To the Editor: A response to Gerard Koot's letter

To the Editor,

I wasn’t planning on sending an opinion piece on the matter of Russell’s Mills Village, the RMV 40C Historic District Commission, and 4 Tannery Lane. But following the letter published on June 16, 2026, from Gerard Koot, one of the recently fired members of the district commission, I couldn’t help myself. The folks who live in Russell’s Mills Village should have been aware that the Davoll estate at 4 Tannery Lane was for sale. Caveat emptor. 

I attended the “public hearing” by the district commission on April 21, 2026. Because I am not an abutter within that village, my support of the Buzzards Bay Coalition project didn't count for much nor was I persuaded by the those who spoke passionately about retaining the 1972 building on the site. Mine was a minority opinion. The behavior toward two of us who favored the demolition of the house was nothing short of rude and arrogant. And as a town meeting member, I voted for the conservation restriction.

I have found that the 40C district is not as transparent as the other town boards and commissions. The bylaw is public record, but I spent an inordinate amount of time trying to understand the district’s role, its agendas, and its rationale behind decisions, looking for meeting minutes, etc.

It always seemed to me that the business of the district was vague, not easily accessible to the public, in other words mysterious. Eventually, I thought, the opaque management style of this tight-knit little group would come light. And it did with the 4 Tannery Lane matter.

Mr. Koot wrote, “History has taught me that it is sometimes necessary to disobey regulations if those regulations are unjust and prevent a greater good.” Really? Unjust by whom? The “greater good” in the eye of the beholder as he sees it? Isn’t that capricious and arbitrary? That’s why we have open meeting laws and ethics standards. Like it or not, all town boards and commissions are governed by laws and regulations. Otherwise, there is confusion and chaos. And the public’s right to know is compromised. I would argue that willful Ignorance of those laws and regulations are no excuse.

Of course, people can get frustrated and impatient with town government. I’ve had my own share of grievances against the town. But for one town organization to believe that those laws don’t apply to it is simply rogue behavior. I expect the appointing authority, the Dartmouth Select Board, to do the right thing. That means to safeguard the interests of the town’s only 40C district but also to protect all of our interests. Finally, I prevail upon all residents of Dartmouth to exercise their individual responsibilities to put in the effort to pay more attention to what goes on in our town.

Diane M. Gilbert

Dartmouth