Saturday, July 10, 2010

Issues survey - July 2010

The Committee to Elect Randy Hunt has been calling voters in the 5th Barnstable State Representative District for a couple of weeks getting their ratings of how important the following issues are to them:

- Job creation
- Lowering taxes
- Public benefits for illegal immigrants
- Pensions for elected officials

So far, we’ve called over 2,000 households. Our surveying will be complete by the end of July, at which time we’ll post the results.

In the meantime, we created an online survey that adds the following issues to the ones above:

- Dealing with waste water solutions for Cape Cod
- Balancing the power in the legislature (currently 179 Democrats and 21 Republicans)
- Imposing term limits on elected officials
- Lowering the cost of homeowners’ insurance

Click here to take the online survey.

Click here to see the current results.

Some of the comments we’ve received from survey participants follow. Feel free to add your comments to this blog post.

First, something your survey doesn't mention at all: education/local aid. This should be of utmost importance to my legislative representative. I want my kids' schools to be superb - not just fine, not just great by Cape Cod standards, but superb.

Job creation is very important to me as I look to re-enter the paid work force after a hiatus. I have a graduate degree, and common sense, and work hard, but there just aren't enough well-paying jobs on the Cape.

Waste water solutions are very important to me; I would prefer higher taxes to having this issue not dealt with. However, banning use of most fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides on Cape Cod would help a lot in the meantime. With our fragile estuaries and sole source aquifer, why do we even allow the use of these things here?

The pension system is off the rails. In principle, I don't begrudge people their earned pensions, but there needs to be a cap on publicly funded ones. Public service ought not be a path to riches.

* * * * *

There are so many residents having a difficult time finding affordable health insurance that doctors on the Cape will participate with. Many of the primary physicians on the Cape will not take affordable health care such as Commonwealth Care, Commonwealth Choice, Neighborhood or MassHealth. We should be able to have affordable health insurance BEFORE illegal immigrants receive so many benefits. Doesn't seem fair.

* * * * *

The benefits to the children of illegal immigrant should not be lost. Many of these children are US citizens. This includes education and other benifits.

* * * * *

Adequately fund public education and fully fund all mandated programs.

Allow municipalities to adjust insurance premiums, copays and offered plans without union approval.

* * * * *

2 issues that bug me as I work daily in the court system:

1. Court appointed lawyers for ILLEGALS. Ridiculous. Most Brazilians are working under the table and sending cash home, yet they just report to the Court that they make nothing or under the poverty line so, they are handed a public defender for breaking the laws of a country they are (most likely) in illegally! The Court does NOT check this information. They just believe what you tell them about your income.

2. The DA's office employees (on the Cape) who get paid vacation days for their birthdays and most of them have blackberry devices with internet access paid for by the state!! Talk about waste!!

* * * * *

The 800 pound gorilla on Cape Cod's sandy shores is waste water treatment; how to maintain high quality water from the sole source aquifer. Bourne, like many of the Cape towns has spent tens of thousands of tax payer dollars studying and coming up with proposals to address our issues. We are not unlike most towns on the Cape and in the state unable to pay for taking the first steps to address the issues.

* * * * *

All of those issues are very important to me, but some other issues that are very important to me include:

-Free-market energy policy

-Eliminating the budget deficit

-Enacting pro-growth, fundamental tax reform (something like the FairTax)

* * * * *

I am concerned about the mandated health insurance requirement. It should not be mandatory with fine for not having it. If it is mandated it should be affordable. My selfemployed son and family cannot afford it. I'm paying for it. Repeal mandatory health insurance or subsidize it. This was well intentioned but has too many unintended consequences.

Repeal the tax on products sold in liquor stores.

Increase meals/hotel tax instead.

* * * * *

I am strongly opposed to the funding of Planned Parenthood of $35 million annually plus other monies they receive from the Departments of Public Health and education. This is a private, multi million dollar corporation which should NOT be getting tax dollars.

Further, the Mass Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender (GLBT) Commission is a totally autonomous organization with absolutely no state oversight. They have been receiving millions in recent years to promote graphic homosexual education in public schools. In this year's budget they will receive $100,000 from MEDICAID funds (when and if the Feds approve that budget item). They will also have access to millions more - no cap - through the Depts. of Public Health and Education - Budget items 0950-0500; 4590-0250 and 7010-0005. Here is a link to a sample of what they distribute in schools. of which most parents are oblivious: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/10c/youth_pride/bagly_flier/index.html#flier

* * * * *

I consider the above issues to be relevant as ongoing objectives for those elected to govern. Unfortunately, these issues are the standard hot button promises that are repeatedly spoon fed to public each election cycle; the result being sweet fanny Annie being done.

You're a very capable person, if elected, and I hope you are, you'll spend most of your term planning for reelection and raising money. Imagine the state of our society if all other profession had to spend equal amounts of time raising money to continue their respective professions as engineers, electricians, doctors, CPA etc.

THE POINT!! Consider spending 95% of your time, if elected, carrying our the NEEDS of the public via a list of things to do for each district and in return establish fund raising committees for each precinct with specific goals relevant to specific accomplishments.

Eliminate the words "I fought" and replace with "I did/supported". Amount of funds raised will be the measure of constituent satisfaction.

* * * * *

These are inter-related items in many ways. Eliminating state pensions for elected officials, stopping public benefits for illegal immigrants, and job creation will all generate more cash flow which should help reduce taxes. Changing the balance of power is a long-term process that starts now.

As for homeowner's insurance, it's insurance. If they don't get you one way they will get you another. Oh wait!.....that's the Commonwealth's plan!!!

Thanks for asking for my opinion. Usually I have to express it without request.

* * * * *

I am not completely comfortable with the labeling of all these issues. For example, I don't want my elected officials to even think they can "create jobs" because that probably leads to increased government jobs. Out of control increases in government jobs is a big problem.

My preference is for a representative who says that existing government jobs will be reduced. I would prefer to see your first issue titled reduction of government jobs. Hopefully this would lead to a general reduction in government. Whichever comes first, you get the idea.

Balancing of "power" in the legistature is not the way I would frame the issue. (unless, of course, that might lead to a government that is at a stalemate for a few years. I'd like that.)

Seriously, it's time for the balance of power (assuming this means our intellectual approach to government)to shift rather than equalize.

* * * * *

I'm very pro-life.

Corruption in government and Wall Street, which is destroying our country, is only part of the bigger picture of loss of integrity, honesty and morality everywhere.

We need to get back to not only fiscal responsibility, but social responsibility also.

We've got to stop the legalized killing of unborn babies.

As a nation we've lost out moral compass.

* * * * *

I agree with the concept of term limits -- BUT the voters always have that ability -- don't vote for them.

I agree with the idea of eliminating elected pensions -- ideally you would want the benefits to attract qualified people -- BUT I would rather be represented by people who have had a real job and earned their own benefits.

Not sure how you could balance legslature if you can't get qualified Republicans to run.

* * * * *

I also believe that personal property rights are key and that anyone trying to dillute these rights should be ignored!

* * * * *

I think your top 3 items are all tied together. Stopping public benefits for illegal immigrants would reduce a drain and waste of Government $ WHICH would mean it's "easier" to Lower taxes.
That in turn would help WE THE PEOPLE have "some" added $ which would only help consumer spending and thus COULD mean Job creation!

Eliminating state pensions for elected officials as well as other things like hack expense accounts would be a step to Beacon Hill putting it's $ where it's mouth is.

* * * * *

On job creation - it's not the state's job to create business...It's the commonwealth's job to lower taxes and paperwork and then get the 'heck' out of the way of the private sector.

I do not begrudge anyone a pension - I wish I had one - however "double-dipping" should be eliminated.

* * * * *

I would have to believe the social costs of casino gambling would be far greater than any monetary gains to the state. I realize the train has left the station but am horrified looking down the track in years to come.

* * * * *

Arizona's problem is America's problem. Bravo to them for taking the initiative to act where the federal government (Congress & the Executive) have done nothing except be critical. Seal the borders and stop the handouts.

* * * * *

Job creation is not the business of government. They can however destroy jobs.

* * * * *

Like most of us I support Cape Wind in spite of the multimillion dollar smear campaign run by wealthy opponents.

* * * * *

Stop the expansion of state-sponsored gambling, which is essentially a (very inefficient) tax on the most gullible and vulnerable families. God help any kid whose parent is a gambling addict!

There must be a reason the last 3 Speakers have been indicted.

* * * * *

The cost to taxpayers on the Cape for the regionalized centralized sewer systems that the county (Gottlieb and Niedzwiecki) are planning to impose on all towns is prohibitive and the most expensive way to ensure clean water.

All towns should support the National Academy of Sciences review of MEP science that Orleans is asking for. All towns should be evaluating how cluster systems and permeable barriers can be used to handle septic and other groundwater nitrogen far less expensively and environmentally better than Big City Sewer systems. All towns should resist ceding authority to the county to act on their behalf in dealing with DEP and EPA and any suit that CLF may file.

Towns can't rely on Gottlieb/Niedzwiecki. They have made it clear they support a Big City regionalized sewer system for the Cape and will "agree" to that should CLF in fact sue. Not in the interest of the towns.

* * * * *

Jeff Perry's attempt to have all aid-applicants checked for citizenship was an outstanding idea. We should continue to pursue that.

* * * * *

I feel the legislature’s budget should run the way any successful household budget is. If you do not have the money you do not spend it. Yes, tough sacrifices need to be made, but you either deal with it now or make it worse and deal with it later.

* * * * *

I think some of the most important issues for constituents are:

We are tired of the arrogance.

We are tired of being lied to.

We are tired of seeing our money being used to buy votes from people who don't earn it.

We are fed up with the government campaign to control our lives.

And it has only taken us 18 months to get angry with a liar and traitor in the White House and his partners in Congress who are clearly trying to destroy the country some of my friends and ancestors fought and died for.

* * * * *

I think the biggest issue not explicitly mentioned is budget reduction by examining each expenditure in detail and removing the pork and nonsensical entitlements and by streamlining and consolidating where appropriate. If jobs are created and budgets are without waste then you could consider reducing taxes because you would have more tax income and spending would be under control. I don't think taxes can be lowered without jobs and proper budget scrutiny.

I also think that the illegal immigrant issue is so complex, emotional and polarizing that it could take years to come up with something reasonable. Like everything now, bigger government always seems to be the answer to everything.

Is the Cape Wind project a more important issue to Cape Codders than the waste water issue?

* * * * *

Increase competition for insurance companies to level the playing field and to give homeowners better choices.

Help for business owners making it easier to do business on the Cape.

* * * * *

I think one of the biggest issues for us as a family living here on Cape Cod is the jobs issue. The Cape needs to focus on bringing a higher level of professional positions to this area. Outside of maybe 2 large companies here on the company, if my husband and I want to maintain our standard of living, we both are going to have to continue our 1+ hour commutes off the Cape towards the Boston area. As young professionals the commute wasn't a problem, but now that we have young children, we probably won't be able to stay here for long and continue this.

* * * * *

22 comments:

  1. Good Afternoon Mr. Hunt you have mentioned many good reasons above and as a sportsman I would like to see more of an effort being made to protect all of our natural resources. No matter if it is Coastline or Interior natural resources the powers to be needs to spend more of an effort to protect every ones public rights for excess along with actually protecting our waterways and endangered species from further decline.

    I am hoping that you will provide the missing link which is reguired to be a good stewert of all our Natural Public Resources.

    Carl Johansen
    A concerned citizen of Sandwich

    ReplyDelete
  2. Gerald N. ScampoiJuly 13, 2010 at 8:12 PM

    Good Day, Mr. Hunt;

    I want to comment on only one statement in your blog:

    "I also believe that personal property rights are key and that anyone trying to dillute these rights should be ignored!"

    Did you write that? It doesn't ring true to some comments I have heard directly from your lips....

    I am a resident of Sandwich and I hail from the Canvasback development. I would like to state for the record that I live at 22 Pierre Vernier Drive, have owned the property for 16 years and have been a member of the Canvasback Association for that entire length of time.

    Anyone who purchases a home in this development is automatically a member of the Canvasback Association by virtue of accepting the deed. Yes! The association has existed that long. No organization has to be incorporated to exist!

    You stated at a Selectman's Meeting that you held no respect for the Canvasback Association because it was recently formed. You, sir are wrong! It was recently incorporated, but was formed many years ago.

    Now, about property rights: When I purchased the lot in Canvasback, I was handed the "Covenants" governing the common property and the association. I'm certain that you are familiar with similar documents, if not that one in particular. Even before Mr. & Mrs. Keideisch purchased their property, they attempted to get the association dissolved. They had the developer sign a dissolution statement and they personally registered it at the Registry of Deeds. They were informed before they purchased the property that the path next to the property line existed.

    Is this starting to sound familiar?

    I have no idea what their motives were, but the process they used was illegal and improper, did not properly notify all the abutters property owners and the dissolution document was pronounced 'nul & void' before it ever had the chance to come into effect. The developer rescinded it (rather than being the defendant in a lawsuit!).

    The association then decided to incorporate to prevent further assaults on our property rights.

    Based on her illegal document, Mrs. Keidiesch began to whine and rant to the Selectmen of Sandwich. At one of those meetings, you made the comment that a Jersey Barrier could be employed to "solve the problem." That sounds to me a lot like trying to dillute my property rights. Should I then IGNORE YOU?

    Should you ignore Mrs. Kiedeisch - who also tried to 'dillute' the property rights of all her neighbors? I believe you should! Your acceptance of her support in your campaign may get me (and many others) to vote for your opponent, whoever he may be, even though I have consistently donated to republican election campaigns and have never voted for a Democrat in my life! Wow, talk about being in the minority!

    I really don't expect you to post this on your blog, but I am pleased that you have taken the time to read it.

    If you would like further information, please call.

    Sincerely,

    Gerald N. Scampoli

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mr. Scampoli:

    The comment you refer to was from one of the survey respondents, though I generally share that sentiment.

    I appreciate your point about incorporating the long existing HOA. My disappointment was that the representative who spoke to us one week prior made no mention of establishing the corporation, only making the point that the HOA had been in existence for many years. The organizing documents (which I just re-reviewed at the Secretary of the Commonwealth's website) make no mention of this being the incorporation of an existing entity. I'm not an attorney, so if the process of starting a brand new entity is identical to incorporating an existing entity, then I cede your point and admit I was wrong about that.

    To that point, I would like to review the HOA's tax returns for the years leading up to incorporating the HOA. If the HOA did exist, then I'm sure the tax returns would have been duly filed with the IRS and DOR, as required.

    The other item I had in front of me at the meeting was a document which was purportedly the dissolution of the HOA. Assuming you are correct about that document being fraudulent, I was operating in good faith with information provided to me in bad faith.

    Regarding the Jersey barrier, I made such a comment regarding the Doll Museum owner's right to close off the entrance to Town Hall Annex (which crosses his property), but I don't recall suggesting that Wendy could or should do the same. If I did mention a Jersey barrier, it was probably an allusion to the town's action to close off Kiah's Way, which was being illegally accessed and improved by a private contractor. A similar action could be taken by the town if that were proved to be the case at Pierre Vernier. To my knowledge, no such action has ever been contemplated by the town.

    Finally, my appeal to the BOS and Planning Board was to deal with the situation rather than to allow our board meetings to be dominated by this issue which was clearly in the purview of the Planning Board and Conservation Commission.

    I believe that was, indeed, the result of that meeting. Not everyone is going to be happy, of course, but a significant amount of progress has been made since the stalemate we were dealing with prior to that meeting.

    Call or email me or post another comment if you'd like to continue to discuss this. You'll always find me accessible and willing to discuss any issue.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Gerald N. ScampoliJuly 14, 2010 at 7:58 AM

    Mr Hunt,

    I realize that most CPA's do not ever deal with not-for-profit and non-profit entities. As a CPA, I am certain that you are at least partially familiar with the IRS Code dealing with non-profit & not-for-profit organizations. These entities were not required to submit IRS reports until very recently. Many smaller HOA's believed themselves to fall under the '501(c)' regulations, either as a 3 or as a 7. Under those regulations, even without a "Letter of Determination" from the IRS, organizations such as an HOA did not have to file. Even now, for most, only a 990N Electronic Post Card is required, and that is only if the gross income of the organization is over $12,000.00 (that's for this year, it goes up in future years).

    In discussing the complaints that Mrs. Keidiesch brought before the Selectmen, you did indeed remark that a Jersey Barrier could be employed to solve the problem, JUST LIKE AT KIAH'S WAY. So , it seems to me (and please review the video archives to determine the veracity of my statement), that you were willing to infringe on the property rights of an entire neighborhood without ever hearing the other side of the argument. Just my view.

    Where she is now supporting your election so vigorously, someone uninformed may start to assume that a "deal" was negotiated.

    I do appreciate your time and your efforts for the people of Sandwich and I thank you for taking the time to answer my concerns.

    Gerald N. Scampoli

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mr. Scampoli:

    I am intimately familiar with the IRC nonprofit rules. It's a significant part of my practice.

    Though your analysis of the rules is not quite accurate, I'll take your points regarding filing requirements, 501(c)(3)'s and (7)'s, and the 990N as you state them.

    All of this is irrelevant, however, to Canvasback HOA because it is does not have an IRS Determination Letter (I researched that). Anyone can go to my website (www.RandyHuntCPA.com) and click on Qualified Charity Lookup.

    Your insinuation of a "deal" is flatly false. Couching it in the terms you used is like saying "I'm not saying that he's on the take, but..."

    Stick with the facts.

    The ConCom's decision has a slew of requirements that, if complied with, will result in the HOA having a set of docks. It's now squarely in the hands of the HOA to follow through and, perhaps, some weekend next summer you can invite me for a drink on the pond.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Just curious, but did Canvasback raise money and have a neighborhood party or something like a party. If so, would they need to file an 1120L?


    Justine Abateman

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mr Hunt I would not accept any invitation to having a drink on the proposed docks by the Home owners association. An appeal has been filed and recieved by the appropriate Departments. An on site review will take place and then a desision will be made as to the merits of the Order of Conditions, filed by the Canvesback Home owners association.

    Many aspects of public concerns will be given close scrutany as will all actions concerning MGL91 violations.

    As a further tid bit of information any path that has been traversed for 20 years becomes a public way. A public right of way to a Great Pond becomes just that, any one can access that path for use by the general public.

    I will bet some one will wish that a legal barrier was put in place a long time ago. This will continue to be a breaking point in the discussions in hand, regarding illegal clearing of open space under the law.

    Carl Johansen
    A concerned citizen of Sandwich

    ReplyDelete
  8. Carl,

    I don't think there's any danger of you being invited over for a drink!

    ReplyDelete
  9. When will the review be done and will it be a public meeting for the purposes of the open meeting law?

    ReplyDelete
  10. The local review is done according to the Conservation Commission. They approved it without even seeing a wetland delineation or inquiring about impacts! Overall review is not complete, as the State DEP has received an appeal from local citizens and have yet to issue 2 state level permits. If you oppose the project, you need to write to/call DEP ASAP. DEP Southeast Regional Office 20 Riverside Drive Lakeville, MA 02347 Attn: Brenda Harper. A project of this magnitude truly deserves, at the very least, more opportunity for public comment. The public deserves to have the chance to realize what is going on here. If this project succeeds, more are likely to follow in its footsteps. The land these docks and piers are on belong to the public. The applicants have already placed facilities with no permits and no public comment or environmental review. They now are asking to increase their footprint even more...How about the damage they have done to date? What if we all went out to public lands and started building structures and trails for our own personal enjoyment with no permits? The potential damage they have done to surrounding habitat and the pond via lack of environmental engineering controls could be stunning. Most do not realize this pond presents as an impacted pond to begin with. See Capecodgroundwater.org to read the report on Peter's Pond. Citizens may like to consider approaching the Board of Selectman about why a project of this scale is gliding through a process as if it were insignificant. Elected officials should care about what happens during their term. The treatment of this project on Peter's Pond marks the beginning of an era not looking especially favorable for the Town of Sandwich. Submit comments today or see exactly how that era folds out.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Mr. Hunt a follow up to the above comments. The Department of Envronmental Protection conducted an on site reveiw of the 10 page violations that had been submitted on behalf of the people that own this Great Pond [Peters Pond] As part of the on site visit that was conducted on August 5 2010 by both a representative for the DEP, but also the leading expert on Chapter 91[Colonial laws] in the Commonwealth. On hand were the Canvesback Home owners association and other concerned citizens, myself included.

    It was apparent to those in attendance that many wet land violations were present and knowingly or not were very flagrant in nature.
    It was very clear andit was pointed out that the 100 foot buffer zone is not privately owned and that any conditions that violated this area must receieve permission from not only the town , but the state as well. Also a federel permit is also reguired.

    The actions of the violations will be forth comming in a later review, along with documentation as to precise wording in regards to placement of any docks or piers built or not built. Once that process is unfolded it will recieve what is known as the penility phase, by another review group to determine what if any penilties will be forcomming to the canavesback home owner association will be.

    I suspect should any penilties be given out that they would be judicated to the officers of this newly formed corporation that does not list any other members as being part of the corporation filed in August 12 2009

    This whole process may take up to a year, from filing to appeal.

    When one considers that adjoining the land violated by the Home owners association are at least two legal documented piers that filed all the proper paper work before they began the project, it becomes apparent some do follow the letter of the law and others do not.

    Carl Johansen

    A concerned Citizen of Sandwich

    ReplyDelete
  12. Gerald N. ScampoliAugust 10, 2010 at 7:11 PM

    Mr. Hunt,

    I cannot believe that you allowed Mr. Johansen's uninformed commentary to be published. He has no standing in this matter and is so totally clueless about environmental matters and procedures that nine pages of his ten page appeal document weren't even about the "environmental violations" that he was concerned with! I can only wonder who mixed the Kool-Aid that he was drinking when he wrote that!

    The only truth in Mr. Johansen's statement is that a representative from the State Department of Environmental Protection and a gentleman from the state office responsible for Chapter 91 interpretation came to the Canvasback subdivision to inspect BECAUSE OF THE APPEAL THAT HE FILED AND PAID FOR.

    Mr. Johansen refused to accompany the inspectors on their site visit, he declined to point out any of the alleged violations and AS A RESULT he does not have first hand knowledge of the site visit or it's immediate conclusions!

    The only wet-land violations that the inspectors found on the tour were a stair leading to the water and a storage box near the pond edge (that were placed there by Mr. and Mrs. Kiedeisch)and a kayak that was left in the woods near the pond by another neighbor.

    The one-hundred foot buffer zone is a part of the "open space" lands that really do belong to the Canvasback Homeowners Association. Neither the state nor the town have any claim to them; the deed is held by and registered to the homeowner's association. There are, indeed, certain regulations the buffer zone is subject to and that is the only claim that the state and the town can make over these lands.

    There is no doubt in my mind that the necessary permits will be granted and that the association will enjoy the use of their docks for years to come.

    If Mr. Johansen would like to put his time, money and effort to good use, he could donate some of it to the Perry campaign or perhaps even to yours! As it is he has wasted his time and the $100.00 that he spent to file the appeal.

    Thanks for your interest in this matter. Fairly or not, you may be judged by the company you keep.

    As I stated in past correspondence, please feel free to call me for clarification of these matters when they come up.


    Gerald N. Scampoli

    ReplyDelete
  13. Mr. Scampoli, very well put. It is important to be accurate and not mis-informed when one writes on these blogs. Mr. Johansen should run for office and see just what many of us believe about his constant mis-information to townspeople. Thank you so much Mr. Scampoli. I can't believe that after all the noise, he would not even show up. How cowardice.

    James Madison

    PS I disagree with those docks, but you are right that you will get them approved.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Carl Johansen said
    Mr.Scampoli Your information as to who owns the land with in the 100 foot buffer, can be taken up with a review of the chaper 91 colonial ordinance. It is unfortuned that you were not listing when the comments were being made in regards to ownership. Not you or any one associated with the newly formed canvesback home owners have any legal rights under the law. This buffer along with the water where you illegally placed your piers,steps,paths belongs to the Citizens of Massachusetts. This has been a legal document in the Commonwealth for more then 100 years. You can state what ever you want in the above matter, but you along with others did in fact violate many regulations along that shore line you claim you own.

    One can say that the review of those violations will be determined by the appropriate bodies as well as any penlities. This process make take a year or more from start to finish , but rest assured one thing will be made very clear and that is you and your newly form association will have a better understanding of MGL91 and perhaps even if the Canvesback home owners association is a legal enity at all that can apply a covenant from an association that was disbanded in 2006 and then reformulate a new one in 2009 While we are at it, do you presently pay taxes on this open space you claim to own?

    Have a nice day

    ReplyDelete
  15. Mr. Johansen, do I dedect a bit of anger in your last post?




    James Madison

    ReplyDelete
  16. If my memory is correct, the Canvesback Homeowners Lawyer stated that all piers or docks will have a communal use . I take it every member of this newly formed corporation will have legal excess and use of every pier or dock that will be allowed to stay,once approved by the DEP.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Carl Johansen said Mr. Hunt a little correction.
    It could be stated the Canvesback Homeowners perhaps may own the Buffer Zone or an indivual land owner. Some where in the translation the facts still remain that this area is protected by the Wet Lands Act and any thing that is in the water is protected by MGL91. What this means is that no one can place or destroy at will any thing they want to do with out the proper permits. For example the placement of any thing on the water {NO tresspassing signs] peirs, docks are illegal, until the proper permits are secured from the authorities under whom only they can give a permit to.

    We can state that a private person can own up to the water mark, but once they obtain permission under the Wet Lands Act to change any thing or add anything they will be taxed accordingly to those approved conditions of change, upon this Buffer Zone.
    To my knowledge the town of Sandwich charges a small fee at present for this space, but once and if any docks or changes are legally permitted the changes will constitute adding the appropriate dollar value of the house to the towns tax rolls. This may be small potatoes if it were only speaking about one illegal pier, but we are talking about a multitide of peirs, docks,physical changes over many years lost from the tax rolls.

    The town of Sandwich has been denied the payment of the actual value of the property by this illegal way of avoiding a legal permit to make changes.

    Our mutual public shared Great Pond[Peters Pond] has been denigrated by the illegal placement of such piers and those whom have the legal right to use the shore line have been denied the use of a public resource. The habitat of the natural spawning fish stocks in Peters Pond has also been comprimised by all the illegal activity that has been allowed to continue unabaded along these shore lines.
    The quality of this water source has also been comprimised as well, by all this illegal activity, over many years, by severel uncaring folks who have decided to not follow the rules in place to protect this natural resource.

    ReplyDelete
  18. My comment is for James Madison. Evidently you do not know the definition of the word coward. Unlike you, Mr. Johansen signs all his postings and if you forgot Mr. Johansen filed the appeal - doesn't sound like a coward to me!!
    Like you it is very important to be accurate and not to misinform the public. Boy, have you been misled by Mr. Scampoli. I attended the DEP site visit and Mr. Johansen informed the DEP rep the minute he arrived and told him that he had an appointment he had to go to and would have to leave at a certain time. We were held up for approximately 35-45 minutes why the attorney for Canvasback spoke and didn't allow anyone (who was not from the association) to speak. Then it started to rain and we were held up again. In no way did Mr.Johansen refuse to accompany the inspector on their site visit. Guess who was not in attendance, yes you guessed it MR. SCAMPOLI!! Don't always believe what you read - have you heard of PINOCCHIO?

    ReplyDelete
  19. I know what the word coward means, but for sure, Mr. Johansen does not. A true American is not a coward because he votes a bullet or does not vote.

    My name is James Madison. I believe I wrote it down. you, on the other hand, are a coward.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Gerald N. ScampoliAugust 13, 2010 at 8:31 AM

    Mr. Hunt,

    Anonymous (above) is correct in one way. I did not attend the site visit personally, I had to work. I did, however send a representative and attend many neighborhood gatherings after the site visit. I learned more about the inspection than either Mr. Johansen or Mrs. Anonymous did - Him because he declined to accompany the inspectors and she because she never stopped talking.

    In reference to "James Madison," who at least used a nom-de plume', why doesn't Anonymous use her real name and stop hiding behind anonymity? Does anyone really believe that all the anonymous posts came from different sources? Step out into the world of truth!

    I posted no fact that cannot be substantiated with adequate documentation. If you feel that I have misled or mis-stated anything at all, you are welcome to bring action against me; my consencience is clear and, TRUTH IS AN ABSOLUTE DEFENSE AGAINST LIABLE.

    In just three posts above, Mr. Johansen changed his tune from "Not you or anyone.....have any legal rights under the law" to "perhaps may own the Buffer Zone."

    Which statement is true? Neither. The truth does not depend on point of view, but on point of law.

    Pinocchio told anyone that would listen:
    The paths are illegal.
    The Town owns the land.
    The neighborhood association has been dissolved.
    The neighbors are harassing me.
    The neighborhood association is recently formed.
    I was at church when the path was cut.
    The path was cut at midnight by an ATV.
    The Town officials are corrupt.

    All of the above statements are false! Where does Pinocchio get the truth? Out of the clear blue sky.

    Please Anonymous, TELL THE TRUTH!

    Gerald N. Scampoli

    ReplyDelete
  21. Mr. Scampoli, I went from thinking you were terrible, to maybe he has a point, to maybe he really has a point, to leaning in your favor. At any rate, I believe your last post to be straight on and hope for the best.

    James Madison

    ReplyDelete
  22. To the anonymous poster who spoke to Mr. Johansen's courage for writing down his name. Did you know that some of the anonymous posters are people that write their names only on some of their posts. Randy Hunt has it right. Put down your thoughts, let them be read for what they are not for who wrote them. It does not take any courage to write on a blog whether is be anonymous or not. Ask Sandy Shoes.

    ReplyDelete

I monitor all comments. As long as there are no personally defamatory statements and/or foul language, I'll post your comment. For this reason, your comment will not appear instantaneously. To comment without registering, choose Name/URL and type a screen name (or your real name if you like) into the Name field. Leave the URL field blank.