Westwood Minute is happy to offer a place for community members to contribute to the site. Please register to post or add to the discussion.

Replies

Replies

Westwood Weather: Sunday March 29
High: 55°
Low: 25°
Wind: 11 MPH SSW
Chance of rain: 0%

Sunny, with a high of 55 and low of 25 degrees. Sunny for the morning, clear in the afternoon and evening,

Replies

Correction: The Westwood Select Board members in 2000, when the Town formally accepted and acknowledged the Conservation Restriction on 665 Clapboardtree Street including the meadow, were Anthony Antonellis, Michael Walsh and Patrick Ahearn.

3
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

Thank you for this very helpful explanation. I think it’s also important to keep in mind that the Bean Farm has stated that their intention would be to use the land “for generations”, so they have no actual intention of returning the land to a meadow state.

6
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Thank you for this explanation. It is very surprising and disappointing that the Select Board did not do their own due diligence into the ecological consequences of farming as they were contemplating this lawsuit and asserting that it is in the "public interest"! 

5
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

Thank you, Mr. Christensen, for your helpful response to Ms. Galkowski. For additional clarity, we felt uncomfortable putting our full names after witnessing some baseless, negative accusations and remarks made from the WLT supporters toward the Bean Farm supporters.

2
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

I am curious about a few claims that you state here. Does denying the use of this particular land by the Bean Farm necessarily mean that the farm will cease to exist? If the farm closes or moves, does that necessarily mean that the Beans’ land will be fully developed?

2
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Mr. Moore, I think it’s very inappropriate that you are projecting “criticism” and me being “upset” onto my comment, as someone who has felt more than welcome to voice your own opinions on this and other posts.

1
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

I am not surprised at the speculations on cronyism and quid pro quo. The lack of transparency on an issue centered on one business + the fact that the Bean family are the largest donors to the Chair's campaign is enough to raise this question! Campaign finance records can be found here: 

3
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

I am not surprised at the speculations on cronyism and quid pro quo. The lack of transparency on an issue centered on one business + the fact that the Bean family are the largest donors to the Chair's campaign is enough to raise this question!

2
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Mr. Moore, please, could you  be more specific about your assertion here, so  those  readers following this exchange of positions can understand what you are referring to in your brief post?

I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

Mr. Christensen, with respect to your comments on the cost of the town meeting. Many residents did reach out to the select board, by email and public comment at select board meetings. You can review the videos of those meetings.

2
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

I agree that this is a false choice, but i see the false choice as being between allowing the farm to use the conservation land and losing the farm to development. I support the farm’s success but I don’t believe that this specific land is the only option for them to survive, it is just the most convenient.

4
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Thank you for your thoughts and I wish there was a way for everyone to communicate this topic in person so that the tone and tenor of our voices wouldn't be confused as argumentative or adversarial.  

2
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

The town is not subsidizing the farm strictly speaking, but they are funding the lawsuit over the use of the land. Based on typical agricultural lease rates, the cost of the litigation is not likely to be recouped by the town.

3
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

Well said Mr Moore. To those concerned about the cost of the lawsuit and the indirect benefit to the Bean family, according to a letter from Mr Bean their family was overcharged for property taxes in excess of $40000 which adjusting for inflation would be approximately $100,000.

1
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

Hi Erin, Change.org does not allow me to restrict anyone from signing the petition.  If this were a vote or something similar to your petition calling for Westwood Government to take some action we would need to weed out the signers that are not from Westwood.  At points as the word spread they came in fast and furi

1
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

Replies

While I respect your position of supporting the effort to use the meadow, your statement that “WLT is responsible for “monitoring” the property, not deciding what articles to enforce and what exceptions to approve.

4
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

The LT also has the authority to deny the approval.  They may not unreasonably withhold approval but they also may not, per the CR, grant any approvals that would impair other conservations purposes like preserving the meadow.

3
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive

We actually went and took a look at this “meadow” when we got our Christmas tree this year. We’re arguing about a couple acres of dirt that directly abuts Bean Farm and has zero external access, except to go through Bean Farm. 

3
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive