Is this how you want your town government to be run?
On December 30,2016 town counsel filed a response prior to a January hearing date in Forster v. Henniker Merrimack County Superior Court Case No.: 217-2016-CV-00534.
In that document the Henniker, through their attorney states the following town-of-henniker-zba-memo-of-law-12-30-16 see page 5.
“…the Court observed that “[c ]onsistent with the common law, the Town’s ordinance defines an accessory use as a ‘use subordinate and customarily incidental to the main … use on the same lot. ‘” The Court continued “[h]ere, the petitioner failed to establish that the proposed uses have ‘commonly, habitually and by long practice been established as reasonably associated with the primary … use.”
As I have shown in a previous post the NH Supreme Court also stated that the use must rise above being rare:
“While the strength or degree of the customary or habitual association does not lend itself to definition by formula, and while the combination need not occur in a majority of instances of the principal use, the uses must be associated with a frequency that is substantial enough to rise above rarity.” Alfond, 129 N.H. at 29 (citation omitted).”
Just ten days after Chairman Blomback tells Mr. Damourra he cannot give him a definition of ancillary and accessory uses, town counsel files a court document defining ancillary and accessory.
Clearly, Chairman Blomback has no idea what town counsel is doing!
When was the last meeting between the BOS and Town Counsel regarding their defense in Forster v. Henniker Merrimack County Superior Court Case No.: 217-2016-CV-00534?
I would like to know how many Selectmen/women have seen the pleadings? Does the BOS receive copies of these pleadings?
Clearly the Chairman is disengaged from his duties and has no clear understanding of what is happening, not applying Zoning Regulations equally and is unprepared and unresponsive to the needs of our community.
Clearly the home owners of 60 Juniper Ridge, cannot prove that a motocross track on a 1/2 acre residential property has been established as being common, habitual and reasonably associated with a residential property in Henniker.
The BOS, by taking no action, is in fact contradicting their position in Forster v. Henniker 217-2016-CV-00534.
I ask you once again, Is this how you want your town government to run?