Annual Town Meeting of 2010.

Earl Johnson attended the last annual town meeting as selectboard member; James Wettlaufer is not credible any longer; and Christian Petersen joined his two colleagues in their quest to promote a project that would have violated not less than 16 provisions under the bylaws or other rules and regulations.
However, the voters of Holland used sound judgment and dared not to follow the advice of their “leaders,” and do it right. The disabled and seniors deserve it, read more»

Posted on 27 May 2010, 00:01 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


Don't miss the ANNUAL TOWN MEETING tonight, Tuesday May 25, at 7:00 p.m. sharp!

A-frame-house-unfinished-for-the-last-25-yearsThroughout the day, I will gather information and will post it here and add as the day progresses, so check back if you can. If you don't like the way our town is run, be there tonight and voice your opinion! Certain articles on the town warrant need your attention, here is what I gathered so far:

Article #3, #4, and #5 seek authorization by the voters to authorize the Board of Selectmen to grant easments and to enter into a lease agreement to lease the 2 acre town owned property to HAP, Inc. in order to acommodate the proposed low income housing project for seniors.
The voters have a last chance to force HAP and the town government to find a better solution for the project.
If the voters vote YES on article #5, the project will be built, if the voters vote NO, the project can not be built at the proposed site.
YES Votes on article #3 and #4 will just make it easier to realize the project but are not necessary for the project to go forward.
There has been strong opposition by several residents towards the project's realization on the proposed side as the 2 acre parcel does not allow the construction of the Project,
To read more about article #3, #4, and #5 click here!»

Peter Frei

Posted on 25 May 2010, 13:15 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


Wales not to be bullied by James Wettlaufer.

Wales residents sent a clear message to the “leaders” of Holland; the rejection of the proposed regionalization of Wales’ and Holland’s Elementary Schools came as no surprise for many. Read more»

Posted on 20 May 2010, 00:01 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


Wales voted NO!

I’m attending the Wales annual town meeting. The voters of Wales just voted on article 12. Article 12 is the question on the warrant whether the voters of Wales are in favor of regionalizing their elementary school with the one of the town of Holland. The vote count is:
54 votes in favor, 101 against the regionalization of the elementary school. More when I'm back home!
Peter Frei

Posted on 19 May 2010, 21:50 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


Ray Korny, Holland's New Beginning.

I've lived in Holland for my entire childhood till I was 21 years old. I moved permanently back to town in 2005.
Since that time we've lost a lot of our old timers who helped build this town and make it what it's become.
People like Tom Mulrain, our police chief, John Goodhall who ran the Holland Fire Dept. for many years,
Fred Henke who served us as Selectman/Police Officer along with many other positions, my dad, Gerry Germaine, who took care of the Holland School as janitor for many years and more recently Walter Woods who made sure we could always get home in a storm running our Highway Dept., All people who took care of US by taking care of our beloved town . They did it on a shoestring and dedicated countless hours of their own personal time and money and often times with great sacrifice to their own families with no reward.

I moved back to Holland only to find the town immersed in political strife that can only be rivaled by the Hatfield and McCoys.

The upcoming election will prove to be an opportunity for the people of Holland to make a change away from the direction of past politics. We have such a person here in Holland who I believe holds the ideals and dedication of some of his past predecessors who can help implement some much needed changes here in town. I believe Ray Korny who's running for Selectman has the character, honesty, and integrity needed for Holland to go forward to a new beginning. You only have to talk to Ray Korny a few minutes to find out he's articulate, well read, educated, and detail oriented and that he isn't afraid to speak up for what he feels is right or WRONG. You only have to drive by his property or go to his web site for his and his wife Barbara's bed and breakfast (restfulpaws.com) to see how dedicated and detail oriented he is to a project. I believe he will be just as dedicated to the Town of Holland. He has served in a number of capacities for the town already, and he's here in town almost 24 hours a day 7 days a week. As such he is familiar with the interaction of our existing officials.
Holland has a rare opportunity right now for that New Beginning. I hope the people of Holland will throw all their support behind Ray on election day and do what's necessary by voting for him. It's rare that a town has the opportunity and willingness of an individual like Ray Korny to serve it's people. It may be a long time before we have another chance at such a quality individual. Let's not miss this one!.

Gerry Germaine
Hisgen Farm
Hisgen House
Bed & Breakfast
78 Hisgen Road
Holland, MA

Posted on 13 May 2010, 12:19 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


Public Hearing on Budget (Draft) for Fiscal Year 2O11.

This year’s public hearing with the Finance Committee was held on April 20, 2010. Thomas Dubrey, chairman of the Committee, together with Anthony Roman and Andrew Harhay presented the draft of the budget for FY2011 and explained how they will keep the town fiscally afloat during these economic hard times. Dubrey had an unexpected clear answer to tax collector Nancy Talbot’s request for more funds. Read more and watch the video»

Posted on 7 May 2010, 00:01 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


Brian Johnson‘s sign at the four corners not too large after all!

My aquisations were incorrect, it was not intentional and here is how it happened: The town zoning bylaws clearly restrict political signs to 288 square inches, see paragraph (i), and (d) of subsection 7.11:

7.1 SIGNS

7.11 General Restrictions and Allowances:

Any exterior sign or advertising device hereafter erected or maintained shall, except as expressly provided, conform to the following restrictions:

  1. No sign shall be so located that it will cause danger to traffic by obscuring the view of a public way.
  2. Flashing, blinking, revolving signs and similar displays are not permitted except by special permit by the Board of Appeals.
  3. No sign shall be place on or project over town property or be placed on utility poles which are located on town property.
  4. Nothing in this bylaw shall forbid property owners from erecting on their own property signs not more than two square feet in area containing the words “No Dumping”, “No Trespassing”, “Private Property”, “Beware of Dog”, “Blind Driveway” or other customary signs of similar import.
  5. One sign for each family residing on the premises indicating the name of the owner or occupant or pertaining to a permitted accessory use provided, however, that said sign shall not exceed two square feet in area, or twelve feet in the aggregate.
  6. One sign not over nine square feet in area pertaining to permitted buildings, structures and uses of the premises, other than dwellings, and their accessory buildings.
  7. Temporary signs aggregating not over twelve square feet in area pertaining to the sale or lease of the premises on which said signs are located, provided that said signs shall be permitted for a period not exceeding one year.
  8. Directional signs not exceeding two square feet in area pertaining to churches, schools, institutions and other non profit uses, or to the location of businesses, places of accommodation and professional offices.
  9. Political signs shall be allowed as a matter of right, but shall not be greater in either area or in the aggregate, than that allowed for non political signs.

To make sure that no other rules apply to political signs erected on parcels in the business district, I started to read subsection 7.13.
campaign-sign-of-Brian-Johnson-at-the-four-corners Under paragraph (a), I read “Signs shall pertain only to a use or business conducted on the premises on which they are located and must conform to the height regulations in the appropriate district.” This sentence is unambiguous and restricts permitted signs to signs that “pertain only to a use or business conducted on the premises on which they are located...” There is nothing that would indicate that there are exceptions, there is no language such as “except,” there is also no restriction on the term “signs.” It does not read, “business signs...” it just reads “signs shall pertain only to a use or business conducted on the premises on which they are located...” There was no need to read any further, political signs are not allowed at all according to the meaning of paragraph (a) of subsection 7.13.

However, I just read the entire subsection 7.13, and to my surprise political signs are mentioned under paragraph (f). Not only are they allowed, they can measure up to “200 square feet in the aggregate.” A political sign could be as large as 10 feet by 20 feet if erected on a parcel in the business district.
The word “aggregate” is a term used to describe the one-dimensional property of a group of items and not the two-dimensional or three-dimensional properties. The word is correctly used to describe the length or height of an item (sign) and not the surface in square foot. I do apoligize for jumping to a conclusion. Anybody familiar with our bylaws will agree with me that our bylaws are a mess and need to be rewritten to avoid ambigiuous interpretations and situations like this one.
Here is subsection 7.13 in its entirity:

7.13 Business Districts

In all business districts the following signs and no other are permitted:

  1. Signs shall pertain only to a use or business conducted on the premises on which they are located and must conform to the height regulations in the appropriate district.
  2. The total surface area of no one exterior sign on any one property shall not exceed one square foot for each linear foot of street frontage; however, in no instance shall the total surface area of all exterior signs combined on one premises be more than 200 square feet in area.
  3. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this bylaw, religious and public institutions shall be permitted to erect signs in the aggregate of not more than fifteen square feet, and only on property belonging to same.
  4. Illuminated signs shall be located twenty five feet or more from a residential district boundary line.
  5. No sign shall extend over public property.
  6. Political signs not exceeding 200 square feet in the aggregate.

Peter Frei

Posted on 18 May 2010, 14:34 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


We need a debate between candidates.

The Holland Blog has an average of 125 visitors a day and this number will rise in the days before the annual town meeting (May 25) and the annual town election (June 7.) Many people, including myself, do not know all the candidates. Robotic-arm-microphone-stand A debate between the candidates would be ideal, the Holland Blog can offer you the next best thing. I will make an attempt to post here on the blog two one-hour audio recordings of two question-answer sessions with the two candidates running for the three year term on the Board of Selectmen.
You, the readers of the Holland Blog, are encouraged to email me questions to be asked during the recorded question-answer sessions. Please email me your questions to peterfrei@cox.net.
I will then setup a time and place and will read the questions to the candidate. The candidate then has 3 minutes to answer the question. I will limit the number of questions to twenty. Once I have both sessions recorded, I will then post the audio files on the blog for everybody to listen to.
If either of the candidates, Michael P. Kennedy or Raymond P. Korny chooses not to participate, I will post the audio recording of the candidate that chooses to participate.
If there is interest in such question-answer sessions to get a debate going, I will send a formal letter inviting the two candidates to participate in the question-answer session.
Peter Frei

Posted on 1 May 2010, 09:34 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


Earl & Brian Johnson, "Keep the team together!"

Some of you may remember the Johnsons' campaign slogan, "Keep the team together." My hope for a positive change was dashed at the caucus when Brian Johnson's nomination for the highway surveyor went unopposed. There was a rumor in town that a most (more) qualified long time resident would be willing to serve the community and challenge Brian Johnson for the highway surveyor position. Kristin LaPlante confirmed today that 52 year old George Carling filed his nomination papers yesterday, Kristin LaPlante: "I have not had the time to certify the signatures yet, but it seems that he has more then he needs." George Carling who previously worked for the highway department for one year under Woods wants to end the deterioration of Holland's roadways (something Brian Johnson is not currently doing) and make a difference. While Brian Johnson founded J & G Construction in 2008 while holding his office, George Carling sold his business recently to devote his undivided attention to better the roads and ways of our town. The community, after all, will get the opportunity to "keep the [Johnson] team together," this time outside the town hall..
Peter Frei

Posted on 20 Apr 2010, 12:57 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


2010 Town Caucus Report

Last night, app. 56 voters attended the 2010 town caucus at the Holland Elementary School. Candidates for a total of 15 positions were proposed to be put on the ballot for the annual town elections to be held Monday June 7, 2010, from 10:00 hours to 20:00 hours, read more»

Posted on 14 Apr 2010, 00:01 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


Community uproar about the proposed low-income senior housing project.

Proposed-conditions-plan-aerial-exhibit-Beals-and-Thomas-Inc.
Selectmen Earl Johnson seemed to be surprised about the turnout and resistance of concerned residents at the March 9th public hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals. HAP’s request for 16 exemptions of the zoning bylaws was heard by the ZBA and residents recognized the dim-witted nature of Earl Johnson’s idea to jam the proposed structure into the tight spot right next to the senior citizens center.
Towards the end of the hearing, Johnson even insinuated that he believed that HAP was not required to obey the town’s zoning bylaws.
The Holland Blog is offering its readers the complete audio recording of the hearing during which HAP Inc. presented its preliminary plans for the $5,280,000.00 senior low income housing project, read more»

Posted on 15 Mar 2010, 00:01 - Category: Town Politics
Comments - Edit - Delete


Pages: ... [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]