it  for GENERAL MUNICIPAL PURPOSES, according to the Deed.

They have since interpreted that General Municipal Purposes means anything they want it to mean.  The piece of land that was used for over 60 years as a private parking lot and recreation is now SACRED CONSERVATION LAND with a plan to return it to its pristine condition in the 1930's: a marsh with a history of a mosquito problem and health hazard for the densely populated neighborhood.  The Town paid $2Million for a mosquito problem.  The benefactors are  Bruce and his relatives.

Don't trust any ambiguous language produced by Bruce, his Sister-In-Law Attorney, or Kopleman & Paige.  Acceptance of "casual" wording and the trust of verbal promises means nothing to these gansters with an attitude of "If you don't like it, sue us!".

Last edited by waterview (2009-10-19 08:17:05)

Bob,

Great breakdown.  I hadn't read the laws in full - I just picked up on the "lease" vs "convey" issue.  It's frightening how much the board seems to rely on one lawyer's opinion on these things.  Yes, they are paid to know this stuff, but when you think about it, almost any time two lawyers are in the same courtroom, they have a different opinion.  One would hope they'd get something solid before trying to ram the proposal down everybody's throat.  I guess that's too much to ask for.

bbrady wrote:

All this information is available for anyone to read.  I encourage everyone to do so if you have the time.  The law is the law.  Visit www.mass.gov

I'll re-post this as it contains links to all applicable MGL and Plymouth Reg. of Deeds, along with Article 2.

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
TAKEBACKWAREHAM

waterview: You are too kind.

  I have it in me to have sympathy for the three BOS people who  seem to be  on the losing side of  personal financial struggles..I've been there....not as extreme as theirs, but enough to "feel their pain."

Having stated that, I have to add that even if these people were family members  or life-long friends, I hope that I  could summon the sense to say that people who are dealing with  extreme financial problems should be prevented , for their own sake, from the inevitable temptations involved in a 30 million dollar development deal.Let's  not kid ourselves: developer$ are aggre$$ive. People who are dealing with these stresses ...3 out of of 5 of whom are also pushing for involving themselves in these stresses should carefully monitored.

I'm not blaming them when I speak of their financial problems...What I'm saying, in medical terms, is that it doesn't make sense to put people with impaired immune systems into highly contagious situations.


If the people we are talking about followed the rules of professionalism and commonsense they'd resign.    You know as well as I that that"ain't gonna  happen".  It's up to us to  make democracy work: at the town meeting(s)  next week and in April.





.