sagefarm@... wrote:

>Dear Neighbors:
>
>I walked around White Pond recently.
>[...]
>there were people swimming in the water, and no enforcement activities were
>observed.  This activity was photo documented and have a copy for the record.
>
>Clearly, even with the limited amount of beach present, due to the high level
of
>the pond, people still come to the pond and ignore the ban on swimming.
>
>
I thought that one had to be a member of the White Pond Association in
order to swim in White Pond. So either the swimmers were members of the
association who were ignoring the ban, or they were not members of the
association and would be in violation whether there was a ban or not. It
might be useful to know which.

How is the membership requirement enforced when swimming is allowed? Why
does this fail when there is no swimming? It seems it would be easier,
as there's no need to distinguish the permitted swimmers from the
non-permitted.

(By the way, what ban? Perhaps if I were a member, I'd know--since I'm
not a member, I have no personal need to know, since I already can't
legally swim there.)

>Imagine if the rail trail makes it easier for people to come and thus even more
>people come.
>
Yes, I much prefer to carry my towels, spare clothing, etc. on a bicycle
than in a car, so making it possible for me to take a bicycle to go
swimming illegally will make it far more attractive than if I had to
drive there. I do of course have my tongue firmly in my cheek now.

Is it conceivable that opening alternative opportunities for recreation
(other than illegal swimming) might actually entice some illegal
swimmers AWAY from White Pond?

It sounds like White Pond needs more study in any case, since whether or
not there is a rail trail the pond will be in a very bad situation. It
also appears that some change is necessary, and it appears to me that if
one is both familiar with and concerned about the problems of the pond,
one should be trying to discover what changes could help preserve the pond.

David K.

Dear David Karr:

The White Pond Beach Assoc has a privately owned beach on the east end of the
pond.  During the summer months, their presence is obvious, with ropes and
floats in the water, lifeguard towers and is staffed during the hours it is
open.  They also periodically have it staffed during off hours to encourage
people to leave.

The "cove", the center of the swimming despite signs prohibiting this activity,
is surrounded by Town owned land and is on the western side of the pond.

White Pond, being around 43 acres in size, and roughly circular, provides some
distance between these two locations.

I hope this information helps.

Sincerely,

David Bearg

Chair, White Pond Advisory Committee

20 Darton Street
Concord, MA


  -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "David A. Karr" <david@...>
> sagefarm@... wrote:
>
> >Dear Neighbors:
> >
> >I walked around White Pond recently.
> >[...]
> >there were people swimming in the water, and no enforcement activities were
> >observed.  This activity was photo documented and have a copy for the record.
> >
> >Clearly, even with the limited amount of beach present, due to the high level
> of
> >the pond, people still come to the pond and ignore the ban on swimming.
> >
> >
> I thought that one had to be a member of the White Pond Association in
> order to swim in White Pond. So either the swimmers were members of the
> association who were ignoring the ban, or they were not members of the
> association and would be in violation whether there was a ban or not. It
> might be useful to know which.
>
> How is the membership requirement enforced when swimming is allowed? Why
> does this fail when there is no swimming? It seems it would be easier,
> as there's no need to distinguish the permitted swimmers from the
> non-permitted.
>
> (By the way, what ban? Perhaps if I were a member, I'd know--since I'm
> not a member, I have no personal need to know, since I already can't
> legally swim there.)
>
> >Imagine if the rail trail makes it easier for people to come and thus even
more
> >people come.
> >
> Yes, I much prefer to carry my towels, spare clothing, etc. on a bicycle
> than in a car, so making it possible for me to take a bicycle to go
> swimming illegally will make it far more attractive than if I had to
> drive there. I do of course have my tongue firmly in my cheek now.
>
> Is it conceivable that opening alternative opportunities for recreation
> (other than illegal swimming) might actually entice some illegal
> swimmers AWAY from White Pond?
>
> It sounds like White Pond needs more study in any case, since whether or
> not there is a rail trail the pond will be in a very bad situation. It
> also appears that some change is necessary, and it appears to me that if
> one is both familiar with and concerned about the problems of the pond,
> one should be trying to discover what changes could help preserve the pond.
>
> David K.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send a blank email to concord-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

If you're a registered voter in Concord, don't forget to vote today in
the Special Election.  Polls open from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm.  Four ballot
questions.  More information, including a sample ballot, is available at
www.concordnet.org/ballotinfo.pdf.

Anita



Anita S. Tekle
Town Clerk
P.O. Box 535
Concord, MA 01742
Tel: 978-318-3080
Fax: 978-318-3093
E-Mail:  atekle@...

At 7:47 PM -0400 6/5/06, David A. Karr wrote:
>Is it conceivable that opening alternative opportunities for recreation
>(other than illegal swimming) might actually entice some illegal
>swimmers AWAY from White Pond?
>
>It sounds like White Pond needs more study in any case, since whether or
>not there is a rail trail the pond will be in a very bad situation. It
>also appears that some change is necessary, and it appears to me that if
>one is both familiar with and concerned about the problems of the pond,
>one should be trying to discover what changes could help preserve the pond.

I still think that the trail might _restrict_ casual access to the
pond.  If not, then, obviously, it wouldn't work.  It might also be a
means to more easily patrol and ENFORCE the various pond issues.

And if there is an easy way to make the trail bypass the pond, on a
secured road area, that wouldn't be a bad idea, either, although it
means that the pond wouldn't benefit from the help that the trail
might give it.
--
Colleen, Neen @ alum.MIT.EDU
at home with 4 kids 18th Reenactor Mom
who never met a textile craft she didn't want to try

Is it still possible to join the pond? I realized a bit too late that the
pool chemicals were going to irritate my son's eczema and that  swimming in the
pond would be better.
Dawna


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If the cove at White Pond is bothered by unwanted swimmers because it is
secluded and people can get away with an unauthorized swim, I think Colleen is
right that having lots of people on the path could make it better protected.
Signs inviting people to call police if they see illegal activity would prompt
civic-minded folks to call in, and would alert trespassers that their
activities may be seen and reported.   Along with the marauding youths that
folks seem
to fear, there will be lots of responsible seniors, alert parents pushing
strollers who'll have their cellphones with them, and the army of runners and
joggers who are a constant presence in our community.   (The runners will enjoy
more safety on this trail, too, than on the edge of heavily travelled roads.)
Maybe our bicycle police will go through from time to time, too!

Ever since moving to town years ago, I've heard the steady complaints about
unauthorized swimming in White Pond, and clearly there aren't any effective
means to prevent it.   Some folks just don't care about signs.   But if the
trespassers know some busybody is going to come along and "spoil their fun",
they'll probably be less likely to do it in the first place.   A good trail, a
good
fence, good signage and plenty of community involvement may fix the problems
which the current set-up can't really fix.

I've lived here over 20 years and have never seen White Pond except on a
Google satellite map.   I tried to visit it once, but there are "stay out!" and
no
parking signs everywhere, and I am a sign-obeyer.   But because I've never
seen it, its condition is not something which gets me worked up.   I hear the
complaints about swimmers and erosion, but I don't feel an urgent need to have
town resources applied to making the pond safer, cleaner, better protected. But
if I could roll by and admire the pond, and if I noticed trespassers or
trash, I would become an advocate, too, and would feel like it was worth having
town oversight increased.

Most people like bike trails, which bring a huge benefit to large numbers of
people.   Think of the potential energy savings of people being able to make
small trips into West Concord center by bike instead of car!   Most Concord
kids can't travel safely anywhere without an adult driving them.   Even "quiet"
streets have no sidewalks, and biking isn't safe on many crucial routes; with a
trail, many more would have access to a safe, convenient route for a large
part of the year and could get there on muscle power instead of fossil fuels. It
would be a huge draw for families on weekends seeking healthy fun, and would
bring visitors to West Concord center for refreshments, snacks, and sundry
small purchases.   We can make our trail successful by studying other trails and
learning from any less-successful aspects of their current installations.

The Bruce Freeman trail people have worked a long time to get their project
to this point, and there were enough people at TM who wanted to encourage them,
so they got their starter money.   Let's try to have a trail AND keep the
pond safer, cleaner and better protected.   I am sure there is a way to
accomplish both.   A good trail could get the Pond people more of what they want
rather
than less.

Laura Gouillart



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi all,

FYI.  A Finance Committee commentary concerning today's Town and
School Proposition 2 1/2 override election is available on the Finance
Committee website at

http://www.concordnet.org/finance/FinCom.htm

Regards,

Mark Russell Prior


--- In concord@yahoogroups.com, "Anita Tekle" <atekle@...> wrote:
>
>
> If you're a registered voter in Concord, don't forget to vote today in
> the Special Election.  Polls open from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm.  Four ballot
> questions.  More information, including a sample ballot, is available at
> www.concordnet.org/ballotinfo.pdf.
>
> Anita
>
>
>
> Anita S. Tekle
> Town Clerk
> P.O. Box 535
> Concord, MA 01742
> Tel: 978-318-3080
> Fax: 978-318-3093
> E-Mail:  atekle@...
>

At 10:41 AM -0400 6/6/06, LauraGou@... wrote:
>  But if the
>trespassers know some busybody is going to come along and "spoil their fun",
>they'll probably be less likely to do it in the first place.

That is me, alright....I would CERTAINLY be one of the ones reporting
that sort of thing ;-)  And I'm doing my best to teach my kids to, as
well...we're always calling in breakdowns on the road, and the
occasional really blatantly impaired driver..
--
Colleen, Neen @ alum.MIT.EDU
at home with 4 kids 18th Reenactor Mom
who never met a textile craft she didn't want to try

Laura writes:   "If the cove at White Pond is bothered by unwanted
swimmers because it is
secluded and people can get away with an unauthorized swim, I think
Colleen is
right that having lots of people on the path could make it better
protected."

Laura,  I'm sorry that you haven't seen White Pond.  Of course, it can be
said that if you have seen Walden Pond, you have seen White Pond's sister
pond.  One of the qualities of a kettle pond such as White Pond is that it
is pretty much invisible because it has steep banks and the water is 20-30
feet below the tops of the banks in most areas. It is a dreadful irony
that White Pond IS visible from one section of the proposed Rail Trail.
However, the cove is absolutely not visible from the trail, in fact the
cove is not visible from many areas of the shoreline/pond, which is one of
the reasons it is so attractive to visitors.

           There is legal parking and access to the pond in three areas if
you are still interested in visiting.

           ALL visitors to the pond who choose not to stay on designated
paths, who choose to bushwhack down the banks to the water create problems
for the pond.  Swimmers are only a special part of that population.

           Perhaps some Rail Trail users would be single-minded and totally
focussed and wouldn't be the least bit interested in climbing down to the
water (less than 50 feet away when the pond is visible), or taking a quick
cooling dip, or coming back at some later time to do all those things.
There is a limit to the number of people who can use a resource such as
White Pond without destroying it. I cringe at the number of visitors to
White Pond that would be generated from the thousands of people who could
see the pond from the proposed Rail Trail.

Laura writes:   "Ever since moving to town years ago, I've heard the
steady complaints about
unauthorized swimming in White Pond, and clearly there aren't any
effective
means to prevent it."

         You are absolutely right - constant and vigilant patrols can help,
but recreation doesn't just take place 9-5 or during business hours.  It
is important to human beings to have fun, to "recreate", and we work hard
at it!  The costs of patrolling and enforcement are considerable and
perpetual: the Town has not been able/willing to pay for it for the last
20 or more years (since our last ranger in the '70's, despite our pleas
for that kind of enforcement).  We will have rangers this year.  Will we
have rangers ten years from now?  And, of course, some of the most
damaging activity (including fires) happens at night when there are no
patrols and no enforcement.

         I hope that we will all think about the water quality problems
i.e. the algal blooms, aquatic vegetation, no dissolved oxygen in the
bottom twenty feet of the pond for the fish to breathe in late summer and
fall that the pond is already having because of human activities in and
around the pond.  Then, I believe, we need to weigh the pond's water
quality needs against the necessity of building the proposed Rail Trail
along its shoreline.  Also, although I'm not qualified to present the
ecological needs of the White Pond watershed in any detail, we should
consider the wild life and plant life that are the current users of the
rail bed, and how they support the ecology of the whole watershed and
beyond.

Laura writes:

         "Think of the potential energy savings of people being able to
make
small trips into West Concord center by bike instead of car!"

         I can think of better and more effective ways to save energy that
would benefit the environment in lots of ways - buying fuel efficient
vehicles is one of them!  We have owned a Prius for the last 6 years and
can really recommend them.  And, if we put smaller vehicles on the road,
there will be more room for the cyclists!  I spent some years in England
riding a bicycle everywhere I had to go on local roads, sharing the road
with cars and trucks, etc.  It has always puzzled me why that doesn't seem
to work in the United States.  Of course, rotaries work pretty well in
England, too.

Laura writes:   "We can make our trail successful by studying other trails
and learning from any less-successful aspects of their current
installations."

         I'm pretty discouraged about making this trail successful for the
pond.  All that I have read about in the Globe in the last 6 weeks or so
is about the problems that the Minuteman Rail Trail is part of.  The most
discouraging story was about $900,000 worth of erosion repair work just
completed at Spy Pond in Arlington.  And, no problem for White Pond,  but
cautionary for all abutters, the Globe's report of the problems that MMRT
abutters are having with graffiti on fences, houses, etc.

Judith


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Debbie,

I see that refreshments are being offered.

I have been bringing a couple of boxes - twenty four cookies in all -- to
the recent gatherings.

I have not been bringing any beverages such as water, lemonade, cider,  etc.

I do believe that we will have an overflow.

What is your recommendation or is it all being taken care of?

Rick


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: jksprott@...
>
> Laura,  I'm sorry that you haven't seen White Pond.  Of course, it can be
> said that if you have seen Walden Pond, you have seen White Pond's sister
> pond.  One of the qualities of a kettle pond such as White Pond is that it
> is pretty much invisible because it has steep banks and the water is 20-30
> feet below the tops of the banks in most areas. It is a dreadful irony
> that White Pond IS visible from one section of the proposed Rail Trail.
> However, the cove is absolutely not visible from the trail, in fact the
> cove is not visible from many areas of the shoreline/pond, which is one of
> the reasons it is so attractive to visitors.
>
>           There is legal parking and access to the pond in three areas if
> you are still interested in visiting.

As an interested outsider, reading all this, is the fear that White Pond will
have MORE
swimmers than Walden?  From what I see, Walden has tens of thousands of swimmers
each year and is still alive.  There's a certain level of prissy middle-class
suburban
correctness, that is beginning to pervade this thread...or am I missing
something here?

Dwight



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

dmackerron@... wrote:
>
>
>
> As an interested outsider, reading all this, is the fear that White Pond
> will have MORE
> swimmers than Walden? From what I see, Walden has tens of thousands of
> swimmers each year and is still alive. There's a certain level of prissy
> middle-class suburban
> correctness, that is beginning to pervade this thread...or am I missing
> something here?
>
> Dwight

Ouch.

I don't live on White Pond, am not a member and don't swim there but I
can appreciate the very real danger the pond, like many of our once
pristine natural resources, faces due to over use.

Maybe it's advanced age (I have teen age kids) that makes me look back
over my 'many years' and notice how we (people) can continue to justify
using any and all natural resources for our own personal enjoyment while
being baffled and offended by those seeking to protect them.

As counter point, please consider this as a valid alternative viewpoint:
   I am selfish; I'm hoping things like White Pond will still be worth
fighting to protect when I'm a grandma and though it's some years off
(it better be) like many things worth while, it takes work now and
continually to make a difference.


Julie

The poll workers in my precinct were punchy with boredom by the time I
strolled in at 6:30.   They reported a very slow day indeed.

Laura


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Dwight,
I've just recently signed up to be a part of this Concord group.  I've been
receiving these emails as well about White's Pond.  I agree with you so much! 
It does seem to smack of eliteness somehow and as  you said, "prissy".  That's
really too bad.  This and Rt. 62 is all I've heard about and it's not what I
expected.  I'll probably take my name off the "list".  Just wanted to let you
know that you were the first person that reflected my view.
Susie
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: dmackerron@...
   To: concord@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 6:00 PM
   Subject: Re: [concord] Conditions around White Pond/the bike trail


   -------------- Original message ----------------------
   From: jksprott@...
   >
   > Laura,  I'm sorry that you haven't seen White Pond.  Of course, it can be
   > said that if you have seen Walden Pond, you have seen White Pond's sister
   > pond.  One of the qualities of a kettle pond such as White Pond is that it
   > is pretty much invisible because it has steep banks and the water is 20-30
   > feet below the tops of the banks in most areas. It is a dreadful irony
   > that White Pond IS visible from one section of the proposed Rail Trail.
   > However, the cove is absolutely not visible from the trail, in fact the
   > cove is not visible from many areas of the shoreline/pond, which is one of
   > the reasons it is so attractive to visitors.
   >
   >           There is legal parking and access to the pond in three areas if
   > you are still interested in visiting.

   As an interested outsider, reading all this, is the fear that White Pond will
have MORE
   swimmers than Walden?  From what I see, Walden has tens of thousands of
swimmers each year and is still alive.  There's a certain level of prissy
middle-class suburban
   correctness, that is beginning to pervade this thread...or am I missing
something here?

   Dwight



   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




   TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send a blank email to concord-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.
   Yahoo! Groups Links







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

We just got back from Ripley: 375 was the count.

It puzzles me. I hear many complain about how expensive and horrible
and unnecessary overrides are. And why doesn't the Town do this, that
and the other thing with our tax revenue. Yet, do they all vote? I
most certainly hope so.

I've decided: I am going to start asking every complainer I hear from
now on if they vote at the polls.

YOU'RE GOT 10 MINUTES LEFT!!! GET ON OUT THERE!!!

chagrinned,
Debbie

At 7:39 PM -0400 6/6/06, LauraGou@... wrote:
>The poll workers in my precinct were punchy with boredom by the time I
>strolled in at 6:30. They reported a very slow day indeed.
>
>Laura
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


--
http://www.GreaterWellbeing.com - 978 369-8454

Wellness Education, Counseling & Coaching
Holistic Healthcare, Whole Food Nutrition

JuicePLUS+: fresh, raw fruits and vegetables
in capsules and delicious chewables.
Recorded Info 24/7: 1-800-942-1260

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

about  375 voters about 7:30pm at precinct 4

/r



6, 2006, at 7:39 PM, LauraGou@... wrote:

>
> The poll workers in my precinct were punchy with boredom by the time I
> strolled in at 6:30. They reported a very slow day indeed.
>
> Laura
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Election is over and the count is in.  Election turnout today was low --
17% townwide. Started off very slow (about 10 voters per hour per
precinct in the morning), but picked up as the day progressed.  A total
of 1,994 voters townwide.  Not a record low, but certainly the lowest
turnout in recent years for an override election.  Here's the link to
the results -- http://www.concordnet.org/clerk/060606results.htm.
Results were fairly consistent across all precincts, with the exception
of Precinct 4 (Ripley), where two questions lost and two won by very
small margins.

Thank you to all who took the time to vote today.

Anita



Anita S. Tekle
Town Clerk
P.O. Box 535
Concord, MA 01742
Tel: 978-318-3080
Fax: 978-318-3093
E-Mail:  atekle@...

I was #371 in precinct 2 around 4:30.

Sara

I'm probably doing something wrong, but the link is not working here - can
someone tell me the results townwide - many thanks!

Jan McGinn
mcginn.jan@...

   -----Original Message-----
   From: concord@yahoogroups.com [mailto:concord@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Anita Tekle
   Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 9:30 PM
   To: concord@yahoogroups.com
   Subject: [concord] Election Results


   Election is over and the count is in. Election turnout today was low --
   17% townwide. Started off very slow (about 10 voters per hour per
   precinct in the morning), but picked up as the day progressed. A total
   of 1,994 voters townwide. Not a record low, but certainly the lowest
   turnout in recent years for an override election. Here's the link to
   the results -- http://www.concordnet.org/clerk/060606results.htm.
   Results were fairly consistent across all precincts, with the exception
   of Precinct 4 (Ripley), where two questions lost and two won by very
   small margins.

   Thank you to all who took the time to vote today.

   Anita

   Anita S. Tekle
   Town Clerk
   P.O. Box 535
   Concord, MA 01742
   Tel: 978-318-3080
   Fax: 978-318-3093
   E-Mail: atekle@...






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Make sure you're not including the "." at the end of the URL.

Try this one:  http://www.concordnet.org/clerk/060606results.htm

-d

At 9:52 PM -0400 6/6/06, Jan McGinn wrote:
>I'm probably doing something wrong, but the link is not working here - can
>someone tell me the results townwide - many thanks!
>
>Jan McGinn
><mailto:mcginn.jan%40verizon.net>mcginn.jan@...
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: <mailto:concord%40yahoogroups.com>concord@yahoogroups.com
>[mailto:<mailto:concord%40yahoogroups.com>concord@yahoogroups.com]On
>Behalf Of
>Anita Tekle
>Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 9:30 PM
>To: <mailto:concord%40yahoogroups.com>concord@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [concord] Election Results
>
>Election is over and the count is in. Election turnout today was low --
>17% townwide. Started off very slow (about 10 voters per hour per
>precinct in the morning), but picked up as the day progressed. A total
>of 1,994 voters townwide. Not a record low, but certainly the lowest
>turnout in recent years for an override election. Here's the link to
>the results --
><http://www.concordnet.org/clerk/060606results.htm.>http://www.concordnet.org/c\
lerk/060606results.htm.
>Results were fairly consistent across all precincts, with the exception
>of Precinct 4 (Ripley), where two questions lost and two won by very
>small margins.
>
>Thank you to all who took the time to vote today.
>
>Anita
>
>Anita S. Tekle
>Town Clerk
>P.O. Box 535
>Concord, MA 01742
>Tel: 978-318-3080
>Fax: 978-318-3093
>E-Mail: <mailto:atekle%40concordnet.org>atekle@...
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


--
http://www.GreaterWellbeing.com - 978 369-8454

Wellness Education, Counseling & Coaching
Holistic Healthcare, Whole Food Nutrition

JuicePLUS+: fresh, raw fruits and vegetables
in capsules and delicious chewables.
Recorded Info 24/7: 1-800-942-1260

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

To get the link to work, delete the final period.

Taxes win again.  Another $443 a year for the median-price home owner. Glad I
got out of Concord when I did.

Marj


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Anita Tekle
   To: concord@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 9:29 PM
   Subject: [concord] Election Results


   Election is over and the count is in. Election turnout today was low --
   17% townwide. Started off very slow (about 10 voters per hour per
   precinct in the morning), but picked up as the day progressed. A total
   of 1,994 voters townwide. Not a record low, but certainly the lowest
   turnout in recent years for an override election. Here's the link to
   the results -- http://www.concordnet.org/clerk/060606results.htm.
   Results were fairly consistent across all precincts, with the exception
   of Precinct 4 (Ripley), where two questions lost and two won by very
   small margins.

   Thank you to all who took the time to vote today.

   Anita

   Anita S. Tekle
   Town Clerk
   P.O. Box 535
   Concord, MA 01742
   Tel: 978-318-3080
   Fax: 978-318-3093
   E-Mail: atekle@...





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

before your kids needed to attend first rate schools?

/r
On Jun 06, 2006, at 10:21 PM, sedona44 wrote:

> To get the link to work, delete the final period.
>
> Taxes win again. Another $443 a year for the median-price home
> owner. Glad I got out of Concord when I did.
>
> Marj
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Anita Tekle
> To: concord@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 9:29 PM
> Subject: [concord] Election Results
>
> Election is over and the count is in. Election turnout today was
> low --
> 17% townwide. Started off very slow (about 10 voters per hour per
> precinct in the morning), but picked up as the day progressed. A total
> of 1,994 voters townwide. Not a record low, but certainly the lowest
> turnout in recent years for an override election. Here's the link to
> the results -- http://www.concordnet.org/clerk/060606results.htm.
> Results were fairly consistent across all precincts, with the
> exception
> of Precinct 4 (Ripley), where two questions lost and two won by very
> small margins.
>
> Thank you to all who took the time to vote today.
>
> Anita
>
> Anita S. Tekle
> Town Clerk
> P.O. Box 535
> Concord, MA 01742
> Tel: 978-318-3080
> Fax: 978-318-3093
> E-Mail: atekle@...
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At 09:52 PM 6/6/2006, Jan McGinn wrote:

>I'm probably doing something wrong, but the link is not working here - can
>someone tell me the results townwide - many thanks!

All questions passed 58-59% to 41-42%

Hugh

Rich

You know I don't have children.  Please also know that I strongly believe in
supporting education, and I'm willing to pay taxes to educate children because I
believe they are an investment in my future as much as anyone else's future. But
please also recognize that the tax situation in Concord is totally out of
control.

Marj

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: rich stevenson
   To: concord@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 10:36 PM
   Subject: Re: [concord] Election Results


   before your kids needed to attend first rate schools?

   /r
   On Jun 06, 2006, at 10:21 PM, sedona44 wrote:

   > To get the link to work, delete the final period.
   >
   > Taxes win again. Another $443 a year for the median-price home
   > owner. Glad I got out of Concord when I did.
   >
   > Marj
   >
   > ----- Original Message -----
   > From: Anita Tekle
   > To: concord@yahoogroups.com
   > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 9:29 PM
   > Subject: [concord] Election Results
   >
   > Election is over and the count is in. Election turnout today was
   > low --
   > 17% townwide. Started off very slow (about 10 voters per hour per
   > precinct in the morning), but picked up as the day progressed. A total
   > of 1,994 voters townwide. Not a record low, but certainly the lowest
   > turnout in recent years for an override election. Here's the link to
   > the results -- http://www.concordnet.org/clerk/060606results.htm.
   > Results were fairly consistent across all precincts, with the
   > exception
   > of Precinct 4 (Ripley), where two questions lost and two won by very
   > small margins.
   >
   > Thank you to all who took the time to vote today.
   >
   > Anita
   >
   > Anita S. Tekle
   > Town Clerk
   > P.O. Box 535
   > Concord, MA 01742
   > Tel: 978-318-3080
   > Fax: 978-318-3093
   > E-Mail: atekle@...
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >
   >
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I was talking with my bookkeeper today, who lives in Worcester. He
say they haven't had an override there since the 1980's! Now they are
having to lay off some dozens of teachers.

I have to think that somewhere between yearly overrides (or in our
case, 2 overrides in 4 months!) and absolutely NO overrides, there
has got to be some good ground we could live with.

-d

At 10:46 PM -0400 6/6/06, sedona44 wrote:
>Rich
>
>You know I don't have children. Please also know that I strongly
>believe in supporting education, and I'm willing to pay taxes to
>educate children because I believe they are an investment in my
>future as much as anyone else's future. But please also recognize
>that the tax situation in Concord is totally out of control.
>
>Marj
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: rich stevenson
>To: <mailto:concord%40yahoogroups.com>concord@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 10:36 PM
>Subject: Re: [concord] Election Results
>
>before your kids needed to attend first rate schools?
>
>/r
>On Jun 06, 2006, at 10:21 PM, sedona44 wrote:
>
>>  To get the link to work, delete the final period.
>>
>>  Taxes win again. Another $443 a year for the median-price home
>>  owner. Glad I got out of Concord when I did.
>>
>>  Marj
>>
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>  From: Anita Tekle
>>  To: <mailto:concord%40yahoogroups.com>concord@yahoogroups.com
>>  Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 9:29 PM
>>  Subject: [concord] Election Results
>>
>>  Election is over and the count is in. Election turnout today was
>>  low --
>>  17% townwide. Started off very slow (about 10 voters per hour per
>>  precinct in the morning), but picked up as the day progressed. A total
>>  of 1,994 voters townwide. Not a record low, but certainly the lowest
>>  turnout in recent years for an override election. Here's the link to
>>  the results --
>><http://www.concordnet.org/clerk/060606results.htm.>http://www.concordnet.org/\
clerk/060606results.htm.
>>  Results were fairly consistent across all precincts, with the
>>  exception
>>  of Precinct 4 (Ripley), where two questions lost and two won by very
>>  small margins.
>>
>>  Thank you to all who took the time to vote today.
>>
>>  Anita
>>
>>  Anita S. Tekle
>>  Town Clerk
>>  P.O. Box 535
>>  Concord, MA 01742
>>  Tel: 978-318-3080
>>  Fax: 978-318-3093
>>  E-Mail: <mailto:atekle%40concordnet.org>atekle@...
>>
>>  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


--
http://www.GreaterWellbeing.com - 978 369-8454

Wellness Education, Counseling & Coaching
Holistic Healthcare, Whole Food Nutrition

JuicePLUS+: fresh, raw fruits and vegetables
in capsules and delicious chewables.
Recorded Info 24/7: 1-800-942-1260

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Actually, Q. 3 passed 61% to 39%.

-d

At 10:16 PM -0400 6/6/06, Hugh C. Lauer wrote:
>At 09:52 PM 6/6/2006, Jan McGinn wrote:
>
>>I'm probably doing something wrong, but the link is not working here - can
>>someone tell me the results townwide - many thanks!
>
>All questions passed 58-59% to 41-42%
>


--
http://www.GreaterWellbeing.com - 978 369-8454

Wellness Education, Counseling & Coaching
Holistic Healthcare, Whole Food Nutrition

JuicePLUS+: fresh, raw fruits and vegetables
in capsules and delicious chewables.
Recorded Info 24/7: 1-800-942-1260

>   before your kids needed to attend first rate schools?

There was a "notion" that occasionally "floated" that folks moved into
Concord for the schools and then tended to move out after their kids grew
up - was/is there any data to back up this "notion".

BettyP
PS  For the record, I had a child in the Concord schools for only 7 of the
33 years I lived in Concord.

What concerns me is the listening going on (or, rather, lack
thereof)...those who want the trail keep making proposals and
suggestions and ideas on how to specifically protect the pond.  Those
trying to protect the pond and saying "I don't mind a trail, but not
near the pond" are not responding to the specifics, just repeating
the pond's current issues.

You don't get far when the suggestions are ignored.  Do you mean to
be ignoring constructive, helpful suggestions?  I assume not...but
that is the appearance, to me at least...and in this sort of
instance, appearances matter.

The pond is currently not well protected.  Unless something
_changes_, from what you've all said, the pond is clearly doomed.
Given that, wouldn't you want to embrace the trail, and the
money/fundraising it will entail, to fund the pond's issues at the
same time?  Then perhaps there will BE rangers...at night, when they
are needed.  Police presence, busybodies like me reporting people
climbing down the slopes, all that stuff that is currently happening
unchecked.

Many from the "pond" side have said they like trails, but not near
the pond.  But I don't recall any saying anything like: If we can
build it so that the pond is better protected than now, it'd be a
good thing.

The other side HAS said that it shouldn't be built unless the pond is
protected (like me ;-).

How come?  If you all ARE truly in favor of rail trails, and are NOT
being NIMBY, wouldn't you expect it?


--
Colleen, Neen @ alum.MIT.EDU
at home with 4 kids 18th Reenactor Mom
who never met a textile craft she didn't want to try

At 7:50 PM -0400 6/6/06, Deborah Bier, PhD wrote:
>I've decided: I am going to start asking every complainer I hear from
>now on if they vote at the polls.

Been doing that for a while ;-)  People will occasionally ask about
something (usually rhetorically), and I'll know the answer, and they
ask how I knew, and I said, "they say it at Town Meeting".  They ask,
"who goes to TM?" (rhetorically, again), and I say "ME!  why don't
you?".

You have to tell people who complain, always, then go vote!
--
Colleen, Neen @ alum.MIT.EDU
at home with 4 kids 18th Reenactor Mom
who never met a textile craft she didn't want to try

As another relative outsider, I have never seen the pond. I'll stop  short of
calling concerns about the welfare of the pond "prissy  middle-class suburban
correctness" because I'm not really sure what the  concerns are. I know that
there are many ponds and lakes that are  enjoyed by swimmers and anglers with no
ill effects at all. Before  writing off the rail-trail-near-the-pond detractors
as prissy, I would  like to know what some of the specific concerns about the
welfare of  the pond actually are. Will the trail cause run-off into the pond
that  is somehow detrimental to the ecological balance of the pond? Are there 
protected species of plants or animals around the pond whose habitats  will be
threatened by the trail and easier access to the pond and if  so, what
(specificaly) are those plants/animals and how will they be  effected? I
understand there are concerns but a good argument should  include specifics that
people can use to make a sound and objective  decision.

   And to take my name off the list because there is some heated debate  about
Rt. 62 and White Pond would equate to putting my hands over my  ears and yelling
"Laaaa, laaaa, laaaa ... "   I think its  good when people can politely
dissagree and air things that they don't  like. It would be a pretty boring
world without at least a little  dissent.

   Just my objective $.02

   -Rich

dmackerron@... wrote:                                            
-------------- Original message ----------------------
   From: jksprott@...
   >
   > Laura,  I'm sorry that you haven't seen White Pond.  Of course, it can be
   > said that if you have seen Walden Pond, you have seen White Pond's sister
   > pond.  One of the qualities of a kettle pond such as White Pond is that it
   > is pretty much invisible because it has steep banks and the water is 20-30
   > feet below the tops of the banks in most areas. It is a dreadful irony
   > that White Pond IS visible from one section of the proposed Rail Trail.
   > However, the cove is absolutely not visible from the trail, in fact the
   > cove is not visible from many areas of the shoreline/pond, which is one of
   > the reasons it is so attractive to visitors.
   >
   >           There is legal parking and access to the pond in three areas if
   > you are still interested in visiting.

   As an interested outsider, reading all this, is the fear that White Pond will
have MORE
swimmers  than Walden? From what I see, Walden has tens of thousands of swimmers
each year and is still alive. There's a certain level of prissy  middle-class
suburban
   correctness, that is beginning to pervade this thread...or am I missing
something here?

   Dwight

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





  __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]