To The Daily Sun,
After reading the Gilmanton voting guide regarding special warrant articles and then reading the articles themselves, I discovered that the instructions and the wording for Warrant Article 3 (to ban sewage sludge ) seemed to be in direct contradiction. I went on to discover, after some inquiry, that it would seem that Article VII of Gilmanton's Zoning Ordinance (often thought of as the "grandfather clause") is somehow being used to justify the continued use of sludge, even if it's banned. This is a mistake.
The lawful "legal use" of these or any farm is to farm the land. That's the meaning of "use" under Article VII: Farming, aka agriculture. If anyone asked any of these farmers who use sewage sludge for fertilizer: "What do you use your land for"?, they are not going to say, "I use it to spread sewage sludge." They're going to reply that they use it to raise grain, or crops, or livestock. That's the use. Sewer sludge is an application.
The "grandfather clause" (Article VII) was intended to prevent new ordinances or codes from forcing home/landowners from dismantling existing structural and or mechanical systems that are permanently in place (think: "nailed down"); it does not apply to applications. Warrant Article 3 is to ban the use of sewage sludge in Gilmanton. If it passes, that means the majority of voters in Gilmanton think it's harmful to their health, the health of their neighbors, their children, the unborn, the land, wildlife, water tables and air. The whole idea of a warrant article that purports to ban something but then turns around and allows it, is to me, quite frankly ... ridiculous.
- Category: Letters
- Hits: 313