Thank you for that information Margaret. The financial considerations I was talking about were those associated with the functioning of the housing complex after it is built.
On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 8:25 AM Margaret Olson <s...@margaretolson.com> wrote: > Debra, > > On the town's side, almost every development with significant levels of > affordable housing in Lincoln has been subsidized either through donation > of the land to be developed or direct cash contributions to the effort. > Attached is a recounting from the Lincoln Housing Coalition ( > http://www.lincolntown.org/documentcenter/view/35196) of the various ways > that the Town has contributed to the development of affordable housing. > Battle Road Farm was supported by a $3 million land purchase. Three group > homes were supported by $250,000 each providing 15 additional affordable > units. The RLF provided $27,000 that purchased 3 acres of land from the > State and the Housing Trust financed the construction of three new > affordable homes (with two of the acres adjacent to Minuteman Park put into > conservation). The RLF also contributed the land upon which Lincoln Woods > was developed. And, as has been noted frequently in this discussion, > Lincoln put in $1 million to the development of Oriole Landing which added > 60 units to Lincoln's Subsidized Housing Inventory (51 over the 9 required > by our zoning bylaw). > > Once the subsidized housing is built the owner of the unit is responsible > for it - collecting rent, maintenance, etc. Applicants must document their > income. For rental units the income is re-verified every year. > > Margaret > > > On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 8:02 AM Debra Daugherty <dadaughe...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I'm glad someone is asking about the financial situation for housing >> complexes with affordable housing units. I feel like people have been >> talking a lot about what they want in the way of affordable housing without >> discussing any of the details about how that program works financially. I >> think you are asking about a rental situation (apartment complex) and >> whether the town would be subsidizing the affordable housing rent. Although >> my guess would be no (subsidies or grants would come from the State and/or >> the rent for any market rate units could be set to offset the cost of the >> affordable units), I'd be very interested to hear how it actually works >> from someone that knows the facts. >> >> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:49 PM Diana Smith <diana.smith.r...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> We are told that to qualify for the affordable units, tenants income >>> can be at 80% of the town's median income which was $145,833 in 2021. So >>> is it correct to assume that we will be subsidizing tenants with incomes up >>> to $116,666? >>> Diana >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:43 PM Robert Ahlert <robahl...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Ok, not technical site plans. How about some 2D “design concepts” which >>>> include the full site? >>>> >>>> The real answer as to why they don’t have them is because they don’t >>>> need to have them. And they don’t need to have them because the plan is to >>>> get HCA zoning and then sell the property for top dollar. Then let the new >>>> owner/developer come up with actual site plans which only the PB sees >>>> because it’s HCA zoning. And the PB can’t control costs of what is built so >>>> the owner/developer will look to pass their higher costs to consumers by >>>> building luxury condos that only the top 1% can afford. >>>> >>>> It just doesn’t seem very progressive to me at all but maybe we’ll get >>>> a super nice developer. >>>> >>>> Rob >>>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:06 PM Sara Lupkas <sara.lup...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> There are no basic site plans for the mall because there is no >>>>> redevelopment plan for the mall right now. The HCA options that we will be >>>>> voting on tomorrow are to decide where to put the multi-family zoning >>>>> districts, that's it. There is no development plan for the mall at this >>>>> time, and no developer bidding on any project. Putting forward any site >>>>> plans under these conditions would be extremely premature. >>>>> >>>>> Sara Lupkas >>>>> Staff member of the Lincoln Land Conservation Trust, but these are my >>>>> personal views and not an official statement >>>>> Sandy Pond Rd >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:03 PM Robert Ahlert <robahl...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then >>>>>> feels hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in >>>>>> the >>>>>> bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March. >>>>>> >>>>>> It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published >>>>>> their draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some >>>>>> basic site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we >>>>>> had a better traffic study which included 5 corners. Etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets >>>>>> of eyes. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, I’m on repeat now. >>>>>> >>>>>> Rob >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis <karlagra...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws >>>>>>> that will be up for vote in March. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important >>>>>>> part of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' >>>>>>> (4 >>>>>>> stories) in the Village Center. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that >>>>>>> include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of >>>>>>> those >>>>>>> will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> lesser of two evils. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says >>>>>>> the PB can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> vote in March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any >>>>>>> restrictions or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't >>>>>>> agree with either? We are forcing residents into false choices. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of >>>>>>> these considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the >>>>>>> option >>>>>>> to choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are >>>>>>> letting the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is very much internally consistent. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP <djcp0...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the >>>>>>>>> Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at >>>>>>>>> town >>>>>>>>> meeting? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis <karlagra...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am confused with this answer. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In >>>>>>>>>> March, the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws >>>>>>>>>> (currently >>>>>>>>>> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the >>>>>>>>>> option to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very >>>>>>>>>> least, there should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of >>>>>>>>>> stories, ability to pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial >>>>>>>>>> space >>>>>>>>>> requirements and whether the planning board can provide variances on >>>>>>>>>> those >>>>>>>>>> or not. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that >>>>>>>>>> information is because some members of the planning board would >>>>>>>>>> prefer to >>>>>>>>>> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote >>>>>>>>>> on those >>>>>>>>>> critical variables. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We understand that residents can try to influence what is >>>>>>>>>> presented in March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. >>>>>>>>>> In >>>>>>>>>> March, residents will only be allowed to decide between that >>>>>>>>>> specific set >>>>>>>>>> or non-compliance. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson < >>>>>>>>>> s...@margaretolson.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings >>>>>>>>>>> as required by law. The town then votes at town meeting. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait < >>>>>>>>>>> sa...@bayhas.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created >>>>>>>>>>>> by the EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is >>>>>>>>>>>> "exactly >>>>>>>>>>>> zoning by laws". >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is >>>>>>>>>>>> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height >>>>>>>>>>>> restrictions >>>>>>>>>>>> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning >>>>>>>>>>>> board can >>>>>>>>>>>> just override everything and make it whatever height and density >>>>>>>>>>>> that they >>>>>>>>>>>> (or the developer) feels like adding. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue >>>>>>>>>>>> that Utile thought may need addressed before submitting it to the >>>>>>>>>>>> state. It >>>>>>>>>>>> meets all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never >>>>>>>>>>>> deemed compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday >>>>>>>>>>>> and will need resubmitted to the state to account for these >>>>>>>>>>>> changes. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive, >>>>>>>>>>>> considering the state actually modified the HCA model used to >>>>>>>>>>>> calculate modeled units this week, due to the LRHA’s work >>>>>>>>>>>> highlighting the >>>>>>>>>>>> significant flaw that results in an overzoning of units. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This change removed over 400 additional units from option C >>>>>>>>>>>> that could have been built, by right, on top of the 800 actual >>>>>>>>>>>> units that >>>>>>>>>>>> are allowed in the current option C being voted on tomorrow. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> While we are grateful that Utile finally listened to our >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns and consulted with the state to address the issue with >>>>>>>>>>>> the model, >>>>>>>>>>>> It’s unfortunate that the HCAWG members refused to sit down with >>>>>>>>>>>> us weeks >>>>>>>>>>>> ago when the issue was detected. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> So if you call that disruptive, so be it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sarah Postlethwait >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Lewis Street >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone interested in learning more about Option E and the >>>>>>>>>>>> significant changes made to options C, D1, D2 and D3 this week can >>>>>>>>>>>> learn >>>>>>>>>>>> more here: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://sites.google.com/view/lincoln-hca-info/compare-the-options >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:10 PM John Mendelson < >>>>>>>>>>>> johntmendel...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws. The HCA is a set of >>>>>>>>>>>>> guidelines and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning >>>>>>>>>>>>> options that >>>>>>>>>>>>> conform (or perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said >>>>>>>>>>>>> guidelines. We've >>>>>>>>>>>>> been told repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote >>>>>>>>>>>>> for one >>>>>>>>>>>>> fully developed plan (or not) in March >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I find this continued obfuscation and distraction really >>>>>>>>>>>>> frustrating and hard to hear as anything but an attempt to >>>>>>>>>>>>> disrupt the >>>>>>>>>>>>> process. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis < >>>>>>>>>>>>> karlagra...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> approval at the March town meeting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a set of bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred >>>>>>>>>>>>>> option would >>>>>>>>>>>>>> then be presented for approval in March. Options C and D as >>>>>>>>>>>>>> being voted on >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tomorrow are incomplete because we do not have answers to these >>>>>>>>>>>>>> questions: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Building heights/stories >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - PB having override prower through special permits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Commercial space requirements >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Allowance of fees in lieu of affordable units >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting >>>>>>>>>>>>>> under incomplete assumptions? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> marga...@margaretolson.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Town Counsel has advised us that we should not bring >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple potential zoning by-laws to town meeting. The state >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regulates how >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zoning changes are handled. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A zoning article at town meeting is a straight yes/no vote >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on a very specific set of changes. We can not have any sort of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> choice vote as we can for a "sense of the town" vote. So if we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bring the zoning by-law changes for all five options to town >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meeting we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would have five warrant articles. In what order should they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appear? If the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first one passes do we go on and vote on the others? As a voter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supports the HCA but doesn't like the variant that comes first >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> warrant what should you do? Vote no, holding out for your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preferred option, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or do you vote yes to ensure we do comply? If all five are on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the warrant >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what happens if multiple options pass? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Margaret >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:59 PM Karla Gravis < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> karlagra...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Given that, according the Chair of the Planning Board: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. "*Compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> laws*" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. "Z*oning by-laws are the implementation of HCA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compliance*" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. These by-laws are not ready >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then, why are we voting tomorrow? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To emphasize how rushed this process has been, significant >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes to the densities across options C and Ds were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communicated on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday evening (without any public meetings). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The areas where the Planning Board hasn't agreed on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bylaws are: building heights/stories, giving the PB special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> permit powers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to change densities and heights/stories, parking and allowing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fees in lieu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of affordable units. These are all critical questions as we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evaluate the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different options. How are we expected to discuss the merits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of these >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> options without a full understanding of those issues? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LRHA has a stance on these open questions. Option E has a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set of setbacks, height/story limits and floor area ratios for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> every >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> district. We are distinctly opposed to providing variances to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all of those >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> items, as well as units per acre, through a Planning Board >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special permit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Margaret Olson < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> marga...@margaretolson.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Compliance with the HCA is *exactly* zoning by laws. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zoning by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no way to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comply with the HCA without voting to amend the zoning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by-laws. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the town votes down the proposed zoning by-laws in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> March, and the sense of the town is that we want to comply >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but the planning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> board presented an unacceptable set of regulations, then the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planning board >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will go back to work and try again at a special town meeting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at a later >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> date. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>>>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> *Sara Lupkas* >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>> Browse the archives at >>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Diana Smith >>> PO Box 6294 >>> Lincoln MA 01773 >>> Cell: 617 803 8022 >>> -- >>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>> Browse the archives at >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>> Change your subscription settings at >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>> >>> -- >> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >> Browse the archives at >> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >> Change your subscription settings at >> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >> >>
-- The LincolnTalk mailing list. To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
