Editor: 

So glad to learn of the reopening of Larry's P.X., a Chatham icon. A must visit every time we come to Chatham. Also happy to see the outpouring of good will from Larry's friends and Chatham residents. Good luck to Mr. Case and best wishes for a successful tenure — without serious disruptions. 

Martin and Gail Berliner
Greenwood Village, Colo.

Editor:

I write to disagree strongly with the comments of Cape Tech Superintendent Bob Sanborn re: the new state initiative on admission to voke-tech schools, as quoted in the Sept. 4 issue of The Chronicle.

I am shocked that Mr. Sanborn would make the comments attributed to him. 

No child of age 13 or 14 from a disadvantaged group (or any other group) should be excluded from consideration for admission because of grades, attendance and disciplinary history. There are many factors (including those involving a student’s home life) that might contribute to a student’s weak record on those counts. Poverty, hunger, parental indifference, lack of transportation and lack of self-esteem are just a few. How on earth can a child of such a tender, untried age be dismissed as unworthy by a publicly supported school program?

Admission to a voke-tech high school might be exactly the opportunity for a student to feel accepted in his/her community and to be encouraged to pursue a successful course in life. 

Kathleen Muller
Harwich

Editor:

Your recent editorial on preserving Chatham's character is a thoughtful and welcome addition to the conversation concerning affordable housing development today. Chatham's historic appeal, its character, is far more than just its aesthetic appeal, although maintaining Chatham's historic small seaside town look and feel is ignored at our peril. It is equally important to have working-age and school-age households together with retirees and summer residents. We are in danger of losing that traditional mix of residents if we fail to address the housing crisis.

For some, unfortunately, the current debate at the zoning board over a proposed Main Street affordable housing development in West Chatham is framed as a contest for or against affordable housing. Nothing could be further from the truth. As your editorial points out, "We're well past the point of arguing about the need for housing of all kinds ...."

The debate should be about how best to protect our past while adding to Chatham's much needed housing supply. When housing is designed intelligently density is not a dirty word, but shouldn't the town place reasonable, common-sense limits on density when contracting for affordable housing? Shouldn't we respect Chatham's 30-foot height limitation or allow limited variances depending on the site? Shouldn't we respect existing single-family residential neighborhoods by requiring deeper setbacks and vegetative buffers for multi-family apartment buildings? Shouldn't Chatham offer subsidies using affordable housing trust funds and other town funds to assist developers with affordable housing development?

In other words, shouldn't we apply sound, generally accepted planning principles and standards for Chatham's affordable housing program?

Rick Leavitt
West Chatham

Editor:

I enjoyed the article on Jeremiah's Gutter and the accompanying illustration of Cyprian Southack's map (“Jeremiah’s Gutter Holds Understated But Important Legacy In Orleans,” Sept. 18). Please count me among those readers curious to learn how a cartographer born in 1660s London became "...a U.S. Naval captain..."

Bob Rice
Brewster

Editor:

I write in support of Dorothy Hopton’s call for dialog on the Stepping Stones affordable housing proposal.

A consideration should be that this development will abut the middle school, so we want it to be nice: Many Harwich voters have their concerns about our joint schools arrangement anyway, and if — to get more “units” — we build a tenement next door, that will just heighten their alarm.

If we build two stories (and make the usual allowances for land devoted to streets, utilities, parking, etc.), the 12 units can be fitted into six buildings, each occupying about a quarter acre. If we go for 20 units, we either have to go to four-story buildings (not currently permitted in Chatham) or settle for tiny lots (10 lots, each one-seventh acre or just under 80 feet on a side).

According to my web search, local preference quotas generally cannot be filled, so most of the new residents will not have a job or other connections here. Most likely, they will be retirees (50 percent of the town is), or they will be looking for a job (which should be good for local employers).

Fred Anderson
Chatham and Pittsburgh, Pa.

Editor:

Do not take the iconic streetscapes in Chatham for granted. Their charm brings measurable historic and commercial value to this village. Thousands of people walk around the Loop, the Old Village, and Shore Road to see and photograph the original houses of this town. One by one, we have witnessed the carnage. The destruction of 162 Shore Rd. is the tipping point for Protect Our Past. 

Historic houses are a proven asset to this town. They are living history filled with stories. They cannot defend themselves. We must. You must. The time has come to step up and say no more. Please sign that you care at www.protectourpast.org.

Matt Holden
Chatham

Editor:

Early in my medical career, I saw measles, pertussis (whooping cough), rubella (German measles) and diphtheria cripple and kill people. Soon after medical school (1978), vaccine requirements made these diseases very rare.

A two-year San Antonio diphtheria epidemic in 1970 infected 250 people; three died. Without vaccine requirements, only 33 percent of children were immunized.

In medical school we were powerless to help infants with whooping cough who were unable to breathe because of the cough’s severity or save kids with measles, 1 to 3 percent of whom died. Congenital rubella caused birth defects (blindness, heart defects, intellectual disabilities) in 20,000 babies a year.

Vaccine requirements eliminated diphtheria and most pertussis by 1980, all measles in 2000, and rubella in 2004. Now with “personal exemption laws” vaccination rates have fallen to 56 percent in Idaho, 62 percent in Texas and 68 percent in Florida. (Massachusetts, without a “personal exemption,” is still 86 percent). There have been 1,491 U.S. measles cases so far in 2025 (285 in all of 2024). Pertussis cases are up 25 times since 2023 and are infecting even older adults.

Our national vaccine access is under serious threat from Robert Kennedy Jr., who has replaced vaccine experts and physicians at the CDC with non scientists and vaccine skeptics. A venture capitalist now runs the CDC. RFK is reviewing all vaccine requirements, and eliminated the COVID vaccine recommendation for pregnant women and healthy people without a provider visit. RFK believes the COVID vaccine is “the deadliest vaccine ever made.” But vaccinated “Blue” counties had 47 to 150 percent fewer COVID deaths than less vaccinated “Red” counties.

This attack on vaccines will cause increased hospitalizations and deaths, congenital birth defects and disability similar to the 19th century. Is this what we want for our children and grandchildren?

Fitzhugh C. Pannill, MD, FACP
Orleans