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.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

I'd Vote for Valerie- From the Plaistow Town Crier

From the Plaistow Town Crier;

I'd Vote for Valerie

If I were a resident of Atkinson, I'd write in Valerie Tobin's name for Selectman. You fell for one of the Chief's buddies last year. You're going to look pretty stupid, falling for another one this time around? I ask you, could Valerie possibly do worse than the Selectmen you've got in there now? The men over in Atkinson's government seem to be practicing a strange form of political perversion, called dictatorship. Ask them about democracy and civil rights and they shrug. It took eight women to muscle through the Vietnam War Memorial, when it should have been a no-brainer. It's going to take a lot more than eight women to muscle Valerie in. Women of Atkinson, unite against the male oppressors in town government!

And on a side note. Whoever files the next civil rights lawsuit against the town of Atkinson, please, please, please have the American Civil Liberties Union represent you. They have an office up in Concord. That way we don't have to listen to all this criticism of Ed Naile, Chuck Douglas and the CNHT from all the progressives and liberals in your town. The ACLU is a liberal group that fights for your civil rights too.

And on another side note. Where the hell is Chaz Proulx? Guess he and his liberal friends at DemocracyForNew Hampshire (DFNH) couldn't care less about civil rights in Atkinson. You're lucky Ed Naile, the CNHT and Chuck Douglas have taken an interest in your rights as citizens of Atkinson. Chaz doesn't care or he'd be there.

73 comments:

Anonymous said...

Actually, the "Chief's Buddy" as you refer to him as, has actually done a pretty good job. Now there will be a lot of screaming regarding that statement, but there is a lot more to being a Selectman than censuring the chief, which is what everyone expects Valerie to do.

He has clearly shown he has more smarts than the other two put together.

Valerie is untested. She has not been involved. Many have great hopes for her, but no guarantees. Seems like voting for Valerie is closer to a crap shoot and an informed decision.

MAcciard said...

My recommendation would be to prioritize the qualities you would most like to see in a selectman, and then figure out who most matches them.

Although, Mr. Bennett seemed nice enough at deliberative session, and certainly is a committed environmentalist, I do not, yet know enough about him to vote for him.

Everything I know about Valerie, tells me she would not only be a strong candidate, but would try to do what is right. To me, that is the most important thing. I want a selectman who will do what is right for the town, even though it might hurt them personally.

I don't want ANY elected official who even considers their own benefit.

Anonymous said...

I love the Chief and all he stand for. I read the first part of the lawsuit, and I can not see what Phil did wrong. All he did was call a couple of elderly that he had helped in the past, and was wondering why they signed a petition. It's a free country and I would have wanted to know, if I were he.

He has done so much good for the elderly and I'm sure he was just checking to see if they knew what they had signed. No harm, no foul. I think he has EVERY RIGHT to call anyone and everyone that sign those petitions, and I encourage him to do so.

My opinion is this suit will be thrown out of court. Civil Right be damned because he broke no laws.

Phil, if you read this, I'm with you. Keep up the good work.

Anonymous said...

anonymuos 2:13 phil nice try, we know what you are ,

Anonymous said...

The ACLU only cares about LEFIST causes, sorry.
We don't fight for the rights of conservative citizens... only those we choose worthy of our defense.

Anonymous said...

By the way, whether Phil was nice or not, he has no right to try to influence people when it concerns him.
It's called electioneering and it's against the law... official oppression too.

You stand for bullying? Shame on you.

Anonymous said...

To Anon March 4, 2009 4:24 PM

No, I don't and won't stand for bullying, but I'm saying Phil didn't bully. I think he was perfectly within his rights for doing what he did. Show me where I'm wrong, or I still say he was well within his rights for what he did. Show me the law that states something different. Until then, I'll back Phil for whatever he lawfully does. Phil works for the elderly and knows the law. My bet is on Phil.

Phil will have this case thrown out of court or at least win the case.

Phil.........the majority of the town stands behind you. Go get them and prove us right.

Anonymous said...

---Crickets---

Anonymous said...

I guess its just like when you find out your favorite Catholic priest is a child molestor. Its just too hard for people to believe. The denial is understandable. After all, to many people our EA director has been the deliverer of all good things. If some people never witnessed anything lesser than that, its understandable they refuse to believe it. I feel bad for those who've been misled so much & used as political pawns. Its really sad. And it creates a huge division in town.

Anonymous said...

Go to the ACLU to protect Ed Naile and CNHT? Now I've heard everything. Yes, free up Ed's time so he can post his white papers comparing support of public education to ethnic cleansing.

Anonymous said...

Now I've heard everything to how far the left will go. Now they want to elevate the subject matter to "ethnic cleansing"? That's SICK. All we want to do is exercise our rights, which they will not address. The best they can do is resort to a "Sound Bite".

Taxpayers please pay attention. The left want your rights and make you pay for taking them away. You need to pay attention and make a decision.

You either want to maintain your right, or give them away and pay for them later.

The Choice is YOURS..........

Anonymous said...

Phil Consentino is the BEST THING to happen in this town in the last 40 years. I don't care what the lawsuit says, it will be thrown out of court, and Phil will win. PERIOD.

Anonymous said...

An outside opinion is always welcome to me. Some times you can't see the forest for the trees.
Kindness is always a good tool to use when you can't show your real objective.
The two Selectmen are smart enough but the distinction is they are not as devious.
No one walks into the BOS knowing everything and they usually finish their term still not knowimg what is going on. Only what the ones in control are willing to let them in on.
We can only hope that there will be a change some how.
If Town Officials only did what they were voted in for the law suits wouldn't happen. That is all the voters want and by law they should have that.
I guess we get what we vote for so we should be careful and value our vote.

Anonymous said...

I cannot stand the liberal ACLU nor do I like bullying of the town folk so that they can have further control on our town.

I would like to see Atkinson returned to the the people who pay the taxes and vote on the decisions that are right.

Anonymous said...

Valerie is the only clear choice with no Hidden agenda. There is no ties to the chief, and that is what this town needs to move ahead, and not backwards. And to anon chief supporter, Your leader will not get this suit thrown out. He, or should i say, our Insurance policy will have to pay for the horrible decisions of him, and the others who did evil.

Anonymous said...

I still say (regardless what the lawsuit says) Phil Consentino, Frank Polito, Jack Sapia, Bill Friel, Paul Sullivanm and Barbara Snicer are the best thing that has happened to this town in years.

Regardless what this blog has to say, I want people just like them to remain in office. They aren't wrong..........and the lawsuit will prove it.

Long live Phil and all those that are in office. We can't do without them.

Anonymous said...

I agree, without the "MAN OF THE YEAR" Phil Consentino........this town would be riddled with crime. It's because of Phil that we enjoy the peace of mind that we moved here for.

Without Phil's intense attention to detail of crime within our town, crime would force us to move out and our property values would drop.

Thank goodness Phil is working for us. I can't imagine ANYONE ELSE that would be so effective. We can't live without Phil.

Just my opinion.

LegalBeagle said...

For the person who wanted to see a law, here it is;

659:44-a Electioneering by Public Employees. – No public employee, as defined in RSA 273-A:1, IX, shall electioneer while in the performance of his or her official duties or use government property, including, but not limited to, telephones, facsimile machines, vehicles, and computers, for electioneering. For the purposes of this section, ""electioneer'' means to act in any way specifically designed to influence the vote of a voter on any question or office. Any person who violates this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Anonymous said...

LeagleBeagle,

You conveniently left out the definition of the qualifying public employee.

Anonymous said...

Anon 6:44 PM,

No one is trying to "elevate" the subject ethnic cleansing. The FACT is there was a paper on the CNHT website that compared support of public education to ethnic cleansing. CNHT is right wing and very, very extremist.

So don't go screaming the left has an agenda here. It is clear that the people who run this blog agree with almost all, if not all of CNHT's positions...no matter how extreme they are. Now who really has the agenda???

Anonymous said...

"Valerie is the only clear choice with no Hidden agenda."

Now, how would you know that? Have you peered into her soul and discovered that?

Because Valerie is anti-chief does not make her the best candidate.

Because Bill knows the chief does not make him the worst candidate.

All I know, Bill has been fighting the fight. Valerie disappeared after the last election, and didn't have a clue what Bill has been fighting for.

The chief will be gone soon enough, with or without Valerie. When the water is gone, its gone. Everyone on a well think about that. Who would you rather take on the DES, PUC and HAWC? And hoping Valerie will do it is just that, hope.

Anonymous said...

To Anon March 4, 2009 7:21 PM

You just made my case. The law you quoted is a misdemeanor (slap on the wrist if convicted). Phil knows that and as a law enforcement officer, he doesn't care. He knows that you aren't going to take it to court, so he wins.

I want to stay with a winner and it's not you. Phil did nothing wrong and you can't prove he did. That being said, he will win and you will lose. Bottom line..............he will get this case thrown out of court and you can't do anything about it.

Phil, if your read this blog.....the majority are behind you. These blog readers don't have the slightest idea what you are about.

Phil, please preserver and you will beat this case in court.

Anonymous said...

To Anon March 4, 2009 7:59 PM


How do you know "The chief will be gone soon enough", did you make a deal with him? If so, what right do you have to say that? The Chief will win this suit and go on protecting the rights of the elderly.

Tell me about your power to look into his mind as being fact.

I don't believe you have that power, so your comment is useless.

Anonymous said...

To Anon March 4, 2009 7:59 PM

Considering the response from our current BOS that has done nothing regarding this matter, we have hope with Valerie. We will go with HOPE as compared with the dismal response of the people that are in charge now. It’s the only HOPE we have.

Anonymous said...

Curt Springer....You've read the complete lawsuit. I say the defendants will win this case because they did nothing wrong. I say they will win this case. What do you say.

Long live the defendants. We need more of them in our government.

Anonymous said...

How can anyone say Phil is Right after reading the facts? Any logic can't lead in that direction. It's impossible. But I can see why this town is the laughing stock of NH>. Your comments (the pro Phil one's) comfirm that.

Anonymous said...

Phil is a moron! So are to people of this town!
It's the "good old boys" syndrome. If you are on the good list you would like what is going on here but if not you are seeing it for what it is worth! POWER and MONEY!

MAcciard said...

I would like to know where my Town Report is? STILL haven't received it, and there is only 5 days left till elections.
Has anyone else still not gotten theirs? And why does it always take till past the deadline to get these documents?

Anonymous said...

"Tell me about your power to look into his mind as being fact.

I don't believe you have that power, so your comment is useless."

I don't need to look into his mind. He's near 70 and has a bad ticker. Do you expect him to serve until he's 80?

So, my comment is no more useless than yous.

tim dziechowski said...

I received my town report in the mail day before yesterday. It also was put up on the town webpage yesterday. I also had the town webmaster put the conservation commission's prime wetlands study there so people can access the maps for the four wetlands to see how/if their house lots are impacted.

Anonymous said...

Mark

The Town Reprt is posted on the Town webite, you can download it. I did receive mine and it raised many questions. The first one is what three lawsuits did they "settle or win this year"?

Carol's was settled. What are the other two?

Anyone?

Anonymous said...

I think if all of us in unison say it loud enough and long enough and frequent enough, then it must be true. They are innocent! They are innocent!

Come on everybody now!

Spin, spin, spin, spin, spin. oh my head hurts from the spinning. What's funny is how much effort the spinsters are putting into this blog. It gives the blog a lot more credibility the more postings the spinsters put out there. I wish I could be a spinster. Its a lot more fun to be a spinster than face reality. The truth hurts and its really ugly.

Anonymous said...

I think between the Consentino issue and the water issue I'll be voting to handle the water issue this year, which means supporting someone other than Valerie. The fact that she's accepted the line of b.s. and seems unwilling to fight the Lewis Water Mafia, and hasn't stayed up on issues since last year, raises some doubts in my mind.

Regarding Friel, he's a shill for the yuppie Sapia clan as best that I can tell, as well as for business interests in town; I haven't heard him have the guts to speak against the Chief or to speak out preserve our town's rural character and our residential areas from commercial development, so he's a bit spineless from what I've seen (or else he just doesn't care).

Anonymous said...

I'll vote for Valerie and support Bill's work on the water issue. I want both issues worked and a vote for Bill means we have to keep the Chief which is not an option for me again this year. I hope Bill wins his water fight and I hope Valerie puts the Chief where he belongs.

Anonymous said...

But who are you voting for Tax Collector;

Debbie stated at candidates night that she was elected twice , and I think she said unanimously, or overwhelmingly, or something like that. She forgot to mention that she ran unopposed both times!

Of course she got the votes, she was the only name on the ballot!

Anonymous said...

Hey, a BLAST FROM THE PAST or WHERE IS SHE NOW?

Does anyone know what happened to Maggie........ah Maggie........oh what's her last name? Maggie, Maggie.....oh ya Maggie Osborne?

Wasn't she the last person Jack Sapia was supporting for a position on the ZBA? You know, the lady that built so many illegal additions to her property or new homes she was building!

Last I heard she wasn't on the ZBA anymore because she has filed a lawsuit against the Town for building another home illegally?

Does anyone know where she is today? Is Jack working behind the scene trying to get her illegal house approved for occupancy, or has he dumped her for the liability she is and replaced her with Patti Mangini.

I can't imagine Patti winning, but if she does........let's watch that relationship develop for any further illegal acts behind the scene. I really have to question the motives of anyone wanting to be associated with a know liar like Sapia. It just doesn’t pass the sniff test.

Anonymous said...

We have two big problems, CheifOBigumWalletO and HAWC, as in seeMeDrainURWater.

I want both Valerie and Bill. Only one way to do that, vote Valerie.

Anonymous said...

why do you presume an association between mangini and sapia? Just because he might choose to support her doesn't mean she is tied to him. patti is nice to everyone and doesn't play politics. she'd be a great town clerk. you have don't have any valid reason not to like her so you make up this association with sapia to make it seem like she is unworthy. how do you know rose doesn't like sapia. that is all baloney. don't invent connections between people that don't exist. patti isn't tied to anyone. she'd work for the good of this town like she does with all of her volunteer work.

Anonymous said...

"I want both Valerie and Bill. Only one way to do that, vote Valerie."

If Valerie is depending on the DES for the real story, we're doomed. The DES started this whole mess and their attitude is, "How dare we mere mortals tells us our jobs."

This shows just how out of touch Valerie is with on of the towns biggest, long term, problem. There is a web site devoted to this whole topic. Has she even bothered to review the data? Her performance suggests she has not.

Yes, Yes, I've heard it all before, she will do the right thing. When she doesn't know what the "thing" is, how can you expect her to do right by it?

Your choice is simple. Go with what you know, or what you hope will become. The stakes are high. Are you a betting person?

The next person we elect will be with us for at least 3 years. Are you ready for the 3 years to be a learning period, or ready day one?

The water issue is up against very powerful forces in this state. First, there are the state agencies themselves. The PUC hearing, and their report, speaks volumes where their interests lie, and, they are not in Atkinson's best interests. Then we have HAWC. What more can be said? It is solely owned by Christine Lewis Morse (it is shown in PUC records). Her husband, Harold, is president. That's it. They are responsible to no one but themselves. Give'em a call. Ask what they will do when your well goes dry. If Harold answers, it will probably be, "I won't discuss that issue." He's done it before.

Are you willing to put a newbie in a position responsible to protect "OUR" interests?

Let me put it another way. Valerie is obviously not concerned with her water source. She had to prepare for a public hearing. Who did she consult? Did she call Carol? Did she call John Wolters? Did she even call Bill? Did she even bother to review all the documentation available? Her showing suggests not. She blubbered her way through the question.

Sorry. She is probably a good person, and wants to do right. But, the problem is NOW. To me, she's a bit late.

Anonymous said...

RE: March 5, 2009 9:43 PM

If you want to gain any sort of credibility, use proper nouns (first words of a paragraph are capitialized)*, do not capitalize everything (that means you are shouting), and take advantage of paragraphs. To do otherwise makes your entry very hard to read, let alone take seriously.

May want to try a rewrite. I'm not criticizing your message. But, if you're going to make the effort, try to make it as effective as you can.

Teenagers can use shortcuts. We taxpayers need it in plain, and proper, English.

Anonymous said...

Ouch, THAT HURT.

Anonymous said...

To Anon March 5, 2009 9:43 PM

Patti and Sapia were not seperated at birth.

Anonymous said...

Has she even bothered to review the data? ARE YOU ASSUMING SHE HASN'T?

Are you willing to put a newbie in a position responsible to protect "OUR" interests? THEY ARE BOTH NEWBIES TO BOS

Let me put it another way. Valerie is obviously not concerned with her water source. BASED ON WHAT FACT DO YOU CONCLUDE THIS?

She had to prepare for a public hearing. Who did she consult? Did she call Carol? Did she call John Wolters? Did she even call Bill? Did she even bother to review all the documentation available? Does she need another to tell her about the water problem? Can't she read up? YOU MAKE THIS SOUND LIKE THE ONLY ISSUE THAT MATTERS. IT'S NOT, I'm ALREADY STUCK WITH HAWC, PAYING FOR THEIR EXPANSION AND I WANT THE CHIEF OUT FIRST AND FOREMOST.

I am entitled to my opinion and you raise a lot of questions about Valerie but your conclusions are many and based on pure supposition.

Anonymous said...

uoooo, a debate, and you don't have to shout.

"Has she even bothered to review the data? ARE YOU ASSUMING SHE HASN'T?"

Were you watching the same Candidates Night I did? Bill showed an in depth knowledge of the issue. Valerlie came out with some feel good platitudes, but no real grasp of the problem. Hence, I can assume she knew little, or didn't care, about the water issue until it became a campaign issue. If she'd researched it, she'd done a better job.

"Are you willing to put a newbie in a position responsible to protect "OUR" interests? THEY ARE BOTH NEWBIES TO BOS"

Again, I refer to the water problem. Bill is ready to go. Valerie has to decide where she really stands, and then start learning. HAWC still has the large ground water withdrawal petition in the works, and an outstanding petition to raise their customers rates, again, to pay for the pipeline. There is going to be a lot of State/HAWC activity in the next 6 months (hearings on the rate increase are in May.) When you are fighting a fire and need volunteers now who would you rather have, someone with experience, or someone just wanting to help?

"Let me put it another way. Valerie is obviously not concerned with her water source. BASED ON WHAT FACT DO YOU CONCLUDE THIS?

She had to prepare for a public hearing. Who did she consult? Did she call Carol? Did she call John Wolters? Did she even call Bill? Did she even bother to review all the documentation available? Does she need another to tell her about the water problem? Can't she read up? YOU MAKE THIS SOUND LIKE THE ONLY ISSUE THAT MATTERS. IT'S NOT, I'm ALREADY STUCK WITH HAWC, PAYING FOR THEIR EXPANSION AND I WANT THE CHIEF OUT FIRST AND FOREMOST."

No, it is not the only issue that matters. But you, as a HAWC customer, are affected by this. When HAWC cannot account for 1 of every 3 gallons of water they pump, you're still the one paying for pumping all 3 gallons. And the rate increase HAWC has petitioned for to pay for the pipeline if it is approved. If HAWC were to fix their water loss problem, they have no need for new wells or a pipeline to fulfill the requirements of their Atkinson customers. HAWC wants a low interest loan to pay for a pipeline it doesn't need, and they want you to pay for it. Seems like that would make you a little angry. Could be wrong.

And as far as the chief. What, you think Valerie is going to get him fired her first day on the job. If firing him were so easy, he would have been gone long ago. There are many reasons why he is still on the job. Valerie, no matter how good her intentions, is not going to have an easy time of it.

And, as I've tried to point out before, I wish the chief would retire today. He won't but he won't be in the job forever either. He's nearing 70 and not in the best of health. I'd wager this will more likely cause his departure than anything else. So, in the long term view of things, the chief is a short term problem. If that pipeline is built, and the new wells come on line, that is a very long term problem. Are you a short term or long term vision type of guy?

"I am entitled to my opinion and you raise a lot of questions about Valerie but your conclusions are many and based on pure supposition."

You are indeed entitled to your opinion, as am I. But I think mine is based on more than just supposition.

I want to make this clear. I voted for Valerie last year. Since that time we've seen water grab to a degree never seen before in this town and government agencies and a private company that have been less than forth coming with the public about it. A handful of people have made it their job to put the brakes on this, or at least slow it down. They have put considerable amounts of their own time into this. Where has Valerie been this whole time?

The DES and PUC have made it clear. They put more stock in what elected officials say than ordinary folk, no matter their qualifications. Bill knows the problem inside out, and as a Selectman, he will have a louder voice.

This chief is a problem. The security of our water is a bigger, and due to circumstances, a more immediate one. Bill is better prepared.

Anonymous said...

With all the talk about Sapia and Patti - do you realize that the Chief is in full support of Rose??

I don't think Mangini is tied to Sapia, but he supports her and you are drawing conclusions. Are you then going to draw the same conclusions about Rose and the Chief?

Fair is fair -- so now, who is the better option (or whom do you dislike more...)

Anonymous said...

"Ouch, THAT HURT."

Probably did. But, when you are trying to present a case, you don't do it with rags in your mouth, which is exactly what the kind of writing sounds like.

Anonymous said...

Were you watching the same Candidates Night I did?
No. I don't have cable and work nights. I read her position in an email being forwarded.

You are indeed entitled to your opinion, as am I. But I think mine is based on more than just supposition. Your opinion is just that, yours. Mine is different and I think the Chief is doing way too much damage, costing us too much money and I personally don't want to see him retire and get away with all the evil doings.

This chief is a problem. The security of our water is a bigger, and due to circumstances, a more immediate one. Bill is better prepared. I completely disagree. The Chief is a menace and Bill won't necessarily make a better selectman because he's been working on ONE issue all year. So what? Everyone has to contibute in their own way to make a better town. This is Bill's way but it does not detract from Valerie in any way. Even Bill may likely fail then we're stuck with Bill and the Chief too. You are slanted in your thinking and close minded to the rest of the issues. One issue does not a selectman make.

Anonymous said...

You are worried about putting a NEWBIE in the BOS, and we put one in the WHITE HOUSE?

Doesnt make sense to me.

Anonymous said...

"One issue does not a selectman make. "

But you claiming just that. You've set your blinders on the chief and dismissed the rest. I agree the chief is a problem. Said it many times. My point is, the clock is ticking on the water issue. If the town does not become better involved, in a hurry, HAWC will have all the approvals they need.

And how dare you accuse me of being closed minded. You don't know me and have not a clue of the other issues in town I'm concerned with. And, as far as accusing me of being slanted, the exact same can be said of you. That is why we are having this discussion, only I'm not yelling.

Why are you under this belief that Valerie will have an immediate impact on removing the chief? Last I counted, the council has 3 members, majority rules, and his biggest supporter on the BOS will be the next chairman. I think you also greatly underestimate the support the chief has amongst the citizens. Not saying that is right or wrong, but that is a powerful force Valerie would be faced with. That cannot just be dismissed. You hate the chief - I'd offer a great many more that don't, or don't care.

Finally, I have not seen her position paper. If the water issue is now part of her agenda, its new to the list. Go back and read the debate assessment posted in another topic. I believe his conclusions lean to Valerie, but he does say, she did not have a clue about the problem. If she's concerned about it now, that is called politics.

I see a town with many problems. I've prioritized mine to coincide with the amount of time we have left to fix a serious one. I've also put my support behind the man I believe most capable of dealing with it.

You're a HAWC customer, so you don't have to worry about your tap running dry, only about the money HAWC charges you for it. However, a majority of the town are on private wells. You will excuse them for worrying the water they have now will be gone and in you tap.

Oh, and I've had one other question yet to be answered. Bill has been actively working to protect this town. Where did Valerie go after the last election? What has she done for the town in the last year? She's had plenty of opportunities to improve her resume. Anything new to add?

Anonymous said...

"You are worried about putting a NEWBIE in the BOS, and we put one in the WHITE HOUSE?

Doesnt make sense to me."

I didn't vote for that newbie either. You did I gather, based on how you framed your question.

Anonymous said...

"But you claiming just that. You've set your blinders on the chief and dismissed the rest. "

Like I said, Bill can take care of the water and Valerie can take care of the Chief. Stop twisting everything I say around.

What else can Bill do besides water? What else has he done all year? Where has he been when the donation scandal cameup? Where was he all the other years? Never heard of the guy before. The Chief's buddy, wonderful for you but I refuse to vote for him.

Anonymous said...

Valerie, Valerie, Valerie.

Anonymous said...

"You will excuse them for worrying the water they have now will be gone and in you tap."

Don't assume that because I have HAWC that I am pro HAWC. That is so small minded and presumptuous of you. You don't know me and you have made of all kinds of ridulous conclusions just because I want to vote for Valerie. You criticize me for pointing out my own opinion and you judge me wrong for having it.

Anonymous said...

"I think you also greatly underestimate the support the chief has amongst the citizens."

It's not support, it's intimidation. Lots of it, but little genuine support.

Anonymous said...

That is why we are having this discussion, only I'm not yelling.
"

sounds like you're yelling

Anonymous said...

"Because Bill knows the chief does not make him the worst candidate.
"

Now, how would you know that? Have you peered into her soul and discovered that?

Anonymous said...

"But you, as a HAWC customer, are affected by this. When HAWC cannot account for 1 of every 3 gallons of water they pump, you're still the one paying for pumping all 3 gallons. And the rate increase HAWC has petitioned for to pay for the pipeline if it is approved. If HAWC were to fix their water loss problem, they have no need for new wells or a pipeline to fulfill the requirements of their Atkinson customers. HAWC wants a low interest loan to pay for a pipeline it doesn't need, and they want you to pay for it. Seems like that would make you a little angry. Could be wrong.
"

It sure does make me angry, why wouldn't it? Oh, yeah, I remember, you are just presuming it's ok with me, but this no basis in fact.

Anonymous said...

"Don't assume that because I have HAWC that I am pro HAWC. That is so small minded and presumptuous of you. You don't know me and you have made of all kinds of ridulous conclusions just because I want to vote for Valerie. You criticize me for pointing out my own opinion and you judge me wrong for having it."

Excuse me, but you were doing the exact same thing, going so far as to call me "close minded", and now small minded and presumptuous. Pot calling the kettle black.

It's obvious we cannot discuss this in a civil manner. I've tried to present a logical, organized argument, did not call you any names, and I don't think I made any assumptions, wild or otherwise, that any other person would not make. You vote for your candidate, me for mine. I'm done here.

Anonymous said...

""Because Bill knows the chief does not make him the worst candidate.
"

Now, how would you know that? Have you peered into her soul and discovered that?"

Actually, I think you meant to say "his soul".

Nope, didn't do that. What I have done is talk with the man. I've been impressed with his knowledge and have no doubts about his concern for this town and his abilities to be an effective Selectman. You may disagree. Fine, I don't care. You may not be able to talk to him, but you can get a feel for him by reading his written PUC testimony on the water site.

Look, many of you are going to vote for Valerie and nothing said here will change your minds. I accept that and I'm fine with it. Wish I could change your mind, but I can't so I won't try.

We've had some good discussions, not a whole lot of serious name calling, and most of you have been polite in your responses. Thank you.

Election is Tuesday. Our job now is do our civic duty and vote.

Anonymous said...

"It's not support, it's intimidation. Lots of it, but little genuine support."

Yes, the chief has intimidated some people (no argument) and by very nature comes off as intimidating, again no argument. But, I think you strongly underestimate the support he has. Misguided maybe, but he has it.

I'm not defending him here. Simply stating what I believe to be true.

Anonymous said...

I think you overestimate the Chief's support. He holds things over people's head to get them to support him. Ask Fred, he's not a true supporter, just an intimidated one.


If you didn't peer into his soul , why did you ask the same of one of Valerie's supporters in a previous post? Hmmm?

You did not present a logical, organized argument in my book, you dismissed the other candidate for one reason only. How openminded is that?

You said:

You're a HAWC customer, so you don't have to worry about your tap running dry.

--Don't tell me what I worry about, a little presumptuous as you claim not to be.

Seems like that would make you a little angry.

-- Mr presumptious again.

You also made a lot of assumptions about Valerie and what she did or did not do this year. Did you follow her around and watch her every move? I think not.

Mr presumptious

Anonymous said...

RE: March 6, 2009 4:47 PM

You seem to have a lot of anger. Get some help. Or is that being presumptuous in assuming that, the anger part that is?

No, and this may be presumptuous, but you seem to angling for fight. You take one innocent phase and suddenly you're being attacked. But, I'll admit that is a presumptuous assumption on my part.

BTW, you spelled presumptuous wrong, and that is not presumptuous assumption.

Oh, and "You also made a lot of assumptions about Valerie and what she did or did not do this year. Did you follow her around and watch her every move? I think not."

This may be presumptuous, but I think you misread the question. I know what Bill has been up to. What I asked was, what has Valerie been up to this year? No where did I claim to know what that was doing. I was asking a QUESTION.

Maybe I was being presumptuous in assuming that everyone could make the distinction.

So, here's the deal. I'll be Mr. Presumptuous and you be Mr. Presumptious. That way everyone else can keep score. Or maybe I'm being presumptuous in assuming anyone cares. Can't seem to win.

Anonymous said...

I know Valerie, and i can tell you she will fight for our water just as hard as Bill would if elected as Selectman. No worries for me, and for anyone doubting Valerie's position.
We can have the best of both worlds, and not having to worry about possible conflicts with Bill and the Chief.
Easy decision, Valerie for selectman.

Anonymous said...

Oh yes, Mr. Presumptious:

"It sure does make me angry, why wouldn't it? Oh, yeah, I remember, you are just presuming it's ok with me, but this no basis in fact."

So, we've established by your own words you angry at HAWC. HAWC is looking for another rate increase. It is Petition DW 08-065 and the PUC hearing is scheduled for May 28, 2009. I'm not a HAWC customer, so I don't care. Being presumptuous on my part, you might. Sorry if I'm wrong.

Anonymous said...

You're an idiot. If you follow the thread of your own posting, it's MORONIC. You criticize, contradict yourself, and call names.

No one approves of HAWC except for Morse, Lewis, the DES, the State. We got that last year. Everyone is anrgy at HAWC but some people want that egotistical hitler removed TOO. Your dead argument that Bill is better choice than Valerie is just plain stupid since your Mr. Bill show doesn't remove the 800# a55 from the equation. How's that for advanced math?

Anonymous said...

" Get some help. "

Oh, nice polite talk coming from a BILL BENNETT SUPPORTER.

VOTE FOR VALERIE TOBIN

Anonymous said...

"March 7, 2009 8:23 PM"

You just have to look at March 7, 2009 8:23 PM to see that there is indeed a lot on anger here. How else could you explain that kind of post?

If this is typical of Valerie's supporters, here we go again for 3 more years if she's elected.

In truth, she doesn't have a chance. Leon's name is on the ballot, not hers. Every vote for him, takes from her. Same as last year. She has a bunch of signs. She had a bad candidates night. So far, I've seen no endorsement. Doesn't take a rocket scientist or a Mr. Bennett supporter to see the desperation.

If she is really serious about the position, why didn't she register when time allowed? Give me a good answer to that, well, it won't change a thing, will it?

Anonymous said...

to March 7, 2009 10:28 PM

you just can't seem to see it in yourself though, can you?

your posts have been very rude and one sided.

Anonymous said...

It's funny to see people fighting over BOS candidates. Can there ever be an article in which their is not a pissing contest that develops over the subject?

I guess that is why not a single candidate submitted an article here. This blog has, most certainly, lost some credibility in town.

Anonymous said...

It's comical to see this guy anger someone with insults and biased comments then he ridicules them for getting angry.

If this is typical of Bill's supporters, here we go again for 3 more years if he's elected.

This is what HE said about the other poster. Talk about anger.

Anonymous said...

Valerie is not the only choice, but she is the best choice for change.

A new broom sweeps clean.

Anonymous said...

[Dear Mr. Moderator: please publish this as you see fit, in the manner most likely to reach the most readers of your blog. Thank you.]

Hello everyone. I am Bill Bennett, and I'm running for Selectman in Atkinson. I apologize; I don't normally visit this blog. But I've been told that I should let all of you know where I stand.


I've been very busy, without time to read postings here in detail, but I see that some of you think I am too closely aligned with Phil Consentino, Atkinson's Chief of Police, and that I am running as Phil's "guy" in this race. Phil did approach me and ask me to run for the open seat on the Board of Selectman, but Phil was neither the first, nor the last to do so. The first ones to ask me to run, and perhaps the most influential of those who have urged me to run, are, in fact, contributors to this blog. I haven't contacted them to get their permission to release their names, so I won't. Time is too short anyway.

But let me say this about Phil Consentino: I've known Phil for more than thirty years, and I like him. I have never seen Phil abuse his office, but I have seen him bend over backwards on numerous occassions to AVOID using his authority, in the interest of a more gentle and peaceful resolution of a situation. Nevertheless, should accusations of misconduct by the Chief arise on my watch, I would investigate them thouroughly and impartially. My concern, in ALL matters that might come before me in any capacity in which I might be serving, is the best interest of the Town of Atkinson and all of its citizens. That has always been and will always be the case. My goal has always been, and will always be, a just and fair resolution of any issue. I will not play favorites and I will not throw anyone under the bus.


For those of you who want to know more about me, I offer this very brief biography: I'm a retired engineer; I put myself through MIT and graduated in Mechanical Engineering in 1968. I married my wife, Pat, in 1969; she has a degree in Physics from Northeastern, and we met while she was working a co-op quarter in the Artificial Intelligence Lab at MIT, where I was working. (I worked for the legendary Marvin Minsky in the AI Lab for several years. It was truly a great experience.) My career was in design and R&D. I am foremost an engineer, and a "political animal" not at all.

Pat and I moved to Atkinson in 1975, started our family, and raised our three children here. Pat now owns and operates Pat Bennett Realty in Plaistow.

I am a Justice of the Peace. I took an oath to uphold the laws and the Consititution of the State of New Hampshire, and I take that very seriously. I was the Police Department's District Prosecutor for a bit over ten years in the 1980's into he early 90's; I took that responsibility as an Officer of the Court seriously as well.

I regret that time will not allow me to return here to have discussions or debates with blog contributors, but I welcome phone calls at 362-4285 and emails to Bill_Bennett@Bennett-Group.com.

Thank you for your time in reading this.


Sincerely,
William M. Bennett

Anonymous said...

Here are some of my goals and objectives:

First, a more comprehensive Emergency Management plan. I know that the town has an emergency plan, and the fire and police department worked hard trying to get help to everyone. However, I feel more needs to be done. I would like to form an Ad Hoc committee to work with the departments, Unitil and the office of Emergency Planning and put together a more comprehensive paln of action for the next time we have an emergenry like the last storm.



Secondly, Accountability of all the departments and fiscal responsibility by all. I would like to evaluate all of the departments, line by line and determine if things could be better streamlined in order to keep the budgets down in each department. I would like to see all budgets and spending on the town website so that it is open an transparent.




Third, Overhall and co ordination of the town's IT system. The town system is not networked, has multiple servers with different softwares that are not compatable. and the servers are not or have not been backed up in the past. There currently is an IT committee working on this, and we need to move this forward so that all of the files are protected, as well as making more information available to the community. This includes improving and expanding the town website to include the budgets and tax cards.



Finally, I would strive to maintain the preservation of the town's resources, such as the prime wetlands and aquifers, as 50-60% of all residents have wells, but also 40-50% of town residents need a viable community water resource. I will meet with all of those involved and make sure that all is properly protected.



I would like to hear from the residents as to what they would like to see done. I'm always open and available to listen to everyone's concerns and ideas.

Valerie