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!