A Letter from FHMNA Secretary Carol Ziemian:
The Office of the Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) held a third Public Hearing on Zoom to receive comments on a proposed Amendment to alter Article 97, which was passed to preserve Open Space in the Commonwealth in 1972 and strengthened in 1998. Based on my experience, it was enlightening.
I want to thank our president, David Buzanoski, for speaking on FHMNA’s behalf. He brought to the EEA’s attention that he had already submitted written comments and spoken during the EEA’s two previous Zoom meetings. On March 26, 2025, for a third time, David emphasized that the proposed changes to Article 97 would diminish the protection of open and public spaces in the Commonwealth. He emphasized that the proposed use of underground properties, specifically SouthCoast Wind’s proposed plan to bury industrial size commercial electric cables under the sand on the Falmouth Heights Beach, does not justify a change to Article 97. It is not in the public’s best interest.
Other members of our Board have spoken previously and sent letters as well. To my knowledge, David, Greg Mazmanian, Bruce Buch and I all spoke at the second hearing, and David at all three. In addition, all four of us sent letters. Some FHMNA members also submitted letters to express their opposition to this Amendment to Article 97. Although I failed in my attempts to speak after David on March 26, 2025, my voice could not be unmuted so I believe they posted a brief, hastily-crafted statement that I provided instead that emphasized the importance of allowing the public to have a louder voice when there are proposed changes being made to Article 97 that protects open and public space. All the speakers emphasized the need to have more public awareness as to the changes the Commonwealth is trying to make (and has already made) to the open space rules.
Speakers who represented other locations in our State outlined their concerns and the potential negative impacts that amending Article 97 could have. They called for more transparency from the State, and more notification that changes are being proposed for open spaces and areas that have been protected by Article 97. Sadly, some said many of the changes our state leaders have made in the past have been driven by profit and commercial interests as opposed to the public’s interest. One speaker said often when open spaces are taken, it serves as a tool to allow industries to pollute and the public’s health often suffers. The call for allowing a town’s people to have a voice as opposed to one or two government officials was strong and the need for wider dissemination of the government’s plans to alter the purpose of a town’s land and open space was emphasized.
In summary, the public hearing made it clear that we need to stay informed and raise our voices.
Once again, thank you, David, for speaking on our behalf.
Sincerely,
Carol Ziemian
Secretary of FHMNA