Less than an hour into last nights selectmen's meeting, Selectmen Sapia and Childs, and Selectman Sullivan had a little contretemps, over going into non-public session to ream our road agent once again. Mr. Sullivan rightly called public attention to the impropriety of the action. Mr. Stewart exercised his right to have the meeting conducted in the open, and apparently that really offended Jack and Fred.
Why cant these issues be dealt with in public, especially when the person being reamed asks for it to be conducted in public?
Why do Jack and Fred NOT want to hire an assistant road agent? What has changed? Why do we not need one now when we have needed one for the last 30 years? This is the same board that in the last three years has created the Town's FIRST FULL TIME police Lt. without even a consideration for the will of the voters, tried to make the community center director full time, increased spending across the board, paid town officials PERSONAL legal expenses, and now they feel that the place to cut costs is with the highway dept.? A dept. that has already reduced it's overall budget by over $100,000 this year?
This blog accepts the fact that Fred has had an axe to grind with Teddy for years, That Jack first ran for office to defeat Teddy because teddy wouldn't put speed bumps on his road, but this vindictiveness is going too far.
Why is it disrespectful, according to Chairman Sapia, to question the manner in which the board of selectmen conducts business? Teddy has been infinitely more respectful to the board, than the board, in the persons of Mssrs. Sapia, Childs, and Consentino, have been to him. It must be such a burden to have a thin skin. Never liked people who dish it out, but can't take it.
Jack made a very good point though, the people of Atkinson ARE sick of seeing the circus on monday nights, but what he misses is that he has been the prime instigator of the circus since the chief left the board.
So here is what last nights CIRCUS was REALLY about....
Two weeks ago, we heard about the issue of renting a chipper, to chip up brush. Well last year when Teddy brought that up, Jack was dead set against it due to the expense of maintenance and insurance and training personell to use it properly. All valid concerns. Twoo weeks ago he chewed teddy out for not budgeting for the chipper rental. Teddy contradicted Jack, which led to a non-public session for the purpose of reprimanding teddy for his insubordination. When the Jack started discussing discontinuing the assistant road agent position, Teddy stated that he would not participate in policy discussions off camera as it was illegal! He was right. From what we hear Fred ordered him back into the room, and Teddy, to his credit, refused. This led to last nights non- public session to write Teddy up for his "disrespect to the board of selectmen" (JAcks words) Two problems, the board can not order anyone to do an illegal thing. Secondly, Teddy is not an employee but an elected official. They can write him up for the quality of his work but not for insubordination, he doesn't work FOR them, he works FOR the people, they merely supervise him. Jack, read the law and learn your job! Selectman Sullivan is exactly right; you can't discuss policy issues in non-public session. You can not FIRE an elected official, even the road agent! You can suspend his duties while you file with the Superior Court to remove him, but you can not FIRE an elected official! You do not control the membership of the tower committee, it is spelled out in the warrant article! Whatever happenned to the man of the people who was going to make everything public and give the town back to the people? I gues you lied about that too, huh, Jack? You can not conduct town business out of public meetings, except as specifically prescribed by RSA 91A:3.
Funny, I remember Jack making such a big deal about adopting Robert's Rules of Conduct, as official policy of the board to instill courtesy and decorum among the board. It only took 22 minutes for Jack to violate Robert's Rules. Perhaps he should have read the rules first! This meeting was a prime example, Jack, as chair, had recognized Paul. When Paul had the floor and started saying something Jack didn't like he spoke over him, something Robert's Rules were designed to avoid.
The part of the meeting where they were reviewing the employee manual was interesting as well, seeing as the Town code of ethics ordinance prohibits discussion, deliberation, or voting upon any issue where there existed an employee/employer relationship within the last 12 months. This means that Fred, who ended his employer/employee relationship one month ago should be recusing himself and stepping aside on these issues. But not in Atkinson!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
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).
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. "
12 comments:
Thank you selectman Sullivan for revealing to those of us who watch what goes on when the cameras are not present, keep up the good work.
Thank you Selectman Sullivan. You are a class act. Well mannered, respectful, ethical and in the face of constant adversity (Jack and Fred) you prevail.
Please don't lose heart.
You are the only good and right thing about Atkinson government today.
Ok, I have a question for the selectmen;
What line item in the recycling budget is going to be used to spend the money to rent the chipper for the brush dump?
From what line item in what budget is the money going to come from for this?
If this is going to cost $5,000 or more, why wasn't this a warrant article, and put out to bid, as per town regulations?
Why were the selectmen against this wen it was brought up during budget season, but so adamant about doing it now that the election has passed?
We(the budget committee) did not budget for this rental, or the training, insurance, labor to run it, where are these expenses to come from?
Why isnt the budget committee asking these questions of the selectmen?
By law, each line item in the budget is a specific spending purpose, there is no spending purpose in the recycling budget for equipment lease or rental or expense. The selectmen can not, by law, add, delete, or move line items in the budget. They can move money into and out of existing line items, but have no control over the line items themselves. The budget committee has sole authority over the creating of line items, yet now that the voters have passed the existing budget, even the budget committee con not legally create a new spending purpose in the existing budget, so how will the selectmen spend money that hasn't been raised and appropriated for a spending purpose that hasn't been disclosed and voted upon by the legislative body(the people)?
Or is this going to be like the SUV purchase all over again, where you do what you want irregardless of what the law and established procedure is?
Mark Acciard
Thank you, Mr. Acciard, for as always cutting to the heart of the matter, and explaining it concisely.
I, too, want to knowwhere the money is going to come from and why weren't the voters involved?
I am sick and tired of these guys just spending money all over the place, when they didn't let us know last month on the ballot. It is time for another revolution.
I have a question, too. Why is it that the department heads can be "written up" for being disrespectful of the Selectmen and who writes the Selectmen up when they are disrespectful of everyone?
You all need to remember that the Selectmen - as a rule - can't spend money unless YOU authorized it at Deliberative Session or at the polls. It's when they spend money that you should raise the roof. Chippers were not in the budget. Time for a roof-raising.
Anon you are wrong, they bought an SUV for the Pd, without consulting the voters. They do what they want they dont care! Remember that when you go to the polls!
I had hoped/expected to see my comment posted today..I guess you will only publish comments in support of those "you" like. Too bad, I thought "you" claimed to consider all opinions. I was wrong.
To Anon @ 11:48
not sure what you are talking about, but if you mean the comment which was requested as an article submission, we felt that was not meaty enough to warrant a full articcle but was perfectly suited to the commentary, sorry if this offends.
Heard Jack say on Monday night that the chipper was important "because is time for the town to start thinking green".
Why is Burning brush not green? It is totally natural, hundred's of thousand's of acres of brush burn every year, Why is running a gasoline engine, spewing hydrocarbons into the atmosphere to chip brush more green than simply burning it? And I wont even discuss the economic costs to the environment! You need to stop thinking in sound bites, Jack!
Here are the budgetary costs associated with the chipper, just off the top of my head:
Rental $ 5,000
Labor $10,855
Insurance $ ??????
Gas $ ?????
Maintenance $ ?????
Note: Labor is figured @ 16 hours/wk. @ 10/hr. plus associated payroll costs to that pay. Included in this figure is 3 hours training at the same pay rate.
We are only one month after Town Meeting at which the voters approved the budget and warrant articles.
Why wasn't this put into a warrant article?
Where s the money going to come from?
Please explain how this is a "change unforeseen at town meeting" as described in RSA 32:10?
Post a Comment