Well it was a very interesting deliberative session tonight in the Atkinson Academy Gym. Roughly 130 people braved an extremely hot and humid gymnasium to debate the two citizen petitioned warrant articles.
Article #1 was to institute a large groundwater withdrawal ordinance, in the spirit of the Center Barnstead ordinance. Article #2 was a revote of the 2005 warrant articles directing the selectmen to place the Vietnam Honor Roll panels in front of the town hall, either side of the flagpoles, which the selectmen refused to honor.
Debate was spirited with the debate on the water article continuing for 75 minutes, followed by 50 very intense minutes of debate about the Vietnam Honor Roll. Over 30 residents asked selectmen why this vote was necessary, with Mr. Artess asking the very poignant question of what would happen if the voters voted to place them in front of the town hall, would the selectmen finally place them there, or would they force the issue back to court? After much hemming and hawing, Mr. Sapia answered that he would vote to place them where the voters said. This sentiment was echoed by Mr. Sullivan, and Mr. Childs. Mr. Childs and Mr. Sapia have gone back on their word on this issue in the past, it will be up to the voters to ensure that they remain honest this time.
Numerous residents expressed their disgust with the selectmen's conduct in this matter, foremost among these residents was former budget committee chair, Mark Acciard who summed the issue up nicely. He stated that pleasing everyone was not the selectmen's job, nor was being liked, their job was to do what the voters told them to do. Thank you once again Mr. Acciard. He also described the selectmen's conduct in this issue as dispicable. This blog would have to agree. Mrs. Zaremba expressed her dismay that the selectmen could "get away" with ignoring a town vote. Over 30 speakers expressing their outrage at the selectmen's stone-walling on the placement of these panels, and not one resident stepped up to defend the selectmen, THAT should be a hint for our corrupt leaders!And many, many residents expressed their disgust outside the meeting while waiting in line to get in. All in All it was not a good night for at least two members of the board of selectmen.
The good news... The articles will go to the ballot pretty much as presented! Lets see what the voters do with them.
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. "
20 comments:
Maybe enough people will be energized well enough to vote the bums out and get true public servants in.
Just maybe a board can be elected that will hold the chief accountable. If he can be fired for his blatantly criminal behavior (not the least of which was that illegal "bonus" he gave himself), just maybe the tax payers won't have to pay him an undeserved pension.
Just maybe a board can be elected that will not have to be taken to court to do what it has been told to do.
Just maybe good ideas will not be ignored because a board member felt the person presenting said idea should have puckered up or bent over but did not.
And just maybe the police force won't be use to harass and intimidate tax payers that demand accountability.
Oops I better shut up before I get on the crap list and harassed next time I am in town to visit Mark or my family.
When is the next Halloween border guard?
The really funny thing is that the guy that started the selectmen's stonewalling on the Vietnam Honor roll panels, Phil Consentino, sat at the back of the room last night, and said nothing while his puppet, Jack, got verbally beaten about the head with his idiocy on this issue.
Check the town website, selectmen minutes, July 2005, and you will understand
Ellie Zaremba was great! She said she the selectmen's behavior over the LAST TWO YEARS has been disgusting! Hey who has been a force on the board for the last two years?
Regarding the debate on the Vietnam memorial, what I found irritating was the misuse of terminology by not only Jack Sapia and Fred Childs but our moderator. They kept referring to a "court decision" or what the "judge ordered" or the what the "judge decided". These are legal terms that have very specific legal meanings and were totally not applicable to the STIPULATION that was a result of mediation between 2 parties.
While subtle and perhaps seemingly innocent, I believe it is completely intentional and designed to mislead and confuse the voters. I believe this has been part of their overall strategy to keep the populace confused and uninformed with half-truths and unclear statements. They don't seem to say anything useful.
I think the chief kept quiet because he may actually have been smart enough to sense he had an angry crowd. Jack was taking a beating up there, well, actually it was more self induced. Fred was upset about getting dirty looks from the crowd.
When Mark Acciard held up a copy of the court documentation, explained the steps that occurred and read directly from the court documents themselves, only then did people get a CLEAR and FACTUAL representation of what really occurred. That was when the real debating pretty much ended. Unfortunately, we can never get this kind of clear and unambiguous guidance from Jack and Fred or our moderator.
With all of the rambling and bumbling from Jack and Fred, I couldn't get a clear understanding about what the heck they were even talking about. They whined too much and stated no facts.
Our moderator did a fair job part of the time - funny thing was the audience had to keep reminding him we had to take votes along the way to follow proper procedure. His commentary on why the town's legal counsel refused to give a legal opinion on some of these issues was less than helpful. Actually it was quite useless.
I think we need new Town Counsel. If our town attorney refuses to do what we pay him for (PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE AND LEGAL OPINIONS - HULLO???), someone please remind me why we hired him. If he won't do his job, there are PLENTY of good attorneys in this state that can step right in and do the job right. Are we getting a partial refund on his retainer because he refused to do his job? Gee, I would like to go in to work tomorrow and tell my boss, "I'm not working today", and still get paid. Good work if you can get it. Plus with all of the legal misteps from Chief, Sapia, Fred and Frank, he gets LOTS of business. I would guess that he must LOVE those guys.
How about a comparison;
Selectmen candidate last election, Mrs. Tobin asked very perceptive questions about what was actually in the stipulation, and what actually hapenned in court, and why the selectmen failed to obey the law. While the person who defeated her, Fred Childs, whined about being liked, and offerred no reason why he failed to do his duty.
Mr. Artess brought up the best point of the night. Even if we vote to place them what is to stopp the selectmen from illegally preventing their placement again.
They have already shown they have no honor or integrity.
I say, that if the selectmen fail to put them up, immediately, then the voters should form a group and put them up, after all, none of this is being done with tax payer money. I'm not sure that they have the authority to stop us from doing that, will have to check with legal, perhaps at the state level. Additionally, if they don't do the right thing, assuming that the voters approve, again, the installation of the panels, a petition to recall them, I feel, would be in order.
the problem is NH does not have a recall petition.
you must go to court to have them removed. Takes at least a year, and by then you have had at least one election, and working on another.
RSA 42:1 states that if an elected official violates his oath of office they SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THAT OFFICE FORTHWITH.
The selectmen's oath of office states that they shall uphold and obey the laws of Atkinson, and the state of NH.
Holding unposted, unminuted meetings, violates RSA 91A:3
making any comments that is likely to adversely afect the reputation of anyone other than a board member violates RSA 91A:3
Buying a vehicle without a vote violtes RSA 32:8
Moving money without a vote violates RSA 32:8
Moving money without an "unforseen change" violates RSA 32:10
Using the taxpayers money to pay personal legal expenses of town officials violates RSA 643:1
Refusing to comply with a town meeting vote violates RSA
destroying a tape of a meeting although illegally recorded by the police chief, after being notified of its role as evidence, violates RSA 641:6 and 641:7
this is just a partial listing
When was the last time you saw the Chief at any meeting when he said NOTHING? Hope you all enjoyed!
My father is rolling over in his grave. So if you walked passed it and the ground above it looks disturbed you will know why. He served something like 20 years on the school committee.
Like Mark Acciard, he was an advocate for accountable government (even if he was a shit heal as a father [not Mark A.])
It is a travesty when good people begin to feel their only choice to stop being harassed by those charged with enforcing the law is to move out of town.
It seems the Chief and his puppets went to the Saddam Insane School of Government at Harvard.
With all due respect to the Town Moderator, his legal education and therefore opinions, let alone track record leave alot to be desired.
Fact is only two parties would have standing in the future to bring the honor roll issue back to court, and that is the historical society, and the selectmen. They were the only two parties to the original mediation. And if the voters say put them in fron of the town hall, then the selectmen lose their standing to challenge that, as they are bound by law to follow town meeting mandates, as I believe Sumner Kalman advised them two years ago.
It is really to bad that the ladies from the historical society allowed themselves to be bullied into a settlement, as they surely would have won in court. Their lawyer simply needed to challenge the selectmen's standing.
In my 44 years in town I have never seen a selectmen whine about "trying to please everyone" or about "being liked".
Mr. Sapia and Mr. Childs, neither of those thiings are your job! Your job is to do what the voters tell you to! If pleasing everyone, or being liked is more important to you than doing your sworn duty, then you should step down!
I am a member of the Vietnam Honor Roll Committee. Were we inexperienced and trusting when we went to Mediation? Perhaps. Were we told that if we went to trial it would take at least two years to get on the court calendar? Yes. Were we told that Judge Morrell always sides with municipal boards, i.e, the Selectmen? Yes. Should we have swallowed that crap? No. Has this entire experience left us as a group rather bitter and disillusioned? I would certainly say so. We were trying to do something that we thought was such a fine thing to do and would benefit the town, put in enormous hours of work and it got us nowhere until we took the step of asking for a Special Town Meeting. Yankee magazine would have a field day with this story! The NH town still fighting the Vietnam war!
Mrs. Dillon
This blog thanks you and your committee for acting honorably, and expending great effort to honor our town's veterans.
It was not this blog's intention to in any way disparage you or your committee. On the contrary, our scorn is, like the many people at deliberative session, heaped upon the selectmen, in general, and selectmen Sapia, and Childs, in particular, for their lack of duty, honor, integrity, and their in ability to do their jobs, and follow the law.
They never should have forced this issue into court, they should have done their jobs. And that goes for the man who first decided that these would not be placed in front of the town hall, Chief Consentino.
Gantlemen, in the words of Mr. Acciard at deliberative session, Tuesday, "your conduct is dispicable!" This blog can not say it better.
Thank you Mrs. Dillon, and we welcome your contribution to this blog, hope to see you on here again.
Hey Publius!
While waiting patiently for the September 12 vote on this issue, how about an update on our scenic vista. We held the required public hearing, so do the Selectmen now need to vote? Have they? What's going on?
You should get on the selectmen to approve this and be done with it. The state sent the town an approval letter in Oct. of last year, why is Russ saying that it hasn't been approved yet?
The selectmen's conduct was disgusting! Mr. Sapia's whining about "trying to please everyone" and Mr. Childs whining about "being liked", why not just do your jobs!
Thank God, we can get rid of at least one of these buffoons in March
This is what happens when the people elect a BoS with no integrity. The BoS is allowed to refuse the mandates of the voters. They are making up all the rules as they go along.It is a slippery slope that will happen again and again. It has been going on since 2005 and will continue to grow until the people wake up say ENOUGH!
Selectman Sapia seems to keep trying to rely on the stipulation agreed to by both parties, by stating that there is an existing court order, and they should obey it.
Mr. Sapia, if there is, indeed, an unresolved legal matter involving the town, it is ILLEGAL for you to discuss any aspect of it., including the stipulation.
Post a Comment