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.

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Atkinson police chief: Bully or a target?

From the Union Leader;

Atkinson police chief: Bully or a target?

Union Leader Correspondent
7 hours, 19 minutes ago

ATKINSON – Two residents who claim police Chief Philip V. Consentino bullied people into removing their names from a warrant article petition are preparing to sue the chief and the board of selectmen.

In a notice sent to the town by attorney Charles Douglas, residents Leon Artus and Gary Brownfield claim Consentino, 68, harassed and intimidated residents into removing their names from a petition that would have changed the chief position from part time to full time and raised the job's minimum qualifications.

Artus and Brownfield collected signatures for the petition.

During Saturday's deliberative session, voters overwhelmingly supported an amendment to the warrant article that restored Consentino's hold on the position.

Had the warrant article passed in its original form, the town would have been required to hire a chief with at least a bachelor's degree in criminal justice and 15 years of experience in law enforcement.

Consentino, who has been chief for 40 years, said neither he nor his second-in-command could meet those requirements and that he was specifically targeted by people trying to get rid of him.

Douglas, however, claims Consentino is responsible for a pattern of civil rights violations made even more serious by the chief's position in town.

"He's got a gun, a badge, a cruiser and a bunch of armed men working for him called the police department," Douglas said. "It's not like he's the town librarian."

Douglas said his clients are seeking monetary damages and an injunction against any further intimidation.

He said he planned to formally file the lawsuit by the end of this week. The lawsuit will also name the current board of selectmen and former selectmen Jack Sapia and Francis Polito, Douglas said.

Neither Artus nor Brownfield would comment on the lawsuit.

Sumner Kalman, the town's attorney, did not return messages yesterday.

Sounds like a bunch of residents that have chips on their shoulders. Is the Chief doing a good job? If yes, then leave him alone. If no, then deal with him in a fair manner.
- Mike Hockhirtz, Atkinson

chief for 40 years, high school diploma and a smile like that, its time to go chief,,
its 2009 not 1969, the town has to catch up with the times
- mike, meredith

The day of allowing a Police Chief to retire from a Town as the FULL time Chief in order to collect his State Pension then returning the very first day after this Retirement in the very same job but now called PART time chief is so morally wrong it needs to stop NOW. The only reason a Town does this is to allow the Chief to "double dip"; to retire and collect his pension but NOT leave the EXACT job, just now call him the part time Chief and allow him to work LESS for MORE pay.
There are two other Town in NH that are doing this under the guise of saving enormous money with NOT a difference what so ever in performance of the Police Department. However, the second this annointed Part time Chief retires the second time the Selectmen will immediately make the position full time, get it recertified quickly with the NH retirement board and do so only because their next pick is not not ready or able to retire and needs a full time job so he can one day "double dip" also if he lasts that long as Police Chief.
This is what is happening in Atkinson, Hopkington and Henniker NH. All 3 Chiefs now earn six figures doing the very same job they did for far less money and now do it for working less hours. Of course these Chiefs will act as they wish in Town; they are already collecting their pension and the worst that could happen is that they retire for real a second time from their part time job as Chief and continue to laugh all the way to the bank to enjoy the TAX money that made him one of the highest paid Police Chiefs in NH.
And the State wonders why their Retirement System is broke???
- George P, Salem NH

Why don't the few people that are making these accusations about Chief Consentino, crawl back under the rock they came from and stop complaining, these accusations have been in the paper for the last couple of years. He must be doing a good job, as he keeps getting elected. It is always the same poople that have no life, why don't they spend more time trying to help out with Elderly program, that Chief Consentino coordinates. or better yet, why don't they just move out of Atkinson
- keith, Chester,NH

This is just another indication that the days of having a Part time or elected Police Chief are over. Regardless of the reason for the petition, todays policing requires that the head of policing agency have the qualifications and education to fill such a position. The good old boy syndrome is over and it is time to ensure that the people we trust to enforce the laws of this state and protect our families have the ability to conduct themselves as professionals. That they have a understanding of the change in how law is being enforced and be able to change with it. That person has to be able to follow the qualifications that are set by Police Standards and Training as well enforce those standards with the people in thier agency. This type of hold on a position is not good for the community or law enforcement in general.
- Dan, Portsmouth


Anonymous said...

Please answer this question, and have the ET publish the answer, so the residents will know once and for all... 1) is consentino certified to carry a gun? 2) when is the last time a board named him chief?
If you aren't certified to carry a gun, how can you be a police officer?
Just the facts please.

Anonymous said...

Heres a little piece of an article from the Eagle tribune...And because of people like Gary, this would be the reason some residents do not want to attend these meeting. No one wants to be put into a three ring circus..I would not have wanted to attend and have someone snapping my picture either.Really we have all seen what happens to these pictures when they are in the hands of these web sites.

But Scanlan said if a moderator believes something is disrupting the meeting, he or she can have it stopped or have the offender removed. Residents can always overrule the moderator so putting the issue to a vote of the people was perfectly reasonable, the deputy secretary of state said.

"He wanted the people to be the ones to decide and not just him," Scanlan said.

Mutual Aid said...

Anon 8:14

Consentino IS certified to carry a gun. PSTC regulations require an annual recertification with the firearm. That is done at the department level. There is a minimum standard (set by PSTC) that must be met, and documentation that needs to be sent to PSTC, but PSTC has no active role in the actual recertification nor does the BOS or any other town body. The qualification is the responsibility of the department's firearms instructor - Lt. Baldwin. Hope that helps, I don't know about your second question.

Anonymous said...

If i am correct, the police chief in Atkinson is not elected..he is appointed by the selectman. The residents do not elect him.

Anonymous said...

You can check with the town clerk, if you don't believe me. His last official appointment was made in April of 1992, for 7 years, expiring on May 1, 1999.

Anonymous said...

That's a riot! He was sitting in his chair snapping pictures. Perfectly legal.

Polito was the one who called him up to stop, and started lecturing him on the law, and POLITO WAS WRONG!

If someone tells you at the polls in March that you cant vote, the law doesnt allow it, and the moderator controls the polls, and you calmly tell him that he is wrong,


Anonymous said...

Phil sends PSTC the form that says he is trained, just like he sends them the form saying he only works 1300 hours, while he admits to the town that he works almost full time.

Do YOU believe what he says, or what he writes, or anything that comes from him?

Anonymous said...

Fellow citizens:

I do believe we have caught Ed Naile and Gary Brownfield in a lie! On 2/1 Ed Naile writes:

"It was quite a childish show once the moderator lost his cool and tried to intimidate Mr. Brownfield, who I asked on Friday evening to take pictures for me. They are my pictures."

Now, in the ET article Gary is claiming he was hired by Mr. Naile. If this was really the case, why did Mr. Naile not state he hired Gary two days ago when he polluted this blog with his hateful, homophobic trash?

Mr. Brownfield and Mr. Naile are now going to attempt to position Gary as a hired professional photographer. This a lie. They know it and WE know it. Keep shooting yourselves in the foot fellas. The whole lot of you are looking like the Keystone Cops.

Please observe how they are lying to strengthen their court case. They will stoop to any level to push through their agenda. Remember, the anti-tax crowd wants to "starve the beast." Google it, if you don't know what that means. What better way to create budget deficits -- and restrict town spending -- than to cause Atkinson to waste tax dollars defending themselves against lawsuit after lawsuit from these guys.

In my opinion, Brownfield and Naile staged this whole thing in an attempt to get sympathy from the crowd to get the votes they needed for their petitions. This may sound crazy to you, but it is no crazier than a small group of people who think the "Atkinson mafia" is out to get them.

BTW, Ed Naile has yet to answer this simple question: why did you need Gary Brownfield to take pictures for you?

Anonymous said...

Wait a minute, Frank

Is CNHT suing the Town of Atkinson too?

I thought it was some residents filing a civil rights suit. The suit doesn't involve CNHT, but that is a nice piece of misdirection.

So you are claiming it is a lie, because Brown said he was hired, and Nail used the words asked him to?

Pretty thin, so was it a lie when Phil said everybody gets transport? or when he said he did 1644 transports for $19,000? Or when he said he has done nothing wrong, and nobody could put a piece of paper on the table that said Phil Consentino did anything wrong? Or when he said he had the selectmen's authorization to buy the explorer, or when he said any of the other outrageous lies he has made?

Anonymous said...

First, I am not Frank. Is CNHT suing the town? No. But Mr. Brownfield did mention that Mr. Naile is his "witness" to his civil rights violation.

Anonymous said...

"BTW, Ed Naile has yet to answer this simple question: why did you need Gary Brownfield to take pictures for you?"

Is that really important? Does it matter why? It's not your business as to why he took the pictures. Who cares why he was hired him or who asked him, the problem is that he was unlawfully stopped.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
namekit said...

Any Town Official, conductng Town business, at a Public Town meeting, has no right to request his picture not be taken while in the process of conducting the towns business. It is clear he didnt mind the tribune taking pictures just Brownfield. the rest is a smoke show. My opinion is if stopped there Mr. Brownfield would be ok, when he started blocking the camera he started to lok foolish.

Anonymous said...

It appears that Gary and Leon are being led around with a ring in their noses and arms with strings attatched. Beware of the puppet
master for he is wise and shrewd.
As for the puppets, you will be judged by your peers so please think thru your actions because when the music stops the person pulling the strings will move on to the next group of puppets.

Carol Grant said...

To the blog manager,

I don't support censorship, but
posting "Feb. 3, 11:45 am" should be deleted.

We are now in candidate election mode and will be so for the next few weeks. That posting is disgraceful and shameful and out of the gutter, and if allowed, will show that there are no standards of decency or propriety for the blog.

There are going to be many pro and con postings with regard to the candidates for all of the town offices during the next few weeks. But there must be a standard held to and insisted upon, that the postings will be about the candidates' positions on issues and not vicious personal attacks.

Posting 11:45 am was sickening and hurtful to the town. That's very probably why so many people who want to serve, won't sign up -- because there are some real sickos out there who will use gutter attack tactics on them. No matter who you support, we, the people of Atkinson, have got to speak out against the use of those tactics against any and all candidates.

Civility has got to be the standard for posting with no tolerance for abusers of civility.

Anonymous said...

What troubles me most is so many people in town think that Phil and Frank and Jack's behavior is somehow OK or that its good for the town. There must be something in Atkinson's water because the documented track record from these people shows there is significant room for improvement.

The RSA is quite clear on allowing cameras. For Frank to "interpret" the RSA otherwise or use the "disturbance" rule because he didn't want his picture taken (waaaaa) shows he he is good at making a show at town meeting that once again will never hold up in court. Taking pictures? Now there's a fight worth pursuing to the bitter end. Chuck Douglas sends his thanks.

It's costing me more tax dollars and you clowns don't have the authorization to spend my money generating numerous lawsuits without my pre-approval. But since so many people think its Ok then I guess you should just keep breaking the law and/or violating people's rights. Mass hysteria is the only logical conclusion I can come to. I've never seen such a cluster of flawed logic in my life.

But let's blame the guy with the camera and the RSA protecting him. Ya, that makes sense.

When are people going to wake up and realize the only ones benefitting from our town official's behavior is the lawyers and the plaintiffs. Where is the ROI for me? I feel like I'm losing my ass in this deal. There is no benefit to me. I feel my property value going down even further when the press makes Atkinson look like a less than desirable place to live with all this crap. We need more responsible town officials that prevent lawsuits and not mass produces them.


Caught in the Crossfire

Anonymous said...

YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AS A PHOTOGRAPHER IF HARASSED. If Someone has threatened, intimidated, or detained you because you were taking photographs, they are liable for crimes such as coercion or theft. In such cases, you should report them to the police. You may also have civil remedies against such persons and their employers. The torts for which you may be entitled to compensation include assault, conversion, false imprisonment, and violation of your constitutional rights.

The law in the United States of America is pretty simple. You are allowed to photograph anything with the following exceptions:

• Certain military installations or operations.

• People who have a reasonable expectation of privacy. That is, people who are some place that's not easily visible to the general public, e.g., if you shoot through someone's window with a telephoto lens.

That's it.

You can shoot pictures of children; your rights don't change because of their age or where they are, as long as they're visible from a place that's open to the public. (So no sneaking into schools or climbing fences.)

Video taping has some more gray areas because of copyright issues, but in general the same rules apply. If anyone can see it, you can shoot it.

And yes, you can shoot on private property if it's open to the public. That includes malls, retails stores, Starbucks, banks, and office-building lobbies. If you're asked to stop and refuse, you run the risk of being charged with trespassing, but your pictures are yours. No one can legally take your camera or your memory card without a court order.

You can also shoot in subways and at airports. Check your local laws about the subway, but in New York, Washington, and San Francisco it's perfectly legal. Airport security is regulated by the Transportation Security Administration, and it's quite clear: Photography is A-OK at any commercial airport in the U.S. as long as you're in an area open to the public.

Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Atkinson Reporter said...

To the Anonymous commentator at 11:45am Your comment has been deleted. Ad Hominum personal attacks that are not apropos of the subject matter being discussed will not be tolerated.

Anonymous said...

Don't post and report the same thing over and over.

Anonymous said...

Hey Frank, using Web Proxies doesn't hide your petty, childishness.

Anonymous said...


This post is everywhere!

Groundhog Day was YESTERDAY. We don't need to read this over and over and over. Once will do.

Anonymous said...

Anon February 3, 2009 12:18 PM writes:

Hey Frank, using Web Proxies doesn't hide your petty, childishness.

OK folks. This is a statement to be frightened by. Why? Because that means someone is trying to figure out who you are by attempting to trace the IP address of your computer.

There are ways to post anonymously using a proxy server (which is what this bozo is referring to.) If one of the loonies who visit here is willing to make a comment like this, you should consider doing one of the following:

1. Use an anonymous server. The easiest way to do this is through the translate tool in Google.


This is serious stuff folks. Obviously someone does not respect the right to post anonymously the webmaster of this board has given to all of us who visit here. Furthermore, and for God knows why, this person wants to really know who you are.

I would DEFINITELY proceed with caution...

Anonymous said...

I want in on some of this action. It looks like a good money making opportunity. All I need to do is find a way to get town officials to harrass me. Then I file a lawsuit and cash in. If I didnt know any better I'd think they were all in this together to ripoff the insurance companies. Its like the car accident scam in Lawrence where they faked car accidents to get insurance money. The only difference is its a different kind of liability. Brownfield and Polito are probably in this together! They staged the whole thing. Brilliant! Frank please find a way to harrass me so I can cash in too. I gots bills to pay.

Anonymous said...

hey ed,
gary said you had some puppet openings. since i've lost my job can you tell me where to apply?

Anonymous said...

I wanted to sign all the pettitions but I done was itimidated. Does this mean my rights were violated? If so can I sign on with the others. I sure could use some cash.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Harold Morse for Selectman or Budget Committee

Leadership skills he the manager of a very successful business in town

Dedication to the town he has served on town boards for many years.

Always ask the right questions.

Never backs down when he knows he is right.

Go Harold one vote from me

Anonymous said...

Harold Morse, world class tool!

Sits on a board that regulates the industry he runs (complete lack of ethics!)

Bullies other boards in town into doing what he wants (maybe because he has to take a subordinate role in another relationship in his life?)

Shoot, he's perfect for Atkinson!

Anonymous said...

Lets not forget that he sometimes has a little difficulty telling the truth. Yep, he's perfect.

Anonymous said...

Fellow citizens,

Below please find a response from Mr. Naile to one of our residents. Mr. Naile is somehow under the mistaken impression that the anonymous person he is speaking with is Frank Polito.


Are you still mad because a I mentioned you are mommy's boy when you brought that humble little police officer outside to make me delete photos?

Come on now.

I still have the photos. What exactly are you going to do about it, blog endlessly over here instead of

Find another venue where there is cable TV to prance in front of.

Your not in Atkinson any more Dorothy, click your heels and wish it wasn't so.
February 4, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterEd Naile

I am sure there is a certain element here who will be amused by such childish comments. However, I am equally sure there are those more moderate individuals who will be shocked by Mr. Naile's taunting.

As residents may or may not know, Mr. Naile is now threatening that he is going to work to change NH law to eliminate deliberative session. Or, at least, deliberative session on citizen's petitions. Setting aside Saturday's session, imagine the impact a change in that law would have for a company like Lewis Builders? As you know, in the past, if they have been unable to get changes to zoning ordinances approved by the Planning Board or ZBA, they have used citizen's petitions to get them on the ballot.

Consider that before you are asked to sign anything supporting this change.

I once again would like to thank Leon, Gary, and Mark for bringing this filthy extremist into Atkinson. With your help, Atkinson will soon be nothing more than one big golf course and an unlimited supply of water for neighboring communities!

Anonymous said...

To Anon February 4, 2009 10:53 AM

How can you criticize Ed Naile for his taunting then you call him a filthy extremist? It shows your bias and ignorance.

As far as eliminating the deliberative session goes, I am disgusted that the citizens cannot get an article to the ballot without getting two blocks of votes in favor. I think if the residents showed respect for each others rights, they would ammend the articles only where necessary and put them on the ballot. I feel my rights are being taken away by 100 or so people who are able to go to the session while others are prevented from participating in the process due to their life circumstance. Not everyone can sit there all day. The deliberative session is disfunctional.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

To Anon @ 10:53;

Why are you so upset at what Mr. Nail says, but you aren't upset that Frank, just handed Mr. Brownfield another lawsuit?

Frank stands up there every year and lectures us on the law, and he is often wrong, but nobody challenges him on it.

This year somebody did, and Frank couldn't handle being told he was wrong. He should apologize, and then move on, but that is probably too mature for him.

Anonymous said...

The legislature should legislate that citizen petitioned warrant articles INTENT can not be ammended on town floor.

Or just make them like zoning articles, where you can discuss them but they go to the ballot as written.

The fact that a few town employees and their families can destroy a warrant article having to do with town employees makes a mockery of the petition process.

Rep. Garrity, get on this.

Diogenes said...

I'll try and make this simple.

The discussions have been vivid and enlightening. However, I have read the documentation on taxpayers site regarding the Chief, Frank Polito, and Jack Sapia. I must admit, it looks kosher.

This is not for those who oppose the above people. I've read it all. And, for this discussion lets leave out what has happened in the past two weeks. Things are still too charged to get unbiased opinions. What I would like is to hear is what their supporters say.

So, the question is, is the documentation posted on the tax payers site accurate in your opinion? If not, what is your interpretation?

If the documentation is in error, how do you suggest it be corrected? If the documentation is correct, why should the people of Atkinson support them?

I will admit, I tend to believe what I've read. But, since the Chief clearly has so much support in this town, I'd like to know why? If the documentation is in error, I can then understand your support. If it is accurate, why should they continue to be supported?

I'm not here to point fingers, make wild accusations, berate people for their opinions. The anti-Chief, Frank and Jack faction have been very clear on how they feel. Honestly, I've come to a crossroads. Despite what I've read, I don't know who or what to really believe. I just want the other perspective. Thank you.

Anonymous said...

Since Frank was not commissioned to moderate, any law suit against him for damages should not be paid by the town and should go after Frank and his estate directly.

A second suit should then be against the town for allowing a non commissioned person to take the podium. In other words the law should have stepped in and prevented Frank from doing what Frank does best and that is being a jerk.

So unless this lawlessness ceases to stop, there is going to be a long line of law suits coming in the future.

Anonymous said...

Not commissioned? Please make sense
of this statement for I find it silly and misleading. What do you mean?

Anonymous said...

I don't know what they by mean commissioned either. Town Moderator is an elected position and if I recall correctly, his two major responsibilities are to conduct the Deliberative Session and the vote that follows later.

Frank has run unopposed for as long as I can remember. There was a meager attempt last year to get a write-in candidate but it was not coordinated and flopped. I think Frank was concerned about though by his obvious hovering over the tallying machines where he could see what the ballots looked like. That should not be permitted this year.

I also recall he would not let Jane Cole work at the polls as she normally does at elections. The reason given was that she participated in blog discussions. I don't think anyone questions Ms. Cole's integrity so this was a telling move.

So, unlike the Chief's position, the Moderator is elected. As long as he runs unopposed, he'll remain. You want this changed, run for the position. Too late to get on the official ballot but not to late to organize a write-in campaign.

I hear a lot of bitching but no one running for office. And don't snap back, "Why not you?" I'm not qualified, I admit it and it is as simple as that.

Just to add a little fuel to the fire. Leon is running, for a couple of positions. I applaud his candidacy but I don't think he is qualified either. With him and Mr. Childs on the BOS I think it will become even more dysfunctional than it already is.

OK, fire away.

Anonymous said...

Leon Says:

The following email was sent to Town Hall today.

Subject: Request for Removal from Ballot

To Whom It May Concern:

Because of my pending lawsuit against the Town of Atkinson and other defendants, I would like to request that my name be removed from the official ballot for the position of Selectman and Trustee of the Trust Fund.

Best regards,
Leon B. Artus

I did this because of any complaints of "Conflict of Interest" while my lawsuit continues through the legal process.

You can't believe what is happening at the Town level to keep me in the running.

Will keep you posted.

Curt Springer said...

RSA 669:22 Withdrawal. – Where a candidate had duly filed according to RSA 669:19 for a non-partisan town election or where a party nominee has been certified to the clerk as provided in RSA 669:50 for a partisan town election, no withdrawal or declination of a candidate shall be accepted by the town clerk subsequent to the last dates for filing except if the candidate dies or shall make oath that he does not qualify for the public office for which he or she is filed because of age, domicile, or incapacitating physical disability acquired subsequent to his or her filing. If a candidate dies or withdraws as provided in this section, the town clerk shall not print the name of that candidate on the ballot. If the ballots have been printed, the clerk shall remove that name using pasters.

Anonymous said...

Look at the integrity Leon
Artus has to ask to have his name removed for selectman in order to be ethical and responsible given his lawsuit for civil rights. I hope he runs for a state office as he will then be able to work for injustice in other towns besides our own. I am just in awe of how this guy has conducted himself. He is a tremendous leader and does not get timid and sticks his neck way out to help protect others. (It is too bad that many residents took off to go skiing on Saturday instead of coming to the big meeting and doing their duty.)

Governor Artus. I like that one. Attorney General Leon Artus. Like that too. United States President Leon Artus. Why not? With the guts he's got. A bronze bust of Leon Artus should be in the lobby of town hall as a tribute to his public service. Go Leon go! Yes we can!

Anonymous said...

Woops. I did not proof read my prior comment. I meant to say Leon Artus works for JUSTICE (not injustice). Sorry about that misstatement.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Maybe cnht can help Leon SUE to remove his name. Sounds like Leon is getting screwed on this one. I think a 100k settlement is justified. What say Ed?

MAcciard said...

Leon can choose not to conduct a campaign, but his name was entered for those offices at the close of sign ups, therefore his name will appear on the ballots in March.

My recommendation would be for him to go to Candidates night and bow out gracefully.

LEt everyone know that he has no intention of campaigning, or serving if elected.

Anonymous said...

Leon should sue, sue, sue everyone.
And don't stop there, just keep suing.

Have you ever been in a fender bender and the next thing you know, the other person is banging at your door with their lawyer? Well
thats how I feel about all these suits. Whether or not the fender bender was my fault I would still be pissed when you show up with your lawyer. Well, all these suits are against us the towns people. Whether you like it or not, no one in this town wants to be sued. Please stop making stupid requests like supporting your desire to sue the crap out of the town to make it better because WE ARE THE TOWN... WE ARE THE PEOPLE.... YOU ARE SUING.... DO YOU GET IT?

Anonymous said...

Ed Naile Said:

As for suing.

If done properly, this could be the last one.

That is what we hope.

Regarding Leon taking his name off the ballot - he can't. He can chose to write the letter asking tobe taken off or saying he will not run.

But no one is trying to MAKE him take his name off.

I know its hard for some Atkinson residents to see the difference.

Anonymous said...

I know its hard for some Atkinson residents to see the difference.

Shut up Ed.

macciard said...

To the Anon. @ 4:24;

WE see it, but do you? You are pissed at those filing suits, well, what do YOU propose?

What would YOU do when you have your name, and your business ruined by the police chief?

What would YOU do when you file complaints to the BOS, and they do nothing?

What would YOU do when your lawyer send the BOS letters notifying them that if they do not follow established town employee policy, and reprimand the chief, a lawsuit will follow, and they do nothing?

How many indignities would YOU suffer at the chiefs behest before you said, ENOUGH?

I wrote my suit in 90 minutes following an altercation in front of the post office, in which the chief verbally threatened me, he then got in his police vehicle, and followed me up main st. onto sawyer ave. even going so far as to turn around in a driveway, immediately after I did, and followed me to the town hall.

I filed a verbal complaint, with the BOS, and then realized that this abuse would not stop, so I filed the suit!


You should be pissed at your town officials who create this mess, but then you would have to be pissed at yourself too, right?

Anonymous said...

go get them leon" all this im god s--- started way back with wayne peak,all over petty cash at the pd .this went to court. result,s were sealed from the public.maybe leon and his lawyer can have these sealed records opened; to see who won .that year my taxes went up $250.00 we pay for his ego trip,s.god luck leon & mark " the bounty hunter "

Anonymous said...

To Mark:
Not all suits fall into the same category. When officials are set up soley to goat them into a suit by using weak minded individuals that go out with the sole purpose to "bait"
town officials for a petty law suit, then I will get pissed each and every time. You know exactlty what I mean. It's this type of crap that will prevent residents from ever supporting this "cause".

Curt Springer said...

Web article: The Truth about the CNHT

Anonymous said...

To: February 9, 2009 9:45 AM

HERE WE GO AGAIN! The ESTABLISHMENT trying to PAINT THEMSELVES as VICTIMS after getting caught breaking the laws-of-the-land. This is wearing real thin! Can hardly wait to see how they try to do it THIS TIME. Excuse better be real good, cause I don’t believe they can get out of being punished with these lawsuits.

Just my opinion

Anonymous said...

suey, suey,suey