34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - Directions - (508) 222-7000
News
No delay for Foxboro's dog park trial, judge says
Top Headlines This week, selectmen directed town counsel Paul DeRensis and his partner, litigator Robert Hillman, to seek the postponement, in part because Town Manager Andrew Gala, who would direct the town's actions, is out of work for several weeks. Gala underwent surgery for a shoulder injury. Hillman, who was to appear for the town, planned to tell the judge that as new counsel in the matter, the firm of Deutch Williams needs time to prepare. Selectman Mark Sullivan said he learned Wednesday that the judge had turned down the requested delay of the trial. Attorney Sam Perkins had filed a motion asking that his firm no longer defend the town in a suit brought by residents seeking to close Foxboro Dog Park. The town's insurance carrier is no longer paying Perkins, and a majority of selectmen voted not to accept a private donation to pay him. In a related matter, Selectman Paul Feeney on Tuesday said the committee he is chairing will have more information in about two weeks on its mission to locate potential new sites for the dog park.
View Comments » No comments posted.
« Hide Comments
|
KRO127 wrote on Oct 4, 2008 5:38 PM:
You have been invited to visit the sight on numerous occasions to prove to you it is not in the condition you state yet you have not taken the time to do so. How can you rant over something that is completely untruthful and consider it legitimate? "
KRO127 wrote on Oct 4, 2008 5:12 PM:
You seem to express the same two arguments over and over without addressing any of the other questions such as are you opposed to the fact that socializing a dog is an important part of owning a dog? Have you visited the site of the dog park?
You have been invited to visit the sight on numerous occasions to prove to you it is not in the condition you state yet you have not taken the time to do so. How can you rant over something that is completely untruthful? "
KyraSkye wrote on Oct 4, 2008 4:57 PM:
The people of the dog park have volunteered to put up a berm, to block noise and the sight of the park to the abutters- but they will not accept anything less than the closing of the park. WHY??? They want it to be an extension of their back yard. Well guess when the judge sees all the evidence, how the patrons of the park clean up after themselves and their dogs- the truth might be the end to it and the waste of your tax dollars. Then again- their lawyer has stated on public record- that he will appeal- wasting yet more tax dollars. "
cassidy29 wrote on Oct 4, 2008 4:42 PM:
cassidy29 wrote on Oct 4, 2008 4:40 PM:
FoxboroKaren wrote on Oct 4, 2008 3:52 PM:
If you want your pooch to be a "good canine citizen", you should set a much better example for it. Treating your own fellow taxpaying residents with obvious spite and not being respectful of their rights as residents, taxpayers and property owners, won't get you anywhere. If you are not able to provide your pooch with the safety, exercise, and socializing, on our own property, you should really reconsider owning a dog. Or try to be a more responsible dog owner by providing your pooch with a fence. Therefore, you can invite all of Norfolk County to your house. I'll be your neighbors would love that!
By the way, Kyra, congratulations! You just proved my point again about the doggie social club mentality - name calling is a typical from your group, which, of course, drops your credibility level to below zero. "
KyraSkye wrote on Oct 4, 2008 9:21 AM:
Socializing is an important part of owning a dog or other pet of 4 legs. I want my dog to be good with other humans, I want her to be a Canine Good Citizen! I do not want a dog that I can not have around people, or take with me when I travel because she is not socialized.
Why is it that Sharon has a dog park, with no controversy? what is wrong with the abutters in Foxboro, that they will not let the dog park put up a berm- at no expense to the abutters- to keep them from having to look at or hear the park?
I will also continue to bring my pooch to the park- no matter it being named a dog park or a park or a recreation area. Again then it will not be regulated and no one will have to curb their dogs from barking, pooing or doing anything they want to do.
I highly suggest that you see and visit the park before you speak ill of it- otherwise you look like an uninformed idiot. "
FoxboroKaren wrote on Oct 4, 2008 8:51 AM:
As I've stated previously, it is the sole responsibility of the dog owner to care for their pet. Your post of "Also I would be honored to have the Norfolk county and pets be invited to my backyard but unfortunitly I do not have the resources for my own dog alone", clearly states that you do not have the resources to care for your dog specifically.
It seems to me that the posts here are very clear and that dog owners intend to take their posse of other dog lovers and their pets to their property just to spite the aubtters. This creates a very hostile living environment for those tax payers.
You and your fellow dog lovers are responsible for the care of your pet. If you cannot provide a suitable place to exercise your pets without interferring with the paace and quality of life of those around you, you need to reconsider dog ownership. "
kro127 wrote on Oct 3, 2008 11:17 PM:
Also I would be honored to have the Norfolk county and pets be invited to my backyard but unfortunitly I do not have the resources for my own dog alone, hence my use of the community dog park. And thank you truth for pointing out the community space is being used no differently than if it was a gathering for an adult sporting event, that is a great example and holds a lot of truth within it. "
cassidy29 wrote on Oct 3, 2008 10:12 PM:
cassidy29 wrote on Oct 3, 2008 10:09 PM:
the truth hurts wrote on Oct 3, 2008 10:08 PM:
the truth hurts wrote on Oct 3, 2008 10:01 PM:
The fact is the area is public land, for use for the whole community not for the private use of Milton Lane residents. If they didn't want people behind their houses they should not have moved in next to a recreational area. As Mr.Baker was told when he built Milton lane "this is a recreational area, always was, always will be, don't come back and complain about the park being used" "
FoxboroKaren wrote on Oct 3, 2008 9:33 PM:
I welcome your comments.
"Instead I respectfully and responsibly choose to bring my dog to a place where he is accepted and monitored."
What you don't understand is that your dog is not accepted by tax paying Foxboro residents who abut the area and listen to dogs and their owners 24/7. Those are the people who pay taxes in this town...not the dogs. Why don't you responsibly choose to invite the Norfolk County dog population and their owners to your own your yard where dogs will really be accepted and monitored? Why do you feel the need to disturb the peace of the abutters? "
KRO127 wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:52 PM:
FoxboroKaren, how is bringing our dog to a local dog gathering ground that is well managed not taking sole responsibility and providing for our dog? If you ask me that is exactly how you take responsibility for your pet.
Not taking responsibility for your pet is to allow him to wonder into your specific yard, possibly bother your pets, maybe even make a mess in your yard. Instead I respectfully and responsibly choose to bring my dog to a place where he is accepted and monitored.
Also a question I ask you FoxboroKaren, have you ever physically been to the dog park? Because last I can recall its far from filled with mess and trash which is what you claim is happening. "
FoxboroKaren wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:36 PM:
Your hostile post is typical of the fanatical doggie social club member mentality. Why don't you invite Norfolk County's dog population and their owners to your own yard and stop blowing smoke at the abutters? Provide for your own dog stop bothering other residents, and stop wasting the Town's time and money. I'm sure the Selectmen have much more important issues to deal with. Good grief.
THANK YOU JOSE. "
cassidy29 wrote on Oct 3, 2008 5:41 PM:
jose21 wrote on Oct 3, 2008 5:34 PM:
FoxboroKaren wrote on Oct 3, 2008 5:12 PM:
Property owners who abut the doggie social club property pay darn good money in property taxes to the Town of Foxboro. I will always support rights of the taxpayers before the dogs. The Town of Foxboro should do the same.
My suggestion to proponents of the doggie social club? Take turns inviting all of Norfolk County to come to -your- backyard and home each day with their dogs. There you can let the dogs roam in your yard, free to make a mess at their leisure. Allow the dogs to bark, yip, play, bite, etc. Also allow their owners to be just as noisy! For an extra added bonus, let the owners leave the dog mess in your yard and let them leave their own trash, too! Keep the noise and the mess in your yard. It is obviously not welcome in the backyards of the taxpaying town residents.
I wish the abutters success with their lawsuit. The Town of Foxboro should put residents first before the dogs. "
dogparkpatron wrote on Oct 3, 2008 2:55 PM:
Might be time for the abutters/troublemakers to call it a day and admit defeat.
Although, Valenzola DID state, numerous times at numerous meetings, that if/when he loses, he'll appeal til hell freezes over. Hey Baker, why not put your money where it can actually do some good, some public good? "
unbiasedobserver wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:49 AM:
brwmstr wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:24 AM: