in Atkinson Town Government. This time the accusation was made at the Budget Committee public hearing last night by Planning Board chair, Ms. Killam, with able assistance by our Town Moderator Mr. Polito. Their complaint was against budget committee member Brian Boyle. Ms. Killam's assertion was that he is an abutter to the proposed site for the new signal tower behind the salt shed. Apparently Mr. Boyle's development at Winslow Dr. is within 200' of the tower site, according to Ms. Killam, and she stated that he could not discuss, deliberate, or vote upon this matter because of this. Mr. Boyle apparently feels his property is outside the 200' limit, but budget committee chair, Mark Acciard still asked him to avoid "the appearance" of impropriety, by stepping down from the committee and speaking from the audience; Which, to his credit Mr. Boyle agreed to do, unlike other notable town officials in recent history.
What is really humorous about this entire incident is that Mr. Polito, while evidently feeling that a tract of land which may be somewhere around the 200' limit set by the town's code of ethics ordinance is such a major infraction, didn't hold that position for the last three years as he told the town in numerous public meetings that it would be "no conflict" for a town employee to serve as selectman. He was wrong as decided by both Rockingham Superior Court, NH Supreme Court, and Atkinson Code of Ethics committee.
As for Ms. Killam, this blog finds it amusing that she is evidently concerned about this distance between Mr. Boyle development and the tower causing the potential for conflict, but is completely non-plussed by the fact that the ad hoc committee responsible for selling this abomination is a steaming cauldron of conflicts, with every member of the committee either living on High Hill rd. or earning their living or in one case retirement from various police depts. All people having clear interests.
Nor does she evidently have an issue with a proposed warrant article to establish a revolving fund for the recreation dept. that is under the authority of the "Recreation Commission". According to selectman Childs and Sullivan; this commission is comprised of the Recreation Dept. Head, Mrs. Mangini; Rec.Dept. employee, Mrs. Travers; Mrs. Mangini's boss in her private employment, Mrs. Thompson; and finally the Son of one of the aforementioned people, although whose was not clear. Although selectman Sullivan maintains that only two fo these people were ever appointed by the selectmen. Is it possible that there could exist, a board with more internal conflicts than this?
Is there anyone on this board, who is not related by marriage, or employment, to the rec. dept.?
Any chance that the person who is doing all this writing at least post their name?
ReplyDeleteWelcome Mr. Mascola, The answer is no, not at this time, not with the town officials in power now. We have seen over the last two years, numerous residents and town officials criticize the selectmen and we have seen the retaliation. Remember the selectmen's meeting June 6, 2006 when Brian Kaye merely came in to notify the selectmen that he would no longer participate do to threats to his family, and we saw the selectmen scream at him, the chief follow him out of the room yelling, then proceed to return and spend 20 minutes verbally bashing him. Remember the budget committee asking how the SUV could have been purchased by the selectmen without a vote, or public input through a warrant article or public hearing, the selectmen's response was to inform the chairman that if he didnt stop asking these questions in public they would have him removed( the implication being by the police) April 18, 2005 selectmen's meeting. How about Mrs. Grant in the Dec. 27, 2005 selectmen's meeting when she came in to file a complaint about the Chief and the selectmen responded to ths woman sitting there reading a statement was to call the police and have her, and her family remover not from the meeting but from the entire building. This removal occurring while the Chief was screaming at her from a distance of about two feet(according to court documents originating in her lawsuit).
ReplyDeletePublius was the name under which John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison pblished articles informing the populace about what was hapenning in their government 240 years ago. These articles, collectively known as the Federalist Papers, laid the groundwork for the Declaration of Independence. Due to the corruption and retaliation under color of law by the British Government it was necesary to keep their identities hidden, but their words were true and accurate. And just as Publius was a pen name for a number of Patriots then so it is now. We are in a similar situation now where the public needs to know what our town officials are doing when the cameras are off. And it is this blogs mission to inform them. For the same reasons as well as those enumerated above, it is necesary to keep our identities hidden for now.
Why would we wish to subject ourselves to the public ridicule heaped upon Carol Grant, Mark Acciard, Brian Kaye, Eleanor Zaremba, Elaine Woodbury, et al. by the selectmen in public meetings, aside from what has gone on behind the scenes, just for expressing criticism.
OK, now that we got the history and relevance of Publius, how about Ulysses?
ReplyDeleteMy name, Ulysses, a 'reasonable adventurer". I will be known by no other name.
ReplyDeletePublius:
ReplyDeleteYour mission sounds honorable; however, how are we to know fact vs. fiction?
Shakespeare
Welcome William, A Long trip from Stratford-Upon-Avon. I ask not that you believe everything I say, but that you at least keep an open mind and check it out for yourself. To Quote Ronald Reagan "Trust, but Verify". If you find a fact that I state that is incorrect you have only to bring it to my attention along with your refuting evidence and I will apologize for the mistake, and seek to correct it in the future. In reality that is the only currency we have to trade upon here is the truth.
ReplyDeleteAs an interloper to your town politics(I live in Derry) and an avid reader of the continuous drama surrounding your town officials refusal to obey the law, it occurs to me that the simple answer would be to stop electing town employees to run your town, or to not let them run in the first place. If they are not going to do the right thing when in office, they probably are worthy of their town jobs either.
ReplyDeleteas an atkinson resident...i agree with the last comment from derry..
ReplyDeleteBut what seems so simple, can be at times difficult. I do believe in time, that this all will be behind the town. I will say i havn't been invloved in town politics for a while(because of the way things have been), but i will say this forum has made me feel otherwise.