Incumbent NG Directors seek return to 1982 Covenants
Oct 27, 2016 8:38:07 GMT -7
chris and bluebird like this
Post by Admin on Oct 27, 2016 8:38:07 GMT -7
Incumbent North Glastonbury Directors seek return to 1982 Covenants
In a recent letter to North Glastonbury landowners GLA Board Secretary Charlene Murphy and sitting directors Gerald Dubiel and Newman Brozovsky promised that the voters will receive "their continued adherence to the founding principles of" Glastonbury. Our community was founded by Church Universal and Triumphant and their principles are detailed in the 1982 Covenants. Those covenants forced landowners to forfeit Constitutional and God given rights.
The 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments to our US Constitution were routinely violated via the 1982 Covenants. Landowners were not allowed to exercise their choice of religion; Church Universal and Triumphant was the "official" religion and if you were not a firm believer in the teachings and did not give 10% of your income to the Church you were not allowed to purchase land. Free Speech and opinions dissenting from official Church doctrine were prohibited. If you disagreed the Church could repurchase your property and kick you out of Glastonbury. Landowners were not allowed to petition government for a redress of their grievances. The Church was the sole entity of power and dispensed justice as it saw fit. The Church had the right to seize or purchase your property for any reason and at any time. By depriving you of the right to a non-Church religion of your choice, by denying you the right to believe and publish dissenting opinions and by having the power to seize your home and property the Church denied people their right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness as defined in Constitutional Amendment five and the Declaration of Independence. It is not surprising that the Church views the Declaration's author, Thomas Jefferson, as a fallen master.
The prospect of returning to the 1982 Covenants should send a collective chill over our community and cause landowners to seriously consider their votes for the GLA Board in November. Do we want to take a giant step backwards or move forward with positive change? The Church owes landowners tens of thousands of dollars on past due assessments that have never been paid. Recently the Church abandoned their original idea of a community business center for South Glastonbury when they sold that land to Mountain Sky Resort. None of the estimated 9 million dollars in proceeds were shared with Glastonbury landowners yet all will bear the community cost of any development. Will the Church do the same with their extensive land holdings in North Glastonbury? Some members of the GLA Board have spent a tremendous amount of time in 2016 trying to forgive and/or reduce the amount the Church owes landowners. Others have tried to spend landowner money maintaining and even upgrading Church property. They, like the three incumbent North Glastonbury landowners up for re-election believe that the Church would be a good partner and thus should receive special treatment.
The 2016 GLA election presents two paths for our community. The choices are stark. Some want a return to the days of absolute Church rule. Others advocate addressing and solving problems by involving all landowners. Their campaign platforms include: a long term comprehensive road plan, GLA Board transparency, simplified and more effective communications and financial statements and equality for all landowners. Which path will you choose?
Download Candidate Murphy's letter here.
The 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments to our US Constitution were routinely violated via the 1982 Covenants. Landowners were not allowed to exercise their choice of religion; Church Universal and Triumphant was the "official" religion and if you were not a firm believer in the teachings and did not give 10% of your income to the Church you were not allowed to purchase land. Free Speech and opinions dissenting from official Church doctrine were prohibited. If you disagreed the Church could repurchase your property and kick you out of Glastonbury. Landowners were not allowed to petition government for a redress of their grievances. The Church was the sole entity of power and dispensed justice as it saw fit. The Church had the right to seize or purchase your property for any reason and at any time. By depriving you of the right to a non-Church religion of your choice, by denying you the right to believe and publish dissenting opinions and by having the power to seize your home and property the Church denied people their right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness as defined in Constitutional Amendment five and the Declaration of Independence. It is not surprising that the Church views the Declaration's author, Thomas Jefferson, as a fallen master.
The prospect of returning to the 1982 Covenants should send a collective chill over our community and cause landowners to seriously consider their votes for the GLA Board in November. Do we want to take a giant step backwards or move forward with positive change? The Church owes landowners tens of thousands of dollars on past due assessments that have never been paid. Recently the Church abandoned their original idea of a community business center for South Glastonbury when they sold that land to Mountain Sky Resort. None of the estimated 9 million dollars in proceeds were shared with Glastonbury landowners yet all will bear the community cost of any development. Will the Church do the same with their extensive land holdings in North Glastonbury? Some members of the GLA Board have spent a tremendous amount of time in 2016 trying to forgive and/or reduce the amount the Church owes landowners. Others have tried to spend landowner money maintaining and even upgrading Church property. They, like the three incumbent North Glastonbury landowners up for re-election believe that the Church would be a good partner and thus should receive special treatment.
The 2016 GLA election presents two paths for our community. The choices are stark. Some want a return to the days of absolute Church rule. Others advocate addressing and solving problems by involving all landowners. Their campaign platforms include: a long term comprehensive road plan, GLA Board transparency, simplified and more effective communications and financial statements and equality for all landowners. Which path will you choose?
Download Candidate Murphy's letter here.
