Editor:

I am writing to express my concern regarding the possibility of establishing a multi-use path from Barley Neck Inn to Nauset Beach, currently being discussed by the Complete Street working group. Recognizing that the contract for the feasibility study has yet to be signed, it is important for the citizenry of Orleans to understand what a multi-use path is as opposed to putting in sidewalks. A multi-use path is just that, wider and meant to accommodate with ease a flow of bikes, carriages, and pedestrians moving in both directions. While the idea of increasing accessibility for cyclists and pedestrians is commendable, the plan poses significant risks to the historic character of the streetscape in Orleans.

Our town is renowned for its unique charm, with its ancient stone walls, historic homes, and tree-lined streets. The proposed path, however, threatens to disrupt this timeless landscape. The construction would likely involve the removal or dislocation of these historic stone walls, many of which have stood for centuries. These walls are not just structures; they are part of the cultural heritage of our community.

Furthermore, there are potential hidden costs that the town may not be fully considering. The land-taking process required to create the multi-use path could involve lengthy legal battles, leading to significant expenses in lawyers’ fees, court proceedings, and compensations to affected landowners. These costs could easily balloon beyond initial estimates, putting an unnecessary financial strain on the town's resources. The project may also require relocating utility lines, removing trees, and addressing drainage issues, all of which come with additional, often unaccounted-for, costs.

As stewards of our town’s history, we must consider whether these risks to our streetscape and budget are worth the benefit. When the feasibility study is complete and alternatives presented, I urge the town to explore ways that preserve our history and protect us from unforeseen financial burdens.

Lastly, with safety as a profound concern for all, there are ways in which to address safety on Beach Road that do not require the expense of taking or establishing a multi-use path.

William H. Wibel
Orleans

Editor:

As we all know, part of the price of gasoline is a road tax for using the public roads. But who is paying this road tax when people have electric vehicles? I suppose us gasoline people are covering that cost. As more and more tree huggers buy e-cars the gas tax will rise.

John Harris
Brewster

Editor:

On behalf of our committee, I extend a well deserved thank you to all of the people who voted for the 90 Bridge St. project at last week’s special town meeting. Your willingness to invest in the infrastructure of our waterfront and continuing support for Chatham shellfishing were evident in your resounding 462-99 vote. The successful passage of this warrant will favorably impact the Chatham shellfishing community for generations to come.

Bob Davis, chair
Chatham Shellfish Advisory Committee

Editor:

I was very surprised to see the letter from Carol Gordon thanking everyone who attended the South Chatham Village Association meeting on Saturday, Sept 7. 

What surprised me wasn't her “thank you,” but that Mr. Schell, who's chair of the select board as well as the affordable housing trust, said he was there as a "private citizen." How exactly does that work? And he brought Charlie Adams of Pennrose Developers, who wasn't on the agenda, with him. Adams obviously went because Mr. Schell, who spoke of being a huge proponent of Pennrose, is chair of the trust. 

This was just a week before “negotiations” between Pennrose and Chatham about the former Buckley property and Meetinghouse Road. Chair Schell is supposed to be representing Chatham's interests in negotiations, not answering questions from the public as a tag team with the developer.

One would think Mr. Schell would be more careful after what happened with Pennrose and Charlie Adams in Orleans when the affordable housing trust chair had to resign. This is really unbelievable and reeks of impropriety. Whose side is Mr. Schell on? And town boards and staff wonder why so many are upset? 

Judy Patterson
West Chatham

Editor:

I would like to thank the five Lower Cape residents who helped recover my boat from the beach at Head of the Bay, Harwich, this weekend. 

Completely unknown to me and each other, they each came down to the beach on Saturday and Sunday for different reasons (clamming, passing by on the way to work, beachcombing) but each took time out from their day at just the right moment to help a total stranger in need. Like they'd known each other for years, they worked together with me as a team to dig, push, pull, heave, set anchors, and unfoul lines until the boat was off the beach and motoring back to its mooring where it belonged. It's this kind of community ethic that makes living on the Lower Cape special to say the least, and by way of thanks I can only encourage us all (and myself) to keep "paying it forward" when we see another resident in need. 

Big shout out to Bill at the harbormaster's office, and John and Jim at Lower Cape Mooring as well, I couldn't have done it without you! 

Tom Wooton
Harwich

Editor:

In an age where the news and opinions seem often to be dark and angry, I always looked forward to reading Captain Hap Farrell's Rock Harbor Fishing Report. I enjoyed the folksy tone, tips on how he catches fish, what gear to use and how to rig it, the background on his clients, and overall friendliness of his charters. I also enjoyed his reminiscing on the past and looking to the future for some "hot spots" that you might want to try. I fish mostly Nantucket sound and around Chatham, so reading these columns was mostly a guilty pleasure. So, thank you Hap, and tight lines! Hopefully we will be able to read stories about the bluefish finally showing up next year, and more!

Paul Aldrich
Chatham

Editor:

As it has been suggested many times before, “all politics are local,” this in response to the request that you publish letters pertaining to local issues only. The issues that we grapple with in any presidential election always impact us and our community on some level. In part because as science as well as the world's religions and wisdom traditions have been pointing to, everything is connected. To suggest that we needn't be in public dialogue as a community about the issues in this particular election is to be in denial of what this election actually means, locally, nationally, and globally. 

To be in thoughtful and respectful dialogue about what the United States continues to struggle with "in order to become a more perfect union" and the values we proclaim we cherish, like sustaining our democracy and the rule of law, telling the whole truth, equity, diversity and inclusion, justice with peace and prosperity for all not just some, sustaining our environment — the list goes on — is so vital and critical to our democracy at this point in time. I think it takes great courage, great heart, to be in meaningful conversation about what we value these days. The courage to be in dialogue has less to do with being fearless but has everything to do with loving something so much, in this case our democracy, that we will risk writing a letter, talking with your neighbor or a family member who we might disagree with, learning and talking through the facts with one other, advocating on any level for human rights and for the most vulnerable among us, all for the sake of this way of life we hope to pass on to future generations. We are so much better when we work together (someone much younger and wiser than me said it is our super power!) which means communicating, with respect and temperance.

These are the values I love and hold dear, and I will be voting for those values in the candidates who embody them. I am a registered independent and so I believe our democracy, while difficult and challenging, is so much greater than any party affiliation. As the facts continue to demonstrate in this election cycle, the Republican Party, in backing a convicted felon, has clearly “lost” its purported values and supplanted them with authoritarian power and greed, the deliberate corruption of justice, blatant manipulation and lies, fear and hate mongering. If we choose not to speak out, may we be reminded of what history has shown when people kept quiet and looked the other way while Hitler did what he did. We need to speak out in whatever way we can, and of course the voting booth is one of the most powerful ways we do that in a democracy. 

So I for one, am grateful that The Chronicle will continue its practice of considering publishing our letters, whether they are about local, national or global issues that confront our humanity. Whether we agree or disagree, this is a part of what a healthy and engaged democracy looks like.

Dawn B. Tolley
Chatham

Editor:

The letter to the editor "Stick To Local Issues" that was published in The Chronicle on Sept. 19 inspired me to write this:

Imagine a man is running for the Chatham Select Board and he suggested injecting disinfectant to combat COVID-19 and declared that children are being forced into gender transition operations at the elementary school. Welcome to the Twilight Zone.

Also imagine that candidate has accused some Chatham residents of eating their neighbor's dogs and cats. Here kitty, kitty.

Additionally, envision that man keeps declaring that Chatham elections are rigged and if he isn't elected to the select board there will be hell to pay and the town's economy will crater. 

Oh well, Chatham had a good run.

Did I mention that guy has made it perfectly clear around town that he hates Taylor Swift? What a sap headed thing to say.

That nightmarish candidate reminds me of this observation: "If ignorance goes to $40 a barrel, I want drilling rights to George Bush's head" – Jim Hightower referring to the 41st president.

So now I have to ask, would you vote for that guy?

Mike Rice
South Wellfleet