Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Way to go Wayland

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    165

    Angry Way to go Wayland

    When is this town going to learn how to behave intelligently when it comes to development?

    As seen by our "friends" at WVN:


    SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE ADDS PENALTIES FOR WAYLAND

    On top of the unanimous jury verdict against the Town of Wayland and its
    Wastewater Management District Commission, the judge is ordering Wayland to pay
    Twenty Wayland, LLC additional damages beyond the $989,774 decreed on June 11.

    Twenty Wayland had sued the Town and Commission in November 2011 after
    complaining for months about the allocation of capacity to discharge wastewater.

    The total is now $1,227,485.49. In addition Wayland must comply fully with a
    1999 agreement to provide 45,000 gallons per day of sewage discharge capacity
    and charge fees as described in 1999.

    On June 21 Twenty Wayland attorney Daniel Dain filed a Motion for Entry of
    Proposed Judgment. On June 24, Superior Court Judge Dennis J. Curran entered
    his Judgment, ruling in favor of the Town Center developer on all claims, before
    Wayland Town Counsel Mark Lanza entered his motion for a time extension to
    oppose Dain's motion. The judge then added two filings on June 26 and June 27
    that appear to leave some options open for the Town.

    Since the June 11 verdict, town officials have issued no statements and have
    refused requests for comment. The facts presented in the court docket were not
    announced at the Selectmen's June 24 meeting.

    To read the developer's original Complaint, the jury's June 11 verdict, the
    judge's June 24 Judgment, and the court docket:
    http://www.waylandtransparency.com/wastewater.php

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    448

    Default

    Carl, thanks for posting this.
    I'm puzzled, though as to why you put the word "friends" in quotes when referring to WVN.
    If not for WVN, we would not even know about this. We don't have to like the often bad news they report on, but I for one, am grateful that they shine a light on things like this.
    John Flaherty

    Any views expressed are NOT mine alone.
    Wayland Transparency - Facts Without Spin
    http://www.waylandtransparency.com/

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    I'm just guessing, but I suspect that Carl put "friends" in quotes because of WVN's long-demonstrated but implicitly denied bias.

    The problem that many have with WVN is what they actually write compared with how they present themselves; from their Yahoo Groups page: "Our mission is to ensure that Town of Wayland voters are informed about Town decisions that will directly affect them, and to encourage voter participation." A reader of this description may be forgiven for calling to mind such fair and objective entities as National Public Radio and the League of Women Voters.

    Instead, WVN has consistently taken a pro-environment, anti-spending, anti-majority-town official stance. I have no objection to an organization taking any or all of these stances. Rather, what I object to is (a) their doing so under a false banner and (b) their doing so unfairly. For years, I documented this behavior here.

    My suggestions to WVN: (1) change their name to the Wayland Accountability Network and (2) be fair in who they hold accountable and why. Until they do so, their one-sided "informing" of Wayland voters is as bad as waylandtransparency.com's "transparency"--unless you know how to plumb the depths of WHOIS, you'll be hard-pressed to transparently find the lone voice that publishes it.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    215

    Default

    How long does Wayland have to fully comply with the 1999 agreement to provide 45,000 gallons per day of sewage discharge capacity?

    How much will it cost to provide the additional capacity?

    If Wayland fails to comply in time, can Twenty Wayland seek additional damages?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    448

    Default

    Dave, you might find the answers here: http://www.waylandtransparency.com/index.php

    On the Wastewater page, you'll find the court rulings and other documents pertinent to the case.
    John Flaherty

    Any views expressed are NOT mine alone.
    Wayland Transparency - Facts Without Spin
    http://www.waylandtransparency.com/

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    44

    Default

    I would appreciate it if someone could explain why the town is in this position. It appears from the court's ruling that the town clearly breached the Memorandum of Agreement with regard to its obligation to provide 45,000 gallons per day and with regard to the formula for charging Twenty Wayland for its usage, and that this is going to cost the town 1.25 Million plus all the legal fees resulting from the lawsuit. Is there another side to the story (there usually is)? I am not criticizing anyone. I just would like to understand how we got here.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    165

    Default

    The silence is deafening Lawrie. I think the answer to your question is self evident. How many years of senseless, counterproductive anti-town center junk persisted after the overwhelming vote at town meeting in support of it did we have to endure? The "friends" of wayland are the root cause for this law suit, laying out obstacle after obstacle (apparently some not so legal according to our judicial system) in a vain attempt to stifle the mandate from the town. Sad, isn't it?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    215

    Default

    What obstacles are the root cause of this lawsuit?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Carl, based on what I have read (which is admittedly a limited amount), it looks to me like the selectmen and the WWDC signed an agreement unconditionally agreeing to provide 45,000 gallons per day of discharge capacity to Twenty Wayland even though they had not yet received the required permitting to do so from the EPA and the DEP, and apparently still have not. I don't understand why they did so, and I also don't understand why, once Twenty Wayland sued (or threatened to sue) the town for not providing what it had agreed to provide, the case was not able to be settled. I am trying to find out the answers to these specific questions. I don't see how the people who opposed the town center project were involved in this case at all. Am I missing something?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    448

    Default

    No, you're not missing anything, Lawrie. Those opposed to Town Center had absolutely nothing to do with this.
    The Board of Selectmen at that time and the Town Administrator had everything to do with it.

    The questions you ask are good ones and I hope that you and others will keep asking until satisfactory answers are given. In the meantime, there have been more documents added to the Wastewater page of WaylandTransparency.com, including original town and court documents that might begin to shed some light on the answers.
    John Flaherty

    Any views expressed are NOT mine alone.
    Wayland Transparency - Facts Without Spin
    http://www.waylandtransparency.com/

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    215

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Rosenblatt View Post
    The silence is deafening Lawrie. I think the answer to your question is self evident. How many years of senseless, counterproductive anti-town center junk persisted after the overwhelming vote at town meeting in support of it did we have to endure? The "friends" of wayland are the root cause for this law suit, laying out obstacle after obstacle (apparently some not so legal according to our judicial system) in a vain attempt to stifle the mandate from the town. Sad, isn't it?
    Sad that you would post such an accusation and then fail to substantiate it with even one example of an "obstacle" that is responsible for Developer's lawsuit against the Town.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    165

    Default

    Seriously? You really need me to remind you of the years of ridiculous roadblocks raised in a hopeless attempt to stop progress? Yes, it is sad that you feel the need to re-highlight the divide that WVN brought to Wayland. Sad indeed.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    215

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Rosenblatt View Post
    Seriously? You really need me to remind you of the years of ridiculous roadblocks raised in a hopeless attempt to stop progress? Yes, it is sad that you feel the need to re-highlight the divide that WVN brought to Wayland. Sad indeed.

    You posted "The friends of Wayland are the root cause for this law suit, laying out obstacle after obstacle (apparently some not so legal according to our judicial system) in a vain attempt to stifle the mandate from the town."

    You have yet to substantiate your claim that opposition to the Town Center was the root cause of the Developer's lawsuit against the Town, responding instead with juvenile evasion. Evidently, your claim is baseless.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •