Editor:

For weeks I've followed national and international news articles about the arrival of 15,000 United States soldiers in Puerto Rico. The strategic placement of USA warships in the Caribbean bordering Venezuela including one that traveled from the other side of the planet. The bombing and destruction of tiny boats — skiffs — accused by the current administration as boats carrying drugs. Yet, the current administration has not backed that accusation with evidence. 

Finally, last weekend, the middle of the night bombing in Caracas, the port in La Guaira and the kidnapping of the president of Venezuela. All actions breaking established international laws.

I've read the descriptions by many politicians and newspapers of president Maduro being corrupt and brutal. Yet, when a felon got in the White House who has been found to be guilty of equally unacceptable actions, the United States Senators (making huge salaries) surround him with approval and support. 

Why hasn't he been deposed? 

Why isn't the Epstein case right, front and center? 

Why aren't the judges and other authorities doing the work they swore to do and are paid to do? 

It's remarkably easy to walk all over the Constitution and get away with it. 

So sad to see that thousands of kids and youth in the USA are learning that this is the norm in the USA. Corruption 101. Breaking the Law 101.

Becky Mendible
Harwich

Editor:

Well, Chatham, you continue to shine! Community support for our holiday project brightened the lives of 236 Chatham children this year. We continue to value the mosaic of contributions from elves of all aspects of our generous town. 

Special thanks to the crew at Monomoy Community Services, the Chatham Angel Fund and particularly to Father Sullivan at Holy Redeemer Church and Gail and David Oppenheim for making Santa’s Workshop warm and welcoming in South Chatham.

Our individual elves and donors are our greatest treasure — way too many to name! The ongoing support from the First Congregational Church pumpkin sales, Airport Elves, St. Christopher’s gift card drive, Angel Ornaments, Holy Redeemer Church and this year’s Orpheum event hosted by Kim Roderiques are just some examples of our valuable helpers. This town-wide effort from businesses, churches, organizations and individuals ensures we will continue to support working families in our community in a variety of ways throughout the year. 

We can’t thank you enough! Wishing you all a happy and healthy 2026! You are truly a community who cares for our residents and we are grateful.

Pat Vreeland, Chatham Children’s Fund
Theresa Malone, Monomoy Community Services
Ginny Nickerson, The Chatham Angel Fund

Editor:

At the Jan. 5 Brewster Select Board meeting, the T word surfaced again. Trust. Surprisingly, it was introduced by a sitting select board member (an ex-fincom guy). That word makes some of our elected representatives uncomfortable and they do not like it bandied about. Perhaps a little history would help here.

In the summer of 2024, the select board was preparing the funding articles for the bay and pond properties first phase development. There was serious discussion about splitting the required plan and debt authorizations into separate articles — two articles for each parcel. The reasoning behind that was not to complicate the process, but rather to focus on an issue of concern to many residents, housing development on Zone 2 property.

In July 2024, the select board received a letter from the Brewster Conservation Trust that conveyed serious reservations about housing development on the pond property and suggested that the BCT would condition and perhaps rescind some of its committed funding if the housing issue was not addressed. This letter was reviewed by the select board in executive session, was not disclosed on its July 24, 2024 agenda and never saw the light of day. Most Brewster residents were not aware that the BCT was raising concerns about this issue. When the fall warrant was being prepared in 2024, I spoke to our town administrator about splitting the articles so that we could get a clear indication from the voters about housing on the pond property. No dice.

What followed was a contentious fall town meeting, an initial “no” vote on the Sea Camps property development plan, and then — surprise — reconsideration and approval of the article by a handful of votes. A few weeks later Brewster voters overwhelmingly voted down the debt authorization. Since both town meeting approval and ballot approval are required, the initial plan failed.

Chastened, our elected representatives publicly declared that the real problem was poor communication and commenced months of serious community engagement. Last night’s packed select board meeting was the board’s first effort to publicly discuss and vote on housing on the pond property. It did not go well. The attendees were provided with a surprisingly timely draft quality report from Horsley Witten (which had not been made public until just before the meeting and had not been reviewed in the last water resource task force meeting) that suggested despite its location, the pond property was not “really” Zone 2,or if it was, initial analysis suggests that housing would not adversely affect our well heads. A great majority of the attendees vocally rejected the select board’s decision to continue to spend money on this project.

So it seems, as it was with the case of the Wing Island boardwalk and the recent decision to reluctantly amend the integrated water resource management plan, it will take a citizen’s petition to convince the select board that Brewster residents are not going to sacrifice our precious Zone 2 open space on the altar of affordable rental housing. Three cheers for the Petes (Dahl and Johnson) and the other Brewsterians who stood up and voiced their opposition.

Frank Bridges
Brewster

Editor:

In his letter to the editor Jan. 8, Rene Haas reveals the true reason for tree cutting around Chatham Airport. While Mr. Haas is correct that tree cutting is required for certain safety initiatives, the objective requiring enhanced safety is airport expansion and larger charter planes to accommodate "thousands of visitors it brings into town." So there it is. Bigger planes. More planes. More airport traffic. I don't deny that is my objection.

James Schwartz
Chatham

Editor:

Your recent article on the Brewster Select Board’s vote to refer the Sea Camps pond property to the affordable housing trust for further study and community engagement accurately reported the outcome, but it left readers with the impression that opposition represents the broader community. That does not reflect the full public record.

At every step of this process, beginning with the original Sea Camps vote at town meeting, there has been substantial public support for exploring housing on a limited portion of this property while preserving the vast majority of the land. The adopted plan preserves 60 acres or about 85 percent of the parcel as open space, with housing considered on a small, defined area. That vote passed with housing clearly identified as part of the plan. The select board’s recent 4–1 decision continues that direction.

While a small but vocal group spoke strongly against the feasibility study at the meeting, many residents submitted letters in support, including seniors, families, and housing advocates who understand the urgency of Brewster’s housing needs. A feasibility study does not approve a project or commit the town to building, it simply allows facts, data, and environmental review to guide future decisions.

Public discourse is healthiest when all perspectives are represented. A handful of loud voices should not be mistaken for the will of the community, nor should they overshadow years of public process, planning, and voter approval.

Stephen Ferris
Brewster 

Editor:

I would like to express my disappointment in the outcome of the Jan. 5 Brewster Select Board meeting regarding transferring the Sea Camps Long Pond property to the affordable housing trust. Although the board did not vote in favor of transferring control of the property, the board did vote 4-1 to go forward with a feasibility study on the property.

The select board should have voted to defer a decision on both transferring the property and the feasibility study until town meeting voters were given a chance to weigh in as was committed at the May 11, 2024 town meeting. I am hoping that the May 2026 town meeting will give voters the opportunity to decide whether or not to proceed with housing on the Sea Camps Long Pond property.

Nancy Ortiz
Brewster

Editor:

It’s close to unheard of for a Cape Cod Commission subcommittee to fail to hold a second public hearing (as opposed to a “public meeting”) where the members of the public can be heard in the case of a project as large and as controversial as the proposed Wychmere hotel expansion. I feel that if the process is allowed to proceed as scheduled, the subcommittee will take a vote to recommend the project before Jan. 22 and most of the members of the full commission will feel obligated to accept that recommendation. This is a “now or never” moment for Harwich Port.

This is a huge project with major consequences for the Harwich Port community. There is widespread opposition around the town and beyond.

It is highly unusual and simply beyond understanding why a project of this scope that has engendered such opposition and (with only minor adjustments) was rejected by a 4-1 vote of an earlier subcommittee is now being fast-tracked without adequate opportunity for the public to directly voice its concerns more than once in a hybrid format to the new subcommittee.

Because the hearing on Dec. 16 was held shortly before the Christmas/New Year’s holidays, many members of the public were away visiting their families and unable to attend the hearing and were, therefore, denied the opportunity to voice their concerns that could add relevant additional information to that offered on Dec. 16.

It seems arbitrary and without justification to proceed without a second hybrid meeting when the same developers made an almost identical proposal earlier in 2025 which warranted four scheduled public hearings and ended up voting against the project. How much more proof is needed of how controversial this is than the vote of the previous subcommittee?

Lastly, at the Dec. 16 public hearing, when a subcommittee member asked whether the concerns of the Davis Lane neighbors fell under their purview, he was advised by staff that it did not when it clearly does because it goes to the issue of whether the detriments to the community outweigh the benefits. This is just one example why the opponents need to be given an opportunity to provide the subcommittee with new information or to correct any misinformation from the earlier meeting.

Lucy Steere
Harwich

Editor:

I have long supported affordable housing in Harwich, including in my own neighborhood. Families thrive when they have a safe, stable place to call home. But the proposal for the corner of Queen Anne Road and Route 124 is not the kind of thoughtful, community‑minded project our town deserves.

Although presented as “affordable housing,” this is a 40B development in which some units are not affordable at all, and the affordability requirement lasts only a limited time. That alone raises concerns about whether this project truly serves Harwich residents.

Equally troubling is the suggestion made at the recent zoning board of appeals meeting to reroute traffic from the development onto Oak Street using an old road behind the site. Anyone familiar with that area knows how unsafe this would be. The intersection at Queen Anne and Oak already has limited visibility due to a curve, and it is heavily used by people accessing the public facilities on Oak Street.

Beyond safety, this part of Oak Street is a quiet, cherished neighborhood. Children ride their bikes and fish at the nearby pond. People walk their dogs and enjoy the natural beauty that defines Harwich. Turning a cartway into a through‑road would permanently damage that character.

Harwich’s new local comprehensive plan emphasizes preserving the town’s tranquility and outdoor appeal. This neighborhood embodies that vision. Affordable housing is essential, but it must be integrated responsibly. The development should fit the neighborhood — not force neighborhoods to fit the development.

Carol Porter 
Harwich

Editor:

We heard many reasons why people signed up for Chatham’s Boy Scout Troop 71 to pick up their Christmas tree (a community fundraiser):

 “I was a Scout and enjoy seeing them come by.”

 “I’m not able to do it anymore.”

 “This is so convenient.”

 “To support the Angel Fund and Family Pantry,” the 2026 beneficiaries.

Those comments echo the one heard most often: “Thank you!” It’s a collective thanks to the Scouts and volunteer drivers who picked up Christmas trees from over 70 addresses in Chatham and Harwich during two recent weekends. (Troop members come from those and other Cape towns.)

We heard how participants learned about the tree pick up:

 “Used you for many years.” (Thanks, again!)

 “The Chatham Mainsheet." (Thanks newsletter editor.)

 “The Cape Cod Chronicle.” (Thank you, thank you, thank you!)

"Flyer in a store." (Thanks for your windows and bulletin boards.)

 “Place where I bought the tree." (Thanks Chatham Boat Company, New England Gardens, Agway, Harwich Masons.)

And this singular gem: “Looked up if a local troop did this.”

We’d like to add our thanks to the staff at the Harwich and Chatham transfer stations who made it easy for the boys to wrap up at the end of their route before going home for some hot chocolate.

Email ChathamScouting@gmail.com if you’d like to reach a local Cub, Boy, or Girl Scout group. See www.ChathamScouting.com for more Troop 71 activities and photos.

Judy Carlson and Lynne Phinney
Chatham and Harwich