Defend Myrtle Woodward and Her Family!

[jcpliberty]

No, just your plain ole net geek.

Too funny!

JP

[Michael Fisher]

Google comes up with:? David Kestner, (603) 332-2113, , Farmington, NH 03835

Let's also invite him into these forums.

[Kat Kanning]

Who is calling the David guy?

Also, would it help to start a petition of some sort to stop the demolition of Myrtle's home?

[jcpliberty]

Who is calling the David guy?

Also, would it help to start a petition of some sort to stop the demolition of Myrtle's home?

Yes it would, I already started yesyerday. But what to say in the petition is what gets me... I'm usually good at wording petitions, but suddenly -- I'm at a loss to exactly how we want to say this.

JP

[Michael Fisher]

Call her again and ask if she is finished writing up her explanation of what she's going through.  This should help with the petition.

[Russell Kanning]

I like all of these idea. We need to take this one all the way. Giving out flyers in these lady's neighborhood and Kevin Schultz's (Heartless Bureaucrat) also is just perfect.

[Erethizon]

I contacted IJ(Institute for Justice). I'm disappointed with their response but I guess its understandable.

If you want the case considered fill out their form and submit it..


http://www.ij.org/potentialcase/p_case.pdf

[Russell Kanning]

Part of the problem is that we are fighting both bad laws (zoning etc.) and bad enforcement (bureaucrats). We have to go over the heads of the bureaucrats and around the law to what is right.

[Erethizon]

Has anyone contacted the town selectmen to see if they approve or are even aware of what their building inspector is doing?

You're not going to get bad laws changed overnight but maybe the overzealous enforcement could be.

[jcpliberty]

Has anyone contacted the town selectmen to see if they approve or are even aware of what their building inspector is doing?

You're not going to get bad laws changed overnight but maybe the overzealous enforcement could be.

Working on it.

JP

[jcpliberty]

From Barbara Burbank today:

Hello Jim,
Yes, thank you, I  welcome you to come take pictures and I can show you a copy of the letter that a respected real estate broker wrote that refutes what the town building inspector has said in the court documents.

Thank you also for the local connection to the fellow in Exeter.

Tomorrow, I was planning to put together a piece for you as you had asked.  I was upset today by the Hampton Union's article that was NOT a good one.  It did not quote me correctly and it claimed that the building inspector had "confirmed" his findings.  I am planning a letter to the editor with my complaint, but they probably will not publish it.

Thank you again for your support.  You can give Alan my home number if you would like.  It is 603-...-....

the suspected "dish washing criminal",
Barbara..."I'm not guilty, I swear, all my dishes are dirty!"

[rothamerica]

I've got 1000 flyers printed up, ready for distribution!

[Amethyste]

You can bet that my husband, LeRuiner6, will be on this like white trash on Velveeta!
I will not post too often in this forum - but this family's struggles with the moronic law
is disturbing. We moved from Vermont to NH because of this sort of crapola, and here it is
HERE again. 

-=Amethyste

[jcpliberty]

Town says garage fix-up illegal

From http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/hampton/01072005/news/57845.htm

By Patrick Cronin
pcronin@seacoastonline.com

HAMPTON - "Not fit for human occupancy."

That is what the sign says on Barbara Burbank?s garage addition, where her daughter was staying, after a surprise inspection by the building inspector.

"It doesn?t make any sense," said Burbank.

While the town says Burbank built an illegal apartment, she says she did nothing of the sort and is now being forced to defend herself in court.

Building Inspector Kevin Schultz filed legal action against Burbank and her 95-year-old aunt, Myrtle Woodward, on Dec. 13, asking a judge to order the woman to demolish everything not approved by the town, prohibit further construction and pay the town?s costs and attorney?s fees.

It also asks that the town be reimbursed for time the Building Department spent on the case and the women be fined $275 per day for every day since Feb. 27, 2003, when they allegedly violated their permit.

Schultz is scheduled to face Burbank and Woodward at Rockingham Superior Court on Jan. 25.

Burbank, however, wants to know what building code she violated and what exactly the town wants her to get rid of.

"I have no choice but to defend myself because I didn?t do anything wrong," said Burbank.

She says the zoning board approved a variance to construct an addition to her garage with "a large recreational room with smaller loft and bathroom above."

The approval came after she was denied a variance in April 2002 to construct an apartment, with a kitchen, for her daughter above the garage. It was denied primarily because two-family dwellings are not permitted in that area under the Hampton Zoning Ordinance.

"I didn?t change anything," said Burbank. "I did everything according to the plans that were approved."

The only thing that changed was they moved furniture into the rooms including a bed, Burbank says.

Her daughter was sleeping there at night because she is allergic to her aunt?s long-haired cats.

While she had a sink and a stove inside the room, which would make it an apartment, it wasn?t hooked up.

Burbank said while her daughter slept there at night, she ate, showered and did her laundry in the main house.

The Building Department was tipped off about the so-called illegal apartment when it received a complaint from a Portsmouth man who said he stayed in the addition.

According to Barbara, that man was her daughter?s ex-boyfriend and his complaint was made out of anger.

The man stated he stayed there and had concerns about the safety of the bedroom over the garage because there is no secondary means of egress in case of an emergency.

After receiving the complaint, Schultz obtained a warrant from Hampton District Court to inspect it.

On Nov. 19, Schultz along with Assistant Building Inspector Chuck Marsden, accompanied by a Hampton police officer, inspected the place and confirmed there was a two-bedroom apartment, a kitchen and a laundry area.

"The original permit was only for an addition to the existing garage, but there has also been a great deal of additional construction throughout the entire area above the garage itself," states the lawsuit. "No permits have been issued or applied for as to this work."

In addition, the findings also confirmed there was no second means of exit, windows that don?t meet requirements for escape, and construction lacking the required fire separations between the apartment and the garage bellow.

As a result of that inspection, Schultz declared the building unsafe for human occupancy.

Burbank said the charges are untrue.

"It?s inconvenient that I have to defend myself," said Burbank.

[Russell Kanning]

As a result of that inspection, Schultz declared the building unsafe for human occupancy.

Burbank said the charges are untrue.

"It's inconvenient that I have to defend myself," said Burbank.

She should not have to waste time defending herself. I wish we had the manpower to defend her home, so that she could just ignore the city.
If we had that, we could rip of that sign the city put on the garage and let them get back to their lives.