December 4, 2025 • 39 mins
For years, officials in Massachusetts have been working to secure federal funding to help replace the Cape Cod bridges. As part of the Sagamore Bridge replacement project, roughly a dozen homes would be taken by eminent domain. While local officials assure the public that the projects are moving forward, there is uncertainty about the funding for both bridge projects with the US Army Corps of Engineers recently pausing more than $11 billion in funding projects, which includes the Cape Cod bridge projects. We discussed the plans for these bridge replacement projects and spoke to some locals affected by the project.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
It's Night Side with Dan Ray on WBS Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Boy. You know, one of the things we'd like to
do here on Nightside is follow up on stories. The
other thing which you'd like to do before we get
to my guests is remind you that we still have
openings for a couple, maybe two or three charities for
the annual night Side Charity Combine. All you have to
do is contact me and if you are a member
(00:29):
or a leader in a charity, it doesn't matter the size.
We'd love to give you some free publicity on Tuesday Night.
Tuesday Night, December twenty third, my last night broadcast night
of this year. We tend to finish up on a
very positive note and give some publicity to anywhere from
you know, fifteen or so to eighteen charities. You everybody
(00:50):
get three or four minutes to talk about their mission,
what they do. And all you have to do if
you want some publicity for your charity is contact me
at WBZ Ray at iHeartMedia dot com. If you have
any problems with the spelling of the name d A
N R EA, there's nothing I can do about that
at iHeartMedia dot com, or you could call Rob right
(01:11):
now and he'll spell it out for you if you
would like before we get our phone lines lit up.
And again, do not send us a suggestion that we
contact some charity. We don't do call outs. If you
represent a charity and you'll like to be on, let
us know and we will. We'll give you a quick rundown.
I'll call you during. Leave us a daytime phone number
(01:32):
and I'll get to you and we'll have everybody set off.
It goes like it goes off like clockwork. We've done
it now for twelve years. This will be year number thirteen,
and it is just a it's a great program, and
it's a program that has helped a lot of charities
raise some money. At the end of the year. People
are figured looking for a good charity to support so
(01:53):
they have some deductions with when the taxman comes next April,
and some charities are looking for more volunteers. So give
you a chance of getting your charity noticed here on
night side Tuesday evening, December twenty third. It's as simple
as that, and send me an email and we'll set
(02:14):
it up. Set up something tonight with a veterinarian here
in Boston, and we'll have more, that's for sure. So,
as I said, we like to follow on stories. And
last I guess I'm guessing it was August, maybe it
was a different time. We spoke with Mark and Joan Handel.
They live on the Cape. They live, I don't want
(02:38):
to say in the shadow of the Sagamore Bridge, but
they live near the Sagamore Bridge, and in there lies
the problem. There is going to be an effort to
fix the bridges, both the Sagamore and the Bourn It's
going to take billions of dollars, and that money now
(02:58):
is tied up. The Department of Transportation here in Massachusetts
is trying to focus on about thirteen homeowners who live
close to the Sagamore Bridge, and one of that those
homes is owned by Mark and Joan Hendel. So Mark
and Joan, I want to have you retell your story,
(03:21):
but also tell us about the pressure that you and
others in your neighborhood are feeling from the Department of Transportation.
Right now, welcome back to nights Side to both.
Speaker 3 (03:31):
Of you, and thank you. It's very very nice of
you to have us back. We're pleased to be here.
True recamp our story we're native New Englanders. We lived
out of state for some time and when our children
grew up, we decided it was time to move back
to our home in New England. We both missed our family,
(03:53):
we missed the water. We're water people. And it turned
out there was a great opportunity here and Sagamore, and
that opportunity was to purchase a piece of land that
was offered with it came with a contract to build
a spec house and it was just ideal for us.
It was the perfect location. We've always wanted to live
(04:15):
on the cape and we did it. So we pulled
the trigger and in twenty twenty four we had this
home built for us, all kinds of customizations and things
that make it our forever home. In March of this year,
about four or five months after we had moved in,
we got a knock on our door with a letter
(04:36):
saying that our home was going to be taken by
Eminent Domain by mass Dot because instead of fixing the
current bridge or making it wider or strug restructuring it,
they want to build two bridges, one of which requires
all of the land in our Round Hill neighborhood to
store cranes and build cranes so that they can build
(04:58):
these bridges. At the time we've been following this, we've
been attending public meetings, We've been trying to get mass
DOT to talk to us. They are very noncommunicative, but
in the public meetings we've had public statements from them
stating they aren't rushing anyone and that they're doing the
(05:18):
early takings because they want to give us a chance
to let this soak in and to find a home
and all this. But as you know, Dan, there's a
huge housing crisis on the Cape. There's no way that
they're going to find thirteen homes in born on this
side of the Cape for us. And to make matters worse,
as I said, they've told us shovels in the ground
(05:39):
late twenty seven, early twenty eight that they're not pushing us.
Several of our neighbors have received their appraisals and those
have closing dates of January ninth, and that is let me.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Just make it. I just want to slowy down a
little bit. Your synopsis is great, spot on, But when
you say closing dates normal, when there's a real estate closing,
someone has come to your home and you have had
a conversation back and forth, purchase and sale agreement. Finally,
you know, first and offer offers accepted, inspections, purchase and
(06:15):
sale agreement, and then the date for the closing. This
is nothing like that's telling you absolutely, yeah, using the
word closing from for an eminent domain. And by the way,
you have described to me that the three homes that
they are for closing on immediately, you know, in January
(06:37):
is owned by a single woman who is ninety, another
is on a single woman who is eighty nine, and
another is owned by a couple who are in their seventies.
Speaker 3 (06:48):
Yes, so we have at an eighty year old, an
eighty nine who's going to be ninety year old, okay,
and a couple in their seventies. Yeah, they have received
theirs already. These are the people who had their appraisers
out to their home in June and July. We didn't
have ours until October, so we have not received ours yet.
But we're very concerned that the timeline is being pushed
(07:10):
up and they aren't telling anyone and on the date
that you close, that's the word they use, even though
as you mentioned, it's wrong. They own the deed entitled
to your home. And although they've said no, we're not
going to kick anyone out and nobody's going to be homeless,
they have not even provided our neighbors, our friends with
(07:32):
a comparable home for sale that they could possibly purchase
with the money that the state is giving them. Where
do they expect these people to go? And we don't
want this to happen to us.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
Are they are they basing the eminent domain appraisals? Are
they basing those on the fair market value or that
are yet less than fair market value?
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Their claim is that the law requires them to use
fair market value, whatever that means, which is never going
to be enough to compensate people. I do not have
any information as to how much these people have been
offered in comparison to what they consider the fair market
value or their home. But I am concerned that they
(08:19):
are speeding this up, that they are pushing people out,
and that they just don't have a plan. There's no
final plan for the bridges. The funding, as you mentioned,
is in jeopardy. They have no permits, you know, I mean,
there's a lot of things that have to happen.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Also, by the way, just in terms of we're in
a housing market, which is a seller's market, meaning no,
if they decide they're going to give you X, and
you can't take that amount of money whatever X is,
and use that money to find an equivalent home on
(08:57):
Cape Cod You're going to be literally up the creek
without a paddle here. And prices on the Cape are
sky high for a whole bunch of reasons, as people retire,
As the Cape is a small portion of land, you
can only have so many properties there. I know that
(09:19):
your wife, Joan is on a separate phone, So Joan,
I just want to get a quick comment from you.
How much of a you know, Mark is just I
thought laid it out perfectly. How much of a drain
has this been on you in Mark and the other
people in the area, just to drain psychologically?
Speaker 4 (09:39):
It's unbearable, absolutely unbearable.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Yeah, I think that. I think that does say it all.
Speaker 4 (09:52):
And people have no idea, they don't have any idea
how psychologically impactful this is for.
Speaker 5 (10:01):
All of us.
Speaker 4 (10:03):
Mark and I are younger than eighty in ninety and
our dear neighbors who are in their eighties and nineties.
I can't even imagine, I see it.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
Has anyone from the governor's office or the Lieutenant governor's office,
or never mind someone the governor or the Lieutenant governor
ever come down to one of the meetings and with
all of you and said, gee, we know this is
a tough set of circumstances on everyone, but we will
we will make a more than than fear offer to
(10:36):
you to basically, you know you, we're asking you to
do something quote unquote in the interest of the public,
the motoring public, and you're making a sacrifice, an incredible sacrifice,
surrendering your home, whether it's taken from you by eminent
domain or you engage in some good faith conversation. Has
(10:58):
anyone from the governor's office reached out to you and said, look,
would like to treat you as human beings and let's
have all.
Speaker 3 (11:06):
Now we've reached out to all of them, and we
have heard nothing from the governor, the Lieutenant governor, from
any politician. The only politician who has reacted, and he
reacted immediately upon hearing about it, is our state representative,
Steve Csarros. He came to our house within two days
of me emailing him about this. But we have, you know,
(11:28):
talked to all the federal representatives and senators. We've emailed
the federal Department of Transportation, We've emailed that, We've talked
to all kinds of people. Nobody has responded from the
political arena except Steve Sorrow.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
So you're Congressman, Congressman Bill Keating.
Speaker 3 (11:44):
No response, Nope, No, that's correct.
Speaker 2 (11:47):
Senator Warren, Senator Markeye.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
Correct, no response. Although Markey, he was out here a
couple a couple of weeks ago filming a little video
of himself for his Facebook page standing by the bridge,
but he didn't bother to come visit any want or
ask about anyone.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
So use the bridge as a prop correct, So your
collateral damage in a way. Look, we're going to take
a break. When we get back, I'm going to ask
your attorney, and I'm sure you may have more than
one attorney by time this is over, because there's a
whole bunch of battles that you'll be fighting. Phil Tracy
(12:26):
is going to join us. We'll contact him. You stay
right there, and so we'll broaden the conversation if anyone
would like to call. And I hope some of you
out there, whether you are amongst the group that is
impacted or somebody who's just a decent, ordinary citizen. This
is a multi billion, not million, multi billion dollar project,
(12:50):
and it seems to me that this state could provide
sufficient funds to make this horrific transition that this family
and twelve other families are going to have to undergo
unless somehow the state can be stopped make it a
little more comfortable for them. I just don't understand the
(13:13):
lack of transparency and the lack of humanity in this situation.
We'll be back on nights Side with Mark and Joan
Hendel and Hendel excuse me, Mark and Joan Hendel. Is funny.
I was over the Sagamore Bridge a couple of weeks ago,
and with the foliage down, I was able to look
down on your neighborhood. And it's a beautiful look in neighborhood.
(13:37):
I mean, anyone would love to live there. You bought
in good faith, and now you know, just a matter
of months later, the rug is being pulled out from
beneath you. And I want my listeners here on Nightside
to join this conversation and be supportive and let the
politicians know that this is the sort of things that
(13:57):
we will remember because if it can be done to
Mark and Joan and their neighbors, it can be done
to anyone else. We'll be back on Night Side with
their attorney, attorney Phil Tracy, right after this.
Speaker 1 (14:09):
You're on Night Side with Dan Ray on w b Z,
Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
All right, we are talking with Mark and Joan Himdell.
They live on the Cape technically inborn in the in
the shadow of the Sacamore Bridge. Am I accurate on that?
Speaker 3 (14:27):
Mark and Joan, Yes, and they are.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
Yeah. If you drive over the bridge with the foliage down,
you can see their home. We're joined now by their lawyer,
attorney Phil Tracy. Phil Tracy, Welcome to Nightside.
Speaker 6 (14:42):
Thanks.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
Yeah, I'm Mark and Joe.
Speaker 3 (14:45):
Hello.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Yeah, So Phil, you're working on this case. I know
it's a complicated case. But how you you you normally
deal with with as a criminal defense lawyer, but you
do civil cases as well. How are you going to
push back for them against the Department of Transportation which
(15:09):
looks to me like they've adopted a steamroll of philosophy
that they're coming in and they're going to take the
properties as well.
Speaker 6 (15:18):
There's no question that you know, this is a very
difficult situation, especially for Mark and Jones, because they are
the traditional American people. They've lived in Iowa, they've familiar
with New England. They wanted to sort of find their
(15:38):
end days down here, retire, and then of course this
comes up. Now. The problem is twofold the popular transportation
has not been very careful and friendly and respective of
their feelings.
Speaker 3 (15:57):
That's one thing.
Speaker 6 (15:58):
Now, on the other hand, and they bought the property,
the seller, the lawyer for the seller, the broker. Nobody
disclosed to them that this thing had been going on
for maybe ten years. I can easily remember meetings and
things like that that you know, the planning state. The
(16:20):
third factor, I guess is that we don't know whether
or not they will be able to put the project
together with the federal funds. But they're trying to kick
the people off the ground, and then what if they
don't do it for another ten years exactly, it's just
a very unfair situation.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
Well, it seems to me to be a rush to
judgment here that they're convinced, Look, the Trump administration might
very well be serious on Massachusetts is not the favorite
state of Donald Trump. Yeah, and so they may hold
in abeyance the money for these bridges and force the
(17:05):
Commonwealth to come up with the cash. And we're talking
about billions of dollars. Oh yeah, you know, so this
is this is this is a fight in the court
of public opinion as well as in the courts.
Speaker 6 (17:18):
As far as I'm const agree, I agree completely. It's
not fair and it's not the way citizens you know,
love the United States and have experience across the country.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
It's just it's it's.
Speaker 6 (17:32):
Mind boggling that they would be treated so harshly.
Speaker 7 (17:38):
Uh.
Speaker 6 (17:39):
They have the dream house, they love their house.
Speaker 3 (17:42):
It's just not right.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
Yeah. And and what is going to make I mean
if if they conclude that, look, this property, this this
acreage is needed for the stage equipment. Uh what the
question then has to be what will make No one
is ever going to be able to replace this home
for Mark and Joan. Although I think you mentioned to
(18:06):
me that in the past homes have physically been moved.
Tell us about that if you can filter.
Speaker 8 (18:13):
Well, I learned this from Joan that in fact, when
the bridge was built in nineteen thirty three to thirty five.
Speaker 6 (18:25):
There were homes that were.
Speaker 7 (18:28):
Moved.
Speaker 6 (18:29):
Now, the technology was probably different then, but nevertheless, all
of us have seen, for instance, a lighthouse or somebody
has a house that's going to fall into the sea,
and so you know, it can be moved. I believe
it can be done, and I intend to ask the
Dot to consider it. And because they had their house
(18:53):
custom built for them and they liked their house, as
anybody would, you know, you have a house. It's not
like they bought a house standing house. They bought the
land then built the house. And when they bought that land,
they should have been told.
Speaker 3 (19:09):
Yeah, and we, uh, you know, we believe Angel for
go ahead, Mark, Uh, yeah, we believe that land.
Speaker 6 (19:15):
Because of the new bridge.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Okay, go ahead, Mart, we believe that's okay.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
We believe that moving the house is the best solution
because it does keep the house that we want. Uh.
But we have an email that we just received from
mash Dot that says because there is no requirement to
move a home, that they have rejected our requests to
move our home.
Speaker 6 (19:40):
Well, both Monk and dan I responded to the Dot today.
They say, I want to revisit this in detail and
do a deep dive into what we can what we
can accomplish together, because as I said, it's been a
little bit difficult to deal with them because because as
(20:01):
you know, there's some elderly people that they're basically saying,
all right, we want your house, and we want it now,
and here's whatever we decided to give you. So what
does an elderly per a ninety year old do in
that circumstance. They definitely would say I better get.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
Out of here.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Phil. Look, I'm glad they don't want to do. I'm
glad you joined us for a few minutes here. I'm
going to let you go. We have a newscast which
we have to take and when we get back, I
want Joan and Mark, who truly are amongst the victims.
Here are these thirteen families to talk to some of
my callers. So we have full lines fill, including yours.
So I'm gonna I'm gonna bid you do. You probably
(20:40):
are somewhere in court tomorrow morning at eight o'clock, so
I'll let you know I will be.
Speaker 6 (20:44):
But Mark and Joanah, they are rock solid, good people,
and you know it's just a shame. But all we
can do is fight it.
Speaker 2 (20:55):
Well. I'm no one will fight it harder, that's for sure.
And I know that that you do a great job
pill appreciate your time today. Thanks Phil. Well, Rob, you
can take Phil down for me. We're going to take
a break because with the bottom of the hour mark,
and Joan, I want you to stay right there. We
have some phone calls. We want to talk to some
(21:15):
people who might be impacted or people who are just sympathetic, empathetic.
If it could happen to you, folks, it can happen
to anyone. And there has to be parameters and restrictions
they placed upon the unbridled power of the state, in
my opinion, here if they can establish that indeed there
(21:38):
is a need for your property, any and every compromise
should be on the table, up to an including moving
your house to a parcel of land that you will
also have the quiet and the enjoyment that you've had
now for only a few months. This cannot go unchallenged.
(21:58):
And I know that they are listeners out there saying
why is Dan interested in this? I'm interested in it
because they're listeners. And I hope all of you have
some empathy because this is this is a horrific example
of government overreach in my opinion, and government arrogance, and
(22:19):
this cannot stand in this way Mark and Jones. Stay
right there. We'll be back with you right after the
news and with the callers on the line. The only
line open is six if you want to get through.
Coming back on Nightside.
Speaker 1 (22:32):
It's Night Side with Boston's News Radio.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
My guest on the phone, Mark and Joan Handel. They
live down on the Cape. They've been only there for
a couple of years. Their native New Englanders came back
here a couple of years ago, bought a piece of property,
built a home and now they're one of thirteen homes
that the state wants to take by eminent domain, which
(22:58):
is never a pleasant prospect or project. And they have already,
I guess, told at least three of the homeowners that
they have decided what they will pay and that the
closings will occur in January, which is to me, is
absolutely unfair. And if there ever was a case of
eminent domain where people should be given, the state should
(23:19):
be given giving the people a little more leeway. This
is it. Let me go to Karen in Stoneham. Karen
appreciates your waiting and you were first this hour on
Night Side with Mark and Joan Hendel. Greta have Karen Okay,
Rob much. You put Karen on hold. I assumed that
(23:41):
she knew we were coming to her. Make sure that
she didn't have her phone on mute, and let me
go to Linda in Weymouth, and we just lost Karen. Karen,
please call back if you'd like, Linda, Linda and Weymouth.
Speaker 5 (23:54):
How are you?
Speaker 9 (23:54):
You almost lost me too because I had my questions answered.
Speaker 2 (23:59):
Ok So that's fine. If you have a question you
want to ask, go right ahead, and if they're answered,
we'll move on. Go ahead, Linda.
Speaker 9 (24:07):
I just wanted to express my concern to these folks
and the other twelve there, and my concern was, you know,
push forget your house moved, you know, put that in
you know, I pray that the option becomes available that
you can move the houses to a suitable, agreeable location.
Speaker 2 (24:32):
Well, apparently this was done previously. This apparently was done
previously when the bridge was built back in the mid
nineteen thirties. So there's a precedent. And certainly, if technically
it could be done in the nineteen thirties, I think
it certainly should be able to be done in the
twenty twenties.
Speaker 9 (24:54):
Absolutely, okay, especially you got it custom made. There so
from Biels can move.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
In all right, Thank you very much, appreciate it. Lennon
good Night, six seven two five thirty six seven thirty.
By the way, Karen's waited for half an hour, so Karen,
if you call back, we'll get you on. I have
no idea how that went down, but let me go
to Larry and Dennisport down on the Cape. Larry, you're
(25:23):
next on Night Side with Mark and Joan Hendell.
Speaker 3 (25:27):
Thanks Dan.
Speaker 10 (25:28):
Yeah, I heard your segment back several months ago with
the same couple and the frustration. I feel your pain.
I went through a similar process back in the seventies
when I lost my business to the Chelsea fire in
the city of Chelsea took my land. So I understand
what you're going through. Here's the situation, as I assessed
that I bought my house forty years ago in the Cape,
(25:50):
I go over the bridge as little as possible. The
bridge was built in the thirties with a fifty year
lifespan estimating a million cars a year. I think it's
up to thirty six million cars a year go over
the Cape. The bridge is already forty years overdue. They
knew this long ago that had to be replaced. My
(26:11):
question is do you think you have any serious recourse
to the realtor that sold you this property, because they
had to have known that this bridge was going to
be built, and long ago I forgot how many years
ago they decided they were going to build the bridge
on the inside of the cape, right by your property.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
Yes, thank you for that question. That's an excellent question.
And yes, we are pursuing against the realtor and the seller,
who both knew that this was happening. So it's what
we want to do is make sure that they understand
what they've done to our lives and how they've ruined
our lives. But we are definitely pursuing that. We know
(26:55):
that people knew around here. We had no way of
knowing the because we lived out of state, and so
that is definitely in our future.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
It seems to me Mark and Joan and Larry. Then
that's going to be a tough road because I don't
know if statutorily or under case law, the seller is
obligated to say to you, hey, and I hope they are,
because they certainly, from an ethical point of view, should
(27:28):
have done it. I do know that in Massachusetts, and
says some law that if you are aware that someone
died in a property, you have to disclose. But I
don't know if the individuals could say, hey, it was
public knowledge and they had to do I think the
easiest solution for everyone is for the state to do
(27:49):
the right thing and make you happy and make the
other people happy who might have purchased the property thirty
or four years ago never thought that they would ever
be in a situation where this massive federal project is
being contemplated and worth billions and billions of dollars. Larry,
(28:14):
I think again that the state needs to step up.
The state needs to step up. We can take care
of people coming into Massachusetts because we're a wonderful state,
and we're a welcoming state and where all of this,
But when we have people who are residents here who
have to basically interrupt their own lives for the common good,
(28:37):
then I think the common good should be a little
better to these people in question.
Speaker 3 (28:42):
Agreed, And you know, Dan, the amount of money that
they would have to spend to make everyone in this
neighborhood feel less stressed and better about this is minuscule
compared to the multi billion dollar price tag on this
thing absolutely.
Speaker 2 (28:56):
And that's why I think that the governor the lieutenant
governor should be down there and meet with the people
and tell them that they will go as far as
they can go. Now they're not going to be able
to give.
Speaker 7 (29:08):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
Let us assume that the that Mark or Joan is
picking a number that's X that would make them happy.
I don't think that that it's reasonable for the the
people down there to say no, I want five X
or ten X. I mean, you know, I talk funny money,
(29:29):
but a reasonable figure which will one accommodate you and
and and and and make you make you a whole
here because you're going to go through a lot of
inconvenience whenever this happens.
Speaker 3 (29:41):
And yeah, there's future mental torture. Basically every time we
drive over the bridge in the future, or we go
to market basket and see the spot where our home was,
that is like a PTSD waiting to happen. Okay, and yeah,
but just just on Larry's comment, I just want to
add really quickly, Yeah, you are not saying that nothing
(30:01):
should be done to the bridges. We one hundred percent
support the idea that they need to be repaired in
some way. To be safe. Our friends go over them,
our family go over them, We go over them.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
So yeah, absolutely you are reasonable to people. This lawyer,
go ahead.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
I'd like to mention one of a flying ointment here.
The problem is the Army Corp of Engineers controls the
canal and I think the actual bridge, the state tools
the highway that goes over it, and the city of
Bourne is where the on and off ramps are. All
these thirteen houses have to deal with all three agencies
or is it just a pop now it's all of them?
Speaker 2 (30:42):
Okay, Well, I'm sure that I'm sure that I would
assume have you received any correspondents from any agency other
than the promity Transportation?
Speaker 3 (30:55):
No mascot is the one coordinating between all these exactly,
they are the communicator, right.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
But but the town of Born is not going to
have the deep pockets that Massachusetts or the federal government has.
That's reality, nor is the Army Corps of Engineers. It's
if you were going to be given some reasonable relief,
which is all you're asking for, it has to come
through the Governor's office because that's what the Department of
(31:20):
Transportation reports to. Larry has always love your loyalty, to
night Side. You have a big heart, my friend. Thank
you so much. Thank you. Okay, we'll take a quick break.
We've got some other calls on the other side, other
side of this from my guest Mark and Joan Hendel Handel.
We'll be back on Nightside right after this.
Speaker 1 (31:38):
It's Night Side with Ray Boston's News Radio.
Speaker 2 (31:43):
Back to the phones, and we're gonna try Karen and
Stoneham one more time. We lost it before. Karen, I
hope you're there now.
Speaker 3 (31:49):
I am. I'm here, go right ahead.
Speaker 2 (31:52):
We're getting a little tight on time, but I want
to get you.
Speaker 11 (31:54):
You go right ahead, Okay. I'm actually Jones's sister. So
this is like devastating and that the town should have
never authorized any permit to be building on that land
at all. I don't even know how that even went through.
It's it's disgusting what they're doing.
Speaker 2 (32:13):
That's a very interesting point. That's a good point that
you're raised that they never I don't know where they'd
be living now, where you know Joan and Mark would
be living. But but if the permit was not issued,
and they must have, towns should have known that the
days were numbered on the use of this property as
a residential property.
Speaker 12 (32:33):
Yes, and we we are and we are Actually it's not, Karen,
and I appreciate you calling in and your support. That
is actually part of what we're going after because you're right.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
Yep, Okay, well, Karen, Look, I appreciate the time that
you've you've spent holding on. Any other comments you'd like
to make, obviously, as as Jones sibling, I know where
your heart is and I know where your mind is.
Any other comments you'd.
Speaker 11 (33:03):
Like to make, No, I think I just want to
let you know she's a mass Army National God veteran
as well, so you know, just.
Speaker 6 (33:12):
Yeah, you know, you know.
Speaker 2 (33:15):
It's it's like Ronald Reagan used to say that the
scariest words were when all of a sudden someone knocks
on your door and they say, I'm from the government
and I'm here to help you all. I can appreciate
you calling your patience.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (33:31):
Let me go to Susanna and Suzanne. You're next on
nights that we're a little tight on time.
Speaker 5 (33:36):
You go, right ahead, Yes, I'll keep it brief. This
several fourth doutgee thirty eight. I've just celebrated my eighty
seventh birthday.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
Happy birthday. What you call happy birthday?
Speaker 5 (33:52):
I want to say to the people affected by the
Sagamore Bridge. I'm not a lawyer, but I hope that
you will prevail against the forces.
Speaker 2 (34:06):
Well we'll we'll try to help him as much as
we can. Thanks Susanna, thank you for your support, and
happy birthday to you. All right, have a great night.
Let me go to Steve in Fort Evans. Steve, you
were next on night Side with Mark and Joan Hendel.
Speaker 7 (34:24):
How are you doing daring? Thanks for taking my call.
What was a pleasure to talk the question I had?
They mentioned earlier that they were using the in for.
Speaker 2 (34:37):
Uh uh you know, yes, a staging area for you know,
a staging area for the equipment there will be needed
to to tear down one bridge and build it, build
another bridge replacing the second.
Speaker 7 (34:56):
In the fifth Amendment. Right, so if you go back,
you know, if it's not for public use, okay, the
constitution permits domain. The situation's way, the acquist serves as
public use. If that's not serves as public used. In
(35:18):
other words, it's neither on ramp or anything like that.
But it's just a staging area.
Speaker 2 (35:25):
Well, it's a staging area look, I don't I don't
know if if you're practicing law, but you may want
to read that a little bit more carefully. If if
they need a space either directly underneath or adjacent to
the bridge. This is a monumental task that will be
undertaken to replace this bridge, and it is a public
(35:51):
use because without the new bridge, either there will be
some collapse of the old bridge at some point or
it will be you know, basically, they'll they'll stop people
from going over it. They'll say, look, it's now too dangerous.
And obviously it's needed to connect the cape to the
(36:12):
mainland and all of that. So there's no question there's
public use, and it's it's a public project which is
spiking nice state money. So I think you're trying to
be innovative, Steve, and I give you an a plus
on innovation, but I don't think unfortunately, it's going to work.
Speaker 7 (36:30):
Okay, Well, well listen, I'll tell you what. I'll stand
out one of those bulldozers for that family if it
comes to it, and then thank you. First off, I'll
call uncle what's his name there, you know, and have
him try to stop it.
Speaker 2 (36:51):
I have no idea who you're talking about but doing
me a favor. I don't want to see you. I
don't want to see you arrested. Okay, thanks very much, Steve,
Thank you, Mark, Mark, and Joan. I hope tonight has
helped a little bit in making people aware of what's
going on. I wished more of your neighbors would have
(37:12):
taken the time to stand with you. I think that
you are, as I said to Mark today, sticking your
head above the foxhole. And I think the other neighbors
who are similarly situated should should, should use your courage
as an example, because if they all go quietly into
that good night, no one will notice. And I admire you.
(37:34):
I admire your courage, and please keep us posted on
this and I hope that at some point we can
we can get a get a solution which is going
to be acceptable to you.
Speaker 12 (37:46):
Above all, Yes, and our neighbors are standing and they
are fighting as well.
Speaker 5 (37:50):
We're very close.
Speaker 2 (37:52):
No, I understand, but they could have they could have
joined the conversation tonight, as I expressed the Mark today,
Because the fight right now is not in a court
of law. The fight on nightside is in the court
of public opinion, and the court of public opinion is
a very important court in Massachusetts.
Speaker 3 (38:09):
Thank you, Mark, appreciate your continued support on this, and
we appreciate your having us as guests again and we
appreciate how much this means to you, and so thank
you well.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
My pleasure and please I like to fight on behalf
of people and use my microphone, particularly for those who
are who are being rolled over. If not physically read
uh yeah red figuratively uh in actuality I was I
(38:40):
was reaching for. So stay stay strong and keep keep
us posted. Okay, thank you, Mark, have a great night.
Good night. When we get back, we're going to talk
about a little a bit of a dust up in Debta, Massachusetts,
where a Catholic priest has decided to turn a Nativity
scene into a political statement. I'm troubled by it. Some
(39:01):
people support it. Love to know what you think. Coming
back on Nightside,
It's Night Side with Dan Ray on WBS Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Boy. You know, one of the things we'd like to
do here on Nightside is follow up on stories. The
other thing which you'd like to do before we get
to my guests is remind you that we still have
openings for a couple, maybe two or three charities for
the annual night Side Charity Combine. All you have to
do is contact me and if you are a member
(00:29):
or a leader in a charity, it doesn't matter the size.
We'd love to give you some free publicity on Tuesday Night.
Tuesday Night, December twenty third, my last night broadcast night
of this year. We tend to finish up on a
very positive note and give some publicity to anywhere from
you know, fifteen or so to eighteen charities. You everybody
(00:50):
get three or four minutes to talk about their mission,
what they do. And all you have to do if
you want some publicity for your charity is contact me
at WBZ Ray at iHeartMedia dot com. If you have
any problems with the spelling of the name d A
N R EA, there's nothing I can do about that
at iHeartMedia dot com, or you could call Rob right
(01:11):
now and he'll spell it out for you if you
would like before we get our phone lines lit up.
And again, do not send us a suggestion that we
contact some charity. We don't do call outs. If you
represent a charity and you'll like to be on, let
us know and we will. We'll give you a quick rundown.
I'll call you during. Leave us a daytime phone number
(01:32):
and I'll get to you and we'll have everybody set off.
It goes like it goes off like clockwork. We've done
it now for twelve years. This will be year number thirteen,
and it is just a it's a great program, and
it's a program that has helped a lot of charities
raise some money. At the end of the year. People
are figured looking for a good charity to support so
(01:53):
they have some deductions with when the taxman comes next April,
and some charities are looking for more volunteers. So give
you a chance of getting your charity noticed here on
night side Tuesday evening, December twenty third. It's as simple
as that, and send me an email and we'll set
(02:14):
it up. Set up something tonight with a veterinarian here
in Boston, and we'll have more, that's for sure. So,
as I said, we like to follow on stories. And
last I guess I'm guessing it was August, maybe it
was a different time. We spoke with Mark and Joan Handel.
They live on the Cape. They live, I don't want
(02:38):
to say in the shadow of the Sagamore Bridge, but
they live near the Sagamore Bridge, and in there lies
the problem. There is going to be an effort to
fix the bridges, both the Sagamore and the Bourn It's
going to take billions of dollars, and that money now
(02:58):
is tied up. The Department of Transportation here in Massachusetts
is trying to focus on about thirteen homeowners who live
close to the Sagamore Bridge, and one of that those
homes is owned by Mark and Joan Hendel. So Mark
and Joan, I want to have you retell your story,
(03:21):
but also tell us about the pressure that you and
others in your neighborhood are feeling from the Department of Transportation.
Right now, welcome back to nights Side to both.
Speaker 3 (03:31):
Of you, and thank you. It's very very nice of
you to have us back. We're pleased to be here.
True recamp our story we're native New Englanders. We lived
out of state for some time and when our children
grew up, we decided it was time to move back
to our home in New England. We both missed our family,
(03:53):
we missed the water. We're water people. And it turned
out there was a great opportunity here and Sagamore, and
that opportunity was to purchase a piece of land that
was offered with it came with a contract to build
a spec house and it was just ideal for us.
It was the perfect location. We've always wanted to live
(04:15):
on the cape and we did it. So we pulled
the trigger and in twenty twenty four we had this
home built for us, all kinds of customizations and things
that make it our forever home. In March of this year,
about four or five months after we had moved in,
we got a knock on our door with a letter
(04:36):
saying that our home was going to be taken by
Eminent Domain by mass Dot because instead of fixing the
current bridge or making it wider or strug restructuring it,
they want to build two bridges, one of which requires
all of the land in our Round Hill neighborhood to
store cranes and build cranes so that they can build
(04:58):
these bridges. At the time we've been following this, we've
been attending public meetings, We've been trying to get mass
DOT to talk to us. They are very noncommunicative, but
in the public meetings we've had public statements from them
stating they aren't rushing anyone and that they're doing the
(05:18):
early takings because they want to give us a chance
to let this soak in and to find a home
and all this. But as you know, Dan, there's a
huge housing crisis on the Cape. There's no way that
they're going to find thirteen homes in born on this
side of the Cape for us. And to make matters worse,
as I said, they've told us shovels in the ground
(05:39):
late twenty seven, early twenty eight that they're not pushing us.
Several of our neighbors have received their appraisals and those
have closing dates of January ninth, and that is let me.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Just make it. I just want to slowy down a
little bit. Your synopsis is great, spot on, But when
you say closing dates normal, when there's a real estate closing,
someone has come to your home and you have had
a conversation back and forth, purchase and sale agreement. Finally,
you know, first and offer offers accepted, inspections, purchase and
(06:15):
sale agreement, and then the date for the closing. This
is nothing like that's telling you absolutely, yeah, using the
word closing from for an eminent domain. And by the way,
you have described to me that the three homes that
they are for closing on immediately, you know, in January
(06:37):
is owned by a single woman who is ninety, another
is on a single woman who is eighty nine, and
another is owned by a couple who are in their seventies.
Speaker 3 (06:48):
Yes, so we have at an eighty year old, an
eighty nine who's going to be ninety year old, okay,
and a couple in their seventies. Yeah, they have received
theirs already. These are the people who had their appraisers
out to their home in June and July. We didn't
have ours until October, so we have not received ours yet.
But we're very concerned that the timeline is being pushed
(07:10):
up and they aren't telling anyone and on the date
that you close, that's the word they use, even though
as you mentioned, it's wrong. They own the deed entitled
to your home. And although they've said no, we're not
going to kick anyone out and nobody's going to be homeless,
they have not even provided our neighbors, our friends with
(07:32):
a comparable home for sale that they could possibly purchase
with the money that the state is giving them. Where
do they expect these people to go? And we don't
want this to happen to us.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
Are they are they basing the eminent domain appraisals? Are
they basing those on the fair market value or that
are yet less than fair market value?
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Their claim is that the law requires them to use
fair market value, whatever that means, which is never going
to be enough to compensate people. I do not have
any information as to how much these people have been
offered in comparison to what they consider the fair market
value or their home. But I am concerned that they
(08:19):
are speeding this up, that they are pushing people out,
and that they just don't have a plan. There's no
final plan for the bridges. The funding, as you mentioned,
is in jeopardy. They have no permits, you know, I mean,
there's a lot of things that have to happen.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Also, by the way, just in terms of we're in
a housing market, which is a seller's market, meaning no,
if they decide they're going to give you X, and
you can't take that amount of money whatever X is,
and use that money to find an equivalent home on
(08:57):
Cape Cod You're going to be literally up the creek
without a paddle here. And prices on the Cape are
sky high for a whole bunch of reasons, as people retire,
As the Cape is a small portion of land, you
can only have so many properties there. I know that
(09:19):
your wife, Joan is on a separate phone, So Joan,
I just want to get a quick comment from you.
How much of a you know, Mark is just I
thought laid it out perfectly. How much of a drain
has this been on you in Mark and the other
people in the area, just to drain psychologically?
Speaker 4 (09:39):
It's unbearable, absolutely unbearable.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Yeah, I think that. I think that does say it all.
Speaker 4 (09:52):
And people have no idea, they don't have any idea
how psychologically impactful this is for.
Speaker 5 (10:01):
All of us.
Speaker 4 (10:03):
Mark and I are younger than eighty in ninety and
our dear neighbors who are in their eighties and nineties.
I can't even imagine, I see it.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
Has anyone from the governor's office or the Lieutenant governor's office,
or never mind someone the governor or the Lieutenant governor
ever come down to one of the meetings and with
all of you and said, gee, we know this is
a tough set of circumstances on everyone, but we will
we will make a more than than fear offer to
(10:36):
you to basically, you know you, we're asking you to
do something quote unquote in the interest of the public,
the motoring public, and you're making a sacrifice, an incredible sacrifice,
surrendering your home, whether it's taken from you by eminent
domain or you engage in some good faith conversation. Has
(10:58):
anyone from the governor's office reached out to you and said, look,
would like to treat you as human beings and let's
have all.
Speaker 3 (11:06):
Now we've reached out to all of them, and we
have heard nothing from the governor, the Lieutenant governor, from
any politician. The only politician who has reacted, and he
reacted immediately upon hearing about it, is our state representative,
Steve Csarros. He came to our house within two days
of me emailing him about this. But we have, you know,
(11:28):
talked to all the federal representatives and senators. We've emailed
the federal Department of Transportation, We've emailed that, We've talked
to all kinds of people. Nobody has responded from the
political arena except Steve Sorrow.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
So you're Congressman, Congressman Bill Keating.
Speaker 3 (11:44):
No response, Nope, No, that's correct.
Speaker 2 (11:47):
Senator Warren, Senator Markeye.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
Correct, no response. Although Markey, he was out here a
couple a couple of weeks ago filming a little video
of himself for his Facebook page standing by the bridge,
but he didn't bother to come visit any want or
ask about anyone.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
So use the bridge as a prop correct, So your
collateral damage in a way. Look, we're going to take
a break. When we get back, I'm going to ask
your attorney, and I'm sure you may have more than
one attorney by time this is over, because there's a
whole bunch of battles that you'll be fighting. Phil Tracy
(12:26):
is going to join us. We'll contact him. You stay
right there, and so we'll broaden the conversation if anyone
would like to call. And I hope some of you
out there, whether you are amongst the group that is
impacted or somebody who's just a decent, ordinary citizen. This
is a multi billion, not million, multi billion dollar project,
(12:50):
and it seems to me that this state could provide
sufficient funds to make this horrific transition that this family
and twelve other families are going to have to undergo
unless somehow the state can be stopped make it a
little more comfortable for them. I just don't understand the
(13:13):
lack of transparency and the lack of humanity in this situation.
We'll be back on nights Side with Mark and Joan
Hendel and Hendel excuse me, Mark and Joan Hendel. Is funny.
I was over the Sagamore Bridge a couple of weeks ago,
and with the foliage down, I was able to look
down on your neighborhood. And it's a beautiful look in neighborhood.
(13:37):
I mean, anyone would love to live there. You bought
in good faith, and now you know, just a matter
of months later, the rug is being pulled out from
beneath you. And I want my listeners here on Nightside
to join this conversation and be supportive and let the
politicians know that this is the sort of things that
(13:57):
we will remember because if it can be done to
Mark and Joan and their neighbors, it can be done
to anyone else. We'll be back on Night Side with
their attorney, attorney Phil Tracy, right after this.
Speaker 1 (14:09):
You're on Night Side with Dan Ray on w b Z,
Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
All right, we are talking with Mark and Joan Himdell.
They live on the Cape technically inborn in the in
the shadow of the Sacamore Bridge. Am I accurate on that?
Speaker 3 (14:27):
Mark and Joan, Yes, and they are.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
Yeah. If you drive over the bridge with the foliage down,
you can see their home. We're joined now by their lawyer,
attorney Phil Tracy. Phil Tracy, Welcome to Nightside.
Speaker 6 (14:42):
Thanks.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
Yeah, I'm Mark and Joe.
Speaker 3 (14:45):
Hello.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Yeah, So Phil, you're working on this case. I know
it's a complicated case. But how you you you normally
deal with with as a criminal defense lawyer, but you
do civil cases as well. How are you going to
push back for them against the Department of Transportation which
(15:09):
looks to me like they've adopted a steamroll of philosophy
that they're coming in and they're going to take the
properties as well.
Speaker 6 (15:18):
There's no question that you know, this is a very
difficult situation, especially for Mark and Jones, because they are
the traditional American people. They've lived in Iowa, they've familiar
with New England. They wanted to sort of find their
(15:38):
end days down here, retire, and then of course this
comes up. Now. The problem is twofold the popular transportation
has not been very careful and friendly and respective of
their feelings.
Speaker 3 (15:57):
That's one thing.
Speaker 6 (15:58):
Now, on the other hand, and they bought the property,
the seller, the lawyer for the seller, the broker. Nobody
disclosed to them that this thing had been going on
for maybe ten years. I can easily remember meetings and
things like that that you know, the planning state. The
(16:20):
third factor, I guess is that we don't know whether
or not they will be able to put the project
together with the federal funds. But they're trying to kick
the people off the ground, and then what if they
don't do it for another ten years exactly, it's just
a very unfair situation.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
Well, it seems to me to be a rush to
judgment here that they're convinced, Look, the Trump administration might
very well be serious on Massachusetts is not the favorite
state of Donald Trump. Yeah, and so they may hold
in abeyance the money for these bridges and force the
(17:05):
Commonwealth to come up with the cash. And we're talking
about billions of dollars. Oh yeah, you know, so this
is this is this is a fight in the court
of public opinion as well as in the courts.
Speaker 6 (17:18):
As far as I'm const agree, I agree completely. It's
not fair and it's not the way citizens you know,
love the United States and have experience across the country.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
It's just it's it's.
Speaker 6 (17:32):
Mind boggling that they would be treated so harshly.
Speaker 7 (17:38):
Uh.
Speaker 6 (17:39):
They have the dream house, they love their house.
Speaker 3 (17:42):
It's just not right.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
Yeah. And and what is going to make I mean
if if they conclude that, look, this property, this this
acreage is needed for the stage equipment. Uh what the
question then has to be what will make No one
is ever going to be able to replace this home
for Mark and Joan. Although I think you mentioned to
(18:06):
me that in the past homes have physically been moved.
Tell us about that if you can filter.
Speaker 8 (18:13):
Well, I learned this from Joan that in fact, when
the bridge was built in nineteen thirty three to thirty five.
Speaker 6 (18:25):
There were homes that were.
Speaker 7 (18:28):
Moved.
Speaker 6 (18:29):
Now, the technology was probably different then, but nevertheless, all
of us have seen, for instance, a lighthouse or somebody
has a house that's going to fall into the sea,
and so you know, it can be moved. I believe
it can be done, and I intend to ask the
Dot to consider it. And because they had their house
(18:53):
custom built for them and they liked their house, as
anybody would, you know, you have a house. It's not
like they bought a house standing house. They bought the
land then built the house. And when they bought that land,
they should have been told.
Speaker 3 (19:09):
Yeah, and we, uh, you know, we believe Angel for
go ahead, Mark, Uh, yeah, we believe that land.
Speaker 6 (19:15):
Because of the new bridge.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Okay, go ahead, Mart, we believe that's okay.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
We believe that moving the house is the best solution
because it does keep the house that we want. Uh.
But we have an email that we just received from
mash Dot that says because there is no requirement to
move a home, that they have rejected our requests to
move our home.
Speaker 6 (19:40):
Well, both Monk and dan I responded to the Dot today.
They say, I want to revisit this in detail and
do a deep dive into what we can what we
can accomplish together, because as I said, it's been a
little bit difficult to deal with them because because as
(20:01):
you know, there's some elderly people that they're basically saying,
all right, we want your house, and we want it now,
and here's whatever we decided to give you. So what
does an elderly per a ninety year old do in
that circumstance. They definitely would say I better get.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
Out of here.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Phil. Look, I'm glad they don't want to do. I'm
glad you joined us for a few minutes here. I'm
going to let you go. We have a newscast which
we have to take and when we get back, I
want Joan and Mark, who truly are amongst the victims.
Here are these thirteen families to talk to some of
my callers. So we have full lines fill, including yours.
So I'm gonna I'm gonna bid you do. You probably
(20:40):
are somewhere in court tomorrow morning at eight o'clock, so
I'll let you know I will be.
Speaker 6 (20:44):
But Mark and Joanah, they are rock solid, good people,
and you know it's just a shame. But all we
can do is fight it.
Speaker 2 (20:55):
Well. I'm no one will fight it harder, that's for sure.
And I know that that you do a great job
pill appreciate your time today. Thanks Phil. Well, Rob, you
can take Phil down for me. We're going to take
a break because with the bottom of the hour mark,
and Joan, I want you to stay right there. We
have some phone calls. We want to talk to some
(21:15):
people who might be impacted or people who are just sympathetic, empathetic.
If it could happen to you, folks, it can happen
to anyone. And there has to be parameters and restrictions
they placed upon the unbridled power of the state, in
my opinion, here if they can establish that indeed there
(21:38):
is a need for your property, any and every compromise
should be on the table, up to an including moving
your house to a parcel of land that you will
also have the quiet and the enjoyment that you've had
now for only a few months. This cannot go unchallenged.
(21:58):
And I know that they are listeners out there saying
why is Dan interested in this? I'm interested in it
because they're listeners. And I hope all of you have
some empathy because this is this is a horrific example
of government overreach in my opinion, and government arrogance, and
(22:19):
this cannot stand in this way Mark and Jones. Stay
right there. We'll be back with you right after the
news and with the callers on the line. The only
line open is six if you want to get through.
Coming back on Nightside.
Speaker 1 (22:32):
It's Night Side with Boston's News Radio.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
My guest on the phone, Mark and Joan Handel. They
live down on the Cape. They've been only there for
a couple of years. Their native New Englanders came back
here a couple of years ago, bought a piece of property,
built a home and now they're one of thirteen homes
that the state wants to take by eminent domain, which
(22:58):
is never a pleasant prospect or project. And they have already,
I guess, told at least three of the homeowners that
they have decided what they will pay and that the
closings will occur in January, which is to me, is
absolutely unfair. And if there ever was a case of
eminent domain where people should be given, the state should
(23:19):
be given giving the people a little more leeway. This
is it. Let me go to Karen in Stoneham. Karen
appreciates your waiting and you were first this hour on
Night Side with Mark and Joan Hendel. Greta have Karen Okay,
Rob much. You put Karen on hold. I assumed that
(23:41):
she knew we were coming to her. Make sure that
she didn't have her phone on mute, and let me
go to Linda in Weymouth, and we just lost Karen. Karen,
please call back if you'd like, Linda, Linda and Weymouth.
Speaker 5 (23:54):
How are you?
Speaker 9 (23:54):
You almost lost me too because I had my questions answered.
Speaker 2 (23:59):
Ok So that's fine. If you have a question you
want to ask, go right ahead, and if they're answered,
we'll move on. Go ahead, Linda.
Speaker 9 (24:07):
I just wanted to express my concern to these folks
and the other twelve there, and my concern was, you know,
push forget your house moved, you know, put that in
you know, I pray that the option becomes available that
you can move the houses to a suitable, agreeable location.
Speaker 2 (24:32):
Well, apparently this was done previously. This apparently was done
previously when the bridge was built back in the mid
nineteen thirties. So there's a precedent. And certainly, if technically
it could be done in the nineteen thirties, I think
it certainly should be able to be done in the
twenty twenties.
Speaker 9 (24:54):
Absolutely, okay, especially you got it custom made. There so
from Biels can move.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
In all right, Thank you very much, appreciate it. Lennon
good Night, six seven two five thirty six seven thirty.
By the way, Karen's waited for half an hour, so Karen,
if you call back, we'll get you on. I have
no idea how that went down, but let me go
to Larry and Dennisport down on the Cape. Larry, you're
(25:23):
next on Night Side with Mark and Joan Hendell.
Speaker 3 (25:27):
Thanks Dan.
Speaker 10 (25:28):
Yeah, I heard your segment back several months ago with
the same couple and the frustration. I feel your pain.
I went through a similar process back in the seventies
when I lost my business to the Chelsea fire in
the city of Chelsea took my land. So I understand
what you're going through. Here's the situation, as I assessed
that I bought my house forty years ago in the Cape,
(25:50):
I go over the bridge as little as possible. The
bridge was built in the thirties with a fifty year
lifespan estimating a million cars a year. I think it's
up to thirty six million cars a year go over
the Cape. The bridge is already forty years overdue. They
knew this long ago that had to be replaced. My
(26:11):
question is do you think you have any serious recourse
to the realtor that sold you this property, because they
had to have known that this bridge was going to
be built, and long ago I forgot how many years
ago they decided they were going to build the bridge
on the inside of the cape, right by your property.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
Yes, thank you for that question. That's an excellent question.
And yes, we are pursuing against the realtor and the seller,
who both knew that this was happening. So it's what
we want to do is make sure that they understand
what they've done to our lives and how they've ruined
our lives. But we are definitely pursuing that. We know
(26:55):
that people knew around here. We had no way of
knowing the because we lived out of state, and so
that is definitely in our future.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
It seems to me Mark and Joan and Larry. Then
that's going to be a tough road because I don't
know if statutorily or under case law, the seller is
obligated to say to you, hey, and I hope they are,
because they certainly, from an ethical point of view, should
(27:28):
have done it. I do know that in Massachusetts, and
says some law that if you are aware that someone
died in a property, you have to disclose. But I
don't know if the individuals could say, hey, it was
public knowledge and they had to do I think the
easiest solution for everyone is for the state to do
(27:49):
the right thing and make you happy and make the
other people happy who might have purchased the property thirty
or four years ago never thought that they would ever
be in a situation where this massive federal project is
being contemplated and worth billions and billions of dollars. Larry,
(28:14):
I think again that the state needs to step up.
The state needs to step up. We can take care
of people coming into Massachusetts because we're a wonderful state,
and we're a welcoming state and where all of this,
But when we have people who are residents here who
have to basically interrupt their own lives for the common good,
(28:37):
then I think the common good should be a little
better to these people in question.
Speaker 3 (28:42):
Agreed, And you know, Dan, the amount of money that
they would have to spend to make everyone in this
neighborhood feel less stressed and better about this is minuscule
compared to the multi billion dollar price tag on this
thing absolutely.
Speaker 2 (28:56):
And that's why I think that the governor the lieutenant
governor should be down there and meet with the people
and tell them that they will go as far as
they can go. Now they're not going to be able
to give.
Speaker 7 (29:08):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
Let us assume that the that Mark or Joan is
picking a number that's X that would make them happy.
I don't think that that it's reasonable for the the
people down there to say no, I want five X
or ten X. I mean, you know, I talk funny money,
(29:29):
but a reasonable figure which will one accommodate you and
and and and and make you make you a whole
here because you're going to go through a lot of
inconvenience whenever this happens.
Speaker 3 (29:41):
And yeah, there's future mental torture. Basically every time we
drive over the bridge in the future, or we go
to market basket and see the spot where our home was,
that is like a PTSD waiting to happen. Okay, and yeah,
but just just on Larry's comment, I just want to
add really quickly, Yeah, you are not saying that nothing
(30:01):
should be done to the bridges. We one hundred percent
support the idea that they need to be repaired in
some way. To be safe. Our friends go over them,
our family go over them, We go over them.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
So yeah, absolutely you are reasonable to people. This lawyer,
go ahead.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
I'd like to mention one of a flying ointment here.
The problem is the Army Corp of Engineers controls the
canal and I think the actual bridge, the state tools
the highway that goes over it, and the city of
Bourne is where the on and off ramps are. All
these thirteen houses have to deal with all three agencies
or is it just a pop now it's all of them?
Speaker 2 (30:42):
Okay, Well, I'm sure that I'm sure that I would
assume have you received any correspondents from any agency other
than the promity Transportation?
Speaker 3 (30:55):
No mascot is the one coordinating between all these exactly,
they are the communicator, right.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
But but the town of Born is not going to
have the deep pockets that Massachusetts or the federal government has.
That's reality, nor is the Army Corps of Engineers. It's
if you were going to be given some reasonable relief,
which is all you're asking for, it has to come
through the Governor's office because that's what the Department of
(31:20):
Transportation reports to. Larry has always love your loyalty, to
night Side. You have a big heart, my friend. Thank
you so much. Thank you. Okay, we'll take a quick break.
We've got some other calls on the other side, other
side of this from my guest Mark and Joan Hendel Handel.
We'll be back on Nightside right after this.
Speaker 1 (31:38):
It's Night Side with Ray Boston's News Radio.
Speaker 2 (31:43):
Back to the phones, and we're gonna try Karen and
Stoneham one more time. We lost it before. Karen, I
hope you're there now.
Speaker 3 (31:49):
I am. I'm here, go right ahead.
Speaker 2 (31:52):
We're getting a little tight on time, but I want
to get you.
Speaker 11 (31:54):
You go right ahead, Okay. I'm actually Jones's sister. So
this is like devastating and that the town should have
never authorized any permit to be building on that land
at all. I don't even know how that even went through.
It's it's disgusting what they're doing.
Speaker 2 (32:13):
That's a very interesting point. That's a good point that
you're raised that they never I don't know where they'd
be living now, where you know Joan and Mark would
be living. But but if the permit was not issued,
and they must have, towns should have known that the
days were numbered on the use of this property as
a residential property.
Speaker 12 (32:33):
Yes, and we we are and we are Actually it's not, Karen,
and I appreciate you calling in and your support. That
is actually part of what we're going after because you're right.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
Yep, Okay, well, Karen, Look, I appreciate the time that
you've you've spent holding on. Any other comments you'd like
to make, obviously, as as Jones sibling, I know where
your heart is and I know where your mind is.
Any other comments you'd.
Speaker 11 (33:03):
Like to make, No, I think I just want to
let you know she's a mass Army National God veteran
as well, so you know, just.
Speaker 6 (33:12):
Yeah, you know, you know.
Speaker 2 (33:15):
It's it's like Ronald Reagan used to say that the
scariest words were when all of a sudden someone knocks
on your door and they say, I'm from the government
and I'm here to help you all. I can appreciate
you calling your patience.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (33:31):
Let me go to Susanna and Suzanne. You're next on
nights that we're a little tight on time.
Speaker 5 (33:36):
You go, right ahead, Yes, I'll keep it brief. This
several fourth doutgee thirty eight. I've just celebrated my eighty
seventh birthday.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
Happy birthday. What you call happy birthday?
Speaker 5 (33:52):
I want to say to the people affected by the
Sagamore Bridge. I'm not a lawyer, but I hope that
you will prevail against the forces.
Speaker 2 (34:06):
Well we'll we'll try to help him as much as
we can. Thanks Susanna, thank you for your support, and
happy birthday to you. All right, have a great night.
Let me go to Steve in Fort Evans. Steve, you
were next on night Side with Mark and Joan Hendel.
Speaker 7 (34:24):
How are you doing daring? Thanks for taking my call.
What was a pleasure to talk the question I had?
They mentioned earlier that they were using the in for.
Speaker 2 (34:37):
Uh uh you know, yes, a staging area for you know,
a staging area for the equipment there will be needed
to to tear down one bridge and build it, build
another bridge replacing the second.
Speaker 7 (34:56):
In the fifth Amendment. Right, so if you go back,
you know, if it's not for public use, okay, the
constitution permits domain. The situation's way, the acquist serves as
public use. If that's not serves as public used. In
(35:18):
other words, it's neither on ramp or anything like that.
But it's just a staging area.
Speaker 2 (35:25):
Well, it's a staging area look, I don't I don't
know if if you're practicing law, but you may want
to read that a little bit more carefully. If if
they need a space either directly underneath or adjacent to
the bridge. This is a monumental task that will be
undertaken to replace this bridge, and it is a public
(35:51):
use because without the new bridge, either there will be
some collapse of the old bridge at some point or
it will be you know, basically, they'll they'll stop people
from going over it. They'll say, look, it's now too dangerous.
And obviously it's needed to connect the cape to the
(36:12):
mainland and all of that. So there's no question there's
public use, and it's it's a public project which is
spiking nice state money. So I think you're trying to
be innovative, Steve, and I give you an a plus
on innovation, but I don't think unfortunately, it's going to work.
Speaker 7 (36:30):
Okay, Well, well listen, I'll tell you what. I'll stand
out one of those bulldozers for that family if it
comes to it, and then thank you. First off, I'll
call uncle what's his name there, you know, and have
him try to stop it.
Speaker 2 (36:51):
I have no idea who you're talking about but doing
me a favor. I don't want to see you. I
don't want to see you arrested. Okay, thanks very much, Steve,
Thank you, Mark, Mark, and Joan. I hope tonight has
helped a little bit in making people aware of what's
going on. I wished more of your neighbors would have
(37:12):
taken the time to stand with you. I think that
you are, as I said to Mark today, sticking your
head above the foxhole. And I think the other neighbors
who are similarly situated should should, should use your courage
as an example, because if they all go quietly into
that good night, no one will notice. And I admire you.
(37:34):
I admire your courage, and please keep us posted on
this and I hope that at some point we can
we can get a get a solution which is going
to be acceptable to you.
Speaker 12 (37:46):
Above all, Yes, and our neighbors are standing and they
are fighting as well.
Speaker 5 (37:50):
We're very close.
Speaker 2 (37:52):
No, I understand, but they could have they could have
joined the conversation tonight, as I expressed the Mark today,
Because the fight right now is not in a court
of law. The fight on nightside is in the court
of public opinion, and the court of public opinion is
a very important court in Massachusetts.
Speaker 3 (38:09):
Thank you, Mark, appreciate your continued support on this, and
we appreciate your having us as guests again and we
appreciate how much this means to you, and so thank
you well.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
My pleasure and please I like to fight on behalf
of people and use my microphone, particularly for those who
are who are being rolled over. If not physically read
uh yeah red figuratively uh in actuality I was I
(38:40):
was reaching for. So stay stay strong and keep keep
us posted. Okay, thank you, Mark, have a great night.
Good night. When we get back, we're going to talk
about a little a bit of a dust up in Debta, Massachusetts,
where a Catholic priest has decided to turn a Nativity
scene into a political statement. I'm troubled by it. Some
(39:01):
people support it. Love to know what you think. Coming
back on Nightside,
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.