Well, the Answer to that question depends upon who you ask. Last year at deliberative session we all heard Lt. Baldwin yell at us about the amount of crime in Atkinson, which we civilians know nothing about. We also heard him tell us that our officers put their lives on the line every time they put the uniform on, because they have only one officer on any given shift, and no back up. He said that Salem and Methuen and the like always had backup. Lt. Bladwin told us that the proposed 180' tower was "absolutely necessary" as half our town had little or no communications, and that it would be "FREE"! Selectmen Sapia told us that it was a "life safety issue" and that it "won't cost a dime"!
Mr. Acciard pointed out that "even if the cell company built the tower, the $538,000 of equipment was a cash expense, that would be offset by $25,000/yr. lease, but that it would take 22 years to recoup our investment, and THAT AIN'T FREE!"
So what is the truth?
Well, the truth is that Atkinson does not have a transmission problem. The truth is that the Vehicles have 90-100% coverage in town. The Problem is that the shoulder radio's do not have the power to reach the station in some areas.
This is a problem that is solved by plaing "Repeaters" around town to bounce the signal back to the station. Another truth is that ALL DIGITAL REPEATERS DO THE SAME JOB! A Repeater on a tower, does the same job as a repeater in the truck of the car! It just cost 30 TIMES AS MUCH!
Mr. Murad of our communications committee said that Vehicle repeaters "don't work"! With all due respect to Mr. Murad, that is nonsense! Vehicle repeaters are used by 3825 polie and fire depts, aross the country, including ALL 50 STATES STATE POLICE FORCES, THE FBI, AND THE PRESIDENTIAL DETAIL OF THE SECRET SERVICE!!! But Acording to Mr. Murad, Mr. Baldwin, Mr. Sapia, they are good enough for Atkinson. Did you get that? They are good enough to protect the President of the United States, but not the Town of Atkinson! Ridiculous!!!
What they also are failing to tell you is that a Vehicle Repeater is a unit the size of a car stereo amplifier that bolts in the trunk of a cruiser, and costs $1,300-$1,800.00/ unit, and can be removed and put in a new vehicle just like the lights and radios.
We have 8 police vehicles(plus 3 elderly) and 8 fire vehicles! You could put vehicle repeaters, INSTALLED in all 16 vehicles for under $35,000. Not $500,000-$750,000 like the powers that be want to spend on their permanent phallic memorial to their monumental egos.
Go to the Motorola website! Google Police digital vehicle repeaters, lots of valid information there. Part of our problem is that twice now our committees have started with the premise that we NEED a tower, and worked to fulfill that. The consultant actually TOLD the tower committee that vehicle repeaters "WOULD WORK, BUT THAT ISN'T THE BEST WAY TO GO FOR AN AFFLUENT TOWN LIKE ATKINSON!!! So that is the same as saying "Yes, we can solve your problem for under $60,000.00 but you can afford to spend so much more" I know you WANT the Cadillac, but you can AFFORD the Rolls Royce and it is so much more elegant!
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. "
14 comments:
Cell coverage sucks in Atkinson. I'd trade a tower for decent coverage any day.
If they end up placing a tower anywhere they best lease to the cell phone companies. I have an active nextel and verizon cell and both are useless in town. This is a
SAFETY ISSUE in itself. If we are going to go 120' then go all the way up and solve the cell phone safety issue at the same time!!!!!!!!!!
Did anyone watch last night's meeting, when the Selectmen agreed with a recommendation from the Moderator to hold a public hearing on the warrant articles that were not discussed by the Budget Committee? (Scheduled date to be announced; petitioners to be invited.) Apparently to eliminate some of the probable extended discussion at Town Meeting.
Do you suppose this public hearing
is actually being called because there is a petition calling for money, and it wasn't discussed at the Budget Committee's public hearing, as would be required by law?
And if so, is it legal, since I think I heard someone say the deadline for the Budget Hearing was, like, today?
Interesting thought, don't you think?
Also check out a company in Massachusetts. http://www.macom-wireless.com/
They have systems that lay over your existing hardware without having to replace every radio. Motorola can not say that.
When shopping, make sure those responsible do not sell the taxpayers short by not looking at the options that are available.
Motorola tends to suffer from "Big Dog" syndrome.
Please remember people, IT IS NOT A CELL TOWER!!! It is a public safety communications tower!!!
Publius, please accept this as an article submission.
Another S.N.A.F.U.?
I finally had time to watch the budget committee public hearing, and I was surprised to see that they did not discuss, and disclose any of the petitioned warrant articles! I know there is at least 1 petitioned warrant article submitted that is a "money warrant article". Yet they did not discuss this.
RSA 32:5 clearly states;
32:5 Budget Preparation. –
I. The governing body, or the budget committee if there is one, shall hold at least one public hearing on each budget, not later than 25 days before each annual or special meeting, public notice of which shall be given at least 7 days in advance, and after the conclusion of public testimony shall finalize the budget to be submitted to the legislative body. Public hearings on bonds and notes in excess of $100,000 shall be held in accordance with RSA 33:8-a, I. Days shall be counted in accordance with RSA 21:35.
II. All purposes and amounts of appropriations to be included in the budget or special warrant articles shall be disclosed or discussed at the final hearing. The governing body or budget committee shall not thereafter insert, in any budget column or special warrant article, an additional amount or purpose of appropriation which was not disclosed or discussed at that hearing, without first holding one or more public hearings on supplemental budget requests for town or district expenditures.
This would mean that the article can not be legally placed on the warrant, as it was not discussed at the public hearing.
RSA 39:3 also states;
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.
This compels the town to insert the warrant article. Now RSA 39:3 also states that the right to have an article inserted SHALL not be infringed upon by the provisions of RSA chapter 32, and THAT may be the town's way out of this mess, But someone should surely look into why this wasn't presented at the budget committee public hearing. It could be that Russ did not give the committee all of the warrant articles as has happened the last two years, I don't know, but these types of issues should not happen.
Some how I have a hard time believing that a repeater in a car would have as much Power as one on a tower..
How much power do you think you need?
Remember once the signal reaches the tower it is transmitted to the station by landline.
You only need the repeater to reach from the officers shoulder to the nearest tower or station which ever is closer.
I think the tower would be great if it improved cell phone reception.
I've been a ham radio operator for over 40 years. In my early years, just after college, I was a major contributor to my counties first amateur 2 Meter repeater. I also held a FCC commercial license and repaired commercial two way radios,including all my counties public service radios. 2 Meters is very close to the frequency used by the local PD's and I'm very familiar with that frequency's propagation characteristics. It's basically line of site and does well through foliage, but poorly behind hills and valleys. If this town were flat the current setup would probably work, but it is not so I understand the need for some sort of repeater for use with handhelds.
Vehicle radios typically (for this size town)have a 30 Watt output and a more efficient antenna. They should be able to reach the base radio anywhere in town without a repeater. Handhelds have about 5 Watts output and poor antennas. So, some sort of repeater is probably needed.
For this size town a 120 ft tower, and the cost associated with it, is way overkill, and still may not solve the problem. My repeater had its receive antenna at 250' and transmit at 200', but it was expected to cover a 50 mile range for vehicle radios.
I think the idea of mobile repeaters (in the cruiser) is excellent, technically probably better, and appears to be much more cost efficient. The powers to be need a reality check. The tax payers are not money trees and it is their responsibility to have the town spend within its means and their obligation to try and reduce our tax burden.
IT IS NOT A CELL TOWER!!!
IT IS A PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS TOWER!
Cell tower is just the spin to make it more palatable!
Will It Improve cell coverage???
The truth is;
NO ONE KNOWS!
The town has not decided if a cell co. wil be on it.
they have not negotiated with a cell co.
no cell co. has given hard numbers on what it will provide if anything
The numbers they are attributing to investment from a cell co. are WAG's(Wild Ass Guesses)
And NO co. is going to pay $250,000 to Build the tower, then pay $25,000/yr. to lease the land, then pay $300,000 towards the police equip. to go on the tower, just to improve cell coverage! That would a return on investment of only 1.9% their shareholders would kill them!
Don't believe the lies, think logically!
Everyone remember last year when Sapia and Lt. Baldwin were at town meeting telling everybody that this would be FREE!
Sapia said "it wont cost the taxpayers a dime" It was Acciard who called them on it by disclosing the numbers, that we would have to pay our $500,000+ up front and would get that back in lease payments over 30 years!
Dont let them lie to you!
Post a Comment