If you are looking for an evening of viewing pleasure, it looks like you need look no further than your Board of Selectmen's meeting for Monday, July 1, 2013. The posted agenda is chalk full of matters sure to keep your attention.
Make an extra bowl of popcorn because it promises to be a very long night. Appointments are scheduled for 7:00, 7:15, 7:20, 7:30, 7:45 and 8:00 (tax title properties; park motors property, CDBG, Revolution Energy, SEEAL/Next Step Energy, and Fairhaven Wind in that order). These are in addition to the 4 action items and three discussion items. No correspondence this week, that has been pushed to July 15th. Not considering the executive session items. We don't get to see them, that's why i noted onloy one extra bag of popcorn.
Now of course if they follow the allotted times for the appointments, it will be an early evening, and you will have wasted the extra popcorn, unless you are like me and will eat it anyway.
But, given the three discussion items (the lingering easement issue on Cushman Park, town counsel and the B of H election), plus say one or two of the appointments, I am guessing you will be comping on that popcorn watching the meeting.
A note of interest, at least for me, is the fact that neither the Board of Health nor the Board of Selectmen have posted minutes for the "special" noontime meeting on June 10, 2013. Doesn't seem the Selectmen are going to be doing it anytime soon, at least not based on the agenda for Monday.
The Standard Times has an article on the newly formed group "Friends of Fairhaven Wind". Not quite sure this is the type of unity intended by the decisions made/announced at that noontime June 10th meeting, but it does seem to have had a unifying effect for a segment of people in town.
Well it may not seem like much for today, but as with most things, it is what it is.
Be safe.
There's nothing wrong with having another wind-opinion group. But to think that the number of 'likes' on Facebook has anything to do with the number of people who actually support it's stance, or will actively do anything to promote it's cause, might be wishful thinking.
ReplyDeleteThere is/was a group that formed to refurbish something in the north end. They had over 400 'likes,' but they didn't get the job done.
It's great that people feel free to give their opinion and argue for what they believe in. But does a majority's opinion completely eliminate a claim by the other side?
Consider a mental illness: it can't be 'seen,' and the majority of a group doesn't acknowledge what they can't 'see.' Does that mean mental illness doesn't exist?
We could solve or decide every situation by 'majority rules.' That would be easy.
There are definitely sides to the wind issue. I'm sure both sides could rally sides larger than what's being heard from right now.
But not everything that's desired by only one side will be the resolve to the problem.
“But does a majority's opinion completely eliminate a claim by the other side?
DeleteConsider a mental illness: it can't be 'seen,' and the majority of a group doesn't acknowledge what they can't 'see.' Does that mean mental illness doesn't exist?”
This is being used as some sort of defense every time this discussion comes up now. It’s all some people can come up with I sup[pose.
This point simply ignores the facts when you keep claiming pro-wind arguments are made to simply “eliminate claims by the other side”. I would ask to be given one, just one time that the complaints are being ignored, by anyone. Tell me the one meeting, or agenda item or what ever you wish that proves that people are being purposely ignored. Before you claim you have found one, EVERY time I hear that argument it, so far has been disproven, as people who are not familiar with government procedures are impatient or do not care about rules and regulations. They needle pick regulations or statements and then immediately claim victory or persecution.
So if you could tell us all, exactly, where the claims are being ignored, I for one promise to look into it and tell you what I can find out. Please stop thinking we are all uncaring and too stupid to understand the claims being made, because it simply is not true. But I am one town official more than willing to listen to your claim.
I did not say or imply that any "claims are being ignored." I used mental health as an example of a situation where a majority could say that since they can't see something, it doesn't exist. Some of the people quoted in the newspaper state that they don't experience any ill effects. If they are in fact the majority, should the minority who feels ill effects be discounted?
DeleteI don't deny there's credible arguments to both sides of the turbine issue. One of the statements in the newspaper mentioned the number of 'likes' on a Facebook page. I'm saying it shouldn't be settled based solely on the number of bodies on any given side. And in the end, both sides are not going to be completely happy.
I couldn't agree more that "not everything that's desired by only on side will be the resolve to the problem."
ReplyDeleteThere are merits to both sides of the turbine issue - the sooner people truly acknowledge this and stop calling names (today's ST article re 'nuttyville' turbine neighbors) the better. 'Friends' may be a misnomer.
ReplyDeleteInteresting article in the ST opinion page today.It seems like someone thinks he knows the answers to the turbine fiasco.He blames certain Fairhaven citizens and their monetary tactics for our current situation.
ReplyDelete