Fluoride Information

Fluoride is a poison. Fluoride was poison yesterday. Fluoride is poison today. Fluoride will be poison tomorrow. When in doubt, get it out.


AnAmerAffidavit

Monday, February 20, 2012

Update 9/11 Mass. Initiative Petition


     A personal thanks goes out to all Templeton residents who signed the Massachusetts Citizen’s Initiative Petition to reopen the 9/11 Investigation.  Although many signatures were obtained the petitions were not handed in to the Town Clerk due to an insufficient number of collected signatures throughout the State of Massachusetts.
     Perhaps with better organization on a statewide level the signatures for this petition to reopen the 9/11 investigation could have been obtained but unfortunately this was not the case.
     I would also like to thank “Templeton Watch Pauly’s blog” for his freedom of the press and the ability to get this information to those who may be interested in this particular subject. 
    Not to be deterred by the lack of signatures to reopen the 9/11 investigation information has been gathered to hopefully show readers that a new investigation is needed to bring forth information that was left off the original 9/11 Commission Report.
     Here is information that many readers may not have been aware of due to the passage of time and our busy schedules.
     It is hoped that this information will pique the interest of some readers and they can continue gathering information to write their own investigation.    
     Many people didn’t feel right about the events that unfolded down in Florida on the morning of 9/11/01 with President Bush reading to the youngsters. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCtb9nlV_20http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCtb9nlV_20  .  Why did his bodyguards leave an obvious target for the terrorists in a classroom full of elementary school children?
After the second tower was hit should not the Commander and Chief taken charge of the situation?
      This event along with our slow response to mobilize jets to intercept Flights 11,175,77 and 93 and the 411 days it took to form a commission to look into the events of 9/11 made many curious.  
     Then there was Building Seven.           
          Building Seven was the third skyscraper to fall on 9/11/01.  This forty seven-story building had 82 massive core columns and was New York Cities emergency bunker and home to several Federal Agencies.  Building Seven was not hit by a plane that day and at about 5:20pm fell at near free fall speed into it’s own footprint.  The official story was that Building Seven was brought down by fire.  Here is the video that changed my perception of 9/11     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEuJimaumW4. 
     Recently 1500 Architects and Engineers have put their careers on the line and signed a petition stating they believe that Trade Center One, Trade Center Two and Building Seven came down with controlled demolition.  Here is that video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd5Jbmwnwck.   
     It seemed possible that the media may have omitted information from other events that happened that day?  After reading Jesse Ventura’s book American Conspiracies the former Governor of Minnesota and Navy Seal suggested this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ. 
     Zero an Investigation of 9/11 was an excellent over view of events that happened on 9/11.  After reading Paul Thompson’s “ Terror Timeline” and several of David Ray Griffin books I appreciated the detective work that had been done in “Zero”.
     There is an incredible wealth of information that has been brought forth since the original 9/11 Commission Report.  It is for this reason it is believed a new investigation is needed. In the meantime we as informed citizens can gather information on this important subject and share this information with our friends and neighbors.
     It would seem this subject impacts us all.         

Nuremberg Code


The ten points of the Nuremberg Code
The 10 points are, (all from United States National Institutes of Health) [2]
The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him/her to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonable to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
No experiment should be conducted where there is a prior reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.
Reprinted from Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. 2, pp. 181–182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949. Note that complete electronic copies of the Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg [Nuremberg] Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10 [3] are available online, as are most of the other proceedings from the Nuremberg Trials.[The ten points of the Nuremberg Code
The 10 points are, (all from United States National Institutes of Health) [2]
The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him/her to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonable to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
No experiment should be conducted where there is a prior reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.
Reprinted from Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. 2, pp. 181–182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949. Note that complete electronic copies of the Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg [Nuremberg] Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10 [3] are available online, as are most of the other proceedings from the Nuremberg Trials.[

Board of Bar Overseer Complaint Against Kopelman and Paige


Prior to stating my complaint I was told by Ms. Podolski to report that as my capacity as a Templeton Sewer Commissioner I made a complaint concerning this matter to this office in 2005-2006.  At that time it is believed the complaint focused on malpractice.  There was no action taken at that time.  As more information became available it is believed I will be better able to define my complaint. I would like to thank Attorney Scott Graves of Gardner whose legal work brought more definition to the problem.   
     Complaint: It is alleged that the law firm of Kopelman and Paige and specifically William Hewig III and Mark Reich III acted in a fraudulent manner by allowing some members of the Templeton Board of Selectmen acting in a unilateral manner to interfere in the rightful prosecution of another board’s lawsuit.  That other board being the Templeton Sewer Commission and the lawsuit being case 02-2424C heard before Judge Cornetta of the Worcester Superior Court on or around April or May of 2005. It is alleged the K&P attorneys who represented the Sewer Commissioners allowed this interference to cover up their inaction and poor legal advice/fraud involving the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) contract transfer in March of 1991.  As town attorneys K&P sat idly by as both responsible parties were left off the Assignee and Assumption Agreement in 1991. The Town of Templeton and Erving Paper Mills are believed to have been the responsible parties to this contract transfer in 1991. To compound the matter and hide what they had done (misuse of Federal Funds/fraud?) K&P allowed the BOS to interfere in case 02-2424C by omitting evidence from the Federal portion of the case that showed Gorton/Swartwoods legal decision regarding the legal right of the Board of Sewer Commissioners to legally prosecute the case. It is also believed that the vote taken on 4/8/96 was held back from the BOS by K&P.        
     Should K&P have recused themselves from this case due to conflict of interest due to their inaction/fraud in 1991?
     Should K&P been allowed to broker a settlement based on fraud? 
     Why did K&P leave out the Federal portion of the lawsuit showing the Sewer Commissioners right to prosecute?
     Why did K&P omit the testimony of former Selectmen Dana Putnam the only living signatore to the March 4 1974 contract? 
     Why did K&P ignore the prosecuting body (Sewer Commissioners) almost as soon as K&P were brought on board in late 2004? 
     Why did K&P omit the January 26 1974 town meeting vote authorizing the BOS to enter into an agreement with Erving Paper Mill and Baldwinville Products in the discovery phase of case 02-2424C? 
     Why did K&P allow the BOS to interfere in another boards right to prosecute?   
     It is believed that the 4/8/96 vote taken by the Board of Selectmen authorized the Sewer Commissioners to prosecute this matter as opined by Federal Judge Nathaniel Gorton and Judge Swartwood in case U.S. District Court, Civil Action No. 96-40140.  Judge Fox of the Gardner District Court in regards to Graves Law Office P.C. Plaintiff vs. Town of Templeton, Templeton Board of Sewer Commissioners Defendants Docket No. 0863 CV53 on page four opined in a similar manner.      
  Background:  On January 26 1974 Special Town Meeting vote authorized the Board of Selectmen (BOS) to enter into a contractual agreement with Erving Paper Mills and Baldwinville Products.
     On March 4 1974 the Board of Selectmen signed the agreement with Baldwinville Products a subsidiary of Erving Paper Mills. The Selectmen at that time did not realize the mistake of omitting Erving Paper Mills from the signatory page.  It was not the Selectmen’s intention to do this (see Putnam’s affidavit). It is believed that town attorney Thomas McLaughlin of Athol who it is believed was not in attendance was not a healthy man and died a few months later.  
     In 1987 Erving began looking to sell Baldwinville Products. Kopelman and Paige were the Town of Templeton’s attorneys at that time. John Giorgio of that firm handled the affair. In 1991 American Tissue Mills of Ma. took over the responsibilities of the WWTP contract by signing the Assignee and Assumption Agreement that later was ruled null and void by Judge Cornetta in case 02-2424C. This contract transfer between Northeast Waste Services and Baldwinville Products bound to empty shells. 
    After taking control of the operation and maintenance of the WWTP American Tissue Mill began abusing the town.
    EPA coordinator Mark Malone notified the town that their User Charge Regulations were not in compliance in 1995.  Anthony DePalma and Sharon Wells of that agency opined on the matter.
    On 4/8/96 the BOS voted to allow the Sewer Commission to handle all legal actions involving the WWTP contract.  This vote has not been rescinded.
     Differences between American Tissues and the town led to Civil Action No. 96-40140NMG in 1996.  The Templeton Sewer Commissioners hired the law firm of Mirick, O’Connell, Demallie & Lougee, LLP (MODL) after the 4/8/96 BOS vote. Attorney Joseph Hamilton led the prosecution for MODL. 
    After six years the case was sent to the state courts. At this time the Sewer Commissioners changed counsel to Brown Rudnick Berlack and  Israels (BRBI) LLP as money was becoming an issue.   The Sewer Commissioners appealed the decision of Judge Gorton to send the case to the lower court.  The Appeal went to the United States Court of Appeals for the first Circuit No. 03-1134.  The appeal was denied. It was the opinion of the Sewer Commissioners at that time that Attorney Leonard who was handling the prosecution for BRBI would soon run the sewer department out of money with nothing to show.  The commissioners opted for the law firm of Kopelman and Paige (who also happened to be town attorneys) on or around October of 2004.
     It was not known by the Sewer Commission or disclosed by K&P at the time of hire that K&P had been involved with the Assignee and Assumption Agreement in 1991. Mr. Putnam would have known this but he was dead according to Mr. Hewig.   
    In October of 2004 even though it was believed by the Sewer Commissioners that they were in charge of prosecuting the case circumstances show otherwise. Selectmen (Skelton, Columbus and Quartrochochi) and town coordinator Carol Skelton selectmen Gerald Skelton’s wife would undermine the sewer commissioners efforts to hold Erving Paper Mills accountable for damages associated with the WWTP contract.  These actions are shown in William Hewig III deposition. 
    Hewig’s deposition was taken in regards to having star witness former selectmen Dana Putnam’s affidavit used as evidence in a failed attempt by K&P to get this evidence added to the case after the Judge’s decision.    
     On or around May of 2005 Judge Cornetta gave his decision on four items brought before him for Summary Judgment. After learning of the Judge’s decision and reading our briefs I called Mr. Hewig and asked him why he didn’t use any of our evidence.  Mr. Hewig felt that none of it mattered because Erving had not signed the March 4 1974 contract. When asked about star witness (for case 02-2424C) former Selectmen Dana Putnam I was told by Mr Hewig that he was dead.  I was talking to the dead Mr. Putnam in ten minutes. Once again I felt by way of conversation with Mr. Hewig that our money was not being spent wisely. Mr. Putnam’s testimony was never taken and he knew all the details.     
     Two of the judgments given by Judge Cornetta in case 02-2424C contradicted facts from Federal Judge Gorton. Those decisions concerned Erving being a party to the contract and the length of the contract.  It is believed because the Federal case facts had been omitted from State case 02-2424C, Judge Cornetta had nothing to reference and somehow reached a different conclusion.  The third no brainer judgment concerned the legality of the Assignee and Assumption Agreement of 1991 it was null and void. Why it took nine years and three sets of lawyers to reach this conclusion is a mystery to me.     
     After reading William Hewig III deposition it became apparent what had happened. All the evidence had been left out of the case.  And that is about the time I contacted the Board of Bar Overseers. Nothing was done at that time.  I then contacted every other agency I could think at the State and Federal level with little luck.  Most believed I should go back to your office but having already been there it was my belief nothing would be done. The Sewer Commissioners were denied use of legal counsel by the BOS and K&P refused to answer questions saying it was a conflict of interest.  It was our belief however that the 4/8/96 vote and the Federal Judges decision on our authority were still good so we hired Attorney Graves on our own.    
     After hiring Attorney Scott Graves on or around June of 2007 he opened the commissions eyes to the possibility that the Selectmen may have interfered in the rightful prosecution of case 02-2424C. His research involving the lawsuit brought forth many questions regarding the Judges decision.  After being told of the possible interference by the Selectmen’s office I reread William Hewig III deposition this time looking for instances of interference.  Readers of Mr. Hewig’s deposition can find interference by the selectmen’s office in many places but especially on pages 23-24, 46-47,and pages 58-59.
     In conclusion even though K&P were town attorneys at the time of the interference by the BOS it is believed that the rulings of both Judge Fox of the Gardner District Court and Judge Gorton and Swartwood of the U.S. District Court clearly showed that the vote taken on 4/8/96 gave the Sewer Commissioners clear prosecution rights up to the settlement and perhaps beyond.  William Hewig III deposition among other things shows that the BOS interfered in case 02-2424C.  K&P’s inaction in regards to allowing the selectmen to interfere in case 02-2424C mirror K&P’s inaction involving the contract transfer in 1991.  This allegedly fraudulent behavior is epic and has cost the Town of Templeton millions of dollars in damages associated with the town’s WWTP. By allowing interference in a case involving the Grant Conditions that accompanied the Federal monies to build the town’s WWTP it is believed that K&P along with some members of the BOS acting in a unilateral manner have misused Federal Funds and abused the rules and regulations that accompanied this money. K&P actions in 1991 may be evidence of a misuse of Federal Funds.
     PL92-500 was not legislated to shift the expenses of cleaning our countries waterways away from corporate industrial users. Shifting expenses in this way may be a form of Corporatism.    
Pete Farrell Templeton Sewer Commissioner

Documents enclosed:
1.)William Hewig III 6/27/05 deposition
2.)Judge Foxes decision on case 0863CV53
3.)Court Decision case 02-2424C Judge Cornetta
4.)EPA David Chin User Charge Regs.
5.)April 22, 1996 letter BOS on 4/8/96 vote authorizing Sewer Comm.
6.)1991 Assignee and Assumption Agreement
7.)1987 Letter from town to K&P asking for help with WWTP contract.
8.)9/4/90 Letter from Erving Paper Mill pres. Charles Housen
9.)Carol Skelton memo in regards to John Giorgio question on contract.

Please advise on documents needed. 
     Federal case 40140NMG has been placed on discs by Brown Rudnick Berlap and Isreal, Town Clerk has asked for a copy.  The case includes over twenty thousand pages of documents. Hard copy can be found at the BOS office.
     Case 02-2424C contains about four boxes of documents at BOS.
     
    
        
     

Fluoride The Devil's Poison.


     Templeton residents who have spent their lives ingesting fluoride without knowing what the health hazards are would do well to take the time to learn what the EPA scientists have to say on this subject  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR6C2AB4RL0&feature=share  these are the Doctors and Scientists who are responsible for keeping us healthy. 
     Many Templeton residents are unaware that Templeton was one of the first communities in Massachusetts to legally adopt fluoridation.  According to the book Truth Decay by Gladys Caldwell and Dr. Philip E. Zanfagna,M.D. on page 20  Miss Florence Birmingham states for the record as a trustee for the Wrentham State Institution for the feeble minded that the children were being used as guinea pigs in the ten year American Fluoride experiment.  Miss Birmingham goes on to state that a doctor opposed to fluoridation loaned her a book published by the Department of Health titled Commonwealth, from which she learned that the Wrentham and Belchertown schools for feeble-minded were being used in the experiment, with the Fernald School used as the non-fluoridated control. 
     Templeton residents may breathe a sigh of relief to know that our boys were spared the fluoride experiments until they read The Plutonium Files by Eileen Welsome.  According Ms. Welsome the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University working in conjunction with the Atomic Energy Commission and the University of Rochester and Doctor Harold Hodge were injecting and feeding radioactive isotopes of Uranium and Plutonium into the residents of the Fernald School.  The military-industrial complex counts heavily on fluoride, as it is the most extreme oxidizer on the periodic chart.  Atomic bombs and fluoride go together like hot dogs and beans. 
     The original experiments on fluoride began in 1945 at Grand Rapids Michigan with the control city being Muskegon Michigan.  The experiment in Michigan was halted early by pro fluoridation forces using the excuse that fluoride was working so well in Grand Rapids that Muskegon need not wait till the end of the experiment for the benefits. 
     The second experiment on fluoridation was done just west of here on the Hudson River cities of Newburg New York and Kingston New York.  The Newburg experiment also started in 1945 and continues to the present.  Even though there is fifty years of statistics available there is no difference in the rate of tooth decay. An interesting aside is that Newburg at the start of the experiment had much higher levels of calcium and magnesium in their water supply compared to Kingston.  These nutrients are associated with good nutrition and good teeth. The experiments were rigged from the start.
     Newburg’s water is also used at West Point our military academy.  Those who have seen the movie Doctor Strangelove may have a better appreciation for Colonel Jack Ripper’s anger.  As fluoride was indicated by the pro fluoridation forces for those whose enamel was being formed (less than 12 years old) it is confusing at best to speculate why fluoride would be needed for the young cadets.
     The Newburg-Kingston experiment was to go ten years ending in 1955.  Templeton began fluoridation in 1951 four years before the results of the Newburg-Kingston trials.
     Fluoride has been associated with lower IQ, cataracts,arthritist, cancer, ADHD, alheimers,birth defects, thyroid problems to name a few.  
     Templeton residents would be wise to take the time to watch the following video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FH_y3Cw8MVg&feature=share this informative piece will pique your interest on the subject.  For those who have less time on their hand this video is superb http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo6SnvmMP9k&feature=share  
Dr. Paul Connett the author of The Case Against Fluoride and the preceding video has done much to spread the news that fluoride needs a closer look.
     The Fluoride Action Network is an excellent source of info on fluoride.
     Templeton Mass Afa is a facebook site dedicated to informing people on the problems of fluoridation.
     If you would like to sign the petition to get rid of fluoride from Templeton’s water supply or join effort to end fluoridation in Templeton
please contact me at 978-939-2501 or email petefarrell44@hotmail.com.
     Thank you for your interest.
Pete Farrell
978-939-2501
      
    
           

         

Complaint Office of Inspector General Against Kopelman and Paige


Gregory W. Sullivan
Office of Inspector General

Dear Sirs
     The following is a complaint against town attorneys Kopelman and Paige (K&P) and their fraudulent behavior in regards to their representation of the Town of Templeton and specifically the Board of Sewer Commissioners in a case heard before Judge Robert Cornetta in April of 2005 (case 02-2424C) in Worcester Superior Court.  The law firm of K&P should have recused themselves from this case due to shoddy or fraudulent legal work done for the town in regards to the Assignee and Assumption Agreement in the early nineties.  Instead the firm of K&P proceeded to botch the case so that they could escape any legal damages that might have been assigned to the firm of K&P by the Town of Templeton and or Erving Paper Mills.  After losing the case on purpose the firm of K&P brokered what is believed to have been an illegal settlement between Erving Paper Mills and the Town of Templeton in early 2006. Then the firm of K&P kept the responsible parties (Sewer Commissioners) from taking legal steps to protect the town’s interest by working with town selectman Gerald Skelton and his wife town coordinator Carol Skelton to stifle any efforts for legal remedy for the town by the Sewer Commissioners. The allegation follows. 
     The Town of Templeton entered into a contract with Erving Paper Mills in March of 1974 (see Helen Flaster’s email (EHF)) to operate and maintain the town’s wastewater treatment plant (WWTP).  The contract was to last thirty years from the time the plant became operational in 1979. 
     Both the length of the WWTP contract and the responsible parties to that contract had already been established in the Federal part of this lawsuit, which began in 1996. Templeton Board of Sewer Commissioners vs American Tissue Mills of Massachusetts et. al; U.S. District Court Civil Action. No. 96-40140-NMG was that case. The case established as facts that Erving was a party to the contract and the contract ended 30 years from when the plant became operational in 1979.
     The law firm of Merrick O'Connel Dimale out of Worcester handled the Federal part of the case for the Sewer Commissioners. 
     Attorney Joseph Hamilton who works for Merrick and O'Connel summarizes the case for the town in a letter sent to selectmen in 1999 (EHF).
      In 1991 American Tissue Mills of Mass. bought the Baldwinville Products paper mill from Erving Paper Mills and took over the responsibilities for operation and maintenance of the Town’s WWTP.  The law firm who represented the town’s interest in 1991 regarding the WWTP contract transfer was K&P specifically John Giorgio (EHF).  This Assignee and Assumption Agreement in1991 (EHF) was a novation and therefore required the signatures of the original parties of the 1974 WWTP contract.  The Town of Templeton and Erving Paper Mills were left off the new contract in 1991 by K&P.
     Although the WWTP was in disrepair under Erving’s watch prior to 1991, American Tissue Mills let the plant continue to deteriorate.  American Tissue also began taking in large amounts septage and other wastes from outside haulers.  In November of 1992 a mixture of organic pesticide residues and acrylinitrile and other chemicals from Pioneer Plastics of Maine began sickening children at a nearby elementary school. The DEP strike force shut down operations concerning outside haulers and the DEP put a consent order on operations concerning receiving outside wastes to the facility. 
     K&P left town in 1993.
     With a change in guard politically at the WWTP the new Sewer Commissioners began asserting themselves in day-to-day activities so as not to repeat what happened in November of 1992. I was one of the new Sewer Commissioners and also had two kids at that elementary school that was affected by the toxic chemicals.
     Prior to 1996 American Tissue Mills had collected all monies from outside haulers to the town’s WWTP.  In 1995 the Sewer Commissioners, Selectmen, American Tissue's lawyers and EPA coordinator Mark Malone  met to discuss the EPA User Charge Regulations (EHF). On September 11, 1995 a memo from Anthony DePalma Chief Municipal Evaluation Section leader (EHF) stated that the town was not in compliance with EPA regulations.  The town used this information from the EPA and began collecting these so called tipping fees from outside haulers in 1996.  This tipping fee money gave the Sewer Commissioners money for a lawsuit.  The lawsuit began in 1996 in the Federal Court System.
     All monies for litigation for both the Federal and State portions of this lawsuit have come from the Sewer Enterprise Account.  
     The Sewer Commissioners and town fathers believed at that time that a lawsuit was the only way to get American Tissue Mills to abide by EPA regulations (EHF) and terms of the contract. 
     From 1996 to 2002 the sewer department spent nearly one million dollars in the Federal Court system prosecuting the case against American Tissue Mills.  In 2002 the town was told by the Federal Judge that the town’s lawsuit should be in the State Court system.  The Sewer Commissioners appealed the Federal Judge’s decision(EHF) but ended up in the State system just the same.
      American Tissue Mills was a rogue company that took Wall Street to the cleaners as well as everyone else that did business with them.  The President Medhi Gabazadeh is now in Federal Prison for cheating people.  American Tissue Mills went bankrupt on Sept. 10 2001 the day before the World Trade Center disaster. American Tissue Mills broke the terms of the contract and left town in 2002. 
     Erving Paper Mills was the only responsible party left from the 1974 WWTP contract so the Sewer Commission's attorneys brought Erving into the case.
      There were still seven years left on the 1974 WWTP contract that Erving was legally responsible for under the terms of the that contract.
      After the Federal Judges sent the town to the State Court system the Sewer Commissioners decided on new lawyers Brown and Rudnick, who handled the Federal Appeal (EHF) for the town.  Brown Rudnick did little but charged a lot and the commission was running out of money.   
     In 2004 the Sewer Commissioners took the selectmen’s advice and put town counsel K&P in charge of litigation with Erving. 
     K&P had Mr. William Hewig III (Bill) handle case 02-2424C for the Sewer Commissioners. 
    And just when Sewer Commissioners thought it couldn’t get any worse.
    Bill informed us that the case would proceed with a 30(b)(6) type of affair where you had to have all your evidence up front, apparently this was asked for by Erving's lawyers (as stated in Hewigs deposition (HD)).  
     Bill thought that a declaratory judgment on whether the Assignee and Assumption Agreement of 1991 (AA91) was valid would be a good place to start.  The commissioners agreed. 
     Erving added the arguments of were Erving a party to the original contract and what was the duration of the contract to the Judge's decision. 
    In April of 2005 the judge rendered his decision (EHF). 
    I was surprised to learn that the AA91 was invalid.  I was even more surprised to learn that Erving was not a party to the contract and that the contract expired in 2004. These facts had somehow changed from the Federal Case (No. 96-40140-NMG).
     The facts had not changed from case No. 96-40140NMG; they were never presented to Judge Cornetta.
    I asked Bill what happened and he stated we didn’t have the evidence.  I asked him about Dana Putnam’s testimony our star witness who had been a signor of the 1974 WWTP contract and was told that Dana had passed away.   
    I got on the phone and talked with Dana.
    I started to get suspicious.
     Bill apologized and thought maybe we could get Dana’s testimony included in the case with a motion to reconsider. 
     This motion to reconsider led to William Hewig III deposition (EHF). 
     William Hewig III deposition led to this complaint, that along with the fact that K&P handled the legal work for the Town of Templeton concerning the Assignee and Assumption Agreement in 1991 (EHF) and never recused them from case 02-2424C.
    Bill’s deposition concerning locating Mr. Dana Putnam could easily have been mistaken as the work of an idiot if not for work done by K&P in 1991 (AA91).  Instead it reads as a cover up of shoddy or fraudulent work done by K&P. 
     William Hewig III deposition concerning locating key witness Dana Putnam as part of a motion to reconsider for case 02-2424C begins with Bill’s lack of effort to access the Federal portion of the lawsuit that had been stored on disc.  The town and K&P lacked the program to access the information from the Federal case and that is how it stayed. Of course K&P still had twenty boxes of hard copy from the Federal case but it is believed these boxes went unopened.
     Pg. 5-6 discusses the 30(b)(6) rules for deposition.  Bill never asks for more time and never gets the right witnesses to testify about the original contract of 1974 or the Assignee and Assumption Agreement of 1991 (AA91). This would have been Dana Putnam a past Selectman in the Town of Templeton. With a new defendant in Erving Paper Mills and new attorneys on board for the town (K&P) it may have been wise for K&P to ask for more time. An extension was not asked for.
     Pg. 6-12 Bill uses the commissioner’s ignorance of 30(b)(6) rules to set up a losing case for the Town of Templeton.
     Pg 13 On Pete Farrell deposition of 12/04 I directed my statement “If I were you I would talk to him soon” meaning to talk to Mr. Putnam soon as he has terminal cancer to Mr. Hewig and the other lawyers in the room.  It was Bill’s job to get Dana’s testimony and he made little effort to do this. Bill never contacted me to help find Mr. Dana Putnam. Dana would have known that Erving was a party to the contract and would have been able to get the supporting information. Dana would also have known that K&P handled the AA91 for the town if reminded of this fact, which he never was by Bill. 
   Pg. 22-37 Carol Skelton gives Bill the names of Baird Peabody and Neil Cullen as possible contacts to find Mr. Putnam.  Baird was nearly nineties years old and Neil was also a senior citizen.  The two seniors did well in their testimony but it is highly unlikely that Carol and husband Gerald where unaware of Dana’s location. Carol even knew that Dana was an antique dealer but made no effort to locate him. The acrimony between The Skelton’s and Dana Putnam was legendary. The bad feelings peeked when Carol Skelton was terminated as town secretary in the early nineties. Dana was involved with the termination in one capacity or another and the Skeletons filed a lawsuit against the Town of Templeton that was settled in 1993.  Mr. Skelton was very upset at the outcome of that lawsuit and made a statement similar to   he would get the town back if it was the last thing he did, at a public venue.
    Pg.42 Mr. Hewig presents Judge Cornetta of Worcester Superior Court’s decision to his client Mr. Farrell.  At this time I was unaware that Bill had omitted the Federal Case in the discovery of case 02-2424C.  Bill had failed to find the town meeting vote from January 26 1974 authorizing the selectmen to enter into an agreement with Erving Paper Mills and had failed to locate Mr. Putnam.  As the discussion continued about the outcome of the case Mr. Hewig mentioned Mr. Putnam’s death.  I got on the phone to an alive Mr. Putnam.  Mr. Hewig thought we should try a motion to reconsider, as clearly the talk of Mr. Putnam’s death was premature.  It was Mr. Putnam’s affidavit (EHF) that caused the deposition that is currently being covered.  That affidavit and the January 26 1974 document (EHF) that accompanied the affidavit. 
     Pg. 46 This is the page where I realize that someone else is in charge of the lawsuit and not me.  Mr. Skelton acting in his capacity as selectmen and his wife Carol Skelton acting as town coordinator have taken the lead for case 02-2424C.  It could be that K&P knew of his illegal activity in regards to Ch93 acts of 2000 and violating campaign and finance laws and were using it against him or it could have been their mutual goal of putting the WWTP contract in the past.  K&P knew they were responsible for the town’s present mess with Erving.  Mr. Skelton wanted to combine the highway and sewer departments under the selectmen’s office so that he could continue to hand out town money to friends and family. I know that such a committee exists because I am the chairman. 
     Pg. 48 Bill is made aware that the Federal Case was supposed to be used in discovery of case 02-2424C. Erving lawyers don’t stay on topic for long.
     Pg. 49-60 Nobody can find the January 26 1974 special town meeting vote authorizing the selectmen to enter into an agreement with Erving Paper Mills.  Bill sends Carol after meeting minutes of selectmen.  Bill would have known that town meeting approval was needed to enter into a contract of this nature.  Carol as would her husband Gerald in their many years working for the town should have known that a contract of this nature needed town meeting approval.
     Pg.61 Bill speaks of preparing Dana’s affidavit.  Bill seemed to be dragging his feet hoping that Dana would somehow drop dead and his problems would be minimized.  I got the affidavit from Bill and got it over for Dana to sign and to hear his story on the matter. Dana clearly felt as I do that Erving is a party to the 1974 WWTP contract.
     Pg. 61 4/8/96 vote (EHF) authorizing the Sewer Commissioners to act as the town’s agent in regards to all legal matters concerning the WWTP contract is discussed.  In 1996 American Tissue Mills was the defendant, Erving was out of the picture. Erving's name wasn't even on the original lawsuit, Erving was part of et. al. The major argument in 1996 wasn’t the AA91, although maybe it should have been.  The major legal argument in 1996 was the EPA’s User Charge Regulations and how those User Charge Regulations applied to the WWTP contract (EHF).  Nobody in 1996 realized that K&P had botched the AA91 for the Town of Templeton. Joseph Hamilton's summary in 1999 (EHF) mentions the AA91 may be done improperly but does not mention K&P by name. 
     Pg. 64 Bill mentions that Carol had told him that Dana was an antique dealer.   The Skelton’s knew how to find Dana Putnam and chose not to.
    Pg. 66  Bill must have told the court or Erving’s lawyers that Dana was in the hospital and not available for questioning on January 10 2005.  This may have been the last day to get in the evidence for the 30(b)(6) depositions. Erving’s lawyers  showed that Dana was indeed available at that time.
      In conclusion it appears that K&P had no intention of winning this case.  In fact a town victory would have been K&P’s downfall.  K&P knew that the AA91 was invalid and that they were responsible by their negligence or fraudulent behavior for the huge damages (ten to thirty million dollars) being presented to the town by K&P’s mishandling of the AA91 and the WWTP contract. K&P should have recused themselves from this case right from the beginning.
     Erving Paper Mills may also have had a legal case against K&P for their mishandling of AA91.
      The settlement signed with Erving by the Town of Templeton should be negated as K&P had a conflict of interest in the settlement matter and the settlement never had town meeting approval. 
    The selectmen and town coordinator along with town counsel K&P continue to prevent any actions by the sewer commissioners to remedy the situation for the town.  They have denied the Sewer Commissioners use of legal and in fact have refused to pay a bill that was due by the Sewer Commissioners for work done by local attorney Scott Graves in dealing with legal research concerning the aforementioned topic.
     The Sewer Commissioners have been beaten like a rented mule.
     The town of Templeton needs some help in fighting this Fraud and have turned to your agency for advice and action.  Thank you
      Pete Farrell
      Cbairman of Sewer Commissioners
       24 Myrtle St.
       Baldwinville Ma. 01436 



List of Documents sent to Helen Flaster by email.
1.) March 4, 1974 WWTP contract
2.) Federal Appeal No. 96-40140NMG
3.) Cornetta’s Case 02-2424C
4.) Attorney Joseph Hamilton’s case summary 1999
5.) William Hewig III Deposition 6/27/2005
6.)Attorney Scott Graves legal opinion on research of case 02-2424C
7.)4/8/96 vote by Selectmen authorizing Sewer Commissioners.
8.)EPA User Charge Memo from David Chin March 10 2008
9.)Letters of interest for Assignee and Assumption Agreement of 91 (K&P file 11-3-08)
10.) History of 1974 WWTP contract (contains 1/26/74 town meeting vote)
11.) Dana Putnam Affidavit (April 13 2005)
12.) EPA Anthony Depalma letter 9/11/95
13.) EPA Sharon Well letter 3/2/95
14.) Meeting minutes 4/19/95 Templeton Sewer Commissioners, Special Meeting.