[MassHistPres] Boston Globe editorial

[Joyce Anderson]

Yes, it is because of damaging publicity, such as in the Boston Globe, that people distrust the word National Register and Historical Commission. The Princeton Historical Commission prepared to nominate Wachusett Mountain to the National Register of Historic Places, in fact, we received a $10,000 matching grant from MHC to hire someone to write the nomination. The nomination was completed and sent to MHC.it was at this point the Crowley Family opposed the nomination. As hard as we tried to convince them that they would not have any negative effects on their business the opposition continued. Our state senator met with them and the PHC at the state house but to no avail. What can we do to educate people so this negative attitude no longer continues to persist?
Joyce Anderson
Princeton Historical Commission




On Oct 23, 2014, at 5:43 PM, Young, Andrea <YoungA at hingham-ma.gov> wrote:

> In addition to the unfortunate slant, it also seems that the writer of the Globe editorial was confused about which municipal body to target.  The beginning of the article identifies the historic district commission as being the “overzealous” board; however, the writer then talks about the commission imposing a one year demolition delay (a preservation tool used by historical commissions; not historic district commissions), and ends the editorial by saying that the house is not located in an historic district.  What?  Most readers of this editorial are not in the preservation field and would not have picked up on these inconsistencies; nor would they have been aware of the errors, misinformation and omission of  information cited by Matt and Sara.  The frustrating thing is that this mess of an editorial will influence some, and will perpetuate the stereotype held by others that historical and historic districts commission members are outdated in their thinking, out of touch with today’s lifestyles and out of their minds (as in, “I have to go before the hysterical commission.”)   Preserving and protecting our historical and architectural assets is not for the faint of heart.  I, too, sent my comments to the Globe.
>  
> Andrea Young
> Administrator
> Hingham Historical and Historic Districts Commissions       
>  
> From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu [mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of cvwtc at aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 5:20 PM
> To: swermiel at verizon.net; masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] Boston Globe editorial
>  
> The Salem News had the same take on this several months ago but that paper seems heavily biased against preservation anyway.  I have noted times when Salem News and Globe reporters have completely ignored the preservation angle to a story all together and called for equal time were ignored.
>  
> I note the editorial says the National Register offers certain protection but in this case that is simply not true since state and federal funds are not involved.
>  
> They are also wrong about the requirement that the board be seven members.  It does not have to be.  Seven represents the largest number of members allowed on the commission.  
>  
> Matt Pujo
> Beverly, MA
>  
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sara Wermiel <swermiel at verizon.net>
> To: masshistpres <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Sent: Wed, Oct 22, 2014 1:49 pm
> Subject: [MassHistPres] Boston Globe editorial
> 
> I’d like to call the attention of listserv members to an editorial in the Boston Globe last week, “History deserves respect, but overzealousness has a price.”
> http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2014/10/13/beverly-loring-house-history-deserves-respect-but-overzealousness-has-price/zXl3z3U0vOZGuuAxQ0eYeI/story.html
> The editorial deals with the sad case of the Loring House in Beverly, a National Register-eligible property that will be demolished.
> The editorial suggests that the Beverly Historic District Commission was stuck on trivial matters, such as not destroying the house’s façade, and this drove the owner to a drastic act.
> Yes, zealotry is wrong, but was the BHDC unreasonable? Did it act improperly? We don’t know, and the Globe doesn’t know, because the Globe never did any real reporting. Yet it produces an indicting editorial, essentially warning all historical commissions against doing their jobs.
> I wrote a letter to the editor, which I’ll be glad to share with members if you want to read it. If this editorial bugs you too, I urge you to let the Globe know.
>  
> --Sara Wermiel
> History of technology/historic preservation consulting
> Jamaica Plain, MA
> ******************************
> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact 
> Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO THE WHOLE 
> LIST.
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
> ********************************
> ******************************
> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO THE WHOLE LIST.
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
> ********************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20141024/b613e6cb/attachment-0001.htm>