Ok, here is the question, How, when, at what meeting did we authorize the selectmen to INCREASE the size of the fleet AGAIN?
Here is the history:
In 2002 the budget committee put the spending purpose of "cruiser lease agreements" into the budget for the first time. This was because the selectmen claimed they were going to lease two new cruisers every two years. They were going to trade the two oldest cruisers in on two new ones, and this would mean that they wouldn't have to put warrant articles in every two years. The voters passed it thus giving the selectmen the authority to lease vehicles without prior voter approval.
The first time this came up after that was March of 2003, the voters had just turned down a new elderly affairs car, yet elderly affairs got one anyways, because the selectmen(read that as the chief) only traded one in on the two new cruisers, giving the extra one to Elderly, without prior voter approval, or a selectman vote. Then he bought the "surveillance vehicle" through donations, and three months later sloughed that off to elderly to. So even though the voters said no, Elderly got TWO new vehicles in 2003.
The next time the lease came up was in 2005. This year the selectmen(read that as the chief, again) leased a $30,000 SUV, without public disclosure, or vote of the selectmen, thus making the transaction illegal. Sapia STILL insists no laws were broken in that transaction, he is wrong, again! Once again they increased the size of the fleet with no discussion or approval, nor was it done in public. They tried to shelter this heinous action by saying that the spending purpose was in the budget. See how corruption quickly gets out of hand.
The next time leases came up was in 2007, Once again the selectmen only traded one in for two, again increasing the size of the fleet. With the new Wheelchair van on the way we now own 11 police /elderly vehicles! Why, when we only have 1 officer on patrol at any given time? Who drives them all?
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. "
6 comments:
Great Article, this is why for the past two years as budget committee chair, I tried to change that line item back to "cruiser expense" to remove that purpose from the budget, and force the selectmen to put it in a warrant article so that the voters have a say. I was outvoted both times. But as you can see, they are three for three at doing the wrong thing, As I said at the public hearing last year, "I dont trust the majority of the board of selectmen to do the right thing."
what the hell do we need 11 cars for? I think we only have one cruising on most shifts, who are the other for?
I dont remember hearing about this extra car at deliberative session, must be something the chief wanted. selectmen probably didn't even know until it appeared on this blog.
On Monday night, I noted, with great interest, that the Selectmen voted to authorize purchase of the wheel-chair van. Mr. Sullivan did note that no Selectmen's vote was necessary, since it had been approved by Town Meeting via a warrant article. And he was right. Mr. Sapia, however, was determined to follow through with a vote of the Board. Good man, Jack.
If ONLY you had done the same with last year's SUV, which was not approved by anyone, and which was not a warrant article item.
Oh wait...you didn't know about the SUV until it was in the PD parking lot, did you? Too late to authorize; the Chairman had already purchased it.
And lest we forget one selectman has no authority to do anything. and that is why the purchase was illegal!
Atkinson is so lucky to have a police chief who breaks the law, aren't we?
Our town motto should be spend, spend, spend.
It's bad enough on election day the majority of the residents who turn out vote in favor of warrant articles spending money like a bunch of drunken sailors. Then, to next find out about the "2 for 1" deals with regard to vehicle procurement we as taxpayers are being treated to, I'm beginning to wonder if ever the money is going to run out in this town?
I don't imagine the new Lewis development is going to bring in enough additional tax revenue for us to keep up our current spending habits - both the ones voted by our taxpayers and the ones done "unilaterally" by those who feel they can spend our money WITHOUT our approval!
Post a Comment