We are going to start a weekly CIVIC LESSON 101 for our fellow citizens to understand the legal way in which our town government should be run. This will allow everyone to see for themselves, how blatant the violations are of our elected officials. How they continuously ignore these rules week after week.
We will begin this week with “Appealing A Decision” that a Land Use Board has made and the requirements that the officials need to follow for a fair and just hearing. This is something that our officials failed to follow this week during a JOINT HEARING of the ZBA & PB. We look forward to your feed back and if you have any questions, we will be happy to explain!
TITLE LXIV
PLANNING AND ZONING
CHAPTER 676
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
General Provisions
Section 676:6
676:6 Effect of Appeal to Board. – The effect of an appeal to the board shall be to maintain the status quo. An appeal of the issuance of any permit or certificate shall be deemed to suspend such permit or certificate, and no construction, alteration, or change of use which is contingent upon it shall be commenced. An appeal of any order or other enforcement action shall stay all proceedings under the action appealed from unless the officer from whom the appeal is taken certifies to the board of adjustment, after notice of appeal shall have been filed with such officer, that, by reason of facts stated in the certificate, a stay would, in the officer's opinion, cause imminent peril to life, health, safety, property, or the environment. In such case, the proceedings shall not be stayed otherwise than by a restraining order which may be granted by the board or by the superior court on notice to the officer from whom the appeal is taken and cause shown.
676:7 Public Hearing; Notice. –
I. Prior to exercising its appeals powers, the board of adjustment shall hold a public hearing. Notice of the public hearing shall be given as follows:
(a) The appellant and every abutter and holder of conservation, preservation, or agricultural preservation restrictions shall be notified of the hearing by certified mail stating the time and place of the hearing, and such notice shall be given not less than 5 days before the date fixed for the hearing of the appeal. The board shall hear all abutters and holders of conservation, preservation, or agricultural preservation restrictions desiring to submit testimony and all nonabutters who can demonstrate that they are affected directly by the proposal under consideration. The board may hear such other persons, as it deems appropriate.
(b) A public notice of the hearing shall be placed in a newspaper of general circulation in the area not less than 5 days before the date fixed for the hearing of the appeal.
II. The public hearing shall be held within 30 days of the receipt of the notice of appeal.
III. Any party may appear in person or by the party's agent or attorney at the hearing of an appeal.
IV. The cost of notice, whether mailed, posted, or published, shall be paid in advance by the applicant. Failure to pay such costs shall constitute valid grounds for the board to terminate further consideration and to deny the appeal without public hearing.
Source. 1983, 447:1. 1985, 159:25. 1996, 226:1. 1997, 142:6, eff. Aug. 8, 1997.
NOTE: The term "stay" is referring to STOP.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/lxiv/676/676-mrg.htm
17 comments:
And while you are discussing the civics lesson 101 you need to include the responsibility of the Board of Selectmen. It is their fiduciary responsibility to ensure that the town is run properly and those that have jobs in the town are performing them responsibly. Having said that one person should not be head of two boards. Even the village who is missing their idiot knows that. Please continue with the lessons as the people in town need to know and understand that some of the people on the boards only have "their" best interest at heart. Thanks for the information. Keep up the good work!
I think this blog should be required reading for all board members, the ZBA surely didn't follow any of these rules last night at all when they discussed Mr. Towne's appeal, they wouldn't even let him talk. It was as if John Hahn wanted him to take the board to court. As much as I hate to hear of someone filing another suit against the town I would support his doing so 100%, what some of those members said and did was so wrong. Shame on them!
Remember everyone, the selectmen hand picked that board, they are not voted into their positions and several have been on that board for as long as I can remember. Same old people doing the same old things time and time again. Maybe your next civic lesson will be on teaching people how to vote for the "best qualified" candidate and not the same few "known" people who have done nothing for the people of this town except drive them into the poorhouse. If this town is ever going to turn itself around and become a better place for all of us to live, then we need to start making good decisions and removing people that only care about their little bit of power and how they can gain from it.
Yes, I feel that I did not get a fair shake Thursday night, especially when I had requested that our Code Enforcement Officer be present to explain his reasons for denial and answer questions.
My appeal of the board's actions in overturning Leroy's decision was a simple one showing where they had erred in their ruling that asphalt was not toxic to our aquifer. I supplied documentation to them from several different sources including a list of 9 states that have designated and listed asphalt as a toxic substance. Massachusetts was one of them. Only two of them actually listened and agreed with me that having an asphalt plant in our protected aquifer district is a potential disaster waiting to happen ala' BP in the Gulf. Asphalt is toxic and a serious threat to our water supply and health.
Asphalt is the leftover product from the production of gasoline which is made from crude oil. This is then "cut" with a highly toxic chemical and known carcinogen to make it more flowable. Benzene, which is cheap is most commonly used and at the top of many hazardous substances lists. This forms the binding agent commonly called asphalt, though it is not the finished product. Aggregate and RAP ( recycled asphalt ) from old roads and highways is then mixed and heated to form the finished product. Recycled asphalt has been shown to contain MTBE's from auto exhaust, a highly toxic chemical that is used in gasoline to make it burn cleaner has been banned in many states ( not here ) because of it's threat to human health. It washes into the soil every time it rains, it's released into the atmosphere during the cooking stage of asphalt production along with at least 7 more know highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals with attach themselves to dust particles and form particulates ( HAP's ) which rain down on the immediate and surrounding areas, polluting the air and ground and thus our contaminating our groundwater. I would most definitely conclude that asphalt is toxic to our aquifer despite John Hann's dismissal of the facts when he motioned to deny my appeal. I personally think there is more going on here than meets the eye and am very concerned at the way this meeting was run. Why the rush to judgment? Why not a proper hearing to discuss all of the facts and look at all of the data? Why wouldn't they allow public comment or allow me to provide any testimony to back up my facts? What was Mr. Hann afraid of? Why wouldn't the board agree to hear from an independent party instead of taking the word of someone who works for the owners of this plant and is not a chemical engineer or soil scientist? The action of those who voted to deny my appeal seem very suspect when it comes to protecting the town and it's water supply.
I do have recourse through the courts, I can file a lawsuit on behalf of Winchester and Swanzey citizens to make them listen and do what's right. Much as I would dislike taking this route it is now the only option left because of what transpired Thursday night.
John Hann said it himself, "court is the next step in the hearing process." It was almost like he had made up his mind in advance. Is this something worth fighting the town over? Will the ZBA's conclusion now make it easier for the Planning Board to ignore certain facts and testimony?
What do you think? I'd like to hear from the people in Winchester and Swanzey who will be deeply affected if this proposal gets approved and built.
RE: Anonymous 10/8 6:58 pm
John Hann stated that it was "parallel" to Butch's lawsuit that "went all the way to the Supreme Court" and we were vindicated. "Mr. Towne simply needs to appeal to us before he can take it to court" so let's vote against hearing his arguements so it DOES go to court.
Hey, Money Bags John - the rest of the town DOESN'T want to be spending our tax dollars fighting cases that you could have alleviated by simply abiding by our own rules & regulations. Give us a break!
Just because you have no worries since you have your own septic & water - doesn't mean the rest of us don't worry about our water being contaminated. How many other board members have town water? NONE? Don't base all of your decisions on YOU and your circumstance! Consider the BIG picture and be kind to the entire population....
I agree with Mr. Towne and the rest of you this does stink to high heaven and something isn't right. Why did this board except an outsider's appeal and then deny one to someone who will surely be affected by their decision and dare him to take them to court? There is as Mr. Towne says, definitely something else going on here. At least we have one person in Winchester who isn't afraid to stand up for himself and other and who won't be intimidated by the big bad brotherhood downtown, more than I can say for others who have been bullied in the past and shrunk away and you know who you are.
I say take them to court, let a judge hear how the law was broken and our own regulations ignored. I'm appalled that this is what it takes to get our boards to stop acting favorably to certain businesses coming into town and wanting to destroy our way of life. John Hann and those others who voted against giving Mr. Towne a hearing when that is exactly what they did without his or anyone else's input should quietly slink away and find something else constructive to do on Thursday nights. It is without question they do not care about what's right or the town as a whole and don't see the big picture. We don't need board members who won't listen to citizens with valid concerns and the data to back them up. I say remove those people immediately, allow Mr. Towne a proper hearing and avoid the costs of going to court again. This is just pure foolishness and it needs to stop now.
Come on people we all know what this is, for those of you who didn't attend the meeting Margaret Sharra was in a heated discussion prior to the start of the meeting with John. Her body language and demeanor showed she was really agitated and upset about something. None of us sitting far back could hear what she was saying until she stepped back away from the table and loudly said to John Hann, " I can't tell you what to do, it's entirely up to you what you allow the board to do", "It's your decision" and then walked away. We all looked at each other and knew who had just made the decision for him. This woman is a complete control freak and is the real power behind both the land use boards. We all know how she feels about Towne, she'll do and say anything to smear this man when it is really herself who is the town's biggest problem. What we all witnessed Thursday night was a complete orchestrated demonstration of this woman's will, we are in deep trouble as long as Sharra is on these boards.
I also agree, take them to court Mr. Towne maybe the judge will get sick of seeing Winchester before him again.
It is absolutely shameful for someone to continually have to go back to court in order to be heard at a town board meeting. This is very shameful conduct on behalf of people whom I assumed were decent and respectful. I have had my eyes opened wide to what goes on in this town and now will start paying more attention in order to make the right choices in March. As someone said earlier this foolishness needs to stop right now.
Can you believe that both of those boards voted not to hear comments from the public that night? What the hell kinda public meeting is that? Did they forget they have a fiduciary responsibility to hear from all sides on matters before them? This crap has to stop happening, these people act like they are all knowing and some act like the public is boring them. Can't we get some decent law abiding people on these boards who will listen,use common sense and treat the public with decency and respect? Take em to court, they deserve it.
this guy town is nothing more than a troublemaker for evryone. he has costed us many thowsands of dollars in legallity fees and will cost us more til we get him out of town he expects to be in a quiet area yet he lives right on the highway in our building zone I say he goes and he takes his crying with him
go away mr towne you and your friend homan aren't wanted here things were just fine here til you started coming around and making trouble if you dont like it here move to swanzey with the rest of those crybabys
Message for Mr. Towne.
Go away and stop wasting our tax dollars on your personal feud with the town. We don't need or want your kind here, go back where you came from and see if they'll put up with your suing them all the time. Our boards do follow the laws just because they do and your not happy doesn't mean they don't. Go sue someone else and leave Winchester alone.
To the posters above who have a dislike of me, you're entitled to your opinions, but you do seem to be missing the point in all of this. It is not just me who is against putting a business such as this in our town's aquifer district and creating potentially hazardous health issues for the citizens living in this area, there are many people involved in this action who have legitimate fears and an expectation of protection by the town for things such as this. No risk to health or water is acceptable under any means, don't you all agree? Would you want this plant in your section of town or worse, in your front yard?
To quote some of our town leaders, I'll take your comments under advisement. `
Your intelligence on the subject is obvious - not only in your opinion about town politics, but it "parallels" that of your grammar & spelling. Not very persuasive!
It would be safe to assume that you are one of the "free loaders" in town who doesn't pay a dime in taxes...but milks the town for everything.
Now which one on the board are you related to?
Without Mr. Towne and the Informer, we would still be in the dark and a couple of people would rule the town with no one watching. I don't always agree with Mr. Towne, but I don't trust almost everyone in the town hall. When you have employees committing a felony on co. time with co. equipment and things like the town manager buying underwear with the town credit card and the selectmen don't appear to care you need to have someone watching.
Whats the problem, town hall folks and employees, cant stand a little scrutiny? Try the real world, most of you wouldn't last a week.
Post a Comment