PATRICK FOX, JOE CURTIN AND THE STERLING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS A/K/A “THE DEVELOPERS’ DOORMAT” GANG OF DISHONEST SCUMBAGS GET A SHODDY ‘OPINION’ FROM ANONYMOUS ‘TOWN COUNSEL’ TO COVER THEIR CROOKED ASSES AS TO CARL CORRINNE’S 100 CLINTON ROAD PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SO THEY CAN CONTINUE THEIR YEARS’ LONG CAMPAIGN OF SUBVERTING/PERVERTING STERLING’S ZONING BY-LAWS AND SCREWING ABUTTERS

When the scumbags constituting the Sterling Zoning Board of Appeals a/k/a “The Developers’ Doormat” told those assembled at the 11 April 2023 hearing into the 100 Clinton Road multi-family development proposed by two-faced weasel Carl Corrinne, the developer who is in a total conflict of interest as Chair of the Sterling Planning Board, that they had gotten an ‘opinion’ from Town Counsel concerning the matter, I knew that ‘opinion’ was shoehorned to cover the ZBA members’ crooked asses. The fix was already in to subvert/pervert Sterling’s Protective (Zoning) By-Laws, screw the abutters to that parcel, and play footsie with Corrinne. Sterling ZBA members have conducted their dishonest campaign of kissing developer ass, perverting/subverting Sterling’s Zoning By-Laws, and screwing multitudes of abutters to various development projects for years.

When it comes to local developers the Sterling ZBA are a collection of prostitutes who spend all their time on their backs.

A copy of that so-called ‘legal opinion’ was emailed to me in response to my Mass.Gen.Laws Ch. 66, Section 10 public records request. The name of the KP Law, P.C. lawyer who typed out and emailed that shoddy piece of crap– I had to screenshot it in ‘landscape’ orientation that I am unable to ‘rotate’ to ‘portrait’ orientation–is blacked out, of course. If I authored that utter piece of crap I’d want my name blacked out too. To read it easily just print this page and orient it properly. You may need a magnifier.

My response letter is reprinted below it (apologies for spacing irregularities that I am unable to correct in this medium. All text had to be ‘justified’ to the left margin in this medium).

 P.O. Box 1149

 Sterling, MA 01564-1149

 20 April 2023

Sterling Zoning Board of Appeals

Municipal Building

1 Park Street

Sterling, MA 01564

RE: Corrinne’s Proposed 100 Clinton Road Multi-Family Development Bogus “Open Space” Claim

Dear Sterling Zoning Board of Appeals Members,

Today, in response to my Mass.Gen.Laws Ch. 66, Sec. 10 public records request, I received the enclosed ‘legal opinion’ email, dated April 9, 2023, rendered by Town Counsel at KP Law, P.C., concerning Corrinne’s bogus claim of “Open Space” required for his proposed Multi-Family Development at 100 Clinton Road, Sterling. The name of the lawyer who authored it was blacked out. If I authored such a worthless opinion I’d want my name blacked out too.

If you want to be defendants in a potential lawsuit to be brought by abutters, then, by all means, please follow that bogus opinion.

Sterling Protective (Zoning) By-Law Article 301-4.2.3.4, governing Multi-Family Developments, provides:

Open space.

a.   At least 60% of the parcel shall be maintained as open space, and at least 40% of the parcel shall be contiguous open space, excluding required yards and buffer areas.

b.  The required open space shall be used for conservation, recreation, agriculture, horticulture, forestry, or for a combination of these uses, and shall be served by suitable access for such purpose[s].

c.   Underground utilities to serve the development may be located within the required open space (emphasis added).

Town counsel ignored the fact that sub-section b. requires that the designated open space be used for conservation, recreation, agriculture, horticulture, forestry, or for a combination of these uses. Corrinne cannot require or guaranty such usage because New England Power Company/National Grid, the power line easement holder, has the right to restrict the type of vegetation grown on the property and to post “No Trespassing” signs upon it now or in the future. Whether or not that power line easement land is now posted “No Trespassing” is irrelevant. Corrinne cannot guaranty “suitable access” to the land within the power line easement now or in the future. Moreover, that power company may place additional structures on its easement land for increased electrical transmission capacity, covering more of Corrinne’s alleged “open space.” SEE Town of Framingham vs. Department of Public Utilities, 355 Mass. 138 (1969).

In addition, Town Counsel ignored the fact that the electrical transmission lines themselves, within the easement, constitute above-ground “utilities” NOT permitted “within the required open space.”  Electrical transmission lines are “utility lines.” SEE Town of Sudbury vs. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, 485 Mass. 774 (2020); Lane vs. Zoning Board of Appeals of Falmouth, 65 Mass.App.Ct. 434 (2006); Nantucket Conservation Foundation, Inc. vs. Russell Management, Inc., 380 Mass. 212 (1980); Lyman vs. Planning Board of Winchester, 352 Mass. 209 (1967).

In view of the foregoing, Corrinne’s 100 Clinton Road multi-family development proposal fails the Sterling Protective (Zoning) By-Laws “Open Space” requirement and must be rejected by the Sterling Zoning Board of Appeals. 

It remains to be seen just how unethical and intellectually dishonest you are.

Sincerely,

James F. Gettens, Esq.

Enc.

cc:

Abutters

Sterling Select Board

The Item Newspaper

I erred as to the ‘opinion’ date–it was 9 March. Oops.

All Sterling ZBA members are appointed by the Sterling Select Board. The Select Board, the ZBA, and Corrinne are scumbags. This episode just constitutes another layer of guano proof.

J.G.