Stand With Stephen Forster & Forster’s Christmas Tree Farm (Again!)

The next Henniker zoning board meeting (Noooo-body expects the Spanish Inquisition) is this Thursday (tonight) at 7pm, and Steve Forster will once more be brought before the local arsitocray on the matter of the proper use of his property.

Forster's Christams Tree Farm was cited by the town for engaging in activities defined as legal by the state (agro-tourism).

We'd like you to make the effort to get there, cameras and recorders in hand, to capture the event, and if you have the knowledge and the will to lend your support, not just to Steve, but for the right to the legal use of your property, please make the time to do that.

See this link as well for more details on how the Henniker ZBA (and committee fiefdoms all over the state) think they own your property.

[Update] Here is the address of the meeting, (Henniker Zoning Board of Adjustment, Thursday, February 7, 2013 7 pm Henniker Community School Cafetorium 51 Western Avenue), a message from Steve Forster follows, with some additional, relevant documents provided to me by our good friend Ken Eyring after that.

Message from Steve Forster:

Enclosed is the invite to my farms next hearing.. All are welcomed! All can speak or say something pro or con on this matter. A negative outcome could effect all farmers and landowners. Please read the State RSA that I am defending,RSA 21:34a. The town wants to negate this RSA and what the town has adopted. This is so important for farmers to make a living on their land in order to survive and pay our high property taxes. We need farmers, land owners your Reps. to attend and voice their opinion.  

Enclosed also is the definition as the Commissioner of Ag. NH sees it. The town does not want to recognize her position on this.. If not her, then who's definition will they? The town wants to rewrite the definition without having a warrant article being brought to the people for a vote. They want to impose restrictions that do not apply to this issue.. Site Plan Review, etc.. I have done nothing that warrants any of these to be explored. I have not built or changed anything that's warrants me to go to the town to ask them for permission to do what I have been doing for the past 35/40years..

All I ask is to continue to do what I have been doing in the past and them to honor the laws as they are written..Thanks for listening, thanks for your support..

S.Forster

Forsters Christmas Tree Farm

Henniker, NH

...

Next, a letter from Kathleen A. LaBonte to the Town of Henniker (recipients noted in the text of the letter) regarding some...well, irregularities.

KATHLEEN A. LaBONTE

722 Gulf Road, Henniker, NH 03242

Tel. (603) 428-6135; Email: klalo@tds.net

TO:                  Mr. Yennerell, Henniker Town Administrator

Selectboard: Kris Blomback, Chair; Leo Audoin, Vice Chair; Robert French, John Prieto, and  Ron Taylor

RE:                  ZBA Meeting – Forster Christmas Tree Farm Rehearing

DATE:             January 23, 2013

Dear Mr. Yennerell and Selectboard:

Regarding the above matter, I am in receipt of Planning Consultant Fougere’s January 17th email to Attorneys Donovan and Miller scheduling a ZBA meeting for 2/7/13 at 7:00 p.m. at the Community School cafeteria.   Our ZBA meetings are designated by the town calendar for any cases for the 3rd Wednesday of the month, which would be Feb. 20th.   From the Henniker website I have taken the following description:

Description

The Zoning Board is scheduled to meet the 3rd Wednesday of every month IF there is a case to be heard.  Should a case be scheduled, an Agenda or Public Hearing Notice will be attached to this notice under "More Details" a few days beforehand.  Any questions call (603) 428-3221 ext. 1.

There should be no reason for the Forster rehearing to receive any special scheduled date. The public has a right and expects adherence to our meeting calendar unless there is some emergency, which there isn't.

With respect to Mr. Forster's issue, I am increasingly concerned that there is intent by Board members/staff to keep the public confused as to where and when meetings are held because the calendar is not kept current daily, and agenda times and places do not match the website info for meetings.  I am further concerned for the public's safety and comfort while in attendance at meetings that are of great concern to the community because of effort by the town not to move a meeting venue from town hall to a larger facility.  I give the following examples for all of the above.

• 10/17 ZBA meeting was past room capacity with many standing, and the hallway crammed to capacity.  On 10/19, I spoke with Town Administrator Connell to request the 11/15 meeting be scheduled for the Community Center for public safety, and gave all the reasons.  Instead of being decided by the town administrator, as in past standard office procedure, Mr. Connell left the decision to Mark Fougere and Doreen Connor who denied this request, thus showing their lack of sensibility and responsibility for public safety and the right for public attendance.   Further, I was not given a courtesy call to inform me of this decision, and only found out when the agenda was posted on 10/26.  When I went to the office to inquire why, Ms. Gage had no explanation.  She did comment she was also desirous of moving the meeting to a larger location stating that even an abutter to Mr. Forster complained of not being able to get into the meeting room.  On 10/26, I contacted Fire Chief Gilbert, Police Department, and Selectboard Chair Blomback to correct this situation.  Mr. Blomback had a budget review meeting 10/27 and conferred with Selectboard members about this.  By Mon. 10/29 a.m., Mr. Blomback confirmed to me the meeting was moved to the Community Center.  By late afternoon the agenda location was still listed as Town Hall, the website listing "unknown."  On 10/30 website location corrected, but agenda location was not corrected until I emailed again.

• 2010 - all ZBA meetings held on 3rd Wed. of Month (there were 4)

• 2011 - all ZBA meetings held on 3rd Wed. of Month (there were 5)

• 2012 - all ZBA meetings held on 3rd Wed of Month (there were 7) except the last meeting, which pertained to Forster.  This meeting was held Thurs., 11/15 instead of Wed. 11/21.

• Jan. 2013 - ZBA meeting held Tues. 1/3 instead of Wed. 1/16.  On 1/15, I received many calls from interested citizens and news outlets if this meeting was being held, and if Forster issue was on the agenda.   I contacted Ms. Gage, but she was out for the day so Mr. Roy was kind enough to contact me that he reached Ms. Gage to confirm the meeting was cancelled. It seems that the ZBA Board/Planning Consultant and office staff are intentionally causing chaos and confusion because the 1/3 meeting was never posted, which explains the low attendance, and the 1/16 meeting was never unlisted from the website so folks were contacting me for update and agenda.

• Feb. 2013  - ZBA meeting scheduled for Thurs. 2/7 instead of Wed. 2/20 at the Henniker Community School instead of the Community Center by Mark Fougere in his 1/16 email to Forster and Bennett attorneys, which I happened to obtain a copy of.  What about the public??  We are now 7 days later, and the website does not reflect this meeting.  To add further confusion, there is the regular Wed. 2/20 meeting posted on the website.

With respect to Minutes, it should also concern the Selectboard that at the January 3^rd meeting the Board Chair had to be reminded by Dr. Trivellini and Mr. Pagano that Minutes had not been approved going back to August through November!  To not approve minutes for this length of time gave the appearance to the public that the Board was using lapse of memory as a reason to adjust and manipulate minutes to reflect something different than what was said the time of the meeting:

• 10/17 Minutes.  With respect to the Cease and Desist order against Mr. Forster by Mr. Fougere, Dr. Trivellini raised a point of order regarding Article XIII, Section 133-51 that gives this authority to the Selectboard only, and that can’t be tasked out to a town consultant.  On 1/3, Dr. Trivellini questioned he never remembered hearing Chair Connor state “the planning board was acting under proper authorization” and “Mr. Fougere is a representative of the Town and was acting as an administrator of the Town Planning Board.”  Chair Connor has now shown a correction in the 1/3/13 minutes that she meant the ZBA.  In review of the attorney court stenographer’s minutes from 10/17, of which the ZBA has a copy of and part of the record now, the Planning Board was never mentioned in that discussion.  Chair Connor refers to the Zoning Board and even references 674:33 “Zoning Board of Adjustment and Building Code Board of Appeals.”  This truly leaves the public to wonder how the 10/17 minutes have a half paragraph discussing the Planning Board and their authority and no mention of the ZBA or 674:33.

• 10/17 Minutes.  Dr. Trivellini further went on to say as the minutes were being reviewed “it’s to the point now where it’s difficult to recall what was actually being said here…”

It is disturbing to me, and should be to you, that I am now a regular and constant source for accuracy of town meeting dates, times, places, and Minute …not only for the public, but the town office too!!  It is at this time I am requesting the following:

1. That the ZBA adhere to the town calendar of “third Wednesday of the month” for any cases to be heard, as stated in above “description.”
2. That the February 7^th ZBA meeting be cancelled (which is not posted), and schedule the rehearing of the Forster Christmas Tree Farm on the 3^rd Wednesday of the month, which is February 20^th, where it belongs and is already posted.
3. That the Town Administrator facilitate final decisions of any meeting changes and venue based on your experience of community interest in matters, public safety, and adherence to town calendar where a board meeting date change is an exception not the rule.  This will also eliminate the public’s perception that meetings are being manipulated by Boards to cause intentional confusion and inconvenience for the public.
4. That the town website of meetings, dates, and times be posted timely.  When a meeting is scheduled or changed, by the next business day the website should be diligently updated or corrected.
5. That Minutes from the previous month be reviewed and approved before the meeting adjourns.

Thank you in advance for your review, and response.

Sincerely,

Kathleen (LaBonte)

...

Finally, a letter of clarification from the Commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Agriculture, Markets & Food, regarding the law which the Henniker ZBA appears to be ignoring in pursuit of their action against Forsters.  (PDF) Dept of Ag. 2nd letter

If you'd like the short version, Forster's is not violating the law.

Occupy Senator Shaheen's Office

A new Event just sprang up on Facebook called 'Occupy Senator Shaheen's Office.'  They'd like you to spend some "quality time there today and...

Demand an end to indefinite detention without charge and extrajudicial assassination of American Citizens under the NDAA.

Obama's lawyers have laid out who he can kill. "[T]he confidential Justice Department “white paper” introduces a more expansive definition of self-defense or imminent attack than described by Brennan or Holder in their public speeches. It refers, for example, to what it calls a “broader concept of imminence” than actual intelligence about any ongoing plot against the U.S. homeland.

Instead, it says, an “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government may determine that the targeted American has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.” The memo does not define “recently” or “activities.”

This Facebook event was inspired in part by a 16 page memo leaked to NBC news, that outlined the Administrations 'Rules" for using drones to assassinate American's.

So to coincide with Senator Shaheen's staff holding extended office hours this Thursday February 7th (5 pm to 7pm) in New Hampshire, "Occupy Senator Shaheen's office" would like you to avail yourself of the opportunity--to quote Captain Jean Luc Picard--and communicate your concerns about indefinite detention without charge and extrajudicial assassination of American Citizens under the NDAA.

When you get there make sure you tell them..."that you have credible information from an  “informed, low-level” official of the United States citizenry, that the Obama Administration  has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat to the Constitutional liberty of Americans citizens, and that “there is  no evidence suggesting that this Administration has renounced or abandoned such activities."

Trust me they'll love that.

Look Here to find an office near you.

You are reading  "Occupy Senator Shaheen’s Office? "   by  Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

Steve has been recognized as the Americans For Prosperity Blogger of the month for December 2012

If Democrats Really Want to See Wages Increase....

Every good New Hampshire Democrat knows that the best way to have an immediate impact on jobs and the economy is to increase the cost of doing business.  Making it cost more to run a business acts like a tax on the business owner, and Democrats love taxing business.

Enter HB127, An act relative to the state hourly minimum rate.

Rep Tim Horrigan and admitted socialist Peter Sullivan (New Hampshire Democrats), are unsatisfied with the machinations of the Federal government in the value of labor relative to the task at hand and are certain that they know better, not just than their Federal master in D.C., but better than every employer and employee in the entire Granite State, what any hour of labor is (at minimum) worth.

This is an annual affair and every year we have to revisit why Democrats trying to raise the hourly rate is actually a tax on the business owner who must absorb that expense by reducing other costs or by raising prices-passing the labor tax on to you.

If you'd like a nuts and bolts math-based explanation, go here.  NHI contributor Rick Barnes has composed an excellent article that explains the costs of meddling with the cost of labor.

Or, we can go with my observations on Jan 1st, 2011 when Democrat Mike Brunelle proposed a minimum wage increase.

Take 2011-H-0239-R for example.  Mr. Brunelle would like to raise the minimum wage.  But this is a hollow populist act with a real world consequence.  It reduces opportunities for unskilled or under-skilled workers seeking or trying to retain entry level positions.  It adds to the cost of goods and services.  And it increases joblessness, which is a cost borne by taxpayers through unemployment benefits and the loss of economic activity.

How about this for a narrative.  New Hampshire Democrats want to raise the minimum wage to help offset rising electric rates resulting from Democrats forcing RGGI on electricity generators?

Ha!

All you need to know is that when Democrats meddle in the market everyone suffers and the opposite happens.  Every time.

Raising the minimum wage above the current Federal rate will do exactly the opposite of that which Democrats claim for raising it.  Instead of making more take home pay many employees will simply work fewer hours, pay higher prices, or have a harder time even getting a job.

Raising the minimum wage will make it more difficult or teenagers and under-skilled workers to get work.  Learn-while-you earn begins to lose it's value when the State forces employers to pay more for entry level jobs. Where the employers had previously been willing to use their own money to train new entrants to the workforce, artificially inflating the value of that labor makes doing so less cost effective.   It is more cost effective to look for and hire more experienced, older workers, who will take less time to train, mitigating costs associated with a longer learning curve.

And isn't this just the best time ever to make it harder to find work?

Artificially increased labor costs will appear in the cost of goods and services detracting from the point of raising wages while reducing commerce and--ironically--generating less tax revenue for Democrats in Concord.

What?  Oh yeah.  All the factors Democrats rely on for revenue will be negatively affected by forcing labor costs up.

If Democrats really want to do something to increase wages might I suggest that they simply cut business taxes instead?

Over time business owners will use that savings to grow their business and it can attract new businesses and more jobs.  Employers can use tax savings to offer more products or services that attract more customers.  More customers allows them to hire more people.  Greater demand on the labor pool pushes wages higher all on its own.  Entry-level wage rates will go up all by themselves--with the employer still paying freight for teaching job skills when needed.  Existing employees will find themselves getting raises sooner or more often.   Employers will have the option of providing better wages and benefits to those qualified to earn them.  And all while keeping prices stable or possibly driving them lower due to increased competition, all of which will...eventually bring in more revenue to Concord.

Raising the minimum wage will attract fewer new businesses, reduce job opportunities, retard expansion, limit choices, decrease hours, lower benefits, leave youth and unskilled workers unemployed, stagnate the labor pool, increase the welfare burden, increase the cost of goods and services, increase the cost of living, and result in less revenue in Concord, requiring them to insist on rising taxes.

Is that why Democrats like the idea so much?

 H/T Richard Barnes NH Insider

You are reading  "If Democrats Really Want to See Wages Increase…"   by  Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

Steve has been recognized as the Americans For Prosperity Blogger of the month for December 2012

Henniker New Hampshire's Local Aristocracy Wants What They Want

Back in November we reported that despite meeting all the legal requirements the town of Henniker had cited Stephen Forster of Forster's Christmas Tree Farm with the illegal use of his property.

Typically, when such nonsense erupts it is to either punish a landowner for some perceived slight, or to help an abutter (or the town) get something they want.

Somebody still wants something.  And it appears to have escalated.  We've received reports that an intimidation campaign is underway against Dr. Bruce Trivellini who serves on the towns zoning board (ZBA).

Insiders tell us that there may be an effort to kick him off the ZBA because of his familiarity with Stephen Forster, and presumably his support for his (as far as we know) legal use of his property.  My sense is that Trivellini's support in Forster's case has incited an organized effort to discredit him, and perhaps intimidate him.  That would make this a classic small town pissing contest, with all the biggest pissers being the self-proclaimed aristocracy of the town.  They decide how things go, sometimes enlist a local sheriff to lean on the offender (or who looks the other way when other members of town take to shouting, intimidation, or vandalism).

Yes.  This does happen in small town New Hampshire.  More often than you want to believe.  People are still people.  They want what they want.

I don't know the extent of this particular situation.  I am not implying that there has been any vandalism but we know from sources that "pressure" is being brought to bear. I am still digging up contact info for follow ups but we know it is centered on Stephen Forster trying to legally expand his business, the local aristocracy taking umbrage, and the small-town enforcers bringing some leverage to bear on those who might oppose them.

We'll call it "developing" and get back to you when we know more.

You are reading  "Henniker New Hampshire’s Local Aristocracy Wants What They Want"   by  Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

Steve has been recognized as the Americans For Prosperity Blogger of the month for December 2012

Are New Hampshire Democrat’s Pushing a Mental Illness Narrative?

Mental illness is a moving target, but one that keeps getting bigger.  Here in New Hampshire, if you Google Mental Illness, you will discover that it is getting bigger here as well.  Mental illness is up, we are told.   More patients are going unreported or untreated.  And just in time for a Democrat Budget writing House and their spend then-tax-den mother (Governor Maggie Hassan) to ignore the delicate state of the economy, rising payroll taxes, unemployment, wage stagnation, and the cornucopia of looming federal burdens, cliffs, debt, and spending, and Obama care, to justify growing our own budget right here in the Granite State on top of all that.

Look,see!?  Mental illness.  It’s right there!  We (politicians and government) are the only ones’ who can do something about that.  We have to do something…

And didn’t the Sandy hook murderer have a mental illness?  That dove-tails very nicely with unaddressed mental illness narrative.  It’s almost too good to be true if you happen to be a pro-bureaucracy, big government, anti-gun Democrat.

(Never underestimate the “diversity” potential of a good left wing narrative.)

Of course my first thought, upon seeing the buds forming on the mental-illness narrative bush, was that this next observation was too obvious to be worth mentioning; look at all the Democrats we elected to the New Hampshire House.  Another Democrat governor.  Two Democrat Congress-critters.  Obama?  If that is not an indication of some increase in mental illness in New Hampshire what is?

Whatever the evidence, I predict that this up-tick in reporting is simply plowing the field and planting seeds so that the left can put more spending on the table in a way that makes Republicans who might normally question it…um..silent partners.

Facts and evidence will be hard to come by but grand rhetorical flourishes will be in abundance.

Let’s watch and see.

You are reading  "Are New Hampshire Democrat’s Pushing a Mental Illness Narrative?"   by  Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

Steve has been recognized as the Americans For Prosperity Blogger of the month for December 2012