Defend Myrtle Woodward and Her Family!

[Lloyd Danforth]

JohnM,
While I agree with you about the futility and, possible danger of making it personal with this building inspector, the idea of an 'informational' protest sort of appeals to me.  Nah, probably also futile.
However, as a teenager, I once witnessed the guy who, later, turned me on to libertarianism, have a conservsation with a cop and talk him into quitting the police force!
Lloyd

[Kat Kanning]

I actually got anothe email from Representative Nancy Stiles:

Good Afternoon Kat,
   I did follow up on your letter.  In speaking with our Town Manager,
James Barrington, this morning he confirmed that this issue is in litigation,
therefore I really can't comment or pass judgement without knowing all
the facts.  I suspect that the issues on both sides will be addressed and I
feel confident that the correct resolution will be reached. I would suggest
that any questions in this regard be directed through our town manager.

Representative Stiles

[Russell Kanning]

So if it wasn't in court she could have an opinion, but she can't now?

[davemincin]

I believe the orginal request for a variance was turned down 3-2.  Do we know who the 3 are?  Seems like they
are the real power behind this, and should be held accountable.  Is't the zoning boards function to grant reasonable
exceptions?  Surely this was a reasonable request.

[Russell Kanning]

I think you can find a post by Karl with some names of people that currently oppose this variance...

[jcpliberty]

Hmm... I wonder if money is somehow a factor in this...

Just a thought, doesn't lead anywhere yet... but worth looking into i suppose.

JP

[JonM]

JohnM,
While I agree with you about the futility and, possible danger of making it personal with this building inspector, the idea of an 'informational' protest sort of appeals to me.? Nah, probably also futile.
However, as a teenager, I once witnessed the guy who, later, turned me on to libertarianism, have a conservsation with a cop and talk him into quitting the police force!
Lloyd

I think protests are a great way to draw attention to problems.  Sadly, I  am employed a bit too far away to make it to the protest at the courthouse, and I am much grateful to those who are able to attend for taking the time to do so.

What is being done to Myrtle isn't right, and the residents of New Hampshire should be made aware of it.  The building inspector probably believes he's doing the right thing, and there are ways to convince him that this is not the case.  I'd be willing to bet your guy didn't talk the police officer into quitting the force by belittling him.

There are two issues.  One, is the building inspector right or wrong.  If the appliances and fixtures he says make it a standalone apartment which are in violation of the zoning laws are truly hooked up and in violation, the building inspector did nothing wrong in his eyes, he is merely enforcing the law as written.  We may not hold him in much esteem for doing that job, but if he ignored it the ex-boyfriend might have tried to make him look bad for not enforcing the zoning laws.  Who knows?

If, as Myrtle contends, the devices are just being stored there, the best you have against her is intent to violating the zoning laws, which I do not believe is illegal yet.  If so the building inspector overstepped his bounds.

The second is the inherent rightness of 5 people to dictate to the entire town how they are able to use their property.  That's the issue that has better potential to raise awareness, in my opinion.

And Russell, so long as the law exists, it can be dusted off and selectively used against those the majority (or the minority in power) don't like.  We'll never be free so long as the tools to oppress remain in the hands of those who presume to dictate our lives to us.  If Hampton had no zoning laws and took care of these matters with deed restrictions, Myrtle would have to contend with her neighbors to get permission to modify her house.  That still not wide open freedom, but if you enter into a deed restriction knowing what you can and can't do, then there is no issue with having to go through the proper channels to modify it if and when you decide it no longer suits you.  The people on the other side of town have no interest in what she does with her property.  The people living next door may, depending on what exactly she wants to do.

In the short term, the most likely good outcome would be that she not be found in violation of the permits.  After that is to get her the variance she needs.  Long term would be to address the ability of 5 people to dictate to you how you use your property.  The best way to get her the variance is public pressure through raising awareness of the problem, as you're trying to do.

[Russell Kanning]

I would say that building inspector was not doing his job very well even if the law states that he can inspect people homes against their will.
The various taxes that the British tried to extract from the colonies might have still been on the books after the Rev. War but nobody payed them.

[JonM]

The basic rational behind building inspection is to ensure that someone doesn't build a building which may cause damage to someone else's building, by say, collapsing on it or catching fire and engulfing the neighbor's house as well, or its occupants who may not be the builders.

The market may be able to come up with a better way to perform this, but the genesis of the idea was not founded out of malice, even if in some cases that is what it has evolved into.

[intergraph19]

JohnM,
While I agree with you about the futility and, possible danger of making it personal with this building inspector, the idea of an 'informational' protest sort of appeals to me.  Nah, probably also futile.
However, as a teenager, I once witnessed the guy who, later, turned me on to libertarianism, have a conservsation with a cop and talk him into quitting the police force!
Lloyd

I think protests are a great way to draw attention to problems.  Sadly, I  am employed a bit too far away to make it to the protest at the courthouse, and I am much grateful to those who are able to attend for taking the time to do so.

What is being done to Myrtle isn't right, and the residents of New Hampshire should be made aware of it.  The building inspector probably believes he's doing the right thing, and there are ways to convince him that this is not the case.  I'd be willing to bet your guy didn't talk the police officer into quitting the force by belittling him.

There are two issues.  One, is the building inspector right or wrong.  If the appliances and fixtures he says make it a standalone apartment which are in violation of the zoning laws are truly hooked up and in violation, the building inspector did nothing wrong in his eyes, he is merely enforcing the law as written.  We may not hold him in much esteem for doing that job, but if he ignored it the ex-boyfriend might have tried to make him look bad for not enforcing the zoning laws.  Who knows?

If, as Myrtle contends, the devices are just being stored there, the best you have against her is intent to violating the zoning laws, which I do not believe is illegal yet.  If so the building inspector overstepped his bounds.

The second is the inherent rightness of 5 people to dictate to the entire town how they are able to use their property.  That's the issue that has better potential to raise awareness, in my opinion.

And Russell, so long as the law exists, it can be dusted off and selectively used against those the majority (or the minority in power) don't like.  We'll never be free so long as the tools to oppress remain in the hands of those who presume to dictate our lives to us.  If Hampton had no zoning laws and took care of these matters with deed restrictions, Myrtle would have to contend with her neighbors to get permission to modify her house.  That still not wide open freedom, but if you enter into a deed restriction knowing what you can and can't do, then there is no issue with having to go through the proper channels to modify it if and when you decide it no longer suits you.  The people on the other side of town have no interest in what she does with her property.  The people living next door may, depending on what exactly she wants to do.

In the short term, the most likely good outcome would be that she not be found in violation of the permits.  After that is to get her the variance she needs.  Long term would be to address the ability of 5 people to dictate to you how you use your property.  The best way to get her the variance is public pressure through raising awareness of the problem, as you're trying to do.

I would say that this inspector felt some need to do this to this woman.  I have known several building inspectors and they rarely bother to go out of their way unless some one irritates them in some way.  I hate to lump them all into this sort of group, but my personal observations are what they are.  However, he was within the law to do what he did. 

As I recently posted in another topic when asked if I would attend the protest, protesting isn't really my style.  I don't live in that community so I really have no business protesting their laws.  That's up to the people who live there to determine.  I would prefer to see a movement to inform and educate the people there, to inspire them to work on getting this woman's situation straightened out.  It is not my place to go to their community and work to change their laws.

[JonM]

From what I understand, the ex-boyfriend of the daughter (of Myrtle's niece) living at the house got annoyed and narc'd them out to the town, which sent the building inspector over to substantiate the ex-boyfriend's claim of an "unlawful" apartment.? Were it not for the ex-boyfriend the inspector would not have gone to the house.

[Russell Kanning]

Maybe someone will burn the ex-boyfriend in effigy

[Dave Ridley]

Note I'm composing to the building inspector. Feedback and corrections welcome:

---

Dear Mr. Schultz:

I've read about your dispute with Barbara Burbank and her family, as well and the coming storm of protest that is expected to result.   In these remaining days of calm, before the fight becomes more personal and positions calcify...before events spin out of the control of their would-be masters and beyond the boundaries of Hampton...

I beseech you to consider these thoughts.

In America most of us hold - or held at one time - beliefs both common and hurtful, widely accepted yet morally wrong.  In times pre-Revolutionary it was a belief in the divine right of kings.  During the civil rights struggle it was a faith in racial superiority. Today it is the assumption that government exists, in part, to protect individuals from themselves...that it should be able, with relative ease, to inject itself into our homes, dividing up our families in the name of protecting them.

Holding this belief doesn't make one a bad person, just as racism didn't make its every subscriber a devil.   But the belief is wrong nevertheless, destined to generate eventual resistance when imposed.   And you are about to impose it one time too many, in a manner more harsh than a free people can bear.   

Winston Churchill once said: "Never give in...except to convictions of honor or good sense."

Despite what people are starting to say...I am sure you have both.  And it is never wrong, never craven...to submit to either.   Men like Fidel Ramos, Oscar Schindler and Mikhail Gorbacev did this in their time, and history has rewarded them.   

Sometimes people in positions of power step back and take a breath, a soul-searching look at themselves and their purpose.  Usually it happens because a people simply stand before them and tell them they are wrong.   The wise official listens to these discomforting pleas and acts upon them while there is still time, before conflict sears his name into history as a synonym for injustice.   

I urge you to display greatness, to do what General Ramos did in the Philippines when he declined to fire on his people. 

There are probably a hundred honorable ways out of this kind of dispute, known better to you than to me. None of them involve bankrupting or evicting 95-year-old women and their families.   None of them involve large fines, either.

You have a great deal of power.  I ask you to prove you have a sense of honor big enough to match it.

P.S.:  Feel free to give me a call before the 25th if you want to discuss this; I'm eager to know if there's something I'm missing or some reason why you should not be the focus of this resistance. Though not a primary organizer of it, sometimes people listen to me.

[John]

Very, very nice approach.  Thank you for your effort.
Best of luck!

One thought: Also inviting him to write or email would give him options he may be more comfortable with.

[Dave Ridley]

Oh here is an answer if anyone gives us grief for not being Hampton residents:

One could say that if we *were* Hampton residents we would be at risk of retaliation by Hampton authorities for opposing them.   So in a sense it's almost better we're just from the state. Also during the civil rights struggle there were folks who travelled a thousand miles to help people fight oppression - no one thinks that was wrong and those folks were not even from the same states.