Atkinson Town Hall

Atkinson Town Hall
The Norman Rockwellian picture of Atkinson

There is a NEW POLL at Right--------------------->

Don't forget to VOTE!
Make your voice heard!

Welcome Message and Mission Statement

Welcome to the NEW Atkinson Reporter! Under new management, with new resolve.

The purpose of this Blog is to pick up where the Atkinson Reporter has left off. "The King is dead, Long live the King!" This Blog is a forum for the discussion of predominantly Atkinson; Officials, People, Ideas, and Events. You may give opinion, fact, or evaluation, but ad hominem personal attacks will not be tolerated, or published. The conversation begun on the Atkinson Reporter MUST be continued!

This Blog will not fall to outside hacks from anyone, especially insecure public officials afraid of their constituents criticism.

Monday, October 6, 2008

Residents now have TWO ways to donate to police and the Elderly!

Yes that is right, now that the police chief has founded his new non-profit(slush fund), which he happily states will not have to answer to anyone!, and he is right!

A private non-profit, under NH law, only has minimal annual filings, and no accountability to the people for the expenditures of it's money, nor who donated it.

Here's some irony for you;

People complain because the right to know laws are not being followed by the chief, with the donation account, I know, unbelievable, right? and the chief's response is to remove the operation totally from public oversight!


If everything is open and above board and honest as chief Consentino has told us many times, then why hide it? Why didn't you just turn the operation of the account over to the trustees of the trust fund, then the account would be LEGAL, BUT NO...

You choose to start your own private slush fund, where there will now be no accountability at all. And here is the best part, his board of directors, ALL WORK FOR HIM!!! That's right, the board of directors are his elderly affairs drivers, so much for Diversity of interests and experience in staffing the board of directors, it is obvious that CONTROL IS MORE IMPORTANT TO OUR CHIEF!

But, if you do want to know where your money goes, you can donate it to the Town of Atkinson, which is a charitable organization, whcih must, by law, account for the money through the trustees, and which has State agencies making sure that it operates correctly.

Now who do you want to give your money to;

a Town, which MUST spend it for those purposes, and has the trustees, and the state looking over their shoulders to make certain that they do.

or a megamaniacal control freak who has removed your donation from all oversight or accountability, once you donate to this "private non-profit" you will have no idea, where your money goes, or how much is spent, and on what.

Do you want to donate to the Town Trust funds, which have a 50 year track record of being operated soundly, with public audits, and state accountability.

Or do you want to give your money to a newly formed PRIVATE Charity, where you will never know for certain where it goes or what it does.


Anonymous said...

I, for one, lost my last bit of respect for Chief Constentino when he did this. All he had to do was be open and aboveboard, and he chose instead to take the hidden route. I will never again trust him, and in the future my donations will go to the Town where I can trust they wont be used to buy Jackets for the drivers, or a writing table for the bathroom, or any of the other cockamamie things he has spent money on.

Anonymous said...

I won't donate again. Period end.

Fishgutz said...

When choosing, the Chief wants you to know he has a bigger gun and a book full of blank traffic citations.
And there is always that "oh, you want a speedy response by my board members when they are on duty and you ATD alarm goes off?"
No one has ever come forward to say this was actually said. However, does a chief, known for targeting those he does not like, actually have to say this when donations are solicited?
Did Whitey Bulger ever have to say what would happen if a Southie business did not pay their "insurance premiums?"

Yo, Mark, We are moving to North Carolina in November. Further away from the Chief, but I'll still be just a blog post away. Longer summers and almost no winter. They close schools if there is snow in the forecast.

Anonymous said...

If people are still foolish enough to keep giving him there money and keeping him in business, then they deserve to have it taken from them.

They have been duped. Or perhaps they are so dependent on the free services we taxpayers pay for with our illegally misappropriated tax dollars, then I feel bad for them since they are basically under his control. What a place to be. Glad I am not obligated to him for ANYTHING.

Anonymous said...

The important question is who will run EA. If it's PC, he'll end up in control on both pots of money.

Atkinson-Factor said...

The non profit is a scam. Unregulated funds that the chief has his greedy hands on? Why didn't he call his org "Chiefo slush fund org" ?

MAcciard said...

To be fair, the money used to run elderly affairs is not "illegally appropriated".

A budget is presented every year, and the voters vote to approve it.

It is a taxpayer funded program. The fact that it has become political is unfortunate, but not a by-product of the program, but one of it's director.

The only thing that is improper about the elderly affairs budget is that the number presented is not an accurate reflection of the true cost of operating the program.

If the accurate costs were presented, the people would still pass it at town meeting, and it would be honest.

Anonymous said...

Please accept this submission as a new article:

The Mystery is Solved: Why Hampstead Water REALLY Drilled Those New Wells

Posted at Atkinson Town Hall:

Atkinson Farm Inc. (Lewis Builders) submission of an Application for Formal Consideration and Approval for Site Plan for proposed 9 HOLE EXECUTIVE PAR 3 GOLD COURSE adjacent to Clubhouse Drive, Atkinson Resort & Country Club

Yep, here it is folks! You thought that sneaky old Harold Morse (of the SAME Atkinson planning board) was sneaky when they revealed the day AFTER the vote on the water ordinances that they were applying for a $1 MILLION dollar loan from the state (you own money!) to connect up to Hampstead and possibly run our water our of town? That was NOTHING!!!

It turns out that two town golf courses we already have just aren't enough to pump the water out from our wells; Lewis Builders/Hampstead Water/East Coast Lumber isn't rich enough yet, so they want to build ANOTHER golf course!

Did Harold Morse know the whole time this was what he was drilling extra wells for? Sure he did! Was he honest with the townspeople as to his motives? No he wasn't!

There looks to be 50-100 abutters to this project; a golf course if preferrable to a sewage treatment plant (which, by the way, Sue Killiam proposed for Atkinson when discussing possible grant projects, and she proposed it for a section of conservation land right on Big Island Pond!), but Atkinson has enough water issues as it is, and a project like this needs to be carefully considered. Can they even propose this without knowing they will recieve the new water permits, or is the "fix" already in?

Now, usually, a town might be protected by its Planning Board; unfortunately, our planning board is loaded up with fellow and former developers (Sue Killiam, Paul Dimaggio, etc.), those that derive their income from construction companies (Teddy Stewart, the town engineer), and those that were likely "approved" by the powers that be to be appointed to the board. Our board doesn't so much adovcate for the town as much as they advocate for their pocket books; Atkinson is "for sale" to big business, and has been for a long time. So long rural character, so long farms, hello development!!!

You couldn't make this stuff up folks; are you supporting Hampstead Water and Lewis' Builders attempts to take over the town by spending your money at East Coast Lumber, when a Home Depot is right down the road (and cheaper)?

Anonymous said...

To clarify my point on the illegal misappropriation of taxpayer dollars - sorry for the error in terminology.

Our police chief is using money the town approved for the police budget; both funding and existing assets/resources, to pay for the services provided by the Elderly Affairs. There is no way the town could pay for 1,644 senior transports on the actual budget of $19,000 that was approved by the town. So it is obvious he is using the PD dept budget. This is against the law. Period.

It would be like the road agent using town trucks to give seniors rides. All of the road agent's town resources are for town approved roadwork, ONLY. Why not have the fire department give seniors rides?