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

Wednesday, May 30

Quo Warranto-part II, Why won't the selectmen re-appoint Chief?

Quo Warranto is a latin term with a contemporary legal meaning of "show your warrants" or show your authority, and qualifications to hold your office.

Now anyone who wishes to take the time to go to the Town Clerk's office and ask, will find that Chief Consentino's appointment as police chief expired in May of 1999. Since that time, Atkinson has not had an appointed police chief, merely someone filling the slot until an appointment can be made. The selectmen have been apprised of this situation and have chosen neither to re-appoint the chief, nor to advertise the position as vacant, why?

Well, around that time in 1999 a funny thing happened in Concord.... The legislature passed new qualifications to be a police officer in the State of New Hampshire. RSA 188F:27

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XV/188-F/188-F-27.htm


And these qualifications contained no Grandfather clause although they DID give each officer over 20 months to comply. Here are some of the new requirement to be a police officer in NH:

I. At the earliest practical time, the council shall provide by rule that after one year from the effective date of the rule no person shall be appointed as a police officer, state corrections officer, or state probation-parole officer, except on a temporary or probationary basis, unless such person has satisfactorily completed a preparatory program of police, corrections, or probation-parole training appropriate to such person's position at a school approved by the council. No such officer who lacks the educational and training qualifications required by this section may have the temporary or probationary employment extended beyond 2 years.

This allows existing officers a time frame in which to bring their qualification up to standard. It also says that if they don't, they may serve as probationary officers for a max. of 2 years.

II. Every elected police officer shall be required to satisfactorily complete a preparatory program of police training at a school approved by the council. Any elected officer who has not complied with the educational and training requirements of this paragraph within 6 months after election shall be removed from office by the governing body of the governmental unit

III. The council, by rules adopted under RSA 541-A, shall establish the standards for physical and mental fitness under paragraphs III-a-III-h and shall fix other qualifications for the appointment of police officers, state corrections officers, and probation-parole officers, including minimum age, physical and mental standards, citizenship, good moral character, experience, and other such matters as relate to the competence and reliability of persons to assume and discharge the responsibilities of their offices. The council shall prescribe the means for presenting evidence of the fulfillment of these requirements.

III-a. At the earliest practicable time, the police standards and training council shall require that all uncertified part-time and full-time police officers, state corrections officers, and probation-parole officers, prior to assuming their duties, successfully pass a medical examination including a drug screening administered under the direction of a licensed physician according to protocols adopted by the council. Such examination, when conducted, shall be valid for a period of one year for purposes of application for employment.
III-b. At the earliest practical time, the police standards and training council shall require that all uncertified part-time and full-time police officers, state corrections officers, and probation-parole officers, as a condition of admission to a basic or reciprocal certification training program successfully pass a physical fitness performance test administered according to standards adopted by the council.
III-c. No later than January 1, 1999, the police standards and training council shall require that all uncertified part-time and full-time police officers, state corrections officers, and probation-parole officers, prior to assuming their duties, successfully pass a psychological screening test battery administered under the direction of a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist according to protocols adopted by the council and designed to detect behavioral traits that could adversely affect the person's ability to perform the essential functions of a law enforcement officer. Such an examination shall be valid for a period of one year from the date of administration for purposes of application for such employment.
III-d. Beginning January 1, 2001, the police standards and training council shall require that all certified police officers, state corrections officers, and probation-parole officers, hired after that date, as a condition of continued certification and employment furnish the council every 3 years with a certificate from a licensed physician, physician's assistant, or registered nurse practitioner who has conducted a medical examination of the officer according to protocols adopted by the council, certifying that in the opinion of the examiner the officer is physically capable of participating in the council's physical fitness test.
III-e. Any officer who is unable to meet the medical requirements of paragraph III-d may request an additional medical examination by a physician chosen by the council. If the officer is still unable to meet the standards, such officer's certification shall be placed in a probationary status for a period of up to 2 years, during which time the officer may request re-examination at any time. If following the 2-year period the officer is still unable to meet the standards, the officer's certification shall be suspended until such time as such officer obtains the medical certification required in paragraph III-d.
III-f. Beginning January 1, 2001, the police standards and training council shall require that all certified police officers, state corrections officers, and probation-parole officers, hired after that date, as a condition of continued certification and employment every 3 years pass a physical fitness performance test administered by the hiring authority or the council, according to protocols adopted by the council.
III-g. Any officer who is unable to meet the physical fitness performance requirements of paragraph III-f may request an additional physical fitness performance test administered by the council. If the officer is still unable to meet the standards, such officer's certification shall be placed in a probationary status for a period of up to 2 years, during which time the officer may request re-examination at any time. If, following the 2-year period, the officer is still unable to meet the standards, the officer's certification shall be suspended until such time as such officer is able to pass the physical performance test.

Now does anyone believe that our chief with his notoriously bad heart, passed both a physical, and a physical fitness test? Does anyone believe that with our chiefs 30 year documented history of "going after" those who question his actions, and using the police force to do it, passed a psychological, personality test? And what about the 10 hours a year of continuing education classes?

Now for the $100,000 question......

Why havent the Selectmen either re-appointed Consentino, if he is truly qulified, or dismissed him if he is not? Could it be because he got two of the selectmen elected, and they know he isn't qualified, and don't want to deal with the fallout?

Danville is Curious??

Curt Springer said...

ARTICLE SUBMISSION

Your "Chief" is at it again, but this time he is screwing around with your money in my town (Danville).

Thursday, May 24

Selectmen Chairman Abdicates responsibility to the State.

This is Leadership redefined! Thank God Jack wasn't the Mayor of New York on Sept. 11, 2001! He wold have been asking the President what to do.

Mr. Sapia(one can only hope) stated in the Eagle-Tribune today that "He is confident that the state is capable of making decisionson how much water should be taken out of town." and "I have great faith in the state's ability to manage this process and to protect our resources." "Sapia also questioned the need for a special town meeting because it would cost the town"

Mr. Sapia, it is not the state's responsibilty to protect the town's resources, it is yours. It is not the state's responsibilty to hold public hearings to inform the public of the ramifications of the pumping of millions of gallons of groundwater and shipping it to Hampstead, it is not the state's responsibilities to represent the towns residents in this process before the DES, it is yours!

The representative from the State DES, at the April meeting(which had to be called by a resident, because the selectmen failed to do so.)admitted that the state had NEVER in his experience denied a water company's application as long as it is filled out correctly. In light of this, which has been told to Mr. Sapia many times including Monday's meeting, He STILL feel confident the STATE will protect our water? If that is the case what do we have selectmen for, other than to ridicule residents that they dislike?

Mr. Sapia, I am sure that it is easier to let the state handle it, then when people 2000' away from the new well are drawing dry, what will you tell them? Oh, I know blame it on the state. How about some leadership, how about you do the job we elected you for, and leave the lawsuits alone for a while. As for the need for a secial town meeting, We the residents feel the need for a special town meeting so that We can ORDER YOU TO DO WHAT WE TELL YOU! We no longer trust you to do the right thing, because you have failed to do so many times in the past.

WATER !! - The Process




TITLE L




WATER MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION
CHAPTER 485-C GROUNDWATER PROTECTION ACT

Section 485-C:21

485-C:21 Approval for Large Groundwater Withdrawals. –


I. No person may withdraw 57,600 gallons or more of water in any 24-hour period from a well sited after the effective date of this section without the prior approval of the department.

===============================


ADMINISTRATIVE DUE PROCESS - what the DES and Selectmen are required to do


===============================

II. Applications for approval of water withdrawals of 57,600 gallons or more per day shall be filed with the department on a form approved by the department. A preliminary report submitted by a public water system pursuant to department rules shall be an application for purposes of this section. Copies of the application and any subsequent materials submitted to the department shall be forwarded by certified mail by the applicant to the governing bodies[SELECTMEN] of each municipality and each supplier of water within the potential impact area of the proposed withdrawal as defined in RSA 485-C:21, V-e. The department shall provide the governing body of each municipality with copies of any mailed correspondence sent to the applicant. The department shall provide the applicant with copies of any mailed correspondence sent to or received from the governing body of a municipality.


III. Following the submission of the application, the department shall hold a public hearing on the application in the municipality in which the proposed withdrawal is to be made upon the request of the governing body[SELECTMEN] of any municipality or supplier of water within the potential impact area, provided that such a hearing is requested within 15 days of receipt of the application.

IV. The department shall hold the public hearing within 30 days after the request of the governing body of the municipality or the supplier of water made pursuant to paragraph III. Notice of the hearing shall be made by the applicant and shall be published twice in 2 different weeks, the last publication to be 7 days before the hearing, in one newspaper of general circulation throughout the state and another newspaper of general circulation in the municipality. The notice shall also be posted in 2 public places in the municipality.

V. The applicant and the governing body[SELECTMEN] of each municipality and each supplier of water within the potential impact area of the well may submit comments to the department relative to the proposed withdrawal within 45 days after the public hearing in the municipality or, if no hearing is requested, within 45 days after the receipt of the application. If the comments relative to the application make recommendations to the department, the department shall specifically consider such recommendations and shall issue written findings with respect to each issue raised that is contrary to the decision of the department.

____________________________________________________________________


WE ARE HERE in "Due Process" time line if the application was still in process


_______________________________________

V-a. Upon the request of the governing body[SELECTMEN] of a municipality within the potential impact area, the department shall hold a public hearing, after receipt of the final report, and prior to a final decision. The department shall notify the municipalities within 10 days of receiving the final report. The municipalities shall have 15 days within which to request a public hearing. Notice and response to hearing requests shall be the same as that required under paragraph IV.

==========================================================


TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS -Required to get approval of application


==========================================================

V-b. The department's decision on the application shall be based on a demonstrated need for the withdrawal after review of:


(a) A description of the need.


(b) A conservation management plan.


(c) A conceptual hydrologic model of the withdrawal.


(d) A water resource and use inventory.


(e) The effects of the withdrawal on water resources and uses.


(f) Completion of a withdrawal testing program.


(g) Development of an impact monitoring and reporting program.


(h) Identification of potential mitigation measures.




V-c. In order to preserve the public trust, no large groundwater withdrawal shall cause an unmitigated impact as determined by the following:


(a) Reducing the withdrawal capacity of a private water supply well of a single residence as a result of the reduction of available water that is directly associated with the withdrawal as determined by the following:


(1) Any reduction in capacity for wells with a capacity less than water well board recommended optimum minimum flow capacity of 4 gallons per minute for 4 hours before the withdrawal;


(2) Any reduction in capacity below 4 gallons per minute for 4 hours, for wells that had a capacity greater than 4 gallons per minute for 4 hours, before the withdrawal; or


(3) A reduction in capacity where the well still has a capacity between 4 gallons and 10 gallons per minute for 4 hours and the user provides information indicating that the reduction in flow has resulted in the inability to meet his or her water needs;




(b) Reducing the capacity of a public drinking water supply below the minimum withdrawal rates required per consumer determined by the following:


(1) Minimum daily amounts of drinking water shall be determined per use based on the design flow criteria established for public water supply systems established in rules adopted by the department; or


(2) Where it is verified that such wells were unable to produce the design flow before the withdrawal began, the adverse impact shall be any reduction in the ability to produce water;


(c) Reducing the capacity of a water supply that is used for a multiple unit dwelling residence, but that is not a public water supply, that results in the inability to continue established activities or maintain existing water capacity requirements;


(d) Reducing the capacity of a private, non-residential, non-drinking water supply that results in the inability of a commercial, industrial, agricultural, or retail facility to continue established services or production volumes;


(e) Reducing the ability of a registered water user to produce volumes equivalent to the average daily withdrawal for a specific calendar month as determined by discharge measurements and reports made to the department in accordance with the water user requirements under RSA 488 or other previous water use reporting requirements of the department;


(f) Reducing surface water levels or flows that will, or do, cause a violation of surface water quality rules adopted by the department;


(g) Causing a net loss of values for submerged lands under tidal and fresh waters and its wetlands as set forth in RSA 482-A;


(h) Causing the inability of permitted surface water or groundwater discharges to meet permit conditions;


(i) Reducing river flows below acceptable levels established pursuant to RSA 483;


(j) Causing the contamination of groundwater obtained from wells or surface waters from contaminated groundwater whose flow has been altered by the withdrawal, or causing the contamination of an aquifer or contributing to the spread of any existing contamination;


(k) Causing the long-term predictable rate of replenishment of the aquifer that is the source of the withdrawal to be exceeded.




V-d. Terms and conditions of approval for a large groundwater withdrawal may be altered by the department to accommodate for drought conditions or new withdrawals.




V-e. Applications for large groundwater withdrawals shall be accompanied by an impact assessment of the potential impact area of the proposed withdrawal to demonstrate the preservation of the public trust as set forth in paragraph V-c. The impact assessment shall include at a minimum the following:


(a) The maximum extent of the cone of depression created by the withdrawal with the assumption of a conceptual hydrological model condition of 180 days of continuous pumping at maximum volumes without recharge from rainfall or snowmelt;


(b) The maximum extent of the recharge area for the withdrawal with the assumption of a conceptual hydrologic model condition of 180 days of continuous pumping at maximum volumes without recharge from rainfall or snowmelt; and


(c) The downgradient area of the withdrawal which shall include:


(1) An existing or new delineation of a potential impact area large enough so that the size of the entire study area for the withdrawal is at least 10 times the size of the recharge area for the withdrawal;


(2) An existing or new delineation of a watershed where the amount of water crossing the downgradient boundary, that is, leaving the study under current conditions, is at least 10 times the amount to be withdrawn; or


(3) An alternative method of estimating a potential impact area provided it relies on conservative assumptions, is demonstrated as appropriate for the site by test results, and is clearly explained and justified.




VI. (a) Decisions of the department may be appealed in accordance with RSA 21-O:7, IV.


(b) Any party shall have the right to appeal from the decision of the water council to the superior court of the county in which the large groundwater withdrawal is to be made to determine the validity and the reasonableness of the department's action on the permit. The appeal shall be filed within 60 days after the decision of the water council. The appeal shall suspend the decision of the department pending the outcome of a preliminary hearing. The appeal, so far as practicable, shall have precedence over other actions in the same court.




VII. Records of public hearings shall be available pursuant to RSA 91-A.






VIII. Before the department issues a large groundwater withdrawal permit, any municipality(Selectmen or designated representative of town) in which a well is sited or proposed to be sited, or any municipality within the potential impact area of the proposed withdrawal pursuant to paragraph V-e, may require the department to determine that the withdrawal will not infringe on the public's use of groundwater, including any contribution to wetlands and surface waters, by ensuring that the requirements of paragraph V-c are met. The department's determination shall be based on substantial evidence and shall include the methods, evidence, and data it used to support its judgment.






IX. The department shall allow any municipality(Selectmen or designated representative of town) showing that it may be substantially and specifically affected by a proceeding under this chapter to intervene as a party in the whole or any portion of the proceeding and shall allow the municipality to participate by presentation of argument orally or in writing or for any other purpose, as the department may order. A municipality that intervenes before the department shall retain its status through any appeal of the department's decision.

Monday, May 21

Scoop:Citizens fed up! Petition selectmen to do their jobs

What a meeting tonight! Once again the general selectmen disrespect for resident who are asking them to do things they do not wish to do was evident. Typical Selectmen screaming, raving and infantile rants were the order of the evening.

First planning board members Mike Fletcher and Teddy Stewart told selectmen Sapia and Childs that they made a "mistake" by not re-appointing long serving planning board member Chuck Early at last weeks meeting. Many in town believe that the snub to Mr. Early was retribution for his vocal opposition to selectmen Sapia in particular, and to a lesser extent Childs, in the battle over the fire hydrant two years ago. It has been reported that Mr. Sapia was overheard to comment that this would end the back room deals on the planning board. Funny that comment coming from the man that made a back room deal to offer sworn testimony against the very town he was sworn to serve.

This progressed on to two citizens petitions directing the selectmen to call for a special town meeting to adopt our own version of the Center Barnstead water restriction as a town ordinance. Secondly, another citizens petition for a special town meeting to direct the selectmen to finally place the Vietnam Honor Roll panels, as directed by the 2005 town meeting vote. Selectman Childs greeted the presentation of these two initiatives with a first class temper tantrum, refusing to accept the petitions, even going so far as to accuse Mrs. Grant of passing a meeting attendance sheet off as a petition, which was ridiculuous on the face of it. Mr. Sapia responded by complaining that there would need to be TWO town meetings one for each article, and that they would cost $5000 apiece. This sentiment was echoed by Town Moderator Frank Polito. This blog would like to ask WHY there has to be two separate town meetings. Surely both questions will fit on the same ballot?

Selectmen Sullivan and Sapia prevailed in convincing Childs that the board had no choice but to accept the petitions and call for the special town meeting. Our Town Administrator claimed to have a letter from NHMA ( NH Municipal Assoc.) that stated that there would have to be two separate town meetings, but we will wait to see the actual letter. We remember numerous other letter espousing legal opinions that did not turn out as claimed. Selectman Sapia (intentionally?) misinformed the audience by stating that he didn't know if they could deal with the Vietnam Memorial issue because the Judge had issued an Order on that. Well that is not true, the two sides stipulated, the Judge approved the stipulation, later both sides mutually withdrew the stipulation to change it, and that second stipulation was refused by 97% of the petitioners. The Judge NEVER issued any order in this matter!

As for Moderator Polito's legal opinion and selectman Sapia's echo that the town will need to hold TWO town meetings to satisfy both articles, here is the law;

RSA 39:3

39:3 Articles. – Upon the written application of 25 or more registered voters or 2 percent of the registered voters in town, whichever is less, although in no event shall fewer than 10 registered voters be sufficient, presented to the selectmen or one of them not later than the fifth Tuesday before the day prescribed for an annual meeting, the selectmen shall insert in their warrant for such meeting the petitioned article with only such minor textual changes as may be required. For the purposes of this section, the number of registered voters in a town shall be the number of voters registered prior to the last state general election. The right to have an article inserted in the warrant conferred by this section shall not be invalidated by the provisions of RSA 32. In towns with fewer than 10,000 inhabitants upon the written application of 50 or more voters or 1/4 of the voters in town, whichever is fewer, and in towns with 10,000 or more inhabitants upon the written application of 5 percent of the registered voters in the town, so presented not less than 60 days before the next annual meeting, the selectmen shall warn a special meeting to act upon any question specified in such application.

Notice that there is nothing in the law requiring one meeting per article, this amounts to another scare tactic on the part of the selectmen trying to inflate the actual cost of these meetings.

The ironic facet of tonights spectacle is the fact that if the selectmen would do their jobs, without prejudice, they would not have residents ordering them to do what they should have done in the first place.

If the selectmen had simply put the honor roll panels where the voters said to, the selectmen would not be in receit of a request for secial town meeting right now, and further, if the selectmen had intervened on behalf of the town, to ensure that the town's water is protected they would not be in receipt of a petition for special town meeting today. In other words they made their beds, now they have to lie in them.

Are the Selectmen control freaks?

Ah, the links to the selectmen's minutes finally work! In reviewing the minutes from recent meetings, we came across the minutes from the April 23, 2007 meeting. The one in which Jack was insistent upon reprimanding Teddy for refusing to participate in an illegal meeting. These minutes are available on the Town of Atkinson website, under the selectmen tab. Here are the salient points for our discussion;

"The written reprimand was read. Mr. Sullivan disagreed with the reprimand noting that the violation was neither clean nor obvious. Mr. Sullivan expressed his view that the non-public session of April 9th was a policy discussion and therefore not covered under statute. Mr. Stewart was, therefore, not guilty of insubordination."

"Mr. Childs read from the statute that defines the Board’s authority over the Road Agent (RA) noting that the RA reports to and takes lawful direction from the Board. Mr. Childs noted that directives of the Board are often ignored and that it is wrong and it was his feeling that Mr. Stewart could not just walk out of a discussion because he disagreed with the Board."

" Mr. Stewart replied that the Board could lawfully direct the RA, but that the Board acted unlawfully by changing issues in the non-public session and therefore he was not guilty of insubordination. Mr. Sapia explained that the non-public session was available to discuss personnel issues so that the reputations of those involved did not suffer. The April 9th non-public session was to discuss Mr. Stewart’s recommendation of a candidate."

Now what Mssrs. Childs and Sapia neglect to tell everyone, is that after discussing Mr. Stewart's recommendation, they changed the topic to whether or not the town needed an assistant road agent. At that point, legally, itbecame a policy discussion and Mr. Stewart was correct not to have anything to do with it. A personell mater deals with a specific person, such as hiring, firing, promoting, or demoting an employee. A discussion of a position within the ton is a policy matter and should have been discussed in public. The question is why does Mr. Sapia fear being as open and ..... um.... honest? (probably not the right word given the protagonist) in public meetings as in private? Here is another little piece of the open meetings law that has escaped Mr. Sapia's attention many times over his reign as selectman, The board can not go into non-public session to avoid harm to a member of the boards reputation. Non-public meetings for an issue likely to harm a reputation is designed to protect the individual not the board. Sorry Jack!

Now we move on to the next in the long list of reprimands that selectman Sapia feels are necessary because these people did not genuflect before his ring, the cable camerapeople, you will remember the article a few weeks ago about selectmen Sapia's ire with a camera person, Well the reason he wants her written up is because when he got up to follow Teddy out into the hallway to ream him, she swung the camera around to catch it. Bear in mind that he had not recessed the meeting, as he is now claiming, the meeting was in full swing, and again, anything he had to say to the road agent should have been in the public meeting in that context, but no; he tried to have words off camera, and they were caught for the town to see, so in Mr. Sapia's eyes she now needs to be reprimanded and the Cable TV director needs to establish firm rules about when cameras and mics are on and off. Here is the quote from the minutes;

"Mr. Sullivan re-addressed the reprimand issue again by suggesting that there was a pattern of abuse of employees. Mr. Sullivan held up two letters from the Town Clerk. Mr. Sullivan noted that he had heard that letters of reprimand were being prepared against two cable employees and that the TA and Mr. Sapia had spoken with the Cable Director. The TA noted that he had spoken with Ms. Jordan and asked that she prepare a set of standard operating procedures for cable employees that establish guidelines for when microphones are on and off during meetings as well as camera stills during recesses."

We will leave Jack's disgusting treatment of the Town Clerk for another article. If only the Atkinson Academy Mom's whom Jack actively courts could see him as those of us who work with him do.

Tuesday, May 15

Has NH banned cell phones while driving?

There was an article in the Eagle-Tribune on May 14, 2007, that told how the Atkinson Police are going to be cracking down on speeding throughout the summer. That is all fine, well, and good, but in the article, Lt. Baldwin was quoted as saying; "If I catch anyone talking on a cell phone while they are speeding, I will give them a Negligent driving charge too."

This blog was curious so we read the RSA on reckless driving, here is the RSA;

265:79-b Negligent Driving. – Whoever upon any way drives a vehicle negligently or causes a vehicle to be driven negligently, as defined in RSA 626:2, I(d), or in a manner that endangers or is likely to endanger any person or property shall be guilty of a violation and shall be fined not less than $250 nor more than $500 for a first offense and not less than $500 nor more than $1,000 for a second or subsequent offense.
Source. 2001, 254:2, eff. Jan. 1, 2002. 2005, 267:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2006.

Now here is RSA 626:2, II(c) referred to therein;

626:2 General Requirements of Culpability. –

II. The following are culpable mental states:
(a) ""Purposely.'' A person acts purposely with respect to a material element of an offense when his conscious object is to cause the result or engage in the conduct that comprises the element.
(b) ""Knowingly.'' A person acts knowingly with respect to conduct or to a circumstance that is a material element of an offense when he is aware that his conduct is of such nature or that such circumstances exist.
(c) ""Recklessly.'' A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the circumstances known to him, its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the situation. A person who creates such a risk but is unaware thereof solely by reason of having voluntarily engaged in intoxication or hypnosis also acts recklessly with respect thereto.
(d) ""Negligently.'' A person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he fails to become aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that his failure to become aware of it constitutes a gross deviation from the conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.

Now nowhere in these statutes is talking on a cell phone while driving banned, or considered reckless. While Mass. has passed a law declaring that practice to be a violation, NH has not, which means Lt. Baldwin does not have the authority to make it illegal. Nice try, LT. have to see how this practice works in court.

What was that old adage.....
Oh yes;

Absolute power, corrupts absolutely! There is no greater demonstration of this than the persons of Chief Consentino, Selectman Sapia, And to a lesser extent Lt. Baldwin.

Lack of Decorum once again on the part of our Selectmen

Last night's meeting was notable, once again, for its lack of decorum and courtesy towards long serving town officials. Town Clerk, Linda Jette, was in to give her recommendations for a new hire to replace one of her staff that has left., In the past, the proceedure was that Linda would post the job and field responses, and give the selectmen her recommendation, for then to hire, much the same as the police chief does forr his dept., remember that the town clerk does not work for the selectmen, but is an elected official, however her staff are town employees, and therefore the selectmen do the hiring.

Selectmen Chairman, Sapia, scolded Ms. Jette, on camera, regarding her posting the job, and screening candidates. He felt she should have come, hat in hand, to beg the selectmen to post, screen, and hire her staff, which is totally within their rights; However, that has not been the proceedure in the past, so why would Sapia reasonably expect her to do that now?

Wouldn't it have been better if the selectmen were going to establish a new proceedure to inform all dept. heads, town officials, and committee chairs, BEFOREHAND? Wouldn't that have been better than just waiting for someone to do it the old way, and then embarrass them on camera before the entire town? Sapia is establishing a track record for this, he also did it in 2005 with then budget committee chair Mark Acciard.

This behavior is obviously indicative of the total lack of respect the selectmen have for anyone and everyone else. They do what they want without regard for how it will affect anyone else, and offer no consideration when their hils are not adhered to. For all of selectman Sapia's incessant whining about people's disrespect towards himself, One would think he would be a little more respectful towards others, but apparently the lesson about the golden rule never stuck with him.

Thursday, May 10

Welcome to our neighbors

ARTICLE SUBMISSION

I just want to send greetings from our independent community web site, SpeakoutDanville.

Our home page is http://www.speakoutdanville.org . All of the action is on our bulletin board section, http://speakoutdanville.org/bbs .

We have a blog section but it never caught on.

Now I know why the Danville selectmen's staff refer to our site as "the blog". They are both residents of Atkinson.

Cheers,
Curt Springer,
one of the sponsors of SpeakoutDanville

Friday, May 4

A sample of the posts we have been rejecting. Do you want to see more?

These are samples of the posts that you have read about us refusing to publish. This is not the nastiest, but annoying none the less, because they comes from certain town officials. For your anonymous posts - Thank you, "Mr. Official"!

Incidently the information such as it is contained herein is inaccurate, Oh and to the poster, for someone so intelligent, why would Mr. Acciard be posting anonymously when the very post before this was his by name? This blog can't figure THAT one out.

These are direct quotes from the "Anonymous" poster- we left the names of the people Anonymous is insulting so you can see how bad they are.

Please comment and let us know what you think about this, and if you wish to see more of them.

SAMPLE # 1

The Anonymous poster said:
"Ken Grant said: Some of us work during the day, and obviously some days we don't have as much time as you to check and publish material.

Ken, just what job do you have? Last I heard you were ad psuedo lawyer/BU graduate named seenitdoneit. Please enlighten all of us!

Or was it Mark the Janitor this time...I guess he was out late last night cleaning toilets again, needed to sleep in all day."



To the town official that posted that bilge, wrong again, Ken Grant never posted any of that, but nice try guessing! Also to the best of this blog's knowledge he is not seenitdoneit, either. You are batting 0

Here is another sample:

Sample #2

The Anonymous poster said:
"So Ken, Carol, Jane, and Mark, funny how the moderator got more votes than any other official running unopposed. I guess you are suffering from a major case of depression because no one is listening to your foolishness. And you want to take it out on Polito? Go for it, one more indication of how rediculous your views are. "
Publish Reject


In this post this official is very laudatory of our moderator, could there be a reason, "Mr. Official"?

And Another:

Sample #3

The Anonamus poster said:
"Mark, oh please spare me. "Temerity"...wow...did you take a break from toilet cleaning last night and look up some new words? By the way, what is that pimpmobile you are driving? Is that the car you got in trouble for swapping plates on?
Looks like there is a lot of interest in the blog. One who response here, what do you supposed happened? Time to call Jane, Ken, & Jill to fill out the responses so it looks like someone is reading this.

Well, I'm off to my real job now. I will be back in a few days and I look forward to seeing your creative writing when I return."

Publish Reject


Or this one:

Sample # 4

The Anonymous poster said:
"Marcus and dumb dumb Ken, it is so good to see this blog going down in flames. The number of posts has fallen of dramatically and all that is left are the idiots; both of you, dumb dunb Carol, Donna I'm paranoid Sullivan, and Jill I'm angry Flemming (did I forget anyone?). It has gotten so bad that you removed the post from someone who said yestreday that you are all whiners...so you have sunk pretty low (not that you weren't low already). It just goes to show you, the people of this twon are smarter than you morons will ever be. Marcus, maybe you can ride to your janitor's job in the back of the wheel chair van that was overwhelmingly passed Tuesday. Bye for now...say hi to your fellow loosers! (like Doug the "non-tax payer" Dowd)"
Publish Reject




These are the taunts of petulant child, a little boy being deprived of getting his way. We have received a lot of comments requesting to see the posts that were rejected. Out of 823 posts submitted to this site since its inception, 21 have been rejected, these are the LEAST offensive of those. Some of the others were outright LIBEL, accusing certain town resident of committing crimes, and other misbehaviors.



Let us know what you think please.

Tuesday, May 1

Got A gripe we wont post? Click this title

Get your anger out here!
http://www.hwforums.com/2174/messages/997.html

The Plaistow Town Crier has graciously offerred to publish the "invective-filled rants" that the Atkinson Reporter will not. So if you town officials who HAVE been posting these disgraceful posts actually wish to get your bile read, send it on over.

And here is the best part....

To post on the Town Crier, you must use your email address, kind of hard to be anonymous then. LOL, Who knows, perhaps in this new environment you will have the fortitude to publicly stand by your words.

Good Luck

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. "