By Ryan O'Connor
Staff Writer

Now that Warrant Article 48, which would have taken U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter’s home by eminent domain has been reworded to nullify any possible action, supporters of the initiative have exhausted all options, right?

Wrong.

Logan Clements, who has been the central figure in the campaign since its onset, said the loss at the deliberative session of Weare Town Meeting on Feb. 4 was just a stumbling block, but does not hurt the longterm goals of his initiative.

“What happened on Feb. 4 doesn’t really affect our plan at all,” said Clements. “What we are focusing on is getting supporters of our project elected to the board of selectmen. We have two qualified people running this year and hopefully we can get them in this year.”

Keith LaCasse and Joshua Solomon are both running for a seat on the board of selectmen, which has two openings, and both have been outspoken in their support to take Souter’s land and build the Lost Liberty Hotel in place of his home. LaCasse said he has no plans to give up.

“We’re set back by 12 months, but we, of course, are going to try again next year because the citizens of Weare didn’t get the chance to vote,” said LaCasse. “We will pick up the pieces from this year and try it again next year.”

Should both men be elected, Clements said the plan is to try to convince another member to side with them, thus giving them a 3-2 majority, at which point they would proceed with the plan to use eminent domain on Souter’s land.

If the plan fails, Clements said the worst-case scenario would be waiting until next March and attempting to get another supporter on the board at that time.

If Walter Bohlin has anything to say about it, Clements will never get his way. Bohlin is running for selectman as well, and was the individual who put forth the original amendment to reword Article 48 on this year’s warrant. He said he will try his best to ensure the plan to take Souter’s home never comes to fruition. Based on a slew of recent harassing phone calls and e-mails, he said his resolve is stronger now than it was on Feb. 4.

Current Selectman Joseph Fiala, who has been openly against taking Souter’s home, has taken a unique approach to the idea of LaCasse and Solomon infiltrating the board.

“I have actually encouraged anyone who is in favor of taking Justice Souter’s home to go ahead and vote for them,” said Fiala. “I am not sure where they have gotten this idea that they have all of this support, but they just don’t. They will find out just how much support they have on election day, and, if there is the support that they claim in town, they will get elected, and if there isn’t, they won’t.”

Fiala is not sure how much energy his opponents are willing to put into their plan, but said they will realize it’s not viable.

“It’s just really bizarre to me. It’s kind of a funny idea, but to actually take someone’s land is just evil.”

Clements said one of the reasons he continues to pursue action is because he believes support for his initiative is overwhelming in Weare based on phone and door-to-door surveys done by himself, Solomon, LaCasse and others.

Fiala had his own take. “If they come up to you with a petition, you are going to sign it rather than stand in your driveway and get in an argument over eminent domain,” he said.

Clements, however, said the only reason the article was amended in the first place was due to a lack of supporters showing up at the meeting and detractors capitalizing on the opportunity.

“The opposition deceived and lied to those in attendance and used the divide-and-conquer technique to make this a locals-versus- nonlocals issue,” said Clements. “Eminent domain is the issue here. It affects every town and city in the country. It is not just a Weare issue. It is part of a larger battle.”

He added, “The reason that they sabotaged the article in deliberative session, the reason they didn’t want people to vote on it, was because it was going to pass,” he said.

Not all residents are sure if it would have passed, but some say the town should have at least had the opportunity to vote one way or another on March 14.

Weare resident Forrest Esenwine said he thinks it is wrong to change a warrant article that people have taken the time to present to the meeting.

“I just don’t feel that it’s proper to kill that and not even let that get to the voters because they have done what they are supposed to to get it to the voters,’ said Esenwine, “and now we’ve had this deliberative session that, in effect, says, ‘No, we are not going to let the voters vote on it.’ I would rather see it go to the voters and fail than to do it that way.”