Editor:

I write to lift up those courageous folks that made the decision to step forward and say “yes!” When emotions are running high it is so easy to sit back in silence. When threats swirl in the heat of the moment the temptation to abstain is strong. Who wants the attention of those who so strongly and emphatically say “no!”

But the courageous did step up and state their convictions, and I for one applaud you. You were there because you knew that change is needed. You were there because you knew that we as a community simply couldn’t afford to continue on the same path we’ve been on. You knew it would have been easy to say “yes, but,” but you didn’t. You said yes and then went on to say why you believed that yes was the only answer. We all can take lessons from your courage. Thank you.

Robert Spencer
Harwich
The writer is a member of the Harwich Affordable Housing Trust but is writing as an individual, not as a member of the trust.

Editor:

Hello, fellow Rough Riders. We are in search of contact info on the classmates of 1975 and 1976 from Harwich High. Our reunion is scheduled for the weekend of Sep. 11. A dinner, lighthouse tour and a family day are all in the works. To keep updated, get us your contact info. Please go to Harwich Rough Riders 50th Reunion on Facebook and ask to be invited. You can also contact Terry Warner for the class of '75 at terrywarner@comcast.net or Mimi Brock for the class of '76 marina.brock2@verizon.net .

Cindy Eldredge
Harwich

Editor:

Well, at what was supposed to be a low-key, mid-winter select board meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 13, the real estate exemption (RTE) issue once again raised its ugly head. The most shocking revelation was that the board was completely unaware that, if implemented for the next fiscal year beginning on July 1, upwards of 20 percent of the houses in town might not be eligible for the exemption if the trusts that hold those houses are not written in a certain way. Moreover, the deadline to rewrite those trusts has already come and gone to be eligible for the RTE in fiscal year 2027.

Apparently, based on information presented by the assessor’s department at the meeting, that deadline was Dec. 31. To his credit, Select Board member Cory Metters raised the issue of liability to the town of invoking the RTE while knowing that at least a percentage of homes would be automatically excluded from qualifying. A very solid point by Mr. Metters, I might add.

However, the real issue of the RTE is much larger. Not only is the proposal obviously divisive and unfair, but it contains huge flaws and unintended consequences. Specifically, the RTE does nothing for renters who work and live in Chatham, so the RTE only potentially benefits a subset of the working population in town. Moreover, it benefits only those who have already seen the value of their house literally double in the last five years. But the largest flaw, by far, centers on the issue of home affordability. There is almost unanimous consensus that the biggest issue Chatham faces is the cost of housing. The problem is that by lowering the property tax for a subset of full-time residents, this in effect becomes a subsidy/discount to owning full time, which will immediately be reflected in driving housing prices higher by tens of thousands of dollars, particularly at the lower-end of the market, where higher house prices will be most painful. 

As a 30-year resident in Chatham, the last thing I want to do is subsidize a retiring Boomer from, say, Weston, with an even lower property tax rate just because they now decide to move to Chatham full-time. 

Michael Young
Chatham

Editor:

If you live between the question and the answer, it is natural to linger on a single, unsettling word: why. It is a small word, easily spoken, yet often carefully avoided. Why presses for accountability. Why exposes weak reasoning. Why opens doors that many would prefer remain shut.

Listen closely to interviews with public figures. Notice how rarely why is asked — and how skillfully it is deflected when it is. Deeds are described, outcomes justified, but motives remain unexplored. Without why, stories flatten into explanations rather than understanding.

Children instinctively ask why until adults train it out of them. We tell them they are too young to know, yet as adults we often stop asking altogether. Society supplies us with prepackaged answers: rules that keep us safe, employed, respectable or quietly compliant. What we seldom do is challenge the wisdom beneath our own thinking or confront the why behind our habits, beliefs, and choices.

When individuals fail morally or ethically, progress does not come from denial but from inquiry. Do we mend the fence — or simply walk around it?

Perhaps our current fractures stem less from disagreement than from a collective failure to pursue why with rigor — to distinguish fact from fiction and motive from rhetoric. Holding ourselves accountable for our own why is a beginning. Demanding that media relentlessly ask why of power would be a meaningful next step.

When why goes unexamined, ignorance thrives — and humanity pays the price.

William Wibel
Orleans

Editor:

As leaders of community-based human services organizations on Cape Cod, we see every day how strong public leadership and effective partnerships make it possible for people with disabilities to live safely and with dignity in their communities. We appreciate the commonwealth’s continued focus on strengthening disability services and the specialized workforce that delivers them.

Together, our organizations support more than 1,450 individuals with disabilities and employ over 1,100 people across our region. For more than half a century, these services have been an essential part of our local communities, services that connect individuals to their neighbors and workplaces.

History shows us that a stable, skilled workforce is fundamental to sustaining this system. Direct support professionals provide care for individuals with complex medical, behavioral, and daily living needs. However, their median wage, approximately $21 per hour, is constrained by state-established funding rates. On Cape Cod, where our cost of living is especially high, this creates pervasive challenges in recruiting and retaining staff, even as the need for our services continues to grow.

These workforce pressures directly affect how care is delivered and how many people on Cape Cod can be served. Maintaining service stability requires continued alignment between state policy goals and their supportive funding structures.

Governor Maura Healey has always demonstrated a strong commitment to people with disabilities and to the human services sector statewide. As her administration prepares the upcoming state budget, we are hopeful that maintaining existing funding rates will allow providers across the Commonwealth to continue advancing our shared goal of top-notch, community-based care.

Gerry Pouliot, CEO, Latham Centers
Kim McElholm, CEO, Cape Abilities
Kate Driscoll, CEO, Community Connections
Cheryl Evans, CEO, LIFE
Carol Kenner, Parent Advocate, Chatham

Editor:

With regard to Mike Schell’s letter in the Jan. 15 edition (“Contrasting Messages Delivered”), it doesn’t have to be this way. Rather than fanning the flames of polarization, a little common sense and backing off of partisan views is called for. There are compromises available. For example, if the local police and politicians would back off their misguided sanctuary and no-bail policies, ICE agents could round up these illegal felons in the jails instead of in the streets. And if the local police would provide support for ICE, then ICE wouldn’t have to send as many agents to any one area. Surely it is in the interest of all citizens (conservative and liberal) to get the child molesters, murderers, wife beaters and rapists off our streets and out of our neighborhoods. 

Jim Frost
Chatham and Naples

Editor:

The recent killings of Renée Good and Alex Pretti in Minnesota resulted in a rush to judgment by federal officials responsible for enforcement. In the wake of Pretti’s death, Border Control Chief Bovino called on state and local law enforcement to "help us coordinate to get violent criminals off the street.” According to Fox News, “Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem on Saturday labeled the alleged actions of the suspect killed in a Border Patrol-involved shooting in Minneapolis as ‘domestic terrorism,’ accusing Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey of inciting violence against federal officers while stressing that President Donald Trump is prepared to invoke the Insurrection Act if deemed necessary.”

The New York Times reported, “President Trump and administration officials declared without evidence that Mr. Pretti intended to attack federal agents. Bovino said that Mr. Pretti was intent on a ‘massacre.’ Kristi Noem, the Homeland Security secretary, said, ‘This looks like a situation where an individual arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage.’

What we did not hear from federal officials responsible for immigration enforcement after the tragic deaths of two Americans at the hands of federal agents was a call for a careful investigation and cautions to avoid a rush to judgment. The video evidence in Mr. Pretti’s case is clear. He was holding a cell phone in his hand, and his weapon was holstered. He was not a “domestic terrorist” at all, nor was he on the scene to inflict “maximum damage.” He was an ICU nurse caring for veterans who was acting as an observer and who was offering help to a woman whom an ICE agent had just assaulted on the street.

Noem’s and Bovino’s comments after Pretti’s death are best characterized as inflammatory. They are the opposite of what we hope to see from federal officials leading a law enforcement agency. When Bovino calls for cooperation from local law enforcement, he should be cooperative himself in pursuing investigations into the deaths of American citizens exercising their constitutional rights under the First and Second Amendments. Instead, it’s clear from their actions that the federal officials at the Department of Homeland Security seek to prevent local authorities from investigating the deaths and hope to keep the facts from the public. I am pleased that Walz and Frey will be working to see that these needless deaths are properly investigated and those responsible are brought to justice.

Matthew Brown
Harwich

Editor:

The recent decision by Chatham to lower property tax assessments for resident homeowners at the expense of nonresidents is both shortsighted and illogical.

Logic would say that residents, who use the great majority of town services, should pay higher taxes than nonresidents. 

I have owned a home in Chatham since 1987 and, like everyone, have paid property taxes all those years. Those taxes, as do all other non-resident taxes, subsidize many services and facilities enjoyed by residents, schools being the most obvious. But also other physical facilities.

However, our street is designated a “private way,” whatever that means. As such we can’t even get potholes filled or other road maintenance even though there are residents on the street. Our taxes don’t help us much. 

The dual tax structure will disrupt the housing market as well, with the possibility of making housing less affordable for residents. 

The reality is Chatham residents and its merchants depend on non-resident tax dollars and more important their seasonal spending, even those who rent their properties. 

I am not suggesting residents pay more, just that the assessments should have remained equal, recognizing the needs of all homeowners and the contributions nonresidents make to the lifestyle residents are accustomed to in a summer vacation town. A lifestyle that would cost more without non-resident homeowners. 

Richard D. Quinn
South Chatham, North Caldwell, N.J.

Editor:

The Harwich Affordable Housing Trust was created to help the town meet the state’s affordable housing mandate. One of the reasons given for its creation was to streamline funding for housing projects and reduce delays that could occur under the Community Preservation Act (CPA), which required town meeting approval for every expenditure. The trust is governed by an appointed board that now decides how public funds are spent to create or preserve affordable housing, rather than having voters approve each project.

With the trust in place, voter oversight has largely been removed. Supporters argue this structure is needed to avoid slowing down developers. In reality, town meeting review does not meaningfully delay developers. Large projects already take years and require zoning approvals, environmental and traffic studies, state permits, financing and infrastructure planning.

Many residents already feel that Chapter 40B overrides local planning and voter intent. Allowing public funding decisions to bypass town meeting only compounds that concern. If a project proceeds under 40B despite a lack of local support, it is reasonable to ask whether it should also receive town funds.

Public funding should also align with the Harwich Comprehensive Plan, developed at a cost of roughly $250,000 and shaped by hundreds of volunteer hours and extensive community input. The plan guides growth to balance housing needs with infrastructure, environmental protection and community character. Funding projects that conflict with it undermine both the financial investment and the civic effort behind it.

Rather than using affordability as justification for large-scale, unpopular developments, the town should explore ways to directly address residents’ housing needs. Programs such as buy-down assistance, rental assistance, or rent-to-own could help town employees, teachers, healthcare workers and public safety personnel. This approach does not prevent subsidizing large developments, but it ensures residents have a voice whenever public money is involved.

Pat Switchenko
Harwich

Editor:

I am writing to urge support for the Wychmere Harbor/Snow Inn renovations. This project has been reviewed by the Cape Cod Commission as a development of regional impact (DRI). The review covered nine areas of impact: economic, housing, energy, historic, wastewater/stormwater, wildlife, vegetation, transportation, coastal resources/impacts. In all areas the staff and review sub committee found the benefits outweighed any impacts.

The project will allow the resort to expand its season to operate year-round, providing expanded year-round employment for local citizens and added shopping and dining patrons for local businesses in the off-season. Due to expanded rooms, meals and property values, town tax revenues will be significantly enhanced. Revenues for wastewater projects and affordable housing will be greatly benefitted.

As part of the project, Wychmere will provide housing for all seasonal employees and many full-time employees. The new sewage treatment facility and site drainage will greatly improve water quality in the harbor and at Merkel Beach. Safety on Snow Inn Road will be enhanced by eliminating large buses and delivery trucks and managing the arrival times of guests for events at the facility.

As a development impacting all of Harwich and neighboring towns, the renovations will provide benefits both to our communities and our natural environment.

Ed McManus
Harwich Center