NOTICE


WARNING ! – Ongoing attempts to by-pass and change the administrative functions and content of this blog ( generic "HACKS") has resulted in Substantial Reduction of normal access. Expectations of restricted availability and access will occur as these intrusions persist.

WATER !! WATER ? "Water"

Are you concerned/interested in Atkinson's water issue?
Visit the new water discussion forum.
http://www.just-goaway.com/
NEW PETITION ON FORUM
New Information and Updates Daily

Tuesday, February 27

No Free Ride in Atkinson

Welcome to a new contributor under the Publius byline.

Publius: ARTICLE SUBMISSION

No Free Ride in Atkinson

If I could speak to all of the people in town that have benefited from the Elderly Affairs Dept, here is what I would say. Please hear me out.

First and foremost, my belief is the overwhelming majority of the town thinks we should keep funding services for Elderly Affairs. When I retire, I hope I have access to this service if I should ever need it. I think it is a great idea and a great service. And the cost is by no means a budget buster. So I do not believe the notion that so many people want it to go away.

But there is a problem that many voters see. And the problem from our perspective is that the group in need of these services most is being taken advantage of and manipulated for their votes. Whenever the chief wants something voted in line with something that he wants, he pulls out his "scare card" and accuses his opponents of wanting to cut the Dept. of Elderly Affairs. This is designed to get all of those obligated to him to cast their votes in line with his position.

He did it again at Candidates Night when he accused two of the budget committee candidates of being against the Dept. of Elderly Affairs and led listeners to believe these two candidates wanted to cut funding for it. He has done this before. Think about it. Think about when he ran for election and scared elderly voters into thinking the town wanted to do away with the Elderly Affairs Dept unless he got elected. The fear tactic he used worked. The chief was elected and his subsequent misuse of taxpayer trust and taxpayer dollars that followed is all recorded on video tape, in the newspapers and in the courts. It got so bad the town overwhelmingly voted last year to prevent town employees from serving as elected officials again - to prevent future conflicts of interest.

Here is what I find troubling about having law enforcement run Elderly Affairs in town.

- If the motive of the Atkinson PD was in good faith, this would be a kind service to people in need. But there is no “free ride”.
But I see the trade off is a vote. Personally, I would not want to be obligated to any one person or organization for my vote, EVER. And then there are the “donations” that get solicited. I can’t imagine a more inappropriate thing than to have a police officer give a needy elderly person a ride (for “free”) and also solicit the same people for a donation to the PD. We have to face the fact that we are talking about some of our most vulnerable citizens, here. My hope is that no lines have been crossed but I am suspicious.

- It would be less problematic if all Elderly Affairs related information was available to the Selectmen for oversight. But under the guise of “confidentiality”, Selectmen do not know who uses the Elderly Affairs service, how often, where to, how many miles, how much time is taken by drivers, etc. etc. So we don’t know if anyone is abusing the service, including the PD. The whole town does not need to know this information as long as the Selectmen had oversight. Then it would not be an issue. But the chief has been asked and he refuses to provide this information. Why won’t he provide it? What is the big deal? I mean, he doesn’t have anything to hide, right? The reality is he does not want to give up his secret list of voters that he counts on for political support. Is he supposed to be running the PD or is he running a political organization?

- Nor do we know about the all of the donations – other than a few publicly stated items. Donations to any police officer must be publicly tracked as town funds. If not, as far as I am concerned, the “donation” becomes clouded. Again, the lack of Selectmen oversight and the chief’s refusal to cooperate and answer questions leave the chief looking guilty – even if he isn’t.

- Use of taxpayer funds for police run concerts and to send out greeting cards signed, not by the town, but by a person. I am sorry, but both you and I helped pay for the cards and the concerts and rides and everything else. For him to take all the credit for Elderly Affairs services is an insult to taxpayers who are footing the bill with our hard earned money. Time after time, he paints the taxpayers as the bad guys who want to eliminate Elderly Affairs and that he is the only hero that will save it. This is a classic manipulation game. As one of the people FUNDING this service, I feel like I am being slandered unfairly - just because I believe Elderly affairs should not be managed by our Police. That’s right, I think it should be managed by a town employee who has no political axes to grind. And town volunteers should be allowed to contribute their time and resources, if they so choose, which would help keep down costs. the chief would be free to volunteer his time if he wanted to. I don't think anyone would be against it. Now what is wrong with that idea? Salem Caregivers accept help from volunteers. But we are paying our PD to do it. Something is wrong with this picture.

- Law enforcement should be doing one and only one thing: enforcing the law. That is what we are paying them to do and that is all they should be doing. Anything other than police work on police time, in my opinion, is simply not in the taxpayer’s best interest. I could go on, here.

In summary, the Dept. of Elderly Affairs should not be run by law enforcement. It should be run by a town employee that is as disconnected from any political activities as possible. It should not be tied to our police or fire dept. or any other official type of organization or elected official. Why not consider the Recreation Dept? In general, that is what the budget committee candidates were saying. But they can’t come out and directly say it or the chief will pull out the scare card so that good, qualified people will be voted against for allegedly being “Against Elderly Affairs”.

That is the problem we see. I know the chief has established long term relationships with many of the people that use or have used the Elderly Affairs services. As a taxpayer, I feel like my contribution toward this service has been pushed aside and, personally, I am fed up with the whole charade.

I am disgusted and tired of seeing any law enforcement officials misuse their position of power and trust to manipulate elderly voters in OUR town. But don’t take my word for it. The next time he pulls out the “Scare Card”, listen carefully to what is being said or asked for…..because there is no such thing a free ride from the Atkinson Dept. of Elderly Affairs -as long as it is run by law enforcement.

Notice the Picture of the Proposed Tower

This is the Tower company's rendering of what a tower would look like behind the salt shed in the center of town. This is not hype, or hysterical unfounded objections. This is the actual TOWER Company's Idea of what a 90' tower would look like! Lt. Baldwin is proposing a 180' tower! So the finished product would be DOUBLE THE HEIGHT of this monstrosity!

NOTICE THE PICTURE IN THE TOP RIGHT OF THE BLOG!

Is this what you want in the center of town?
Do we need this in the center of town?
Where is the data or evidence that this monstrosity is absolutely necesary?
Do we know?
Why has this been pushed on us so hard, so fast?
Why was there no communications problem in 2004 when the town was offerred the opportunity to buy the hog hill tower?

We need and deserve the answers to these questions, before we buy. Lets pass the study and get the answers.

BTW, Do the geometry! The salt shed is 24' at it's peak. the doors are 17', this means the picture of the tower is only 80-90' at most! Even at half the proposed height it is an abomination!

Bureaucratic S.N.A.F.U.! A costly mistake...

Apparently, Folks, We have a lttle problem in town of late. Apparently warrant articles ammended on town floor were printed on the ballot incorrectly. now the ballots have to be re-printed. Furthermore, the absentee ballots have to be re-printed and re-mailed. Now this blog knows not who is responsible, for this fiasco, but the printing of the ballot is the job of the selectmen.

What about the cost? What doe sit cost to reprint the ballot, and the added mailing costs? Why haven't we heard discussion about this at selectmen's meetings? And first and foremost, how are the 19 townspeople currently serving in Afghanistan and Iraq going to get their ballots, vote and return them by March 13, only 14 days away?

Whenever a voter has been disenfranchised by a government official it is serious. Who is going to get reprimanded for this? Someone needs to take responsibility for it!

As all of us Veterans know, S.N.A.F.U. is a military acronym for Situation Normal, All F**ked Up!

Friday, February 23

Candidates Night Redux

Well Candidates night was surely interesting. In our selectmen's race we have three candidates;

Fred Childs, incumbent, town employee
Harold Morse, challenger
Valerie Tobin, challenger

Questioning was started by Mr. Acciard asking Mr. Morse if he would be willing to step aside on planning, ZBA, and inspector appointments over the next three years as he works for Lewis Builders.

To Mr. Morse's credit he answered yes. He described how he has always recused himself from planning board discussions involving Lewis projects, and this is all true. Unfortunately when asked about the school impact fees warrant article, Mr. Morse spoke at length about it, when if he was earnest about stepping aside on these issues he should have then, as the beneficiary of this impact fee waiver is Lewis Builders.

Ms. Tobin was quick to defend her honor when Mr. Childs stated that she and Mr. Morse would have far greater conflicts than he, they being builders. Incredible! Ms. Tobin was quick to point out that she had no ties to any town boards or committees or employees. And all of her business is out of town. There fore she would have no conflicts at all. Mr. Childs restated his thought that as a builder it would be a conflict for her to appoint planning board members and ZBA members, even though she is not building anything in town. Go figure, he sees no conflict in a town employee voting on his own raise, or buying an SUV for his own dept. or signing a voucher to give himself a $1,300.00 "union benefit" but he sees a conflict in someone being a builder even if they dont work in town.

THIS IS CALLED HYPOCRACY!

As to Mr. Childs, He stated his vast experience on town boards and committees, this participation is surely laudable. He stated that the only reason he was found in conflict by the town code of ethics committee, is because he voted on his own raise, and the reason he did that is because they told him the year before that he could do it. That is true, the previous year the code of ethics committee decided not to do their job until forced to, because a couple of the members are good friends with Mr. Childs. After Rockingham Superior Court defined conflict for them in Mr. Consentino's case, they decided to take "a more literal reading of the ordinance" Mr. Smith's words. What Mr. Childs failed to mention is that the vote that got him in trouble came AFTER the Court said dont do it! He STILL didnt get the message.

As to Mr. Childs assertion the "last year the voters didnt know what they were voting for" when voting for Article 21. Guess what, Fred We knew full well. We were sick and tired of the antics of people like yourself who put their own desires ahead of what is best for the town, and ahead of what the voters tell them to do.

In 2005 a majority of the voters said put the honor roll panels in front of the town hall. Fred said NO! and was willing to spend taxpayer dollars to take it to court.

In 2006 a vast majority of voters said we dont want town employees or dept. heads as selectmen. Fred said I want to run anyways.

We need a selectman without a conflict!
We need a selectman who will do the right thing without waiting for a court to tell him what that thing is!
We need a selectman who will put our votes ahead of their own desires!

Thursday, February 22

The ZBA had meeting to discuss putting cell antenna on Hog Hill Tower?

According to the Eagle-Tribune today, the ZBA continued a meeting last night to discuss Mariner Tower(the owners of the Hog Hill tower) putting an antenna for T-mobile on the tower. Chairman Polito evidently expressed the view that this would open the door to other cell companies putting devices on the tower.

Am I missing something here?

Didn't BOTH the Chief and Lt. Baldwin tell us at both the budget committee public hearing and Deliberative session that the Hog Hill tower couldn't support the weight of ANY MORE DEVICES?

Weren't we told that the tower was unsuitable to add anything to it because of the weight it was designed to hold, was at max capacity?

That's what Lt. Baldwin said. Now the ZBA is holding meetings to discuss adding to the tower? So Who was lying?

This whole issue stinks like last week's fish!

Regarding our Road Agent

Anonymous said...


Thank U Publius
---------------------------------------------

Puff piece for Ted;



Ted Stewart is the BEST Road Agent this Town of Atkinson has had the service of in many years, perhaps of all time. We have NEVER seen Ted “out of character” and that is a great “character”. Always a hard worker, we have always seen Ted working harder than his assistants. We know he puts substantial effort into his supervisory and planning responsibilities. We always see him at selectmen’s meetings willingly explaining and giving to the public, accountability for his work and responsibilities.And this in spite of the selectmen's sniping at him. He is the hardest working town employee. We have seen him out diggin out culverts and catch basins, himself, when he could contract that work out. He saves the town a ton of money by also having and maintaining his own equipment, the town doesn't pay for that Teddy does.

We have seen many Road Agents for Atkinson. We have fond memories of
his father, Dan, and now his fine son.

We recall Walter Weeks before Dan. Walter was a character in his own right, from days when snow rollers could occasionally be glimpsed in an Agent’s yard. We remember how Walter would always be “out and about” filling pot-holes with great industry on election day. Definitely not a campaign practice needed for Ted as he spends the entire year building our confidence and pride in our roads.

This Blog has considered the other candidate and, although he is a very upstanding citizen of fine character we have found no advantages for Atkinson in his candidacy.

This blog’s management places its editorial recommendation with Mr. “Teddy” Stewart.
February 22, 2007 1:29 PM

Wednesday, February 21

The Two most critical issues on the ballot this year

are the FOUR tower related warrant articles and Article 2007-23, an attempt to overturn last years prohibition on town employees serving on or being ELECTED TO the board of sleectmen or the budget committee.

You have read articles on this blog discussing these two issues, but it cannot be made clear enough.

Last year the voters of Atkinson said OVERWHELMINGLY "We dont want town employees serving as their own bosses"! Makes perfect sense, right? So why are we still debating it?

Because the very same town employees who refused to do it right over the last three years, who refused to step aside when they were in conflict, who COST THE TOWN MONEY DEFENDING ACTIONS THEY KNEW TO BE WRONG, STILL WISH TO HOLD OFFICE!!!

Last years article stated that "town employees, full-time or part-time, or dept. heads are prohibited from serving on, or being elected to, the board of selectmen or the budget committee." Not they can sign up, then abdicate, thereby spoiling the ballot for the other contenders, not they can sign up violating current law in the hopes that their friends will overturn this prohibition. "they can not be elected to" That is pretty clear. But Fred Childs has the arrogance to sign up anyway. Just like when a majority of the voters said to put the honor rolls in front of the town hall, outside the flagpoles, he said NO! I don't like Carol Grant and she will not get her way! Is that what decides town policy? Are our selectmen acting like 5 year old children? YES!!! for three years they have been. It is time it stops!

Let me ask all of you a question....

Could you walk into work today and give yourself a raise? even if you were giving it to all employees, yourself included, would your company allow you to vote on it? The answer is no!

How about this one...

Lets say you were made a director of your company, what would the shareholders say if your FIRST ACT, 8 DAYS AFTER BEING ELECTED WAS TO BUY YOURSELF A NEW SUV, WITHOUT TELLING THE EST OF THE BOARD. Think you would get away with THAT one? the answer is no!

How about 9 months after being elected to the board, do you think the shareholders or the board would put up with you authorizing the payment to yourself of a $1,300.00 "union benefit" even though you are not part of the union, and as management, excluded form the union contract? The answer is you would probably be facing indictment.

But those three hypotheticals, are EXACTLY what our TWO TOWN EMPLOYEE SELECTMEN DID!!!

Why would we want to return to that?

The people of Atkinson deserve honor, integrity, honesty, and openess in their governing body! it's about time we hold these people accountable. Show them they can't get away with this and DEFEAT ARTICLE 2007-23!!!

Now about the tower;

IT IS NOT A CELL TOWER! IT IS A POLICE COMMUNICATIONS TOWER THAT MAY HAVE CELL REPEATERS ON IT! Will this tower solve our communications problem, we don't know, because we have seen no data, just a slick sales presentation from an armed officer who yelled at us for making him answer questions about a $800,000 project. He can't even tell us how much it will cost the town up front, when asked he and selectmen Sapia both said "nothing, not one penny" This is a lie! It took questions from Budget committee chair, Acciard on town floor to get them to admit that it would cost at least $300,00 up front that cost to be re-couped over 10-20 years.

If they can't tell us the truth up front, then they shouldn't get our votes.

We should study it, then present everything to the people and let them decide.

We hope that the voters DEFEAT ARTICLES 2007-04 and 2007-21

We hope that the voters will PASS ARTICLES 2007-22 AND 2007-24

2007-04 changes the zoning to allow a tower in the center of town
2007-21 authorizes a multi-year lease to erect the tower
2007-22 authorizes a study to find out the truth
2007-24 prohibits the selectmen from doing anything until the study is complete

Sunday, February 18

Answer to questions about Police Chief Appointment

Welcome to another contributor under the Publius byline.

ARTICLE SUBMISSION Police Chief AppointmentPulius,... ARTICLE SUBMISSION
Police Chief Appointment

Pulius, is it allowable to submit a combined response/Article Submission?
I'd like to respond to questions from Anonymous #12 - 9:49 a.m.-- on "Police Communications Tower Confusion" and at the same time, provide information that residents should know and which hopefully will stimulate resident response and discussion on the topic, which might result in the incoming board of selectmen finally taking responsible action on the matter.

1. No, currently Mr. Consentino holds no legal appointment as Police Chief.
According to appointment records in the Town Clerk's office, Mr. Consentino has not held a legal appointment as Atkinson Police Chief since his last of a couple of appointments expired on May 1, 1999 - ALMOST 8 YEARS AGO!!
He had previously made several attempts to get earlier Boards of Selectmen to give him a permanent appointment as Chief, but those attempts were ALL rejected and refused by those Boards of Selectmen.

2. Yes, there are N.H.laws (RSA's)which state requirements to serve in any police capacity. It would have been ILLEGAL since 1999 for any Selectmen to re-appoint Mr. Consentino as Chief, since the N.H. Legislature had passed RSA 188-F:27 which requires that anyone who wants to serve in any police capacity must meet the NEW N.H. Police Standards for medical, physical, mental, education and training requirements which were adopted and MANDATED by the N.H. Police Standards and Training Council in 1999.

RSA 188-F:27 has no "Grandfather clause" to allow retention of unqualified police personnel who can't and don't meet current state standards.

The current Selectmen were advised of this law AND that Mr. Consentino holds no current legal appointment as Chief, AND finally, that Mr. Consentino can not now be re-appointed as Chief because of not meeting the new and current legal requirements and standards to serve in a police capacity.

The selectmen were also provided 24 examples provided by different town residents of how as Chief, he has abused different residents and displayed temperament incompatible with that expected of a Chief.
Under Mr. Childs's chairmanship, the selectmen ignored and quietly buried that letter, keeping the information about RSA 188 from town residents.
By not enforcing RSA 188-F:27 against Mr. Consentino, they are themselves violating N.H. law.

3. Yes, the "Chief" can be removed. Technically, he doesn't even need to be removed from the position as Chief since NO ONE currently and legally holds the appointment as Chief.

The new Board of Selectmen needs to comply with the Atkinson Town Meeting vote of 1997 which REQUIRES that ANY vacant or new position in Atkinson be PUBLICLY ADVERTISED so that qualified appplicants can apply for the job, with the selectmen then conducting interviews of applicants and FINALLY selecting and appointing for Atkinson, a legally qualifed Police Chief who meets all of the mandated N.H. state standards.

4. Any person, including members of the APD, can, at the expiration of their appointment term, be NOT re-appointed. They don't own the position and are subject to being re-appointed just as selectmen are subject to re-election.

Friday, February 16

Plea to defeat Article 2007-23

Welcome to another contributor under the Publius byline.

ARTICLE SUBMISSION:

Discussion of the warrant article to overturn the prohibition on towns employees being selectmen.

There is one very important warrant article on the ballot this year. It is a petition warrant article to overturn last years voter approved warrant article prohibiting town employees from being selectmen.

Look, lets be brutally honest here, none of this would be necesary if the people who are town employees while serving were willing to do the right thing and step aside on matters involving their depts. or town employee matters. But they refused until ordered to, and that has brought us to the point where a clear majority of the voters said NO!!

Unfortunately, the actions of a few have made necesary the restriction on the many. However the current ordinance DOES NOT PROHIBIT ANYONE FROM SERVING! They simply have to do as Mr. Sullivan did and either resign or take a leave of absence from their town jobs to serve.

This is not some great restriction as these employees have told the residents at town meeting. It is the exact same policy, in force in EVERY SCHOOL BOARD IN THE STATE! as well as many towns and cities. This is not depriving the town of 38 years of experience as one town employee said at town meeting, Why wouldn't that town employee offer that experience where it may be helpful, anyway? same with the contact built up over that time, if you are going to use that experience and contacts to help the town you will do it with or without the position.

Please notice that the prime advocates of overturning last years vote are the very same people in a position to benefit from it.

Please look at the difference between 2004-2005 and 2006. There has been a vast difference in the last year, and it will only get better as we purge our governing body of these conflicts.

W have heard so much about RSA 667:9 "specifically allowing" part-time town employees to be selectmen and budget committee members. That is not true, it DOES NOT specifially allow it, it DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT PART-TIME EMPLOYEES! This is an oversight, an omission, not a PERMISSION!

There is a great body of established law in NH preventing this, as Rockingham Superior Court has noted in it's Order's telling our selectmen to knock it off!

The landmark case law on Conflict of interest in the state of NH is "Littleton v. Taylor" the NH Supreme Court stated that "The common law doctrine of incompatibility of offices, states that one cannot hold two offices where the work of one is subordinate to that of the other, as governmental checks and balances are removed"

I can not state it better. Please defeat Article 23 this year!

Thank you,
Mark Acciard

Thursday, February 15

Questions about the Police Dept.?

Welcome to our newest contributor under the Publius byline.

What do we know about taxpayer money for Atkinson Police Dept. funding?

I read two unnerving blog postings that I would like to confirm the accuracy of:

Can someone please point me to the corroborating meeting minutes or other official document that states the selectman created a full time Lt slot at the cost of $85,000 per year? Please tell me this is not for real. If it is, I wish to apply for this job.

Also, could someone please point me to the meeting minutes that confirm the following posting from anon posted 2/9 at 12:19 PM that reads as follows:

"Last year, the board was responsible for negotiating the union contract with the police union. Who represented the town in the negotiations?
Chief Consentino and Town Administrator McAllister.

The result: The most lucrative contract for the union in town history. For the next three years the officers will get double raises. They will get step increases, AND COLA raises!

OK, I know this is a "life safety issue", but why do we have to pay more than any other town of 7000 people in NH, for the same or less protection?

And why? during the negotiations, the selectmen voted to give the PD administration the same benefits as the union got! Is this a conflict?

You can't be your own boss it is that simple!

And MR. Childs you knew beforehand you couldn't vote on your own raise and you did it anyway!"
---------
I would like to know how accurate these scenarios are. If they are true, I can only say this is an absolute fleecing of the taxpayers and that we need to go to the state level for an investigation.

We should also propose a warrant for 2008 to fund a consulting company to conduct a top to bottom audit/review of the Atkinson PD budget and cost structure and compare it to other towns. How much crime is there, EXACTLY, in this town? How much of a police force do we need, EXACTLY? While I suspect the outcome will be obvious, the voters need to know the facts from an outside, unbiased party and not hear it from the Atkinson PD.

And while I agree there are benefits to having an Elderly affairs organization, the budget should not be controlled by law enforcement officials - nor should law enforcement officials be allowed to collect "donations" for the PD's own discretionary spending. These funds should be under Budget committee control. The appearance of a conflict of interest is dramatic. It appears to be too much of a "Quid pro Quo" situation.

Elderly Affairs should be managed under something like the Rec dept (sending Christmas cards, annual concerts, getting volunteers to drive people to appts, etc.) These are not police duties. The core mission of a Police Dept. is LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ONLY LAW ENFORCEMENT. How many other towns in this state do this? And why do we do it when the town of Salem offers a redundant service? The Salem Caregivers website is available for all to see. They advertise right next to our PD in the Tribune apparently competing for business from the elderly in town.

By the way, what is the town's liability/exposure if an elderly person gets injured during transport in a police vehicle? What insurance coverage is in place for this? I would want to see the policy and hear from the town's insurance agent exactly what the risks/coverage are - I want to hear it from an unbiased party and not the Atkinson PD.

Doesn't our budget committee have authority or oversight over any of this? Have these questions been asked before?

These are reasonable questions that I, an Atkinson taxpayer, want and deserve answers to. THIS IS MY MONEY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT - AND YOURS, AND YOURS, AND YOURS!

WHEN ARE WE GOING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT??????

Wednesday, February 14

Rate your Selectmen! an election game...

Below is a list of the last ten people to hold the office of selectman. Feel free to write in and rank them in order from best to worst. For example(xxx-1, xxy-2, xxz-3, etc. until you get to whomever you think is worst.)

We will assign a score of Ten points to 1st place, nine to 2nd, and so on, for each response. And at the end we will see who the respondants think is the best and worst selectman.

Paul Sullivan
Jack Sapia
Fred Childs
Phil Consentino
Brian Boyle
Joe DeRosa
Barbara Stewart
Mike Turell
Bob Morse
Berg Norris

Have some fun, and let us know what you think of your elected officials;

JOB PERFORMANCE, AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN OFFICE ONLY! Not personality!

Tuesday, February 13

For those who wish to contribute an article, rather than a comment

Simply post your article as a comment to any post on the blog, beginning with the words ARTICLE SUBMISSION. If suitable we will repost under Publius byline. No invective, No Slander, No personal ad hominum attacks, Please submit intelligent discussions of verifiable fact, ideas, or events.

Thank you

Police Communications Tower Confusion...

There are four warrant articles on the ballot this year all tied to this Tower. There is a planning board article to allow the construction of a tower on town owned land over 350' elevation. They SAY that this is not designed to restrict it to the fire station property, but is there any other piece of "town owned land above 350' elevation"? This blog knows of none.

Secondly there is a warrant article to allow the selectmen to enter into a lease with a tower company of more than one year but not more than 25 years. Nice but don't you need the zoning change FIRST to be able to lease the land? Isn't this jumping the gun so to speak?

Thirdly there is a petition warrant article to prevent the selectmen from erecting this abomination in town center unless a study shows that a tower is the best way to deal with our communications issue, and that the fire station is the best place for it. THIS IS SMART! WHY ARE WE RUSHING?

Fourthly there is a petition warrant article to commission a study to look into how bad our communications problem really is, how best to solve it, an how much does it cost to do so. AGAIN THIS IS THE SMART PROPOSAL! The meetings would be posted, in the town hall, open to all who wish to come, and open to those who wish to participate. I know Lt. Baldwin has told the town that all of his committee's meetings were open to the public, and anyone could have come to them and voiced concerns, and he said it was wrong for people not to come to the meetings then to ask questions on town floor, and he has a point; but where were these meetings held? I never saw them posted, or advertised. I never knew they were going on until aftr they happened. And if there was so much work done in this study, why wasn't it presented for the voters at deliberative session? Library made a proposal that was in depth, discussed the entire planning process, the building materials, and in depth cost breakdowns. Their meetings were open, in library, advertised, and well attended. And they originally presented three options and asked the voters their opinion.

By Contrast, Lt. Baldwin's committee did a study, or so we have heard, haven't seen any data, just a sales presentation of what our communications coverage is now, and what it will be with the tower. No independent input, no data, no cost breakdowns, no options, discussed or it would seem considered. At town meeting we heard for the first time that you can put repeaters in cars and the officer only has to broadcast to his vehicle, and the vehicle takes it from there. Well, we have heard the Chief and Lt. Baldwin state that they have almost total coverage in the vehicles, why no discussion of this option? Why no explanation of why it will or won't work? No, when we ask legitimate questions about cost, necesity, options, in public, on town floor, WE GET YELLED AT, AND CHASTIZED BY AN ARMED POLICE OFFICER OBVIOUSLY EXASPERATED BECAUSE HE HAS TO ANSWER THE PEOPLE'S QUESTIONS!

I'll put aside the issue of the coersion of having an armed officer present a warrant article at town meeting( And aren't armed officers prohibited at town meeting unless requested by the moderator to keep the peace, under state law?) When a police officer begins yelling at the very people that pay him because he has to answer some questions, well, doesn't that raise OTHER questions? Temperment, suitablilty, professionalism, merit, education?

Just food for thought.

Gestapo Tactics? or merely USSR?

Well This blog has been advised that the powers that be in Atkinson are pulling out all the stops to find out who is behind this blog, and who is commenting on it. Even going so far as to use the resources of Worcester Polytech's Computer Lab to try and trace the IP addresses of people who comment on this blog. (Isn't that the Alma Mater of our Town Moderator, Fran Polito? hmmmm, curiouser and curiouser.)

You gentlemen wish to know who is running and posting on this blog, it is simple.....

IT IS THE PEOPLE OF ATKINSON!!! Currently their are 7 people posting articles under the byline of Publius! and so far there are 44 people commenting! Not bad for a blog in it's first month with little or no advertising! And it is growing daily!

The question for the town government is;
1.) What do you have to fear from free speech that you can not control?

2.) If what you are doing is right, then why can't you defend it, without trying to destroy the messenger?

3.) If what you are doing is right, why can't it be debated in an open blog? Why must you attempt to attack the wives, children, and mothers, of those with whom you disagree?

Thomas Jefferson once said;

Where the people fear their government there is tyranny

Where the government fears the people there is liberty!

There is a reason that the majority of the comments on this blog are anonymous...
As stated, given the actions of our selectmen and Police Administration over the past two years, why would anyone criticize publicly?

Lets take a look at what has happened to those who did.

Brian Kaye- Had been participating in the negotiations with Signal Tower. Came into a Selectmen's Meeting on June 6, 2006 to tell the selectmen he was bowing out due to death threats. What happened? The chief followed him into the hallway as he left screaming at him. then proceeded to return to the meeting and spent 20 minutes bashing Mr. Kaye on camera, with added comments from Mr. Sapia for color.

Carol Grant- Came into a meeting to complain about the selectmen's refusal to conduct elderly business in light of the court orders barring Consentino from participating in these matters, and while she was simply sitting there reading a letter, the Chief slapped the table and roared to turn those cameras off, then proceeded to charge across the room to physically confront her.(tape of selectmen mtg. 12/27/05, and testimony from grant case in court 05-E-056)

Mark Acciard- asked court if selectmen who were also employees had to recuse themselves. Court said yes. Found Chief in contempt of court for disobeying its orders, threatened him with Jail! What Happened? Acciard has been ridiculed a bunch of times in live selectmen's meetings, and in the town report, even sued personally, had his business customers informed by the chief that Acciard was under investigation by the PD.

Ladies and Gentlemen these are Gestapo Tactics. And they have no place in Atkinson!

I thought that dissent was a time honored American Tradition!

Saturday, February 10

Vietnam Honor Roll SCOOP!!!

Your Atkinson Reporter has this story before traditional newspapers!

Viet Nam Memorial

So now I’m understanding that the Viet Nam war is still alive in Atkinson. A little more than a year ago, I was one of the 71 persons who petitioned the Rockingham County Superior Court, hoping they would order the Selectmen to place the Honor Roll panels on either side of the existing Viet Nam Memorial at Town Hall as mandated by an approved Warrant Article. The case was sent to mediation which resulted in no changes in attitudes. The Selectmen offered an alternative “map” stone if the panels were placed at the Library. The Petitioners refused the stone, not wanting the town to have to foot the bill.

The Selectmen have prepared, signed and delivered to the Petitioners a Stipulation saying that the petitioners agreed to place the panels in a different location. We have two options

Yes – we agree. No – we don’t

As one of the petitioners, I should vote NO! and I probably will. But I have to admit I’ve been thinking about it.

Do I want this issue to drag on forever? Nope, I’m disgusted, and very embarrassed that our Selectmen would refuse to honor a vote of their bosses – Town Meeting..

But, I have always felt, in part, that the panels belong up the hill, together with the panels showing the names of veterans of all other wars. Two reasons: That’s where the most of the ceremonies are held – the speeches, the band, and the crowds of people. Taps is played in the cemeteries where many of these veterans either are or will be interred. Why should these VietNam veterans be isolated? Secondly, I’m a genealogist, and I know very well that – in the future – it’s the panels which will receive the attention, not the map in front of Town Hall, as descendants search for the names of their ancestors. I watched my 5-year old granddaughter – not yet a reader – run her hand over the names of her Revolutionary War ancestors on a tablet in Maine as I pointed them out. It was important to her.

Now I have a third reason. Call it sheer unadulterated spite. If the panels go up the hill, the monument at Town Hall will forever be a symbol of the shame bestowed on Atkinson by the three Selectmen who chose to use revenge as their excuse. In a future re-write of Atkinson’s history, the names of Selectmen Childs, Consentino and Sapia will be labeled as the reprehensible three who chose to thumb their noses at the majority of voters. I can’t think of a more deserving trio.

I like to think I’m better than that; I hope I am, but I’m still thinking about it.

a Library 7 years (and counting) in the making...

Yes the Town of Atkison has been discussing building a new library for over 7 years. Initially the library trustees were asked to wait because the old fire station was literally falling down, and needed to be replaced. well we only have a couple of years to go on that bond and it is time to seriously look at a new library.

Last years offer was way too expensive for what you got. $3.2Million is a lot of money. So this year the trustees took the approach they should have taken initially, and that was to set up a task force to study the issue and come up with a plan that would pass on election day.

This blog would like to say thank you to those who volunteered their time to iron out these problems; Kevin Langlois, Brian Boyle, Peter Lewis, Ron LaMarre, Sue Copetta, Roxanne Fuerr, Eleanor Fuerr, we know there are others we have missed and we thank them as well. Obviously bringing builders in to give their input helped in finding cost reductions, while maintaining usability.

This is a good plan at a decent enough price and we hope the voters will finally pass it. The current library was built in 1974 as an addition on to the Kimball House. Prior to that the library was a the two front rooms in the kimball house. The library had a $28,000 construction budget, and they couldn't find anyone to do it for that price. The Lewis' offerred to come in and do it, and they basically built one of their ranch style homes adjacent to the side of the kimball house. This arragement has lasted for 33 years, but has now outlived it's usefullness.

Tha time has come to replace it and we need to take advantage of it.

Thursday, February 8

Public Safety Communications Tower; NOT a CELL TOWER!

Ok, Here is what I don't get about this whole thing;

Lt. Baldwin has supposedly been working on this issue for almost two years according to him. Also according to him even though the first time we heard this crises spoken about publicly was Jan.9, 2006 at the selectmen's meeting, the PD has had communications problems for years.

Ok, for the sake of debate lets accept both of those premises; then here is what makes no sense about this, and what no one including our excitable LT. are talking about;

1.) In 2004 Plaistow received a Homeland security grant for a number of towns in the region, including Atkinson. Evidently, according to the Chief there is a 5' whip antenna and some other equipment(I heard the number $80,000 worth, bandied about) sitting in a warehouse somewhere in plaistow waiting for us to have a place to put it. This equipment was received in Dec. 2004.

In light of this why wasn't something discussed all during 2005, while the chief was negotiating with Signal Tower and the Hog Hill residents over that tower agreement. If the problem existed, and you had equipment needing a place to reside, why didn't this come out publicly?

The chief also said at the Budget Public Hearing, that the town had the opportunity to buy the hog hill tower in 2004-2005 while he was selectmen, and he passed on it. If we had this problem, and that is the ideal site, as the chief has repeatedly stated, then why didnt we just build the tower, and be done with it?

2.) In April of 2006 at a selectmen's meeting Lt. Baldwin showed a powerpoint presentation and stated that the town had roughly 65-70% communications coverage. Later he and the chief stated that they had almost 100% in the cars, it was the portables(shoulder radios) where they had the problems. Even then they stated that often the officers could hear dispatch but couldn't respond. there radios were not powerful enough to reach back to dispatch.

This sounds more like a power problem than a reception problem. We heard at deliberative session that there is such a thing as vehicle repeaters, that are mounted in the cruisers, and enable the officers when they are out of their cruisers to radio to their vehicles, and the vehicle bounces it back to dispatch. we heard the cost for these items at $1,000-$10,000 depending upon brand and model. Was this one of the options considered by the ad hoc committee? we do not kow as when Lt. Baldwin was aked about this he got angry, and if not yelled, at least raised his voice significantly, saying very loudly that he was just trying to PROTECT YOU!, AND YOU!, AND YOU!, AND YOU! Finger jabs punctuating his outburst. I saw no personalities in the questions being asked on the floor, the questions were legitimate. The Lt. evidently didn't like being asked them.

3.) We heard at a selectmen's meeting in Dec. Lt. Baldwin and selectmen Sapia telling us that "THIS WILL COST THE TOWN NOTHING!, NOT ONE PENNY!" Budget Chair Acciard even asked Lt. Baldwin "what about the $300,000 in equipment that need to go on the tower, surely the town has to front the money for that? I mean, I know we will get that back out of lease payments but that will be over 15 years or so, right?" Lt. Baldwin answered no, that will be included in the lease agreement. Selectmen Sapia echoed "That can be structured into the lease" At town meeting we heard the figure of Half a million mentioned by Mr. Brown and Mr. Acciard, and Mr. Brown admitted that a cell company couldn't be expected to front more than $200,00 of that, leaving at least $300,000 to be raised, with the re-coup being spread over 20 years. WHY DO THE NUMBERS KEEP CHANGING? WHY IS IT LIKE PULLING TEETH TO GET ANY INFORMATION OTHER THAN WHAT LT. BALDWIN PRESENTS?

4.) Deliberative Session was Lt. Baldwins opportunity to shine and really sell his project. Instead he stood tapping the forward button on the laptop as Mr. Brown gave his oratory. A speech which left more questions unanswered than not.

Here are some of the questions left unanswered;

1.) Why behind the salt shed? Even the chief admits hog hill is the better site?

2.) What other options were considered? and what were their costs vs. the tower?

3.) How bad is our communications problem compared to other towns around us? and what are they doing about theirs?

4.) Why won't vehicle repeaters work?

5.) Why 180 ft. height? Police communications are line of sight, and 75ft. puts you above the trees and gives you line of sight from the fire station into both plaitow and hampstead.

6.) The height of the fire station is 350ft., the country club is 330ft. with nothing between it and plaistows tower.

7.) Where is the study? where are the cost comparisons? where are the other options? where is the RF study, not just the computer models? WHERE ARE THE FACTS GLEANED OVER 18 MONTHS OF STUDYING THIS? All we have seen is the same tired powerpoint presentation trying to sell us on this, and a six page sales brochure from Lt. Baldwin. No indisputable facts.

8.) Who was on this ad hoc committee? what are their qualifications? do they have conflicts? in other words do any of them live on hog hill? are they police officers?

9.) If all the meeting this committee had were public where were they held? where were they posted and/or advertised? were they in town hall? if not why not? Where is the data that this committee collected? why cant we see it?

10.) WHY WASN'T ANY HARD DATA PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC AT DELIBERATIVE SESSION?

Answer these questions satisfactorily and you will have this blogs recommendation, and moreover, vote!

Wednesday, February 7

Petition Warrant Article to allow town employees to be Selectmen...

In light of the last few years this should be a no brainer. This all started in March of 2003 when Chief Consentino ran for selectmen. When asked about possible conflicts at candidates night by Mr. Acciard, he stated that he served as selectmen in the mid seventies with no problems. He further stated that he would step aside on police matters and let Sgt. Baldwin present them. He did that for the first year and there were no complaints. Also when he served in the seventies there was no conflict of interest ordinance. Then in March of 2004, when Chairman Boyle was absent the Chief made a request to withdraw money from the donation account and voted to approve his own request, with selectman Childs as the second vote.

Mr. Acciard filed a conflict of interest complaint, and the conflict of interest committee refused to do anything. He then asked the Court if Mr. Consentino should step aside on these matters and the Court said YES! Mr. Consentino didn't like that answer and appealed it to the NH Supreme Court. With your money! The NH Supreme Court said the lower court was right! Mr. Acciard also brought Mr. Childs up on a conflict of interest complaint for voting on his own raise. Conflict of interest committee said you can't do that.

It is for these reasons that we need to prohibit town employees from being selectmen. It is not because they would not do a good job, it is because a few bad apples have spoiled it for the rest!

It is because our town deserves better!

And because there is no shortage of people running. Mr. Sapia argued that we will not have people to serve if we disenfranchise town employees, well we have three people running for one office as selectman, and eight running for four slots on budget, I just do not see the dearth of candidates that Mr. Sapia does. Perhaps he sees a dearth of candidates that he can interrupt, talk over, and control.

Tuesday, February 6

What is the single most important quality for a selectman?

This blog would say it is Honesty, Personal Integrity, and a desire to do the RIGHT THING, popular or not! That would be defined as Courage. Now lets take a look at our Candidates;

Fred Childs, Incumbent- Experience, yes; integrity?...... maybe, maybe not; here is a man who was found to have violated the town's cofe of ethics ordinance. He violated it twice, stated that he knew he was doing it but would "wait and see what thry say"; They being the Code of Ethics committee. What they(neighbor, Dick Smith, and longtime friend, Berg Norris) said was no problem, the first time. After the Court Ordered Consentino to step aside on police and town employee matters they decided to "take a more literal reading of the ordinance."(Mr. Smith's words). You have a man who when the voters said put the vietnam honor roll in front of the town hall but outside of the flagpoles, He said I dont agree and fought it in court with taxpayer money. Here is a man who when the voters said we don't want town employees serving as selectmen, he evidently replied by signing up anyway in the hopes of getting the article overturned. If you are going to thumb your nose at the voters, you dont derserve to be elected!

Harold Morse, Candidate- He has been on the planning board for 12 years, and has predominantly stepped aside whenever a Lewis project has come before the board. Yes this IS the honorable thing to do. Will he have a conflict in serving as selectman, probably, only time will tell, but there will always be the perception. Mr. Morse has long been one of the prime sponsors, coach, board member of Atkinson Youth Baseball, and has donated considerably of his time, and effort.

Valerie Tobin, Candidate- She is the only candidate with clearly no conflicts. This blog does not know Ms. Tobin but she has been forthright, and steadfast in public meetings over the past few years. She always has had hard, insightful questions, and has usually followed those up with more. She has brought forward points that often made those she was questioning uncomfortable, but in the end provided much needed information to the voters.

The choices here are clear.

Deliberative Session Discoveries: New Specs for town roads?

The Town has watched for months as the selectmen have reamed the Road Agent publicly for splitting the two roads slated for this year, part into the warrant articles, part into his budget. Mr. Sapia actually accused Teddy of trying to hide the true cost and made it sound like Teddy was trying to get something over on the voters. Mr. Sapia re-worded the warrant articles to "reflect the total cost of the roads... the voters deserve that" But in reality his articles STILL did not cover the total cost of the roads, as was pointed out by the budget committee. Mr. Sapia got very indignant on camera Saturday, about the "voters should have the total cost of the roads when they go into the booth", and "we have NEVER done it this way, we always give the voters the total cost of the road in each article".

Then Teddy explains that the Town's specifications for roads was changed by the planning board approximately three months ago!!! AND PLANNING BOARD CHAIR SUE KILLAM CONFIRMED THIS!!! Mr. Sapia sits on the planning board! And a little research has shown that not only did Mr. Sapia know of this change, HE SPOKE ON IT IN THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING!!!

So while he was chewing out Teddy for this new proceedure of not including the topcoat in his costs, he knew full well that this was the new standards set by the planning board, with his help, and Teddy had to abide by them. Further, at least Teddy never tried to tell people that his numbers represented the total cost of the roads; He explained exactly, many times, where the costs were and what the total was. Mr. Sapia, in fact told the people that he was including the total cost, when he knew he wasn't! Just like he, and Lt. Baldwin told the people many times that the tower would cost the town nothing! It wasn't until budget committee chair Acciard asked the question, that we found out that it is going to require "half a million or so of equipment, and those costs will take 25 years or so to recoup."

Why can't all of our town officials be honest with us?

Monday, February 5

This appeared on the Plaistow Town Crier Website. Regarding our Tower

Here is part of the post with a link.

http://www.hwforums.com/2174/messages/814.html


Hey Atkinson, we got rid of those cell tower cockroaches.
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Plaistow, NH Town Crier ] [ FAQ ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Dennis Herrick on February 03, 2007 at 21:23:15:







Hey Atkinson, we got rid of those cell tower cockroaches over in Plaistow. Now it's your turn. However your task will be more difficult. We already have cell phone coverage from a water tower in the center of our town. We had our health and safety blitz a few years back and not only are we covered, but we're stuck. The ugly water tower that rudely marks the center of our town should have been demolished along with the Chart Industries plant. But, our town fathers and their Attorney Sumner Kalman work diligently to make the cell tower happen? Thanks Selectmen? Way to go, Sumner? Hey, you're becoming quite the cell tower facilitator? Another win for you in East Kingston? Do you get to collect a fee from all the parties involved? The towns and the cell companies? What a lucrative deal for you?

The claim in Atkinson is that for the sake of safety a central cell tower needs to be installed. So they've chosen a high point right in the middle of your town too. Smack dab in the middle of a proposed historic district. Ours is in our proposed Village district. How nice. Since the chances of your tower passing is becoming slim, they've dredged up the Hog Hill Road site that was supposed to be too politically difficult to consider. How convenient. They're snakes, all of them.

Sunday, February 4

Move the Question

Deliberative session, another "special" day for the " special" people of Atkinson.

All too frequently could be heard the command "Move the Question" at the Saturday meeting.

Unfortunately, all too frequently, it is used to stifle debate , bar opinion and limit information.

Unfortunately, all too frequently by those who tout civil discourse then find it an inconvenience to their "authority" or "agenda".

Parliamentary rule and order is necessary and must be available especially for legislative sessions having a character like Atkinson town meetings. Parliamentary rule requires that ONLY motions critical to order are allowed by interruption. Any motion to "move the question" normally and fairly can NOT be brought by interruption and requires a second and Super Majority (2/3) vote to carry.

We will see this meeting repeated numerous times on Cable TV before election day. Everyone will have the opportunity to see those officials abuse the process for their own interests.

Saturday, February 3

Deliberative Session...

Has started with the usual reading of the rules I am sure. I apologize that I am unable to report in person on the doings at this august meeting, but I am recording it as I have out of town engagements, and upon my return Monday I will report on everything that happenned, I hope everyone enjoys the show.

We are many.....Every Vote Counts

Attendance is again low at deliberative session. I wish I could be there but unfortunately I have a prior commitment. I will watch the remainder on cable and will report later. For those of you who can make it, I urge you to attend. Arrive late, but arrive.

This just in!!!

This blog has been informed that Selectman Sapia has been at it again Behind the scenes of course. Apparently it is of paramount importance to him that both Budget Committee Chair Mark Acciard and member Brian Boyle be defeated in the current election cycle.

This blog has been informed by town hall sources that at 4:00 pm today as the sign ups were closing, Mr. Fred Thompson signed up for Budget Committee to run against Mr. Acciard, and he apparently did so at Mr. Sapia's behest. We are also told that Mr. Sapia called his good friend Mrs. Osborne to sign up to run against Mr. Boyle.

The shenanigans continue, obviously the selectmen or more accurately a selectman and his sponsors, believe it necesary to change the dynamics of the Budget Committee. This blog hopes that they are unsuccessful, as we are happy with the budget committee's performance in the last two years. They have managed to restrict the budgetary increase while not cutting services. They have accomplished this with grace under fire and in public. This blog feels that the current board of selectmen, or at least two of them, could take lessons from the budget committee in how to conduct their business as publicly as possible. The Town has the minutes, and the budget online for all to see for the first time. If only the selectmen would conduct all business in the open.

Thursday, February 1

Master...... The Warrant has arrived, Master....

Well, The warrant has been printed and mailed and it is a long one. There is likely to be a very interesting deliberative session Saturday. View this as the playoffs of the political season, with election day being the super bowl.

We start off with the election of Officers, and in flagrant disregard for the stated will of the vast majority of last years voters, who passed Article 21; which clearly stated;

to see if the town will vote to prohibit people actively employed by the Town of Atkinson, as well as those who serve as Dept. Heads within the Town of Atkinson, from SERVING ON, OR BEING ELECTED TO, the board of selectmen, the budget committee.

We have TWO town employees who evidently feel that their desire to be elected outweighs the wishes of the electorate. Yes we know that there is a petition warrant article to overturn this, but that has not passed yet, and what is stated above is the current town law. Now the phrase "prohibit....being elected to" should bar them from signing up. If you cant do what the voters say, then you should not be in public office! PERIOD! Or they could quit their town jobs now and run for the office. By refusing to do that they in effect nullify the election for others. Last year Mrs. Morelli ran but did not take her office, as she didn't wish to quit, if elected will she quit this year? and if not how is that fair to any of the candidates running against her?

This type of egomaniacal behavior on the parts of Mr. Childs and Mrs. Morelli need to be stopped. Atkinson can and needs to do better! Moreover we deserve better!

ATKINSON's Vietnam HONOR ROLL as VOTED and PASSED by 2005 Town Meeting and re-approved at Special Town Meeting Sept. 12

EDITORIAL-


A voice of compassion, an example of fairness and reasonable government.

One who believes in the strength and comfort you, your children and your family can draw from good government leadership.

A person who knows Atkinson is our home -- our most important possession that must be preserved and protected through fair taxes and sound community planning and where our children must be safe to grow to become a new generation of leaders.

One who knows that the citizens of Atkinson are all neighbors with her leadership to be dedicated and responsive to all.

One who believes that when those from Atkinson have served our nation and honors are deserved, those honors must be given.

In Valerie Tobin, we now have a leader we know we can entrust with these responsibilities because they are part of her character.

It is our honor to endorse Valerie for election to Atkinson’s Board of Selectmen.

Just a note for those who wish to count the deer.

In January 08 this blog had 16,000 hits and 1,500 unique visitors (for the month).

In 2007 this blog had over 100,000 hits and 5,750 unique visitors (for the year).

EDITORIAL-


"I offer nothing more than simple facts, plain arguments, and common sense . . ." [TP, 1776]

We take no small measure of umbrage at such a hostile official act against this BLOG’s patron. Therefore, a timely Editorial comment is both appropriate and necessary.

Discussion of Atkinson’s financial direction, from any viewpoint, is fundamental and encouraged and we will always attempt to limit and correct errors.

However, Righteous indignation towards purported error of such inconsequential nature is not appropriate.

The ENTIRE car deal is problematic. If it was caused by poor judgement, improper exercise of authority, neglect or mistake or even specious reasoning, this will never trump the facts that the entire questionable transaction started and ended within a very small circle of confidants.

We find the entire circumstances surrounding the disposition of the police Cruiser highly irregular at the least and the "explanations" somewhat trifling and exhaustive of our intellect.

Mr. Consentino: It’s time to go. Being Chief of Atkinson’s Police Department is NOT a birthright. That is a fabled legend of yesteryear.

Historically in Atkinson, police chief appointments were made "under the hand of the selectmen" for terms of one year at a time, as was also the case in the beginning of Mr. Consentino’s assorted and discontinuous stream of appointments to this position.

Your only remaining credential established on a claim of indispensability has faded.

So time is neigh. Plan a graceful exit, Clean out your desk, Accept the gratitude and tearful sentiments from some. We plan no editorial recriminations. It is time. Thank you for your service, We wish you a long and happy retirement. Bon Voyage.

LETTER


"To All Atkinson Residents,

I am writing to ask for your help. A member of the Atkinson Police Department needs our help. I am here to ask for your help in Corporal John Lapham's fight for his life. As you are aware, John has been diagnosed with Leukemia. He has been once again hospitalized with an infection that is threatening his life. He is one of the bravest people that I have ever met. He has never asked of anything from the residents of the town. Now is our chance to step up and help both him and his family out. As everyone is aware John has been out of work for a few months. His family has been busy helping John to get better. He needs our help, and I am hoping that this town can step up to the plate and help. From the moment that I met John, I have admired him. He does alot, but never asks for anything in return. He has helped so many people in this town. I for one am one of those people. Please help him.

There is a fund set-up in his name at TDBanknorth in Plaistow. Any amount will help John, while he is out of work. It would be great if this town could help ease a burden off his wife.

Thank You

Also if anyone would like to send a card, please address it to:

John Lapham
c/o Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Ctr.
Inpatient mail
75 Francis Street
Boston, MA 02115
United States

Please show Corporal John Lapham, that this community can stand up and show our support to those in need. I for one, miss John and can not wait until he can get better and return to work. Please show him that we support him. "