A barn roof on the Dutch Belt farm has partially collapsed and the remainder of the building has been declared derelict (Notice of Unsafe Structure by the Building Commissioner) and must be razed. This farm was purchased by the town with Community Preservation (CPC) funds. The Executive Administrator is currently working to determine whether the barn contains any hazardous materials (asbetos shingles), solicit proposals for demolition, ...
... and identify a source of funding to carry out the work.
The outbuildings at the farm on Old Fall River Road and Faunce Corner are also showing signs of distress. That farm was purchased by Town Meeting with CPC funds as well.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Barn near collapse at town owned property
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
34 comments:
Community preservation act must be repealed by town meeting members.
Stupid is, what stupid does. In 2002 the world still believed in Santa, Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny, Dartmouth town meeting members voted to approve the community preservation act allowing the town to siphon additional tax dollars from it's tax payers. The state ( you must be nuts to believe) agreed to match the towns tax surcharge.
According to a standard times news article, our Dartmouth town “CPA SPENDING” has reached $12,071,440. $9,717,364 through real estate taxation, matching state funds $2,352,486??? and $4,019,981 through other funding,?? This means to me the CPA is running $2,354,076 in the RED.
CPA members, appointed by the select board, must have a federal government mentality. Spend, Spend, and spend.
According to my math the CPA is spending more money than money received, and continues to do so. I question if the state funding amount collected is correct, or just a promissory note. The state is 1.5 billion in the red. No more state funding, but the Dartmouth CPA members continues to spend.
The Dartmouth CPA committee members, along with town meeting members, have committed $12,071,440 dollars in spending, received $9,717,364 in taxes and other funding, relates to a town over spending of $2,354,076. YOU MUST BE STUPID. This type of spending is a kick in the butt to the Dartmouth tax payers, and the selectmen who appointed these CPA members.
It's time to have the CPA appointed members brought before the select board to answer these very important issues.
Bill, what say you??
Didn't the town sell this property to a farmer after it put agricultural restrictions in place?
I agree the CPA act should be repealed. The CPA is spending more then they bring in is a reckless way to use OUR money. I hope some one will start a campaign to repeal it and put the money back in the txpayers pockets. I don't mind paying taxes if the money is used responsibly.
The Town Meeting approved borrowing for some of the CPC expenditures and that is why the amount appropriated exceeds the amount collected. Some of the funds are used to pay the bonds issued for the borrowing. That is not an unusual state of affairs but it means that the town cannot stop collecting the CPC surcharge until the debts have been discharged.
The Town has tried to sell the Schofield farm on Faunce Corner and Old Fall River Road but the deal fell through. The Souza-LaGasse farm on Hixville Road was sold in 2010. The Dutch Belt farm has not been marketed for sale as far as I know.
Bill, is it correct to state that, while we must continue to have our tax dollars siphoned off into CPA funds until its debt is paid off, we can STILL ABOLISH the CPA now (following appropriate procedures, of course) therefore effectively eliminating any FURTHER spending of our tax dollars other than what must be collected yearly until our current debt is paid off?
The CPA then will be in "existence" in name only and that simply because it must pay off its debt. Since it no longer will be active, it cannot propose any more future projects that our taxpayers must contribute to paying for. Any further monies the taxpayer must contribute will only be money that now will be spent solely to eliminate CPA debt.
Once the debt is paid, we will have that portion of OUR money to be used for OUR needs and services.
Sounds like a plan to me. Is it doable? I don't think we must be stuck with the CPA.
Bill...the town charter allows for Dartmouth tax payer to petition the registered voters of Dartmouth to sign a petition allowing for a town wide referendum vote, for or against, an amount of money approved by town meeting exceeding 200,000 thousand dollars.
The problem with the petition is the number of voters needed to sign the petition within a certain number of days, and presented to the B.O.S.
I believe the time limit is 8 days to obtain 12% of the registered voters. I can not ask for a legal opinion from town counsel, so as my selectman I ask you to check with town counsel for a legal opinion, to see if a permanent number of town voters, willing to sign a permanent override petition with the required number of registered voters and to be kept at the town clerks officer allowing any tax payer, to obtain and file for an override on expenditure that exceed 200,000 thousand dollars and presented to the B.O.S.
If this can be done, than it should be done.
Here we go again. Taxpayer at 5:14pm has thrown the first cards on the table and they read "another override attempt will be made". Get ready for another divisive battle over excessive taxation. Town officials have already been given a modest override that was intended to give them time to get their act together. We see evidence that our employees still don't get it, a prime example being the ranting police advocate posting on this blog. His behavior is reflective of the same attitude we used to see from school advocates. At least the school people seem to have learned that this will only make voters say NO to all of their itemized override requests.
Of course we will also always have those people in town who are determined to spend everyone elses money for their own "special" causes, even if it means looking for excuses to "shake people down" with excessive fines for minor by-law violations.
Dust off the NO OVERRIDE signs. It's almost time to get organized.
Should have stated "CPC" rather than "CPA" when referencing the committee, not the (CPA) legislation in my above post.
Still - - are we stuck with this committee?
Would someone answer this question, please? And if we taxpayers can do something, how do we go about it?
Was this barn intended for reconstruction and preservation? If so, and Town Meeting approved funds for its purchase and reconstruction/preservation, why has it been allowed to fall into such disrepair that now results in its needing to be razed?
Is this the same situation with the outbuildings on Old Fall River Road and Faunce Corner? If we are approving the purchase of such properties, and nothing is done to maintain them until it is necessary for them to be razed or fall down completely by themselves, isn't this a waste of our taxpayer money?
To taxpayer: I will sign. Maybe someone could set up a signing place so that the voters can sign the petition within the alloted time. Let's let our leaders know that enough is enough. No more farm, parks, etc.
Yeah another override attempt will be made - start the rumour mill buzzing with zero justification. What-bored? Got nothing better to do?
CPC appointed members are not stupid. They understand that borrowing of money shall create debt. The town meeting members can't vote to repeal the CPA while they carry a negative balance. The negative balance allows them to continue removing an additional 1.5 % from our total real estate property tax. This type of sneaky, distrustful, unethical, mud in your eye, is provoking.
During the Monday night selectmen meeting. The S.B. motion to allow the a townie “special status” to serve on the historic committee, why, because the same townie is a member of the CPC. According to our town charter, no one person can serve on two separate committee. The CPC committee members and the historic society members are of the same group of money spenders. I challenge, anyone reading this post, to ask the selectmen at a public meeting, to provide a list of names that identify the CPC members, Historic committee, and the agricultural committee.
Tax payer says......referendum requires a total of 12% of the eligible registered voters, to be obtained WITHIN 8 days and return to the selectmen, for a date to have the referendum vote. 12% of registered voters EQUAL 1,600 registered voter signatures required on a petition and all this to be done in 8 days or less. When Dartmouth was a small populated town 12% was not too many voters, but with a population of 35,000 thousand people and approximately 20,000 thousand registered voters you would need 1,600 registered voters to sign a petition within 8 days....good luck. The charter should be changed to meet the total percentage from 12% TO 1% OR 200 HUNDRED VOTERS. It's just a percentage thing......
The membership of those committees is published on the town website. Here is the link. http://www.town.dartmouth.ma.us/Pages/DartmouthMA_BComm/index
Do you think there is a conspiracy?
All appropriations including CPA funds are approved at Town Meeting, as was the property tax surcharge.
Sure they think there's a conspiracy Bill. Much easier to make that sort of baseless acusation than to participate and learn or heaven forbid look something up!
As for lowering the percentage of signatures, more nonsense. A requirement of 1% to get a referendum on the ballot would bring the town to a standstill when the slightest inconvenience is alleged.
Here's an idea, get involved, educate yourself and partiipate. Of course then you'd actually have to do more than sit behind a keyboard.
Taxpayer has me confused. In his first post, he asks Bill to get a legal opinion about retaining signatures for a "permanent override petition". Now it seems his purpose for the petition is to repeal the CPA.
Taxpayer should research the need for an override to eliminate CPA debt before the repeal of the CPA tax. I was under the impression that if the tax is repealed it would only continue until the debt is paid with no need for an override. Nobody wants to avoid another override battle more than me. I am more opposed to overrides than the CPA although some of the approved CPA projects concern me.
I would also be leary that some of the vocal opponents of CPA are only opposed because that money has restricted use. Some may think that by eliminating CPA, they could persuade voters to pay an equal amount through an override for things like schools, libraries, police etc. If CPA were eliminated, property taxes would decrease by 1.5% after the first $100k valuation. The money would not be available for other uses. It would be deducted from our property taxes.
We see evidence that our employees still don't get it, a prime example being the ranting police advocate posting on this blog?
Our employees are citizens and have a RIGHT to speak their mind exactly as you do. You do not have to agree with them but to talk down to them like they are your servants is wrong.
We live in a free society. Town Employees are entitled to vote, run for office and speak their mind! They pay taxes just like you do Sir.
Bill
Here's the funniest part of taxpayers post. He argues the need for 12% of registered voters required for a petition. Okay - then goes on to say that the town has 20,000 registered voters. Okay- again. Could someone please ask taxpayer how 12% of 20,000 equals 1600 people??? He claims great knowledge, but obviously lacks basic math skills.
The ranting person referred to talks down to anyone that disagrees with he/she/it. What is your point?
The ranting person referred to talks down to anyone that disagrees with he/she/it.
As do you, who would call another human being an "it". Big boys and girls can disagree without resorting to that. I hope it was posted in a moment of weakness and not how you are every day.
Bill,
You tell the townspeople where to find a list of committee members but evade the basis of the question.
IF the town charter says no one may serve on 2 committees at the same time, WHY is that being allowed to continue? If you, as a member of the BOS, are not enforcing the charter who is???
I think an override to help offset the cost of some of these CPC projects and other town needs makes a great deal of sense. Especially now.
The question that I would really like to get an answer for from the Town of Dartmouth, is why is it taking so long for these farm properties to be sold? How many years has it been since the Dutch Belt farm was purchased? I find it hard to believe that the town has not "had the time" to do whatever it needs to do to sell this property. Can someone please explain?
NO OVERRIDES for ANYTHING!
Of all things we have to give our money to, we should want to give more to the CPC??
My perception of the police advocate is that he comes across as a bully and that is bad for public relations with the police department.
Our new chief has done an outstanding job trying to improve public relations. He is extremely personable and having the promotional ceremony at the SB meeting shows that public relations are important to him.
I wonder how the chief feels about the police advocate's posts here.
to January 17, 11:14
A reasonable override to help cover the cost of the CPC debt and perhaps get a few more projects underway would be fully justified in my opinion.
Bill:
Please post that the Finance Committee will be discussing CPA on Thursday evening.
Also, the final numbers/situation is not known about the Barn but Mr. Cressman will be providing us with preliminary information.
I wonder how the chief feels about the police advocate's posts here.
Just so you know the Chief is very well educated, he knows his employees also have a first amendment right!!
The ranting blogger has posted here on a number of subjects. One can only imagine how many times Mr. Trimble has not allowed this person's messages to post. Defending someone who is extremely offensive is your right, however, you might be advised that a lot of people will assume you are either the same person or very similar to whoever this person is.
There are legal cliches in the documents (deed) with regards to these properties which need to be dealt with in order to move forward on a proposal and sale . In the blue collar world the more education you have the less you know!
Alright....call me stupid, but please explain ...what is a police advocate??? I've heard of a youth advocate. Is this a police officer who works for the youth advocate?
Folks.....did you hear fincom member Barry Walker announce the money needed to raze the dutch belt farm should come from our town reserve. This fincom member voted to authorize 750,000 thousand of CPC taxpayers funding to reconstruct the old stone barn. The barn isn't worth the money to blow it to kingdom come.
I say we use the CPC money to reconstruct Tucker Roads traffic problems. What say you?
Happen to drive by the property this weekend… what a shame… the barn roof has completely collapsed. Why hasn't this property been put up for sale so that a responsible farmer can bring the land back to "production" and deal with any issues with the buildings on the property? How many years has the town owned this property for?
Post a Comment