#1 2009-12-09 13:59:44
Rip Dinkle here.....................(que the music Hamm)
This reporter has just spoken with an attendee of the Buzzards Bay Coalition meeting from Saturday. Brenda Eckstrom's recap of the meeting must have been based on what someone told her. According to my source, Brenda came 30 minutes late for the meeting, was outside the meeting during the time the expert speakers were addressing the attendees, and left 30 minutes before the meeting ended. I know it difficult to imagine someone as passionate and caring about nitrogen pollution blowing off major chunks of the meeting, but it looks like she did.
Another attendee was none other than David Begley, the citizen who is will be a member of the Charter Review Committee. My source informed me David sat next to Ed Pacewicz, who is also on the Charter Review Committee. Both are contributors to a certain Selectmen's campaign. I was also informed that David Begley and Larry McDonald were engaged in a brief conversation, but no details of that conversation were overheard.
In an unrelated story, the methane removal from the old Observer office is nearing completion. A lone sock was found hanging by a rope in the bathroom with a note nearby. The hand scribbled note said, "Goodbye power elite bastards!". The note was reportedly signed with the initials P.S.
Rip Dinkle....................Over and out!
Offline
#2 2009-12-09 14:24:53
You know we really need to rent that office and do something hilarious with it.
Offline
#3 2009-12-09 19:44:24
700 A MONTH WILL RENT IT. I WANT TO MAKE IT A POWER ELITE CLUBHOUSE. NO BOBO'S ALLOWED!
Offline
#4 2009-12-09 21:13:08
We have enough money in the newspaper account to have TWO offices.
Decas Building, and,....you know.
Offline
#5 2009-12-09 22:16:32
Renting his old office is a great idea. I hate to throw cold water on it, but I have to confess to you that an elite trio of people trained by our military in surrepticious activity has been "bugging" the old office for two years, and we quickly learned that we were dealing with a hazardous situation.....All three of us had symptoms associated with poisonous gasses: dizziness and nausea.
With support from former colleagues now working with Home Security we were able, in our next entry , to install very sophsticated air quality devices. That info was given a fast-track examination at the Center For Disease Control in Atlanta Georgia, and the response was fast and urgent!: "The air samples you have sent us contain the highest percentages ever recorded of the deadly gas known as The Bagelfartz Syndrome...Our "red alert" advice is to secure the building and put out an All Points Bulletin for the carrier of this deadly gas. Our research shows that when bagels enter the digestive tract of certain delusional individuals , the result is the production of massive amounts of deadly flatulence,(or as in the vernacular, farting)
I hate to throw cold water on an idea of geat merit, but my recommendation is that we concentrate on warning the innocent "down-winders" in Halifax . Who among us wants to pick up a newspaper on December 25th with a headline: "White bearded man in a red suit, and a team of reindeer were found unconcious on the roof of a condo in Halifax?
I say, issue a Southcoast Baggelfartz alert !!
Last edited by Dick Wheeler (2009-12-09 22:32:01)
Offline
#6 2009-12-10 07:42:32
Just to weigh in on this, and probably earn some enmity amongst this group, but here goes. But first a disclaimer, what I say here is what I say here (huh?) Put a bit differently, it has nothing to do with the FinCom. at least my comments here.
Now to what you may not like. It was Brenda who spearheaded the idea of getting people with different backgrounds together to discuss the nitrogen issue and 50 of us (me amongst them) were invited to sit in on a discussion of the issues. And the group included the usual suspects but also a whole host of people who are either "neutral" or on the other side, or the presumed other side, for instance cranberry interests (and note: "presumed). So, there was both a diversity (good) and everyone was in the same room (also good)
Does Brenda have a political interest in this, well probably (OK,OK, sure), but that does not make it a bad thing. The meeting was very well chaired by a Wareham summer resident who does this for a living and we stayed on point and were finished at the appointed hour (make that minute) with thoughts for the next meeting (in about a month).
This is a much different approach then trying to ram-rod this through Town Meeting and arguing the merits (or lack thereof) at the meeting. It has not worked in the past, and won't in the future.
So, a different "tack" is being taken. Will it work? That remains to be seen, but at least the meeting was both civil and informative.
And Brenda helped to make it possible. Does that make up for her past perceived transgressions, no of course not. And to be clear, "perceived" means by people who write on this blog and not by me. Is she perfect, well then I will be forced to look in a mirror as I ask that question, so best not go there!
If you sell water on the desert and it starts to rain; you might consider a different business plan. It seems to me, perhaps mistakenly, that Brenda, standing under an umbrella, senses the change in climate, and has embraced a different game plan, and to her credit, regardless of motive--she might have five or ten of the "invitees" marching with her in lock step, but not all fifty. Something will come out of this, and it probably will be to our collective benefit.
Last edited by Dick Paulsen (2009-12-10 11:32:42)
Offline
#7 2009-12-10 08:09:04
If this ever comes to town meeting - hopefully this new guy will not lie to us like Pacewicz did!
Offline
#8 2009-12-10 09:27:26
I attended the meeting and learned a great deal from the speakers. Is there a nitrogen issue? Yes, there is. From my research and the information I gained from the meeting, it needs to be addressed. The question isn't if but how to address it. A "one size fits all" method is not going to work. That was the problem with prior approaches. What may be the "fix" for my property may not be the "fix" for another land owner in town. It makes sense to put together a group to develop a comprehensive plan that will inform/educate the citizens of Wareham and also provide guidelines that will address the issue.
As far as what happened and by whom at the meeting, I was too busy trying to learn about nitrogen pollution. I did speak with Michael Begley and it was a cordial introduction. It's funny how WE (other and myself) are perceived by the TinFoil Hat group. I've seen numerous comments by this group that have no clue who I am or what I am about. Suffice it to say, they don't have a clue.
Oh, for the record, Tom Bicki, Howie Smith, and Bob Brady deserve a special thanks for providing me research information and helping me to learn about the process. A background in finance/accounting does not prepare you for nitrogen pollution issues!
Offline
#9 2009-12-10 10:25:07
I must respectfully disagree with Mr. Paulsen. If you listened to the introduction by Mark Rasmusson at the beginning of the meeting he clearly stated that it was Mr. Phinney who approached the Coalition of Buzzards Bay with the idea of getting involved and facilitating such a meeting. They then approached Mr. Straus and asked his help.
Mark Rasmussen then took the lead and invited Mr. Phinney, Mr. Smith, Brenda and Ed to a first meeting at which they discussed how to move forward. Mr. Phinney has always stated when he has spoken on town meeting floor that this was more than just a "septic" problem and that any committee should be one of a diverse composition.
While Mr. Phinney most likely would not care who got credit, if you were an attendee and listened, it was Mr. Phinney to initiated this movement forward. He has a very real concern for the environment and should be given credit for being someone trying to bring this town together for a common goal.
Offline
#10 2009-12-10 13:36:34
Thank you for bringing that to light. I was aware that another group (not the Town's Clean Water committee) had been meeting to attempt to address nitrogen since it is obvious that the "my way or the highway" approach of the BOS isn't working. It looks like this other group were also included. A very fair and comprehensive mix.
Nitrogen is one issue, affordable housing and finances are going to other matters which are going to require cooperation and input from many sources. A $2.1 million shortfall can't be solved by closing the library or laying off the rest of municipal maintenance. We are facing cuts that are going to hurt. Pay attention and make your voices heard. Every candidate for the BOS better be up to speed on this and be ready to address tough questions.
Offline
#11 2009-12-11 22:50:32
Dick Paulsen wrote:
...
Now to what you may not like. It was Brenda who spearheaded the idea of getting people with different backgrounds together to discuss the nitrogen issue and 50 of us (me amongst them) were invited to sit in on a discussion of the issues.
...This is a much different approach then trying to ram-rod this through Town Meeting and arguing the merits (or lack thereof) at the meeting. It has not worked in the past, and won't in the future.
And Brenda helped to make it possible.
Mr. Paulsen, Sir
Please explain to all readers here how you came to the mind set that "It was Brenda who spearheaded the idea...". It's obvious that two very different representations exist right here on this thread. Many of us here know that Ms. Eckstrom has been known to fabricate. I can't say that of Maturevoter as I don't know him/her.
As to the "ram-rod" approach, that's exactly why the effort has failed miserably for three years. Also, the messenger has absolutely "0" (ZERO) credibility.
If instead the leadership had been able to acknowledge the many talented citizens (assets) with far more expertise and qualifications than their own, we could have already designed and implemented a nutrient management plan as suggested by MassDEP. Instead we're just starting the process.
In any and all of the Town Meeting discussions, never once did anyone deny the need to better manage OUR effects on the environment. The objections came because of misinformation and the narrow minded approach to the solutions.
It's now hopeful that we will finally "move forward", roll up our sleaves and assess the entire scope of the environmental impacts we cause to our water ways and develop a plan (by-laws) to mitigate any adverse effects for generations to come.
I'll go on record here admitting to being a part of the effort that developed a citizens group designed to reseach, review and report the facts based on ALL the data available. In our sessions we concluded that educating our community was essential to succeed. In that we met with school district representatives to discuss the prospect that students in all grades should have more environmental science curriculum that specifically teaches the impacts caused by our every day living. The strategy is that if students are talking about what they're learning, then families will tailk about it. Before long the majority of the community will be talking about what's taught, which will make the adoption and implementation of a management plan, by way of by-laws, pretty much automatic. I see that as a WIN-WIN. How exciting is that ? In fact, I think we can start right here on this site by making information available. Stay tuned. Watch for the "Nutrient Management" thread. Think of it as continuing education.
Last edited by bbrady (2009-12-11 22:51:52)
Offline
#12 2009-12-11 23:30:31
Here, here, Bob! Good for you.
Offline
