We recognize a problem and it is us. The level of discourse has deteriorated to an un-acceptable level. The Anonymous comment we print below clearly expresses the problem and concerns, which we share. Thank you to the Anonymous poster. Satire and humor is effective communications but “nasty” comment is neither funny nor informative. Please, all, raise the level of your comments and think before you post.
"Anonymous said...
There are serious issues of the negligent and abusive use of power in this town, that's clear. No doubt, in not doing their job, the various "leaders" of this community have ticked off a lot of people, and I'm glad this blog is here to get the information out.But I have to be honest about the tone of many of the posts here; they're very immature. The aim of this board, to get this info out and remedy the abuses of power we all witness, is seriously hurt by the juvenile and vindictive nature of the majority of the posts here. It's too bad, because what's going to happen is that the people in the middle are going to be TOTALLLY TURNED OFF by the immature 4th grade tone of many of the posts here, and it's going to take much longer to get things done because of this. Important changes in government come when a critical mass of the public becomes energized around an issue and acts. That's less likely to happen because of the poor quality of posting around here.I still support the mission (which is why I'm posting this), but let's grow up people; we're not much better than the other side when we act like uneducated brats..."
Wednesday, October 31
Sunday, October 28
UP-HOLDING THE WATER WITHDRAWAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
Selectman, Sapia is once again, representing outside private commercial interests instead of the people of Atkinson.
After the townspeople overwhelmingly passed the Groundwater Withdrawal Control Ordinance by a 67% margin at Special Town Meeting, the Selectmen immediately had a legal responsibility to enforce it as representative of the legally voted mandate of a Town Meeting. That ordinance is in effect until and unless a N.H. court rules otherwise.
Instead, what did our Selectmen do right after the Ordinance passed? They tried to find a way to get out of having to enforce the Ordinance. On behalf of and representing the profit-minded private water company INSTEAD of the people of Atkinson, the Selectmen immediately and outrageously sent letters to the N.H. Dept. of Environmental Services, the Attorney General, and the N.H. Public Utilities Commission, asking each agency to hopefully intervene and say that they didn’t have to enforce the Ordinance.
Those agencies do NOT speak for the courts, nor have any authority to intervene or make legal rulings, but our selectmen still tried and continue to try to improperly use those agencies to get out of their enforcement responsibilities.
Our Town Counsel also does not speak for the judges in the N.H. Court system and
has no standing to attempt to do so. His personal opinion (never given) like that of the selectmen, doesn’t matter a damn. This is a democracy and the voted wishes of the people stand until over-ruled by the courts. Town Counsel, like the Selectmen, is required to defend the Town against any legal actions bought against it.
Also, the Selectmen and Town Counsel are NOT supposed to be representing a private commercial interest AGAINST THE TOWNSPEOPLE. The selectmen and Town Counsel have forgotten who pays their salaries
It is time for all residents to take charge again. We went through this in the 70’s. Selectmen and Planning Board and ZBA appointees who (pandered to, catered to, represented) special interests were not re-elected or re-appointed and were replaced by those who put the best interests of the townspeople first. Sapia and his cohorts were not in Atkinson during those times and have no idea what they are doing, or the severe impact their arbitrary and capricious actions are having or will most certainly cause Atkinson to suffer.
We must protect ours and our children’s health, access to clean and plentiful water, our qualities of life and our property values.
After the townspeople overwhelmingly passed the Groundwater Withdrawal Control Ordinance by a 67% margin at Special Town Meeting, the Selectmen immediately had a legal responsibility to enforce it as representative of the legally voted mandate of a Town Meeting. That ordinance is in effect until and unless a N.H. court rules otherwise.
Instead, what did our Selectmen do right after the Ordinance passed? They tried to find a way to get out of having to enforce the Ordinance. On behalf of and representing the profit-minded private water company INSTEAD of the people of Atkinson, the Selectmen immediately and outrageously sent letters to the N.H. Dept. of Environmental Services, the Attorney General, and the N.H. Public Utilities Commission, asking each agency to hopefully intervene and say that they didn’t have to enforce the Ordinance.
Those agencies do NOT speak for the courts, nor have any authority to intervene or make legal rulings, but our selectmen still tried and continue to try to improperly use those agencies to get out of their enforcement responsibilities.
Our Town Counsel also does not speak for the judges in the N.H. Court system and
has no standing to attempt to do so. His personal opinion (never given) like that of the selectmen, doesn’t matter a damn. This is a democracy and the voted wishes of the people stand until over-ruled by the courts. Town Counsel, like the Selectmen, is required to defend the Town against any legal actions bought against it.
Also, the Selectmen and Town Counsel are NOT supposed to be representing a private commercial interest AGAINST THE TOWNSPEOPLE. The selectmen and Town Counsel have forgotten who pays their salaries
It is time for all residents to take charge again. We went through this in the 70’s. Selectmen and Planning Board and ZBA appointees who (pandered to, catered to, represented) special interests were not re-elected or re-appointed and were replaced by those who put the best interests of the townspeople first. Sapia and his cohorts were not in Atkinson during those times and have no idea what they are doing, or the severe impact their arbitrary and capricious actions are having or will most certainly cause Atkinson to suffer.
We must protect ours and our children’s health, access to clean and plentiful water, our qualities of life and our property values.
Thursday, October 25
Selectmen Malfeasance? The story develops!
We all saw the Selectmen's dismal performance with Mrs. Komornick on Monday night; But a little research combined with a couple of phone calls, and FINALLY the release of the minutes from the 10/10/2007 ZBA meeting, only 8 days late according to State Law! Wonder what the ZBA chair, Mr. Polito was trying to hide?, Have revealed this whole sordid affair, which places Atkinson's beloved community center in jeopardy.
What Mr. Sapia, in all of his smug condescension, Monday night failed to reveal, is that the board is in possession of two letters from the Society for the Preservation of NH forests, advising them of the deed restrictions on this property, and that the Town could not violate them.
What he also didn't reveal is that someone(a selectmen, perhaps)apparently told Conservation Chairman, Tim Dziechowski, that he "better not attend" that ZBA meeting. Why Not?
Jack also failed to reveal that a representative from SPNHF was there and Chairman Polito, refused to consider the fact of the deed restrictions. WHY?
The rub is that when the town purchased the community center property from the SPNHF it came with deed restrictions prohibiting any building or commercialism, on the property! Now I know Jack said it is a commercial zone, but he conveniently forgot to mention to all of us at home that the community center land is conservation land, which prohibits signage, AND HE KNEW IT!!!
He seemd afraid that Mr. Pappalardo would sue the town and win, but doesn't care that the OWNERS OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, THE SPNHF, are a state-wide organization with over 10,000 members, and an annual budget of multi-millions, and they exist for the SOLE PURPOSE of protecting NH land and forests! They cannot let this slide because it would set a precedent that would challenge their restrictions on every other piece of land under their control, and they control over 100,000 acres of land in NH! But this is the organization Jack feels will just go away! This lack of honor, integrity, of just basic logic, boggles the mind!
So to recap;
The selectmen violated RSA 91-A:2 by not posting notice of their meeting with the ZBA.,
they violated it again, by not posting the meeting where they decided to go to the ZBA, on Mr. Pappalardo's behalf.
They probably violated the town's code of ethics ordinance by representing a private interest before a town body.
And The Chairman of the ZBA, Frank Polito, yes the very same town moderator that failed miserably in his attempt to sue the town two years ago, stated at the meeting that he spoke with Town Counsel, Kalman, who advised the ZBA to deal with the zoning issue, and forget about the lawsuit, that will inevitably result from this negligence!
This is the type of faulty legal advice that has led this incredibly inept, and unknowledgable board of selectmen into court, ALMOST CONSTANTLY SINCE JACK WAS ELECTED SELECTMAN!
Anyone else see this connection?
And here's the best part.....
IT STATES RIGHT ONT THE DEED THAT THE SPNHF RETAINS THE RIGHT OF RECISSION IN EVENT OF VIOLATION OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS!!!
This means that Ms. Komornick was right!!!
The SPNHF HAS THE RIGHT TO TAKE BACK OWNERSHIP OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER BECAUSE OF JACK SAPIA'S AND HIS BOARD OF SELECTMEN'S INEPTITUDE!!!
What Mr. Sapia, in all of his smug condescension, Monday night failed to reveal, is that the board is in possession of two letters from the Society for the Preservation of NH forests, advising them of the deed restrictions on this property, and that the Town could not violate them.
What he also didn't reveal is that someone(a selectmen, perhaps)apparently told Conservation Chairman, Tim Dziechowski, that he "better not attend" that ZBA meeting. Why Not?
Jack also failed to reveal that a representative from SPNHF was there and Chairman Polito, refused to consider the fact of the deed restrictions. WHY?
The rub is that when the town purchased the community center property from the SPNHF it came with deed restrictions prohibiting any building or commercialism, on the property! Now I know Jack said it is a commercial zone, but he conveniently forgot to mention to all of us at home that the community center land is conservation land, which prohibits signage, AND HE KNEW IT!!!
He seemd afraid that Mr. Pappalardo would sue the town and win, but doesn't care that the OWNERS OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, THE SPNHF, are a state-wide organization with over 10,000 members, and an annual budget of multi-millions, and they exist for the SOLE PURPOSE of protecting NH land and forests! They cannot let this slide because it would set a precedent that would challenge their restrictions on every other piece of land under their control, and they control over 100,000 acres of land in NH! But this is the organization Jack feels will just go away! This lack of honor, integrity, of just basic logic, boggles the mind!
So to recap;
The selectmen violated RSA 91-A:2 by not posting notice of their meeting with the ZBA.,
they violated it again, by not posting the meeting where they decided to go to the ZBA, on Mr. Pappalardo's behalf.
They probably violated the town's code of ethics ordinance by representing a private interest before a town body.
And The Chairman of the ZBA, Frank Polito, yes the very same town moderator that failed miserably in his attempt to sue the town two years ago, stated at the meeting that he spoke with Town Counsel, Kalman, who advised the ZBA to deal with the zoning issue, and forget about the lawsuit, that will inevitably result from this negligence!
This is the type of faulty legal advice that has led this incredibly inept, and unknowledgable board of selectmen into court, ALMOST CONSTANTLY SINCE JACK WAS ELECTED SELECTMAN!
Anyone else see this connection?
And here's the best part.....
IT STATES RIGHT ONT THE DEED THAT THE SPNHF RETAINS THE RIGHT OF RECISSION IN EVENT OF VIOLATION OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS!!!
This means that Ms. Komornick was right!!!
The SPNHF HAS THE RIGHT TO TAKE BACK OWNERSHIP OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER BECAUSE OF JACK SAPIA'S AND HIS BOARD OF SELECTMEN'S INEPTITUDE!!!
Tuesday, October 23
Selectmen Can't seem to act right! What is Sapia trying tohide?
Last nights meeting was interesting. Leigh Komornick came in to ask the selectmen about their procedures for allowing Mr. Pappalardo to place a NEW SIGN for his business on town CONSERVATION LAND!
Ms. Komornick had the covenants, had the original agreements, and had the letters from the Forestry Commission warning the selectmen about violating covenants.
Here is the story, that Sapia, Childs, and Sullivan evidently don't want you to hear;
DOT bought land adjacent to the roadway, when they were building the new bridge. They tore down Mr. Pappalardo's sign for 1 Main st. Now that the project is done, he wants to put a new sign up. Sapia calls it a pre-existing sign, which just shows that he can not read the towns sign ordinances. The old sign was much smaller, and was 50' further up the road towards the bridge. And none of that matters, because once it was torn down, in order to place a new sign, the owner must go through the process all over again.
The problem here is that when the community center was purchased, it came with conservation covenants on the land, which prohibit any further development of the land, and ESPECIALLY NO COMMERCIALISM! No SIGNS! Jack evidently sees this as ridiculous as he intimated last night, He said, "that is zoned a commercial district" "That is commercial land" completely ignoring that the community center sits on conservation land under the management of the Forestry Commission.
What happened, is that Jack and his buddies went to the ZBA, and lobbied on behalf of Mr. Pappalardo's sign. Now there are a number of problems with that.
1.) A quorum of selectmen were at a meeting discussing town business, and there was no posted meeting of the selectmen.
2.) At some point prior to that meeting they all decided to go there and speak, and there was no posted meeting for that decision either.
3.) Selectmen can not advocate for a private interest before a town board.
Jack tried to get around these restrictions by saying he was exercising his free speech rights, and he was there as a resident, not a selectmen(looks like Phil has taught him well) This tells us that Jack had to KNOW what he was doing was wrong, and tried to invent a false and flimsy cover story to explain it.
Can you say CORRUPT?
The problem with all of this is that if the covenants are violated, the NH Forestry Commission may have the right to take back ownership of the property, INCLUDING THE COMMUNITY CENTER! Jack says he doesn't believe this will happen, well thank you for that stellar legal opinion, Jack! Who was your legal counsel, Frank Polito? What Jack DID say was that if they didn't do this he was afraid Mr. Pappalardo would sue the town, and that he might win! Strange, Mr. Sapia, wasn't afraid when Mr. Acciard, filed suit and won, 3 times! He wasn't afraid of helping Phil to violate court orders, by letting him transact elderly affairs business out of the public eye.
AND THEN; Mr. McAllister, and Mr. Sapia, agreed that a judge would have to make the right decision!
MORE LEGAL FEES!!!
WHY DOES EVERYTHING WITH THIS BOARD HAVE TO END UP IN COURT?
WHY CAN'T THEY MAKE A DECISION THAT FOLLOWS THE LAW, SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO TO COURT?
Then Mr. Acciard came in;
Sapia again went through his act of deciding if he would be allowed to speak! My God, THAT is what this whole thing is about, and Sapia is thinking of FURTHER restricting this guy's speech? How inept can one man be?
So He let Mr. Acciard ask his questions, at least a couple of them, and didn't answer any of them, and then SHUT HIM DOWN AGAIN!
SO WHY COULDN'T THE BOARD TELL WHAT STEPS THEY TOOK TO INVESTIGATE ACCIARD'S COMPLAINT?
I think the whole town would like to know that, because it is obvious that they haven't done anything!
And why couldn't he read the letter he gave them, We would like to know what was in it. Mr. Acciard, maybe you could leave that in the library, so that we, the people, can see what our board of selectmen wish to hide!
It is clear that everything this board does, smells! This needs to be looked at by some state agency, because there is no justice in Atkinson, under the current regime!
Ms. Komornick had the covenants, had the original agreements, and had the letters from the Forestry Commission warning the selectmen about violating covenants.
Here is the story, that Sapia, Childs, and Sullivan evidently don't want you to hear;
DOT bought land adjacent to the roadway, when they were building the new bridge. They tore down Mr. Pappalardo's sign for 1 Main st. Now that the project is done, he wants to put a new sign up. Sapia calls it a pre-existing sign, which just shows that he can not read the towns sign ordinances. The old sign was much smaller, and was 50' further up the road towards the bridge. And none of that matters, because once it was torn down, in order to place a new sign, the owner must go through the process all over again.
The problem here is that when the community center was purchased, it came with conservation covenants on the land, which prohibit any further development of the land, and ESPECIALLY NO COMMERCIALISM! No SIGNS! Jack evidently sees this as ridiculous as he intimated last night, He said, "that is zoned a commercial district" "That is commercial land" completely ignoring that the community center sits on conservation land under the management of the Forestry Commission.
What happened, is that Jack and his buddies went to the ZBA, and lobbied on behalf of Mr. Pappalardo's sign. Now there are a number of problems with that.
1.) A quorum of selectmen were at a meeting discussing town business, and there was no posted meeting of the selectmen.
2.) At some point prior to that meeting they all decided to go there and speak, and there was no posted meeting for that decision either.
3.) Selectmen can not advocate for a private interest before a town board.
Jack tried to get around these restrictions by saying he was exercising his free speech rights, and he was there as a resident, not a selectmen(looks like Phil has taught him well) This tells us that Jack had to KNOW what he was doing was wrong, and tried to invent a false and flimsy cover story to explain it.
Can you say CORRUPT?
The problem with all of this is that if the covenants are violated, the NH Forestry Commission may have the right to take back ownership of the property, INCLUDING THE COMMUNITY CENTER! Jack says he doesn't believe this will happen, well thank you for that stellar legal opinion, Jack! Who was your legal counsel, Frank Polito? What Jack DID say was that if they didn't do this he was afraid Mr. Pappalardo would sue the town, and that he might win! Strange, Mr. Sapia, wasn't afraid when Mr. Acciard, filed suit and won, 3 times! He wasn't afraid of helping Phil to violate court orders, by letting him transact elderly affairs business out of the public eye.
AND THEN; Mr. McAllister, and Mr. Sapia, agreed that a judge would have to make the right decision!
MORE LEGAL FEES!!!
WHY DOES EVERYTHING WITH THIS BOARD HAVE TO END UP IN COURT?
WHY CAN'T THEY MAKE A DECISION THAT FOLLOWS THE LAW, SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO TO COURT?
Then Mr. Acciard came in;
Sapia again went through his act of deciding if he would be allowed to speak! My God, THAT is what this whole thing is about, and Sapia is thinking of FURTHER restricting this guy's speech? How inept can one man be?
So He let Mr. Acciard ask his questions, at least a couple of them, and didn't answer any of them, and then SHUT HIM DOWN AGAIN!
SO WHY COULDN'T THE BOARD TELL WHAT STEPS THEY TOOK TO INVESTIGATE ACCIARD'S COMPLAINT?
I think the whole town would like to know that, because it is obvious that they haven't done anything!
And why couldn't he read the letter he gave them, We would like to know what was in it. Mr. Acciard, maybe you could leave that in the library, so that we, the people, can see what our board of selectmen wish to hide!
It is clear that everything this board does, smells! This needs to be looked at by some state agency, because there is no justice in Atkinson, under the current regime!
Friday, October 19
The Complaint against Chief Consentino
MAcciard said:
Publius, Please accept this as an article submission.
The Complaint against Chief Consentino.
I have heard many of my fellow townspeople who were understandably outraged at the official letter that Chief sent to me, ask exactly what was my complaint to the selectmen about this matter. Well, the complaint itself is a public document, and as such I have asked the Atkinson Reporter to post it here as they did, the letter itself.
The issue here is that I, and everyone else has a Constitutional right to question or criticize my government in just about any manner in which I choose. The government DOES NOT have the right to threaten or take away that right.
The fact that I didn't write the article he is complaining about is immaterial. The issue is that even if every word written here came from me, I HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY IT! Law Enforcement does not have the right to stop, or curtail that right.
Now as you will see from the actual complaint if the Blog owner will post it, What I filed was not an administrative complaint, but a CRIMINAL COMPLAINT! This means that I am not coming to the selectmen saying "the officer stopped me and he was rude, and I want him punished." I am saying that there is AMPLE PROBABLE CAUSE to believe that the NH CRIMINAL CODE HAS BEEN VIOLATED by Atkinson's chief law enforcement officer!
This should be a big deal, especially to the selectmen! It should be of concern to everyone in town, because if he can do it to me today, and to Brian Kaye, and Carol Grant at will, then he can do it to you, the next time you criticize him.
This is unacceptable, and the selectmen are probably negligent in their duties to supervise and curtail this behavior.
For the last three years I and my family have put up with the indignities of hearing myself slandered in live selectmens meetings, the lies and mischaracterizations broadcast by our selectmen to the entire town. I have read defamatory remarks written about me and published in the town report. I have sufferred the outrage of having my company's main vendor, and customer ask me why I was "under investigation by the Police" after having received a phone call from Chief Consentino, informing him that I was. Now ask yourself; Would YOU be angry if the chief of police called your boss to tell him you were under investigation by the police, when there were no open cases against you? I have had MY Honor and integrity called into question for asking my town officials to obey the law, and getting a court to do so when they refused, and the very people defaming me are the same town officials, that evidently think laws do not apply to them.
I have gone away, moved on, gone back to my life, or whatever other euphemism Jack would like to use, 8 times in the past three years, and they keep coming back to harm myself and my family again, and again. Like cockroaches they will not go away. Well, I will not back down again. Their abusive behavior will stop here!
Publius, Please accept this as an article submission.
The Complaint against Chief Consentino.
I have heard many of my fellow townspeople who were understandably outraged at the official letter that Chief sent to me, ask exactly what was my complaint to the selectmen about this matter. Well, the complaint itself is a public document, and as such I have asked the Atkinson Reporter to post it here as they did, the letter itself.
The issue here is that I, and everyone else has a Constitutional right to question or criticize my government in just about any manner in which I choose. The government DOES NOT have the right to threaten or take away that right.
The fact that I didn't write the article he is complaining about is immaterial. The issue is that even if every word written here came from me, I HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY IT! Law Enforcement does not have the right to stop, or curtail that right.
Now as you will see from the actual complaint if the Blog owner will post it, What I filed was not an administrative complaint, but a CRIMINAL COMPLAINT! This means that I am not coming to the selectmen saying "the officer stopped me and he was rude, and I want him punished." I am saying that there is AMPLE PROBABLE CAUSE to believe that the NH CRIMINAL CODE HAS BEEN VIOLATED by Atkinson's chief law enforcement officer!
This should be a big deal, especially to the selectmen! It should be of concern to everyone in town, because if he can do it to me today, and to Brian Kaye, and Carol Grant at will, then he can do it to you, the next time you criticize him.
This is unacceptable, and the selectmen are probably negligent in their duties to supervise and curtail this behavior.
For the last three years I and my family have put up with the indignities of hearing myself slandered in live selectmens meetings, the lies and mischaracterizations broadcast by our selectmen to the entire town. I have read defamatory remarks written about me and published in the town report. I have sufferred the outrage of having my company's main vendor, and customer ask me why I was "under investigation by the Police" after having received a phone call from Chief Consentino, informing him that I was. Now ask yourself; Would YOU be angry if the chief of police called your boss to tell him you were under investigation by the police, when there were no open cases against you? I have had MY Honor and integrity called into question for asking my town officials to obey the law, and getting a court to do so when they refused, and the very people defaming me are the same town officials, that evidently think laws do not apply to them.
I have gone away, moved on, gone back to my life, or whatever other euphemism Jack would like to use, 8 times in the past three years, and they keep coming back to harm myself and my family again, and again. Like cockroaches they will not go away. Well, I will not back down again. Their abusive behavior will stop here!
Wednesday, October 17
Selectmen DO NOTHING! AGAIN! Consentino free to continue Threatening Resident at his leisure!
Publius, Please accept this as an article submission.
Selectmen DO NOTHING! AGAIN! Consentino free to continue Threatening Resident at his leisure!
Ok, we all now know about Chief Consentino's letter threatening me with legal action if I don't stop exercising my 1st Ammendment right of Freedom of Speech.
It really doesn't matter that I didn't write the Article he is whining about, What matters is that I and every one of you, have the ABSOLUTE right to question, or criticize your government in any manner in which you choose.
Look at it this way, President George W. Bush is burned in effigy every single day in every major newspaper in the country. Now just imagine how the public would react if he sent the Secret Service to threaten legal action against each and every one of his critics? He would be compared to Hitler with his Gestapo!
But that very same behavior seems to be ok, when it is committed by Atkinson's Chief of Police!
How would any of you feel, if you saw your selectmen or police chief do something you felt was inappropriate, and when you criticized them for it, they used the town to threaten you with legal action?
How about if you sent a sound off in to the Eagle-Tribune, or a letter to the editor, should you be in court if you spoke the truth, but your bully of a police chief didn't like it, and has the power to abuse his office to threaten you?
This type of behavior has to stop! The selectmen are evidently either unwilling, or lack the testicular fortitude to stop it. As long as he is allowed to continue with this abhorent behavior people in Atkinson will have to live in fear of pissing off the police chief, and that needs to STOP!
Selectmen DO NOTHING! AGAIN! Consentino free to continue Threatening Resident at his leisure!
Ok, we all now know about Chief Consentino's letter threatening me with legal action if I don't stop exercising my 1st Ammendment right of Freedom of Speech.
It really doesn't matter that I didn't write the Article he is whining about, What matters is that I and every one of you, have the ABSOLUTE right to question, or criticize your government in any manner in which you choose.
Look at it this way, President George W. Bush is burned in effigy every single day in every major newspaper in the country. Now just imagine how the public would react if he sent the Secret Service to threaten legal action against each and every one of his critics? He would be compared to Hitler with his Gestapo!
But that very same behavior seems to be ok, when it is committed by Atkinson's Chief of Police!
How would any of you feel, if you saw your selectmen or police chief do something you felt was inappropriate, and when you criticized them for it, they used the town to threaten you with legal action?
How about if you sent a sound off in to the Eagle-Tribune, or a letter to the editor, should you be in court if you spoke the truth, but your bully of a police chief didn't like it, and has the power to abuse his office to threaten you?
This type of behavior has to stop! The selectmen are evidently either unwilling, or lack the testicular fortitude to stop it. As long as he is allowed to continue with this abhorent behavior people in Atkinson will have to live in fear of pissing off the police chief, and that needs to STOP!
Tuesday, October 16
So Ordered !!!!
Publius,
I'm the happiest person in the world today. Please accept and publish this as a separate article.
"SO ORDERED"
I've got in front of me the executed court order from Rockingham Superior Court ordering that the Vietnam Honor Roll panels be placed in front of Town Hall,-- exactly where Atkinson's Town Meeting voters have twice voted them to go.
I couldn't wait for the mail. It was worth a special trip to pick up the court order to see those wonderful words: "So Ordered."!!!
I'm estatic. It's taken over two and a half years of pain, anguish and heartache for the ladies of the Atkinson Vietnam Honor Roll Committee before right finally prevailed. And we owe it all to you wonderful Atkinson voters who came through for those 72 young people who left Atkinson to wear their country's uniform and serve under her flag during a tough period. You wonderful caring voters! You 74 % of the voters!
On behalf of the Honor Roll Committee, I'd like to give you our most heart-felt thanks. Also thank you to the donors and co-petitioners!
I'd love to hug you all !!
Carol Grant, Chairwoman
Atkinson Vietnam Honor
Roll Committee
NOTICE OF DECISION
05-E-0676 Carol A. Grant, Chairwoman, et al vs. Town of Atkinson, etal
Please be advised that on 10/10/2007 Judge Lewis made the following order relative to:
Amended Stipulation: Approved.
"So Ordered"
10/15/2007 Raymond Taylor
Clerk of Court
(Actually, the judge signed the
order SIX DAYS AGO !!)
AMENDED STIPULATION
NOW COME, the parties in the above-entitled matter, and having previously entered into a Stipulation, now as a result of a duly petitioned and Special Town meeting held on Wednesday, September 12, 2007, hereby amends said previous stipulation by replacing the terms thereof with the following:
1. In accordance with the September 12, 2007 Town Meeting Warrant Article Vote, the Vietnam Honor Roll panels will be placed directly in front of the Atkinson Town Hall, with one name panel to be positioned on each side of the existing "Vietnam map stone" within 8 feet of the "Vietnam map stone", with each panel positioned outside of and flanking the flagpoles, to be in place prior to Veteran's Day 2007.
I'm the happiest person in the world today. Please accept and publish this as a separate article.
"SO ORDERED"
I've got in front of me the executed court order from Rockingham Superior Court ordering that the Vietnam Honor Roll panels be placed in front of Town Hall,-- exactly where Atkinson's Town Meeting voters have twice voted them to go.
I couldn't wait for the mail. It was worth a special trip to pick up the court order to see those wonderful words: "So Ordered."!!!
I'm estatic. It's taken over two and a half years of pain, anguish and heartache for the ladies of the Atkinson Vietnam Honor Roll Committee before right finally prevailed. And we owe it all to you wonderful Atkinson voters who came through for those 72 young people who left Atkinson to wear their country's uniform and serve under her flag during a tough period. You wonderful caring voters! You 74 % of the voters!
On behalf of the Honor Roll Committee, I'd like to give you our most heart-felt thanks. Also thank you to the donors and co-petitioners!
I'd love to hug you all !!
Carol Grant, Chairwoman
Atkinson Vietnam Honor
Roll Committee
NOTICE OF DECISION
05-E-0676 Carol A. Grant, Chairwoman, et al vs. Town of Atkinson, etal
Please be advised that on 10/10/2007 Judge Lewis made the following order relative to:
Amended Stipulation: Approved.
"So Ordered"
10/15/2007 Raymond Taylor
Clerk of Court
(Actually, the judge signed the
order SIX DAYS AGO !!)
AMENDED STIPULATION
NOW COME, the parties in the above-entitled matter, and having previously entered into a Stipulation, now as a result of a duly petitioned and Special Town meeting held on Wednesday, September 12, 2007, hereby amends said previous stipulation by replacing the terms thereof with the following:
1. In accordance with the September 12, 2007 Town Meeting Warrant Article Vote, the Vietnam Honor Roll panels will be placed directly in front of the Atkinson Town Hall, with one name panel to be positioned on each side of the existing "Vietnam map stone" within 8 feet of the "Vietnam map stone", with each panel positioned outside of and flanking the flagpoles, to be in place prior to Veteran's Day 2007.
Sunday, October 14
Addressing another example of Sapia-Consentino misuse of police power!
Welcome to another contributor under the Publius By-line.
Publius, An article for your blog. Thanks
ADDRESSING ANOTHER EXAMPLE of SAPIA-CONSENTINO MIS-USE of POLICE
By Ken Grant
I am telling this story now for 3 reasons. First, the subject is timely and need to be seen in the context of the problems coming to public attention now. Second, my story contains solid examples and reinforcement of Atkinson’s current pressing problems. And last, but not least, several people whose opinion I respect have suggested I do a short article which, in relating the story, certainly reinforces and highlights many of Atkinson’s current problems.
On November 9, 2005, Selectman Sapia and then-Selectman “police chief” Consentino, FOR POLITICAL REASONS, sent uniformed police to remove me from the Town Hall. They then notified and provided a series of defamatory statements to an Eagle Tribune reporter for the obvious intent of harming my reputation.
On that day, WMUR-TV sent their Anchor/Reporter, Kria Sakakeeny, accompanied by a news cameraman to Atkinson to conduct interviews concerning the Vietnam Honor Roll. The primary interview was to be of the ladies of the Atkinson Vietnam Honor Roll Committee in front of the map-stone.
During those interviews, the reporter stated that she also wished to view and photograph the two Vietnam Honor Roll panels. She was given directions to the storage place but said that she was unfamiliar with the area and could someone show her the way. I was volunteered for the job. I remained at Town Hall solely because I had the responsibility of guiding the news crew to the panels’ location upon completion of their interviews in town.
A second interview of one of Sapia’s anti-panels group, was to take place inside the main meeting room in Town Hall after the interview of the ladies, so I was asked to hang around until after that second interview was completed.
There is no LESS private place on this earth than in an open public government meeting room with a group of people in front of a Television camera while being interviewed by a reporter with a microphone in her hand.
I have personally observed or participated in numerous similar interviews. The behind-the-camera observing audience is often large. But, in Atkinson my quiet and non-intrusive arrival some how provoked the ire of the interviewee, a Sapia ally. He immediately singled me out and demanded “Get him out of here”, referring to me. Sapia and McAllister, amongst others, were also watching the interview, but only I was singled out to leave. I IMMEDIATELY left and returned to the atrium of Town Hall after having been present at this second interview FOR NO MORE THAN 10 – 15 SECONDS. After all, if anything newsworthy was forthcoming it would be available on the evening news.
Within a few minutes a uniform officer arrived, immediately asked me “what is the problem” . The officer thereafter stuck to me like glue even when Sapia came outside to the front sidewalk to taunt me. The officer did or said nothing as I recall. While I waited in the center atrium area, Consentino entered and did a kabuki dance around me as I ignored him and did not acknowledge his presence.
Lt. Baldwin also arrived. To my recollection, I had NEVER met him before. As I recall, we met at the Town Clerk’s counter. I asked him what was going on and why were they all there? I had no idea at that time that they were there in response to a Sapia/Consentino call. Baldwin just gave me a telling smirk and would not give me the basic courtesy of an answer. I have seen him react similarly on another occasion. Why? When a person reacts like that they are either part of the problem or don’t care. He left a bad first impression.
By piecing together the police report with comments by McAllister, Sapia and Consentino in the next day’s Eagle Tribune article, I learned that Sapia had, as usual, totally over-reacted in using police against residents for political reasons, by directing Town Administrator McAllister to call the police against this resident. McAllister then EXAGGERATED and HYPED IT UP by falsely reporting that my presence was “intimidating behavior” and that I “tried to insert(myself) “during an interview
in a forceful manner.” Since when is a resident JUST STANDING THERE WATCHING AN INTERVIEW in a public area “trying in insert” himself or acting “in a forceful manner.”?
McAllister’s call to the police must have been to Consentino because it was Consentino who made the request dispatching an officer to Town Hall. The arriving police officer’s report states that he was told over the radio by Consentino “that there was a potentially volatile situation festering at Town Hall.” Consentino added his own hyping-up of the situation by characterizing a nothing situation as a “potentially volatile situation.” The total over-reactions by Sapia, McAllister, and Consentino in their mis-use of the police against a resident was documented by the police officer’s official report which states that “there were NO incidents of violence or any other type of disorderly outbursts. The interviews took place and NO POLICE INTERVENTION WAS NEEDED.”
The problem: We have Selectmen, two of which were installed in the office by the campaigning efforts of, the “Chief of police”, Director of Elderly Affairs, then Selectman Consentino. As the saying goes, “You dance with the one who brung you”. Call it what you will but “they” work tirelessly administrating (politically) on each others behalf. That is just wrong.
The problem: The people we now employ are not qualified to meet our needs or expectations.
The problem: Going beyond the debate on certification, appointment, and “grand-fathering” claims to office, Atkinson has not had a qualified chief of police for years. The current standards, requirements and expectations for that office are fundamentally different and more advanced than they were 30 years ago. We, Atkinson, need a temperamentally qualified, educationally qualified, physically qualified, administratively qualified person leading our police department under the guidance of the community and NOT a continuation of an arcane system of empire building. We expect the Selectmen, who hold that responsibility, to do what is necessary and proper. This is a very important governmental defect needing solution now.
The problem: We, the voters, decided to allow a “Town Administrator” to be hired with the understanding that this would “save us money” locating resources, application for grants and bringing good administrative techniques and advice. I do not believe these expectations are being met. Yes, we were spoiled by previous T.A. Vic Richards when he set us on a good track. But, we have lost that direction with our current administrator.
Finally, I do not want to leave without solutions. Let’s look at solutions. The solution is definitely NOT to “DO NOTHING”. The solution lies in separation of the offender or incompetent from a continuing opportunity to perform offensively or incompetently . The list of satisfactory options can be wide. As examples:
A. Lateral Transfer – be creative and develop a position.
B. Early Retirement - the golden parachute.
C. Resignation.
D. Re-designate the position.
F. Appoint a replacement.
G. Suspension.
H. Termination for cause.
I. Etc.(Do Nothing, Which would be the Norm.)
Publius, An article for your blog. Thanks
ADDRESSING ANOTHER EXAMPLE of SAPIA-CONSENTINO MIS-USE of POLICE
By Ken Grant
I am telling this story now for 3 reasons. First, the subject is timely and need to be seen in the context of the problems coming to public attention now. Second, my story contains solid examples and reinforcement of Atkinson’s current pressing problems. And last, but not least, several people whose opinion I respect have suggested I do a short article which, in relating the story, certainly reinforces and highlights many of Atkinson’s current problems.
On November 9, 2005, Selectman Sapia and then-Selectman “police chief” Consentino, FOR POLITICAL REASONS, sent uniformed police to remove me from the Town Hall. They then notified and provided a series of defamatory statements to an Eagle Tribune reporter for the obvious intent of harming my reputation.
On that day, WMUR-TV sent their Anchor/Reporter, Kria Sakakeeny, accompanied by a news cameraman to Atkinson to conduct interviews concerning the Vietnam Honor Roll. The primary interview was to be of the ladies of the Atkinson Vietnam Honor Roll Committee in front of the map-stone.
During those interviews, the reporter stated that she also wished to view and photograph the two Vietnam Honor Roll panels. She was given directions to the storage place but said that she was unfamiliar with the area and could someone show her the way. I was volunteered for the job. I remained at Town Hall solely because I had the responsibility of guiding the news crew to the panels’ location upon completion of their interviews in town.
A second interview of one of Sapia’s anti-panels group, was to take place inside the main meeting room in Town Hall after the interview of the ladies, so I was asked to hang around until after that second interview was completed.
There is no LESS private place on this earth than in an open public government meeting room with a group of people in front of a Television camera while being interviewed by a reporter with a microphone in her hand.
I have personally observed or participated in numerous similar interviews. The behind-the-camera observing audience is often large. But, in Atkinson my quiet and non-intrusive arrival some how provoked the ire of the interviewee, a Sapia ally. He immediately singled me out and demanded “Get him out of here”, referring to me. Sapia and McAllister, amongst others, were also watching the interview, but only I was singled out to leave. I IMMEDIATELY left and returned to the atrium of Town Hall after having been present at this second interview FOR NO MORE THAN 10 – 15 SECONDS. After all, if anything newsworthy was forthcoming it would be available on the evening news.
Within a few minutes a uniform officer arrived, immediately asked me “what is the problem” . The officer thereafter stuck to me like glue even when Sapia came outside to the front sidewalk to taunt me. The officer did or said nothing as I recall. While I waited in the center atrium area, Consentino entered and did a kabuki dance around me as I ignored him and did not acknowledge his presence.
Lt. Baldwin also arrived. To my recollection, I had NEVER met him before. As I recall, we met at the Town Clerk’s counter. I asked him what was going on and why were they all there? I had no idea at that time that they were there in response to a Sapia/Consentino call. Baldwin just gave me a telling smirk and would not give me the basic courtesy of an answer. I have seen him react similarly on another occasion. Why? When a person reacts like that they are either part of the problem or don’t care. He left a bad first impression.
By piecing together the police report with comments by McAllister, Sapia and Consentino in the next day’s Eagle Tribune article, I learned that Sapia had, as usual, totally over-reacted in using police against residents for political reasons, by directing Town Administrator McAllister to call the police against this resident. McAllister then EXAGGERATED and HYPED IT UP by falsely reporting that my presence was “intimidating behavior” and that I “tried to insert(myself) “during an interview
in a forceful manner.” Since when is a resident JUST STANDING THERE WATCHING AN INTERVIEW in a public area “trying in insert” himself or acting “in a forceful manner.”?
McAllister’s call to the police must have been to Consentino because it was Consentino who made the request dispatching an officer to Town Hall. The arriving police officer’s report states that he was told over the radio by Consentino “that there was a potentially volatile situation festering at Town Hall.” Consentino added his own hyping-up of the situation by characterizing a nothing situation as a “potentially volatile situation.” The total over-reactions by Sapia, McAllister, and Consentino in their mis-use of the police against a resident was documented by the police officer’s official report which states that “there were NO incidents of violence or any other type of disorderly outbursts. The interviews took place and NO POLICE INTERVENTION WAS NEEDED.”
The problem: We have Selectmen, two of which were installed in the office by the campaigning efforts of, the “Chief of police”, Director of Elderly Affairs, then Selectman Consentino. As the saying goes, “You dance with the one who brung you”. Call it what you will but “they” work tirelessly administrating (politically) on each others behalf. That is just wrong.
The problem: The people we now employ are not qualified to meet our needs or expectations.
The problem: Going beyond the debate on certification, appointment, and “grand-fathering” claims to office, Atkinson has not had a qualified chief of police for years. The current standards, requirements and expectations for that office are fundamentally different and more advanced than they were 30 years ago. We, Atkinson, need a temperamentally qualified, educationally qualified, physically qualified, administratively qualified person leading our police department under the guidance of the community and NOT a continuation of an arcane system of empire building. We expect the Selectmen, who hold that responsibility, to do what is necessary and proper. This is a very important governmental defect needing solution now.
The problem: We, the voters, decided to allow a “Town Administrator” to be hired with the understanding that this would “save us money” locating resources, application for grants and bringing good administrative techniques and advice. I do not believe these expectations are being met. Yes, we were spoiled by previous T.A. Vic Richards when he set us on a good track. But, we have lost that direction with our current administrator.
Finally, I do not want to leave without solutions. Let’s look at solutions. The solution is definitely NOT to “DO NOTHING”. The solution lies in separation of the offender or incompetent from a continuing opportunity to perform offensively or incompetently . The list of satisfactory options can be wide. As examples:
A. Lateral Transfer – be creative and develop a position.
B. Early Retirement - the golden parachute.
C. Resignation.
D. Re-designate the position.
F. Appoint a replacement.
G. Suspension.
H. Termination for cause.
I. Etc.(Do Nothing, Which would be the Norm.)
Sunday, October 7
What is "Malfeasance", and how much of it is there in Atkinson's Government?
Here is the definition from Black Law Dictionary:
malfeasance
n. intentionally doing something either legally or morally wrong which one had no right to do. It always involves dishonesty, illegality or knowingly exceeding authority for improper reasons.
Now, how many instances of malfeasance have we seen in our town government?
1.) Government threatening a private citizen with lawsuit for criticism.
2.) Selectmen violating town ordinance by hiring the town first full time police Lt. without advetising the position.
3.) Selectmen using the police to evict people from the town hall for watching proceedings.
4.) Selectmen using the police to evict persons criticizing them.
5.) Selectmen conducting business in non-public session to circmvent Court Orders.
6.) Selectmen disparaging citizens in the town report.
7.) Selectmen failing in their duty to protect the reputations of any citizen in public selectmens meetings.
8.) Selectmen defaming, and demeaning residents critical of them in live meetings, and broadcasting same to entire town.
9.) Selectmen purchasing a $30,000 vehicle without voting to do so.
10.) Selectmen failing to obey a town vote!
11.) Selectmen refusing to accept complaints form a resident about a town employee.
12.) Selectmen refusing to exercise their duty to investigate and admonish town employee after numerous complaints.
Anyone have any others? Can anyone think of any other instances of malfeasance not lister here? If so feel free to comment.
malfeasance
n. intentionally doing something either legally or morally wrong which one had no right to do. It always involves dishonesty, illegality or knowingly exceeding authority for improper reasons.
Now, how many instances of malfeasance have we seen in our town government?
1.) Government threatening a private citizen with lawsuit for criticism.
2.) Selectmen violating town ordinance by hiring the town first full time police Lt. without advetising the position.
3.) Selectmen using the police to evict people from the town hall for watching proceedings.
4.) Selectmen using the police to evict persons criticizing them.
5.) Selectmen conducting business in non-public session to circmvent Court Orders.
6.) Selectmen disparaging citizens in the town report.
7.) Selectmen failing in their duty to protect the reputations of any citizen in public selectmens meetings.
8.) Selectmen defaming, and demeaning residents critical of them in live meetings, and broadcasting same to entire town.
9.) Selectmen purchasing a $30,000 vehicle without voting to do so.
10.) Selectmen failing to obey a town vote!
11.) Selectmen refusing to accept complaints form a resident about a town employee.
12.) Selectmen refusing to exercise their duty to investigate and admonish town employee after numerous complaints.
Anyone have any others? Can anyone think of any other instances of malfeasance not lister here? If so feel free to comment.
Wednesday, October 3
What is the true cost of the Elderly Affairs program?
Publius, Please accept this as an article submission
MAcciard said:
Something Chief Consentino said Monday night made me think;
He said that the elderly affairs dept. had given 1100 rides so far this year! 1100 rides! So I checked the town website for the town budget, and here is what I found out;
The Elderly Affairs Dept. budget for 2007 is: $17,821
included in this is:
Payroll: $15,300
FICA: $ 949
Medicare: $ 222
Vehicle insurance: 0
Gas: $ 1,350
Then I found out that the drivers make approx. $12.50/hr.
Now: $15,300 / $12.50 = 1,224 manhours.
This means that the 1,100 trips the chief CLAIMS have been provided this year averaged no more than 1hr. 6min. per trip! This includes the driver picking up the car at the police staion where he presumably clocks in.
Then he drives to the residents house and picks them up.
He has to wait for the elderly person to get ready and get themselves into the car.
Then he drives to wherever. Waits for whatever they are doing and repeats the process in reverse.
ALL IN ONLY ONE HOUR! How is this possible when we hear about the regular trips to Lahey Clinic in Burlington, To Boston, To Parkland in Derry, To Exeter Hospital, etc.
Now lets look at the Gas usage:
$1,350/ $2.65 a gallon= 509 gallons. Police cruisers average AT BEST 15 mpg. 509x 15= 7635miles able to be driven within the budget.
7635 Miles/ 1100 trips = 6.94 miles average trip distance!
Distance from Police Station to the Holy Angels, without going to anyones house: 3 miles! ONE WAY!
This means a round trip DIRECTLY from the police station to Holy Angels and back is 6 miles!
By the way, There have been 195 weekdays between Jan.1 and Sept. 31! This means 1100 rides / 195 weekdays= almost 6 rides per day! EACH AND EVERY DAY!
Once again Phil is hamstrung by his own numbers!
In case you missed it this means SOMETHING DOESN'T ADD UP HERE! Phil always talks about his nuumbers; how many rides he gives, how many elderly are in the town, but here are the numbers!
FIGURES DON'T LIE!
Now Phil likes to tell people that everything about this program is open to public inspection, but that isnt true, HE HAS NEVER GIVEN VERIFIABLE INFORMATION AS TO HOW MANY RESIDENTS USE THE PROGRAM! He guesses for the budget committee. He pulls any old number out for the selectmen. He can not prove any of it.
Now I dont know anyone who wants to cut or eliminate this program, but the taxpayers DESERVE some accountability about how many people use it, and how often!
MAcciard said:
Something Chief Consentino said Monday night made me think;
He said that the elderly affairs dept. had given 1100 rides so far this year! 1100 rides! So I checked the town website for the town budget, and here is what I found out;
The Elderly Affairs Dept. budget for 2007 is: $17,821
included in this is:
Payroll: $15,300
FICA: $ 949
Medicare: $ 222
Vehicle insurance: 0
Gas: $ 1,350
Then I found out that the drivers make approx. $12.50/hr.
Now: $15,300 / $12.50 = 1,224 manhours.
This means that the 1,100 trips the chief CLAIMS have been provided this year averaged no more than 1hr. 6min. per trip! This includes the driver picking up the car at the police staion where he presumably clocks in.
Then he drives to the residents house and picks them up.
He has to wait for the elderly person to get ready and get themselves into the car.
Then he drives to wherever. Waits for whatever they are doing and repeats the process in reverse.
ALL IN ONLY ONE HOUR! How is this possible when we hear about the regular trips to Lahey Clinic in Burlington, To Boston, To Parkland in Derry, To Exeter Hospital, etc.
Now lets look at the Gas usage:
$1,350/ $2.65 a gallon= 509 gallons. Police cruisers average AT BEST 15 mpg. 509x 15= 7635miles able to be driven within the budget.
7635 Miles/ 1100 trips = 6.94 miles average trip distance!
Distance from Police Station to the Holy Angels, without going to anyones house: 3 miles! ONE WAY!
This means a round trip DIRECTLY from the police station to Holy Angels and back is 6 miles!
By the way, There have been 195 weekdays between Jan.1 and Sept. 31! This means 1100 rides / 195 weekdays= almost 6 rides per day! EACH AND EVERY DAY!
Once again Phil is hamstrung by his own numbers!
In case you missed it this means SOMETHING DOESN'T ADD UP HERE! Phil always talks about his nuumbers; how many rides he gives, how many elderly are in the town, but here are the numbers!
FIGURES DON'T LIE!
Now Phil likes to tell people that everything about this program is open to public inspection, but that isnt true, HE HAS NEVER GIVEN VERIFIABLE INFORMATION AS TO HOW MANY RESIDENTS USE THE PROGRAM! He guesses for the budget committee. He pulls any old number out for the selectmen. He can not prove any of it.
Now I dont know anyone who wants to cut or eliminate this program, but the taxpayers DESERVE some accountability about how many people use it, and how often!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
ATKINSON's Vietnam HONOR ROLL as VOTED and PASSED by 2005 Town Meeting and re-approved at Special Town Meeting Sept. 12
