Epilogue

Arguably the ruling of the Superior Court, being consistent with the
customary interpretation and application of G.L.c. 30A §§ 11 and 14,
establishes no grounds for, and is amenable to nothing more than an
inconsequential appeal. Not so for the pro se appellant, to whom it 
opens unanticipated perspectives the description of which may persuade
the Appeals Court to dismiss his appeal.

Eleven years ago, when these controversies with the Town of Nantucket began,
the appellant trusted the Town's lawyers to advise the Board of Selectmen
as to "the law", the Board of Selectmen to comply with "the law", the
Attorney General, the agencies of the Commonwealth and its courts to
comply with "the law" as it was ultimately laid down by the Appeals Court.

The record now shows that nothing of the sort happened. The appellant who 
is not a lawyer was ignorant and naive and now apologizes. This record shows
that the Appeals Court was consistently scorned by the Town of Nantucket,
by the Board and by the Superior Court. The Town's primary witness, Mr. Ramos,
urged the Board to preempt judicial intervention, the Appeals Court adjudged
the Board to have abused its discretion in ignoring the Appeals Courts orders,
the Board ostentatiously snubs the Appeals Court when the Board declares 
itself to be only a nominal party to these proceedings, when the Board instead
of holding the hearing ordered by the Appeals Court, goes on record as holding 
a hearing on the Appeal of an Inspector's Decision.