Editor:

I was saddened to read that one long-serving member of the Chatham Zoning Board of Appeals has been made the scapegoat for our collective, decades-long failure to create year-round housing and ensure a vibrant community.

Thadd Eldredge
West Chatham

Editor:

There is another side to Harwich’s housing debate that deserves more attention: the financial side.

We all understand that Harwich needs affordable housing. But we also need to recognize that the cost of running our town continues to increase. Ultimately, much of that cost falls on the people who already live and do business here.

Harwich has different ways to raise revenue. Property taxes are one. Dump fees, beach stickers, permits, recreation fees and other charges are others. But regardless of what we call them, much of that money comes out of the same household and business budgets.

There is a practical question we should be willing to ask: How much more can the people and businesses already here reasonably absorb?

This matters when we talk about increasing housing density. A large development can certainly add substantial assessed value and generate additional property tax revenue. That is a legitimate benefit and should be part of the discussion. But the costs are real, too. More housing can mean additional demands on schools, police, fire, emergency services, roads, infrastructure, maintenance and other municipal services. Those costs should be given the same consideration as the need for affordable housing. This is particularly relevant to the concerns being raised about large 40B projects. Many of those concerns involve carrying capacity. Can Harwich’s roads, water, wastewater, schools, emergency services and other infrastructure handle substantial additional growth?

But carrying capacity is not simply an environmental or quality-of-life issue. The financial impact cannot be overlooked. A large 40B project may add tax revenue while also adding significant costs. In some circumstances, those costs could be substantial enough to increase pressure on the municipal budget and contribute to the need for higher taxes or fees.

Yes, we need affordable housing. But we should also ask whether the current approach, the makeup of new development and its long-term costs are financially sustainable for Harwich. Housing policy and fiscal policy cannot really be separated.

Louis Urbano
Harwich

Editor:

When I was growing up in the 1950s and early 1960s, Boston was “Beantown.”

Boston and baked beans simply went together. Saturday night baked beans, often accompanied by brown bread and hot dogs, were a familiar tradition in many New England homes. Rose Kennedy once recalled that her family ate beans every Saturday night, as “all good Bostonians did.” The connection went back generations. Boston baked beans — navy beans slowly cooked with pork and molasses — became so identified with the city that Boston once had a baseball team called the Beaneaters, while our famous college hockey tournament is still called the Beanpot.

But somewhere along the way, Boston stopped being Beantown. Our eating habits changed, traditional Yankee restaurants disappeared and the Saturday night bean supper largely went with them. Durgin Park, perhaps Boston’s best-known bastion of old-fashioned New England cooking, closed in 2019. There is nothing wrong with change. Still, I think we lost a little something along the way.

Here on Cape Cod, where our New England heritage remains an important part of our identity, perhaps there is room for a small revival. Wouldn’t it be fun if some local restaurants occasionally offered an old-fashioned Saturday night New England supper — Boston baked beans, brown bread and perhaps hot dogs or codfish cakes?

I wonder how many Chronicle readers remember those Saturday-night bean suppers — and how many younger Cape Codders have ever had one. Maybe it’s time for Beantown, and an old New England tradition, to make a small comeback?

Tom Hamilton
Chatham

Editor:

On behalf of the members of Christ Church Episcopal in Harwich Port, a big thank you to the Cape Cod community for celebrating our 100th birthday with us this past summer. It has been a special time to reflect, be grateful to those who went before us and to hear stories of our founders from some of their direct descendants. Several of these people were delighted to visit with us after The Chronicle’s Aug. 6 article by Bill Galvin.

There are so many businesses, residents and visitors who have supported our beloved church in 2026 — whether through monetary contributions, donating items for our silent auction, singing in a community choir for our Bishop’s visit or donating ice cream for our birthday party. Thanks to their support, we will continue to faithfully serve the needs of our community.

We would be remiss if we did not say thank you to all who came out for lobster rolls and pie as we encored this popular tradition. The lobster roll lunch was made possible by a generous supplier and our dynamic kitchen crew.

It took 12 remarkable women within the Harwich Port community to found our church in 1926. We are grateful to know that such faith and dedication continue into 2026 and beyond. Thank you, Cape Cod!

Sandy Allard
Mary Ellen Eichmann, co-wardens
Christ Church Episcopal
Harwich

Editor:

Karolyn McClelland’s assault on Chatham Zoning Board of Appeals chair David Nixon is unconscionable and totally off base. 

Is our school population declining? Yes. Do we need more young families? Yes. We need families in attainable housing not in an unsafe rental development such as Meetinghouse Road. Anyone who attended the endless meetings regarding Meetinghouse Road heard the details of why this permit should be denied. Do I really need to list them again? Perhaps for Ms. McClelland’s sake I do. Just to name a few: no sidewalks for the children to walk to the bus stop, relatively no playground or play space, a neighboring ravine, little to no storage space, limited parking, high density. 

By denying this permit, the ZBA respected our community by listening to our concerns and taking these unsafe measures into consideration, and if anything, protected the children and families that would have lived there. Taking one comment out of context and basing an entire decision of the board on that comment is truly reaching. No one is against affordable/attainable housing, but let’s not just check the box and build something so subpar. 

Stop the whining and work towards the betterment of Chatham. Next time listen and respect the views of the community. Stop the “us and them.” Let’s work together. There’s never a right way to do something wrong!

Carol Gordon
South Chatham

Editor:

The United States has failed to enact a comprehensive federal statute to regulate AI development and its distribution across the states.

A federal comprehensive statute and system is required to address AI safety, accountability and human rights. The statute and its application must be absent any voluntary guidance or executive orders. It must bind companies, be enforceable and remain effective for current and future administrations.

The constituent parts of the statute are to address AI safety and licensing. This will prevent catastrophic misuse of uncontrolled autonomous conduct and the unsafe release of highly capable systems. The law clearly requires mandatory and independent testing to reveal unknown risks, discrimination and security vulnerability. 

People must have the right to a timely process to correct errors which have significant consequences to their lives. This provision is fundamental to insure civil rights, fair housing and credit, employment, educational and disability status.

To fully implement these safeguards, Congress needs to create and adequately fund an independent federal AI commission with the authority to define AI safety for all federal and state agencies. This agency must have the authority to stop unsafe AI development.

Lastly, we must require human control. 

Mark I. Berson
Orleans

Editor:

David Nixon and the members of the Chatham Zoning Board of Appeals took a hard look at the Meetinghouse Road proposal presented as “affordable housing” and asked the questions that needed to be asked. 

Affordable housing is an important need in our community, and no one should dismiss that need. But simply attaching the words affordable housing to a development should not automatically mean that every aspect of the project is appropriate or that legitimate concerns should be overlooked. What matters is what is actually being proposed.

If a project is being presented to the community as affordable housing, yet the design, scale, density and safety appears to serve purposes far beyond providing genuinely affordable homes, residents have every right to question it. The label should not be a substitute for transparency.

That is why the ZBA’s vote deserves recognition, not our town manager getting involved with our select board chair to investigate a complaint on the ZBA doing the right thing! The board had the responsibility to examine the proposal on its merits, rather than simply accept the characterization placed upon it. 

Our community needs housing that meets real housing needs, not projects that use “affordable housing” as a convenient justification for development that may ultimately look and function very differently.

So, kudos to those on the ZBA for doing its job and taking a closer look. Thoughtful decisions today can help ensure that our town grows responsibly while we struggle to preserve the character and quality of life that make it a community worth living in. 

Michelle Kleinkauf 
Chatham 

Editor:

While the Harwich Conservation Trust’s public fundraising appeal implies saving 12 acres from a major subdivision, the reality is that all but 1.5 acres of this land is already protected and cannot be developed. The public deserves transparency regarding Case PB2026-13, where the actual proposal introduces an intense physical footprint on the remaining 1.5 acres.

HCT's marketing emphasizes "repurposing" a residential structure, yet the layout seeks an expansion that doubles the facility's footprint. To support high-capacity public use, the plan adds two sprawling parking lots totaling 38 spaces, extensive graded walking paths, and replaces a single-lane residential driveway with a wide two-way thoroughfare.

This design effectively shifts a quiet, unlit residential zone into an active tourist destination. Funneling high-volume visitor traffic through a major two-way thoroughfare directly onto Route 28 is a critical safety hazard. This stretch of Route 28 is characterized by curved geometry both north and south, severely restricting sightlines. Ironically, standard residential use on this minor 1.5-acre parcel would be far more eco-friendly and generate significantly less traffic than the massive layout proposed by the Trust.

The public appeal emphasizes preservation, but the site plan proposes an over-scaled footprint that permanently alters our rural neighborhood. The planning board must rigorously scrutinize this application and prioritize the traffic safety of Route 28.

Donna and Russell Rich
Harwich

Editor:

On behalf of Eastwind Gallery in Orleans, I would like to thank the town of Orleans for the grant we received from the Orleans Local Impact Program. These funds enabled us to enhance the lighting on our front entrance on Main Street. It also allowed us to replace a banner that informs the public of the artwork we represent. 

Eileen Smith on behalf of
the 14 members of Eastwind Gallery
Orleans