S623 Hearing
On Thursday, April 24th, Rep. Andrews was present to offer testimony before the Joint Committee on the Judiciary regarding S623 - An Act relative to request an investigation by the attorney general into the following incidents in the town of Templeton. testimony was submitted by Rep. Andrews, Rep. Gobi and Senator Brewer. Residents forwarded letters on behalf of this legislation as well.
Julie Farrell, Pete Farrell and Bev Bartolomeo went to Boston to testify on behalf of this bill.
Testimony from Julie Farrell:
Testimony S623
Senator Brownsberger
and members of the the Joint Committee on the Judiciary, thank you for your
time and your consideration here today. My name is Julie Farrell. I am a
resident of Templeton as well as a member of the Templeton Board of Selectmen.
I strongly urge you to recommend and report out in favor of S623. All of the
documents referred to in this testimony are available on the flashdrive
provided as well as some print documents.
S623 lists 4
incidents in Templeton that exemplify the worst aspects of government. On Nov.
15, 2012 the voters in Templeton passed warrant article 8 requesting an
investigation by the Attorney General into the four incidents. Former boards of selectmen, citizens,
and taxpayers have asked for similar investigations. All requests have been
ignored.
Incident 1 –
regarding the purchase of 252 Baldwinville Rd. for a municipal building.
Incident 2 –
return of a gift of money ($369,681.40) to Casella Waste Systems.(2008)
Incident 3 –
Enactment of Chapter 93 Acts of 2000 whereby the Templeton Municipal Light
Department assumed control of the water system in Templeton.(2000)
Incident 4-
Templeton WWTP Contract and ensuing lawsuits.
Arguably, the request for an investigation into the procedures and activities to enact Chapter 93 of the Acts of 2000 is the most urgent. The Town of Templeton and its inhabitants need a determination of the status of the Town’s water system as an enterprise under state law. This determination is necessary in order to be eligible to apply for state and federal grant money to repair our aging water infrastructure.
Templeton requests the following
determination from the Attorney General regarding the nature of the water
enterprise system: Does the town’s water enterprise system operate under M.G.L.
Chapter 164 or under M.G.L. Chapter 44, §53 F ½ ? When the
Legislature enacted Chapter 93 of the Acts of 2000, which regulatory
interpretation did the Attorney General’s office approve?
Currently, water department receipts
are not being recorded by the town as local receipts, and not as town
enterprise fund revenues. The Town of Templeton needs immediate clarification
of the status of the town’s water enterprise.
To complicate matters, the Inspector
General issued an opinion on December 6, 2007. Templeton is in receipt of a
different interpretation from Gerard Perry, DOR Bureau of Accounts issued
January 9, 2014. S623 requests a determination from the Attorney General
regarding the special legislation Chapter 93 Acts of 2000. This special
legislation was approved by the Attorney General back in 2000. The Attorney General is the
appropriate person to make a ruling on this matter.
In summary, S623 has the potential to
affect the financial well being of the Town of Templeton for years to
come. We urge you to consider this
during your deliberation of the facts.
Templeton is
less than 2 weeks away from an override vote. If the override vote fails, the
Town of Templeton will be placed under a control board run by the state. Templeton
will have the dubious distinction of being the first town in the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts to go into receivership.
Repeated
requests for state intervention/determination have fallen on deaf ears. The
question remains will this request for an investigation by the Attorney General
made by the citizens of the Town of Templeton continue to be ignored? I urge
you to report S623 out favorably for action.
Julie
Farrell
24 Myrtle
St.
Baldwinville,
MA 01436
Testimony from Pete Farrell
I support S623 because It is alleged that The Town of Templeton has lost
over thirty million dollars in contractual obligations due to serious ethic
violations and outright corruption of the law firm of Kopelman and Paige in
conjunction with Erving Paper Mills.
It is alleged that the contract and accompanying User Charge Regulations
were distorted by intentional omissions and errors in State Case 02-2424C by
our then town attorney’s Kopelman and Paige and their representatives Mark
Reich and William Hewig III and that obstruction of Justice by then Board of
Selectmen in Templeton allowed Erving Paper Mills of Erving Ma. to avoid
contractual costs that had already been established in Federal Court Case No.
96-40140NMG.
It is
further alleged that Kopelman and Paige used their powerful and trusted
influence in the court system and at the municipal level to cheat the town of
Templeton out of contractual obligations justly due the town and its citizens
from Erving Paper Mills Inc. by allowing another town board to interfere in the
rightful prosecution of case 02-2424C. This is the same law firm that was instrumental in the
writing of State Ethic Laws.
Peter Farrell
Please Vote
on
May 5, 2014
Please support your Town
The residents of Templeton have been robbed by some very cunning people. In the case of the Erving paper mill, Baldwinville Products, the owner found a way out of the business he had had enough of. The only problem with this, was he left the people of Templeton out of the deal. So what you might think? By doing this he beat it out of town with a good size chunk of money and he also left the town he had made a deal with, his partner out in the cold. This town was left to clean up after American Tissue Mills left the waste water treatment plant in shambles. Where did the money come from to clean up this mess ? Not the tooth fairy, or Santa Clause, and definitely not Charlie Hausen or K&P. The Town of Templeton Sewer Commissioners have been under the gun to clean up the mess that was left by the mill. The lagoon has been a sore spot, that the federal people have been pushing the Commissioners to clean up, but to the credit of our Commissioners they have discovered that this is not on land owned by the town, but the land once owned by American Tissue and Erving Paper mills. If Mr. Hausen had been a fair person, he would not have left this town holding the bag. He had a responsibility to this town, and they were a partner with him, but he chose to take the money, and run.Mr. Hausenhe left the people in this town without the financial means to clean up the mess left by Erving Paper Mills, and American Tissue. Shame on Kopleman and Paige, if they had done their job, and treated this town fairly we would not be in the financial mess we are in now. Bev.
ReplyDeleteIt is alleged that Erving Paper Mills is and was a party to the WWTP contract and that K&P used their influence to get them off the hook. Because the BOS interfered in case 02-2424C this case can be reopened. Reopening the case will be fruitless because K&P has the court systems under the palm of their hands. This is why the vote at town meeting asking for help from the State for an investigation is about the only way to go. Many State agencies have already refused to act in this matter due to the powerful influence of Mr. Kopelman and his lawfirm. This case has clearly shown we are not a country of laws but who has the most clout.
ReplyDeleteI must say, we got their attention, and it is about time. The downfall of our town is because people were too trusting, and it is not all right for anyone to take advantage of the situation. Last night I brought up some facts about how the Light Department supported the town financially, for years and years. Now all of a sudden, the money the town has depended on was gone, with not a dam way to replace it !! What were people thinking ?? I wish I knew, because I know one thing, this town cannot run on the backs of the taxpayers alone. Something has to give ! We have a big problem if the Light Department is thriving, and the town is starving. The way I see it, if the town cannot get any financial help from the Light Company, then we as a town have no business playing with the big boys. The Light Department has to go. What benefit do we get from owning this business ?? Oh yes, if there is a problem they will come right away. So if we sold to a bigger company, who is to say they would not have a branch right here in town. It is a lot like living in Leominster, where you can cross the street for milk. When you come to 686 South Road, you learn to adjust and buy enough milk to last, until you go shopping again. Our rates are not ever going to be as low as they were years ago. The real truth is if you believe the snow job that hit us last night, you are being fooled. Our Light Commissioners have no real interest in the people in this town or trying to give us a hand. Like John Driscoll was happy enough to tell us," Don't look for more from us, because we will take it from your pocket". Somehow the reason for being a locally owned company has been lost along the way. This is not my fathers Light Company. Bev.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete