Candidates:
Selectman;
V. Tobin
R O’Leary
W. Friel
Moderator:
F. Polito
Supervisor of Checklist;
M. MacDonald
Cem. Trustee;
D. Murphy
Conflict of Interest;
J. Sapia
J. Hazlett
Lib. Trustee;
J. Goff
Trustee Trustfund;
B. Snicer
Budget;
J. Blakadar
H. Morse
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. "
53 comments:
Who are the candidates for Timberlane school board and budget committee?
Wow, I just watched the deliberative session and realized that this blog "is" just a few deer making tracks in the snow. What an eye opener that all the proposed warrants by the taxpayers group were slammed to the ground. Were was the 100 person support? I almost felt bad , almost, for that group. And the budget is just an estimate as I heard that we overspent the 20 hrs for the HW Dept position to 35hrs weekly all year without any oversight. Also, the estimate for insurance for the new HW Assistant was potentially way off if the Assistant decides on a "shotgun wedding" next week. Stranger things have happened as we all know real life is stranger than fiction. Sometimes you can't make this stuff up. Of course this is just my opinion and perhaps I was watching the wrong channel and am confused but I think it was the Atkinson Deliberative session.
Why was Mark Acciard not there? He usually attends. It would have been nice to listen to his input.
Mark, where were you?
What a sham of a meeting. The citizens petitions were written down to have no meaning or no potential impact. The water article was written down to now be in conflict with the newly approved water withdrawal ordinance. I smell a law suit coming.If this gets passed, what does the town follow? The new water withdrawal ordinance, or all "State and Federal regulations regarding water quality and quantity" which they have no real controls. The process is a rubber stamp if you meet minimum requirements regarding water quantity. This renders all of the residents with no control over Hampstead Water Co withdrawing water and affecting your wells. What a sham! For those that were watching, those that support Sapia and the Chief were there to defeat all of the citizen petitions because they were put on the end of the warrant. It is my understanding that the petition for the water ordinance was a change to existing policy, so it should have been at the beginning of the warrant. It looks like the selectmen didn't want the citizens who were there at the beginning to participate, because it may have turned out differently. What ever happened to "Let the people decide" Frank. A few years back you offered to the legislative body to not reduce warrants to a $1, but to let the people vote their opinion. This obviously isn't going to happen this year. The proposals for the communication tower were another joke because it wasn't fully investigated as it was determined at the meeting. It is a power issue, and more that likely can be remedied without a tower, and without this huge expense. At least Jane Cole had the sense to start a capital reserve fund for this issue, so that it can be looked at this clear eyes, not with eyes with agenda's. Please be very care full on how you vote on these articles, as they now have consequences that you may not like. Another year bites the dust. Oh by the way, Mark is out of town that is why he wasn't there.
At the end there were 44 present at the meeting and 3/4 we either town officials, town employees or their spouses.
What is totally unconscionable is that Moderator Polito urged the few people there to "do what Rep. Garrity urged a few Town Meetings ago: if you disagree with a warrant article, amend it to the point of making it rediculous or meaningless."
Polito once again demonstrated his unfitness to be Moderator when he, like last Deliberative Session, urged that practice that destroys the whole concept of citizen participation in government -- citizens submitting petitioned warrant articles for their fellow residents to have an opportunity to vote on.
It was egregious enough when State Rep. Garrity suggested this making a mockery of citizen's initiative warrant articles. Now, our Town Moderator Polito is urging the practice in his capacity as Moderator.
What happened to the democratic process of allowing townspeople the fair opportunity to themselves vote "yes" or "no" on ballot articles as they were submitted by fellow citizens?
This new Deliberative Session tactic of blocking the town from having an opportunity to vote on petitioned warrant articles submitted by their fellow residents is a mockery of what democracy is supposed to be all about?
During the discussion of the Taxpayer Assn. Petitioned articles, once again, we were treated to the spectacle of Dale Childs rudely and loudly making repeated sarcastic and belittling comments continually while Mr. Artus was attempting to speak.
Her disrepect for other people has become a regular occurence at Deliberative Sessions. Whenever any speaker says something Childs disagrees with, she resorts to rudeness and loud belittling comments.
And our Moderator does nothing about her regular rude disruptions.
Like at past Deliberative Sessions, at last night's Session, once again, we saw our spineless Moderator without the guts to stand up to her disruptive behavior.
At one point when Childs' surly behavior got really bad, Polito said -- not to her, but to the audience in general (since he didn't have the guts to directly confront Childs) that if the rude disruptive comments continued, that he would ask those people to leave.
Knowing Polito didn't have the spine to ask her to leave, Childs continued her rude outbursts, and spineless Polito didn't have the guts to back up his meaningless words with action.
Once again, Sapia showed his total contempt for the townspeople and for any residents who dare to care enough about their town to get involved by signing a warrant article petition.
He systematically went after each one of the 8 Citizen's Petitioned warrant article to block them from appearing on the ballot as they were submitted.
Sapia, in his arrogance, has a total fear of the townspeople having an opportunity to vote on any ballot articles which he disagrees with.
Because he can't control how people vote, he is intent on making sure that they can't vote to pass anything he disagrees with. He is beneath contempt.
As I watched the Deliberative Session, I felt really bad for Carol Grant. She cares about and works hard to protect our environment - our open space and our groundwater - and is really dedicated to it. How Sapia and that small group of his supporters treated her was terrible.
It must be very discouraging for her when her efforts on our behalf are regularly attacked and undermined by Sapia and his cronies.
I remember years ago when she was
chairman of the Conservation Commission and, over the determined opposition of builders and special interests on the planning board, she got passed the Atkinson wetlands ordinance.
Every year that the planning board tried to weaken the ordinance, she would do her pre-Town meeting handouts urging the people to uphold the ordinance, and the people would always rally to her support.
Now, years later, she's still fighting to protect our ground water -- this time from being pumped out of town at danger to lowering our water table-- and she's still up against those who don't give a damn about our environmental future.
I feel for her and feel badly about how sapia and his supporters treat her when she's simply trying to do something important to our town's future.
I couldn't be present but watched the Deliberative Session on cable.
I heard Carol Grant's comments that there, at the end of the session when her two petitioned articles were acted on, that there were only a total of 44 people present and that most of those 44 were there with the intent of undermining the Special Town meeting 2/3's passage of the Water Ordinance.
She was right when she said that it was a mis-use of Deliberative Session for a small group of people who were on the losing end of the Special Town Meeting vote to use Deliberative Session to try to over-ride or destroy that Town Meeting vote.
Carol Grant characterized their efforts and Sapia and the other selectmen's behavior as "unethical." She was 100% right. Their actions were VERY unethical. Deliberative Session has become a bad joke.
Just a couple of comments on some of the Taxpayer's Associations petitions.
They requested that (1) immediately make a copy of any changes,etc) and (2) mail a copy by April 15th.
BY LAW, April 1st is the date on which the coming year's tax rate is based. If it wasn't there on 4/1, it won't be included in the taxes. Assessors often don't even begin their job until after 4/1. Therefore, cards mailed out "immediately" may or may not be complete, depending on work done during the preceding year.
2. BY LAW, the Town is required to send an MS-1 to the State by September 1st. The MS-1 is a report showing the total amount of property in town, and includes all money for all exemptions as well.
3. No changes can be made to anything after that report, because a change would likely affect the total value, and therefore affect the new tax rate.
4. Changes can only be made after the tax bills are received, and BY LAW tax payers have until March 1 to file an Application for Abatement.
In addition to the fact that neither Petition 1 or 2 included and funding (you don't think the assessors would do it for nothing, I hope), neither would accomplish what they were looking for.
Frustrating for them, I know. Next year, they should look for (and fund) tax cards in November (right after bills are sent out) so they could file their abatements in a timely manner. Filing for Abatement is the only way they can get changes. The Selectmen and the State need paper work for documentation.
I believe - and maybe I wrong - that uniform assessments are applicable to individual towns and not the state. I would not expect the land values of Colebook to compare in any way with the values of Atkinson. I also believe that the quality of construction needs to enter into the picture, and I also believe that a lot of Atkinson houses are of very high quality. I don't know about Colebrook, but I'm figuring we have more builders who are eager to build in Atkinson, close to the Mass Border, than Colebrook, close to the Canadian border. Maybe I'm wrong. I can understand why the State hasn't developed any "standards".
Better idea is to send the Taxpayers Association to Appraisal School, to gain more knowledge before they petition again.
Why are people surprised at this outcome? Not enough people showed and participated through the entire deliberative session. If you don't commit to participating in this event in full for the whole day, then a small minority easily takes over the entire process. That's why they stack the citizen petitions at the end. It is all by design.
I'm not interested in hearing whiners say democracy was circumvented. You didn't show up. If you expect a democratic process to occur, show up next time and stay for the entire day until 6 or 7 PM. Yes it is a long day but it is the one and only day out of the entire year citizens control the process. So next year, plan on being there until it ends.
I find Frank Polito's conduct...silly comments etc. very unprofessional. I can't help but compare him to our former moderator, Jack Herlihy. He was such a gentleman & always conducted himself very professionally. We voters want the best for our town & it was disgusting the way that Carol Grant & Leon Artus were treated. Shame on all of you!!!
where was the lady who informed the
blog of the fact that she was in the know about communication towers and how great the repeaters would be for the town...
The meeting was not democracy at its best. The BOS claim their goal was to keep our taxes low, yet over $1 million of new expenditures was approved to go to vote with their blessing. When questions were being asked to justify these expenditures those asking the questions were routinely dismissed, yet the BOS were permitted to make sermons. I thought I heard a alleluia after one of them.
There are two problems with this process of government, a)Too few new faces attend and the people who do attend are always the same ones. They all know one another and anyone else is an outsider, b)The fix was in. Everyone of the non petition warrants passed, including the biggies that deserved more scrutiny, were passed, all petition warrants, as written, failed. Draw your own conclusion.
And, 11:00 AM was absolutely right about our state representative's suggestion. Is that what they teach in Concord? Someone just lost my vote.
The only bright side is that there is one more chance on March 11 to take another shot at this. The goal now should be a get-out-to-vote drive.
Thanks to all who tried to turn the tide in town. I commend Carol, Leon, Ted and those who stood up to speak their minds though ridiculed by some nasty people.
Frank's bias toward some folks was very obvious when he suggested that people ammend the articles to become ridiculous. Garrity is our Rep.? What a thing to recommend, where's the democracy Jim?
I hope we vote Frank out this year and Garrity if he runs again.
Fred Childs said that he was afraid to change the Asst. Road Agent position to full time stating that he didn't want the person hired to have benefits and was afraid they'd get married and have kids and increase the towns cost. Fred crossed the line with his words displayed discrimination based on marital status.
Watching jack Sapia laughing at people speaking was appalling, crude and out of order. He displayed total lack of decency and respect for some people. Glad he's not running again and to think he's running for the Board of Ethics is a scream.
Dale Childs and the Morrelli's sat in the back and heckled people as they spoke at the microphone. Whenever anyone spoke that they disagreed with, they laughed at them openly and make rude inappropriate remarks about them. They showed no class or dignity yesterday.
Phil Consentino came to mic screaming about people who post their opinions on this web log. He is a lunatic with a gun and again, provides us with more reason to remove him (or sue him :)). He is a mean, nasty, ignorant bully and espects us to pay his legal bills. NO WAY. I will sue the town is they attempt to pay for these legal fees.
In the end, it was obvious that the town officials do not want the people to be able to vote on the articles as drafted. I am so disgusted at the manipulation that we witnessed yesterday.
I think we need more people to step up and run against Sapia, O'Leary (friend of Sapia), and Frank Polito. We cannot move in a positive direction with these people in office. We need to fire the Chief, try to impeach any official who is participating in these tactics and restore the faith of the residents.
to Anon 12:20, I believe the taxpayers for fair evaluations meant by "standards" relates to the process of assessing. Such as reviewing the deed(s) of a property for easements; being required to visit the property to verify what is on the tax card, such as factors like land quality ie: amount of buildable land vs wetland, like swamp land being assessed the same is viable waterfront. etc. Even if someone doesn't let the assessor into their home- which is their right-the exterior improvements, structures and land issues should be verified. Once they are verified and properly put into the data base it shouldn't have to be done again unless other improvements have been done. This is where the building department needs to communicate with assessing-which I'm not sure is happening in Atkinson- atleast in the past it didn't, thus there is probably a lot of errors that haven't been caught. All the factors that are used should be given to the taxpayer for their information. It just seems that there is alot of unknown information that the taxpayer has the right to know, but can't seem to get from the selectman. You are correct in saying there is no way that all properties within the state be assessed at the same value, but within each town the assessment should be consistant with proper standards. The state was suppose to set these standards 5 years ago, so that there is consistency in methodology throughout the state.This is needed and all towns should be making their voice heard to make sure this happens as directed by the legislature.
To Anon at 12:20
If you had this information about the dates, why didn't you ask for an ammendment yesterday? Come forward next time.
I watched the meeting all day & was waiting for the girl who blogged here yesterday...she's in the communications business. (don't want to give her name) She never showed up & I'm wondering if "someone" got to her & changed her mind about speaking at the mtg. She seemed to know alot about tower communications & public safety etc. We do not need an ugly tower in our town...repeaters would work in the cars!
Jack is running for Conflict of Interest committee not Board of Ethics, sorry.
It was so nice to hear the Chief reads our blog.
THe "girl" is a guy, and he was there, with several questions for the contractor.
A big problem with yesterday is that many of the people above behaved like children. We saw disrespect, snickering, rudeness, a demonstration of hostility and more by those who should be acting with a much higher decree of professionalism. Looked like a Junior High school.
With respect to the moderator, its a tough job but given the seriousness of the subject matter less familiarity and a more professional approach would have been nice.
I also don't like the way it was pushed along. This is serious money we're talking about here. The discussions should be allowed to take however long they need to be to get all the facts. Sorry to say this, but if there is too much material to be discussed in one day, make it two. It's done in other towns. I also dislike this practice of calling the vote. Its the moderators job to keep things moving along. It should be left to him keep it moving, focused, yet allow to be asked what needs to be asked.
The BOS were right on one thing, this town does need a capable and professional administrator. It would go a long way towards improving this towns image. Lets pray they get right.
When the article about the taxpayers not wanting to pay legal fees came up for discussion, it was inappropriate for Sapia, Consentino and Polito to have participated . They should not have said a word or voted on this. Mark I hope you were watching, your court case may be the quickest way to get these 3 people out of town politics altogether.
To Anon @ 12:20
Those assessment and abatement articles were presented by "Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluations", NOT by the "Atkinson Taxpayers Association".
Two different groups with sometimes symbiotic purposes, sometimes not.
The legal fees article wasn't about suits that the town has to pay for, it was about Sapia and Childs voting to pay for Phil's PERSONAL attorney when he was a witness in the Grant case.
He wasn't a plaintiff or defendant, he was a witness like 20 others, THEY didnt need lawyers, but he obviously felt he needed one, and those ($%#( on the BOS voted to pay for it!
I cannot believe how the Childs peanut gallery behaved!!!! Wow what a bunch of rude ignorant people..I will speak my mind when I run into them.. Their taking this Town to a very low level. When I get harassed I will sue the heck out of this town and move elsewhere! I didn't know that there is so much trailer trash in town.
RE: 3:51 PM - Several? He grilled him.
Interesting to read people's complaints about the numbers of people who showed up for the Deliberative Session. That was exactly the reason why the town went to Senate Bill 2! The few people who showed up, the people said then, controlled the town by their votes, and Senate Bill 2 would give everybody a chance to vote. Sure did....but not on what was originally proposed.
Comments on the Moderator. I've been around for a long, long time. I remember the first moderator I ever saw was Harry Tuttle.....a very prominent Atkinsonian, who's traditional garb was very similar to that of Mr. Polito. And he cracked jokes a lot, if for no other reason that to lighten up an angry crowd. And everybody loved him.
You people are all spoiled by King Hamilton and Jack Herlihy. Mr. Polito is a taste of days of old, and I like it. May not always agree with him, but as a Moderator I think he's terrific.
RE: 2:06 PM - "I'm not interested in hearing whiners say democracy was circumvented. You didn't show up."
Lets be careful here. I did stay to the end and by the end of tower discussion it was clear the outcome was predetermined. When it got to the petitions it was "ABANDON EVERY HOPE, ALL YOU WHO ENTER" - Dante
Wasn't it something the way Planning Board chairwoman Sue Killam kept repeatedly getting in line to attack the Water Ordinance petitions? She seemed in a frenzy to try to take down the ordinance.
In all of the time that she's been chairman, the Planning board has done NOTHING to protect our groundwater. She's provided no leadership or initiatives on the matter. But then when a group of citizen petitioners do her job for her, she gets all offended and her nose out of joint.
Even when the petlitioners submitted their petition for the water ordinance to be acted on at Special Town meeting, she still did nothing. There was still no discussion about water protection at any of the planning board meetings.
When the additional water petitions were submitted for regular town meeting, she still allowed no discussion of it at planning board meetings.
The general manager of the water company is Harold Morse, one of her planning board members. Her behavior is obviously a case of putting the interests of one of her planning board members above the interests of the townspeople.
With her priorities out of whack and ignoring whose interests she is supposed to be representing, she should not continue to be chairman of the Planning board.
I couldn't believe how much of a bully, Jack Sapia looked like at the meeting, screaming at Mr. Artus about his group.
"do you have a non-profit" "are you tax-exempt", "why do you lie"
Tell me, Mr. Sapia, when you were refusing to do what we voters ordered you to do with the honor roll, and you were promoting the "veterans group", why didn't you ever grill them about their "non-profit status" or their"tax- exempt status". Why didn't you ever accuse them of claiming to be something they are not, as you did with the man who disagrees with you?
You are not a uniter, you are a bully. You used the microphone placed there for the selectmen to answer official questions for your own private harrassment of a resident.
Your conduct makes me sick, I will never vote for you again.
To Anon 2/3/08 7:51am
I help coach a "special needs" cheerleading team, and we had our first competition of the season in Providence on Sat. The good news is they won! National Champs!
besides I think a large portion of that room probably breathed a sigh of relief when they saw I wasn't there. LOL, I don't think the town wanted to hear me pontificate, they get enough of that from Jack.
Although I saw the last couple of hours last night, and I couldn't believe the way our board of selectmen treated resident with whom they disagree.
I couldn't believe Jack interrogating Mr. Artus about the "legality" of his group. Nor could I quite believe Fred's bombast about the deputy road agents position. Both of their behavior was reprehensible.
So let me think....if we leave the space "blank" next to "moderator", on the ballot, it will show our disapproval. That's the only means we have to protest. Frank Polito certainly seems to side w/the selectmen, instead of supporting the townspeople. Wish Sapia & Childs (and his loud mouthed wife) would just go away! They should all be ashamed of themselves.
Leaving the space blank next to Moderator won't really do much. A person needs only 10 votes to be elected, and he'll get that. Will all the non-votes matter? Not really. He'll still be Moderator.
just acouple of deer, some people have access to many, many, many ,many computers. looks like your back from your trip ... or is it a coincidence that auto-post is over?? hmm. oh publius is many people. last i checked more than one person was out of town this past week. hmm. ps: when you don't like what is said it doesn't mean your screaming.. jack never yelled at leon. he questioned him on the letter he sent in a polite way and could have given him the hook. doesn't sound like a scream to me.......
wow , i stand corrected and for that i with draw my last post, however you should put back up what was posted yesterday and removed. it was not slanderous, viscious, nor an attack on anyone personally...... what gives???
thanks for restoring auto post!!!
Mr. Acciard, I disagree with your point about Mr. Childs comments on the full time assistant for the road agent. Mr. Childs pointed out that the cost presented on the ballot did not provide for the full cost if the position required full family health insurance. I agree with that premise and think it would be naive to ignore the total potential cost. To me, it is bait and switch.
While it could have been stated in a more articulate fashion by Mr. Childs, I agree with the premise the cost to the voters of about 10K did not accurately depict the total potential cost.
I see this problem consistent with many budget articles. The total cost of ownership (TCO) is not being given to the taxpayers. For example, does anyone know what it is going to cost for operational expenses to run the new library? What about the newly proposed ambulance? Annually recurring costs such as maintenance, insurance increases, manpower, fuel, etc. should be disclosed to taxpayers and not just the initial expense. We need to know the TOTAL cost of ownership.
To anon 12:06
I questioned the library trustees and BOS last year on exactly that issue for the library, no one could answer me, and they couldn't understand why the question was being asked. My take is that if we knew the operating cost of the library, it may not have been approved by the voters. Just the heating and cooling costs alone with cause our jaws to drop. They did say that they intended to hire additional help, but other than that, no idea on the actual projected operational costs, and yes, I do feel that the taxpayers are being hood winked.
If memory serves me correctly, the Plaistow library, which is close to 15,000s/f,first year utility bills were $25,000. This is important to know, because you have cleaning, insurance, and other items that build up the total, or true costs to the taxpayers.
You know, I have enjoyed this Blog since its inception and feel it serves a very useful purpose, in a town where your reputation can be destroyed if you exercise your rights to speak and question publicly, but I feel it lowers the debate to attack people personally.
If you want to debate Ideas, or public officials actions, then great, but there is not need to attack them personally.
Leave that type of despicable behavior to our public officials, they have the experience.
AHHH funny thing.. Anon feb 4th 8:57AM..I was thinking the same thing...Also..Mark..I beleive this blog attacks perple on a personal level also..I recall someone going as low as to critise someones spelling.. And Twist their words to belittle them...
Mark,in this case I have to disagree with you. The reason we are having so many problems in town is because some officials are rude, arrogant and unfair to the taxpayers. You cannot talk about the real issues without stating the offense and describing what happened. The problems are with the personalities and the behaviors. It's important to let others know what is going on, unfortunately this means berating them in the process. If we did not talk about people at all, the real problems would be hidden. It's unfortunate but necessary for now, I believe.
Am I wrong? I was pretty sure Sapia asked Mr. Artus - more than once - whether he was a "not for profit" organization, and Leon said "No"....more than once. I'm gathering Leon misunderstood?
To the last Anon
While I agree with you, What I am trying to say is that; criticizing someones performance, actions, statements in a public meeting, are all fair game.
Making nasty comments about their character, apropos of nothing, or verbally bashing their looks, intelligence, or other issues, is not necessary.
We can debate like gentlemen and ladies, shake hands and go home, without the hate filled invective.
It adds nothing to the debate.
The ptoblem:
All are equal at a Legislative session. The moderator ONLY directs traffic. Mr. Sapia was OUT OF ORDER to question ANYONE who has the floor. The moderator was wrong by not stopping him. Mr. Sapia had the privilidge of sitting at a front table only for convenience of the assembly. Failure to recognize this basic equality is not only rude but ignorant.
In my opinion, the chief was pretty harsh at deliberative session about this blog when he came to the microphone to speak about the warrant article for selling town assets at public auction on ebay. I felt bad for Mr. Brownfield who very eloquently presented the article. Then the chief glared at him and basically ranted and raved. Ebay sounded like a good idea to me to sell town assets and maximize the sale price. Why did the moderator allow the chief to talk about the blog which was not germaine to the warrant article? In the end, it was free advertising for the blog and in my opinon, the chief once again looked like he was out of touch with reality. I see why people think the way the do.
I replayed the meeting {dvr} and went back over the questioning of Leon about his status of not for profit. Leon at first denied he was for profit, then denied the existence of a certain letter. Finally he admitted the letter but said that it was an old letter and he is no longer "for profit". Unfotunately he had obviously forgotten about it. The posters to this blog should stop talking about the subject and also forget about it. The more it is talked about, the more residents will go back and review this. It is clearly something we should all forget about because it only looks bad for the cause and takes credibility away from Leon. I believe it was an honest oversight on his part , however we just keep putting it back in the spotlight. There was no yelling or disrespect on Sapia's part and to try and state incorrect information that most people can easily verify as untrue is foolish. Again, lets forget about it and focus on issues that have true merit. This is not one... just my thoughts.
One more thought.... whats up with disappearing posts? I have seen more than one in the last few days that just go away. They were not flattering but they did not stoop to the level of personal attacks that would warrant such actions.
To Anon.Feb 4th 8:07 Pm...
SHHHHHHH!!!! People will start thinking this blog exaggerates..and twists things around for their benefit...Now we wouldnt want that would we...
Actually what it was was that when Leon sent the selectmen letters early on, with assessment questions, the letter head said;
Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluations
a Non-Profit organization
This was an effort, I believe, to demonstrate for the selectmen that this group was not a profit making enterprise, but had the taxpayers interests at heart. And it was true, They ARE a group, and they do not make a profit.
but later on Fred told Leon that the selectmen had checked with Concord, and he was NOT registered as a non-profit. This was also true.
There is no law requiring a group of people to file to establish themselves as a non-pprofit corporation, which was what the selectmen checked on. This group is not a business, and are not required to file for a 501(c)3 exemption as Jack tried to imply, nor are they required to file corporate paperwork, they do not fundraise.
This was nothing more than a ploy to discredit their opponents, and Leon got so flustered with their interrogations that he apologized for something that required no apology.
All of the town officals are all scamming the town! Its a joke. so obvious. Oh by the way, the cheif of our town will support the no name candidate W.Friel. Even tho Mr Friel might not know it yet, but the cheif will own him like he owns Mr. Sapia. Funny how Mr Sapia is running for conflict of interest? Thats a bit of a conflict right there , isn't it?
But here we go with the 3 person race once again, One of the 3 should drop out for the sake of electing a person who wont be influnced by the cheif. There has to be a 2 person race, or the cheifs pupppet will win by numbers.
No joke. History will keep repeating itself . One of the 3 should do the right thing, to put the people of Atkinson back into the right direction!
Post a Comment