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.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Atkinson couple fights town, neighbors Accused of violating zoning, shoreland rules

From the Eagle Tribune;

Atkinson couple fights town, neighbors Accused of violating zoning, shoreland rules
By Eric Parry

ATKINSON — A couple ordered to stop construction at their Valcat Lane home for violating an agreement with the town has asked the zoning board to delay action on a request to save their bunkhouse.

Margaret and Daniel Osborn, whose Big Island Pond home has been at the center of controversy, requested late yesterday afternoon that the Zoning Board of Adjustment waits until its November meeting to hear their case. No reason was given.

The board had been scheduled to review the matter last night but it was postponed until next month. The couple, who said their home has been vandalized and they were harassed by other residents, was ordered to stop work because they broke an agreement with the selectmen.

The state Department of Environmental Services also has been asked to investigate possible shoreland protection violations on the property.

Selectman Bill Friel said the Osborns told his board they wouldn't do any work without permission from the town.

"They just didn't do it," Friel said.

Last year, the zoning board ruled that the bunkhouse was in violation and needed to be torn down.

Two weeks ago, resident Leon Artus told the selectmen at their meeting that the quality of life on Valcat Lane had been destroyed by the Osborns and residents couldn't access their own property.

Yesterday, Maggie Osborn said in an interview that her family had been harassed by other town residents and the home was recently vandalized.

She did not indicate they would ask to delay the case.

After receiving a cease-and-desist order late last week, Osborn denied they constructed anything without the town's permission. Osborn said she was even given a driveway permit by Road Agent Ted Stewart.

"I feel totally let down by the selectmen's office," said Osborn, a former member of the zoning board.

The state Department of Environmental Services has confirmed it received complaints of alleged shoreland protection violations on the Osborns' property.

DES spokesman Jim Martin said the complaints were recent and he wasn't aware of the specific violations but his department would investigate them.

Tim Dziechowski, chairman of the town's Conservation Commission, has said the alleged violations include removal of too many trees, lack of erosion control during construction, and having docks without a valid permit.

Dziechowski said every time it rains, dirt will wash into Big Island Pond and wetlands that abut the property because there is no fencing or hay bales to prevent erosion.


Anonymous said...

What Maggie neglects to mention is that she AGREED to tear the bunkhouse down as a condition of getting her building permit. Now that she has the permit, and the house built, she doesn't want to tear it down.

Anonymous said...

I heard that the building inspector measured her house and it has a larger foundation than what was approved. It is overhanging the foundation as well, larger square footage that will not be taxed.

Someone is Salem was just fined $40k for shoreland violations. This is not the first time she has done this. She changed the town beach too and the selectmen did nothing. I hope to see a fine and restoration.

Anonymous said...

town beach??? there's a town beach?? can any town citizens use the town beach? first time i heard of that!

tim dziechowski said...

There are two small beaches which are owned by the Hemlock Heights association. Maggie decided that the smaller one of those beaches would be a good place to put part of her last driveway. The beach was surveyed and markers set, but her contractors buried and paved over one of the survey markers, which is a violation of state law.

I have been looking into ways to get us a town beach at Big Island Pond...not easy under current DES regs. The town has to play by the same rules as everyone else.

Anonymous said...

Did you see them bury over the marker? Quite an accusation if you didn't! I smell cheese, no, it's another suit brewing. Ha

Anonymous said...


The Osborns have a silt fence, have for over a year, you can see it from the Lake, new property next door does not, has never. Are you singling out the Osborns? You went to there property uninvited, why not look at the house 20 feet away?????

Anonymous said...

The missionaries arrive uninvited. Despite noble intentions, they are ignorant of the place where they set up shop and indifferent to the hearts and values of the people they have come to help. They meddle in things which are none of their business. They assume that the natives' traditional spirituality is defective, even devilish. They bribe or coerce the people to abandon their traditional ways until, in the process of trying to 'save' the people, the missionaries wind up destroying them.21

Anonymous said...

It's everyone's business. A public way has been moved, chnaged and a person's property has been forcibly taken. Is Carol Davis the only allowed to push back or have a voice here? The rest of us should just shut up and go away while a neighbor is put in this position? Her son wrongly accused?

If these are the traditional ways and the values of the people doing this, change it.

These pagans that started all this and allow it to happen should be reformed and they will be.

Anonymous said...

We are where we are because too many look the other way. Why, when things are to be done properly,every one turns on the ones insisting on what is right.
We get what we deserve if we don't stand up for what we know is right. When will it change? This is important to every citizen. The
BOS has been leading us down the primrose path for years.

Anonymous said...

Facts on Osborn @ 8 Valcat Lane:

1:Building permit with Special Exception/Variance June 2007.

Variance stated:
2. Basement not to be finished without prior approval of ZBA...Osborns finished basement THEN had to go before ZBA after the fact for a permit.

3. Sheds, bunkhouse & junk must be removed...bunkhouse (abandoned shack on edge of water) still remains...

4. Building Permit #4 May 2008: new construction would be a sprinkled building...Osborn built home without a sprinkler system...refusing to add sprinkler system.

5. Osborns told Fire Inspector that house was not being sprinkled.

6. Osborns do NOT own the property that where they are building their driveway.

7. They signed for the driveway as owners of the property...but are NOT.

8. They never received permission to excavate the land from Carol Davis.

9. Maggie Osborn is no longer on the Zoning Board...she was when permits were being issued for the property.

10. Their home on Valcat Lane was constructed using the existing Class 6 road Valcat Lane.

These are facts people. You can check the records at the town hall.

How can the Osborns get away with all this.

Anonymous said...

How can a variance be changed after the construction is completed. Doesn't it need to be changed before construction begins? I didn't know the town allows that!

Anonymous said...

ROTFLMAO!!! So much for the validity of our "heros" suit! HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

Atkinson residents' lawsuit dismissed

By Eric Parry

CONCORD — A federal court judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by three Atkinson residents against town officials alleging First Amendment violations.

Residents Leon Artus, Gary Brownfield and Steven Lewis filed the lawsuit in February, alleging several town officials prevented them from placing warrant articles on the 2009 Town Meeting ballot.

Artus and Brownfield alleged that after collecting signatures for a petitioned article to make the police chief a full-time position, Chief Philip Consentino called several people and threatened them into taking their names off the petition. Consentino is a part-time chief and would not qualify for the full-time position as described in the petitioned article.

The lawsuit alleged Consentino also intimidated residents regarding another article that would have changed oversight of the town's elderly affairs services, a program headed by Consentino.

Judge Paul Barbadoro wrote in his decision Wednesday that Consentino didn't break any laws, even if he did call people asking them why they signed the petition.

"The complaint does not allege Consentino told any elderly citizens he would stop providing them with certain benefits if they signed the petition," Barbadoro wrote.

Brownfield also alleged his rights were violated when Town Moderator Frank Polito did not allow him to take photographs during the 2009 deliberative session.

Brownfield's claims against Polito are not valid because state law allows him to run an orderly deliberative session, Barbadoro wrote.

The town of Atkinson, two current selectmen and two former selectmen also were named in the lawsuit for not reprimanding Consentino.

Anonymous said...

Last post has nothing to do with current article. It gets away from the fact that the Osborns ARE violating zoning laws and should be held accountable just like the average citizen.

Anonymous said...

What, you didn't like hearing about your heros case being thrown out?

Anonymous said...

That last post from the ET should be a new seperate topic so we may discuss this latest development. It
sounds as if the town has been exonerated once again. The run up costs to defend these suits are outrageous. Will the town be using the frivilous suit ordinance to recoop our $$$$$$$$$$$$ ???.

Anonymous said...

Now we can do whatever we want, whenever we want. We can even arrest you or intimidate you at town deliberative meeting and there is nothing you can do about it. The courts will not defend you. We own you.

Anonymous said...

Oh go cry in your cherios... Too bad Brownfield can't harrass whoever he wants. Crying fucking shame that...

Anonymous said...

Maggie can keep her driveway now. BECAUSE WE SAY SO. We run this town.

Anonymous said...

Like one has ANYTHING to do with the other.

Anonymous said...

"Now we can do whatever we want, whenever we want. We can even arrest you or intimidate you at town deliberative meeting and there is nothing you can do about it. The courts will not defend you. We own you."

As Leon so often says, "Poor you."

Anonymous said...

Leon & Gary are not my heros. I'm concerned with the issue of the Town not making the Osborns follow the rules like every other taxpayer in town.

Anonymous said...

What are you talking about? The town gave them a cease and desist order. Isn't that what's supposed to happen?

Anonymous said...

Hey Meggie...what don't you get...zoning laws...variances...special exception...agreeing to sprinklers...are you stupid or just narcissistic.

Anonymous said...

What's the address so we can send you chesse to go with that whine?


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

I wonder how the Osborns got away with changing the deed to their property. They appear to have left out the part that refers to Valcat as the ROW to their property. Now they want a private driveway across land that does not belong to them. It is criminal what they have done. I feel sorry for their children to have parents like them.

Anonymous said...

Why is Leon fighting the Osborn;s??? Have you read Carol Davis's dead???

VALCAT PRIVATE TO LAND OWNERS WHO LIVE ON IT! Not Leon, Not Davis. Davis subject to ROW she bought the land with that knowledge,

The Road agent knowing it was private gave permission for the BOS office and issued a permit.

Document singed by the Osbournes is not worth paper it is written on.

Right to the ROW is clearly stated on Davis's deed BK 3523 PG 2681,

Osbournes deed BK4709 PG1468 a plan of the land and ROW Mrs Davis was subject to is recorded under Catalano BK0457-5057 Plan 00001-36117 registered on 11-08-1995. Mrs. Davis has no right to keep others from the deeded ROW to their private road" Valcat Lane".

dare you to look up the facts, or maybe it's easier to keep your blinders on??

Anonymous said...

Why would they want anything to do with the facts when it's easier to blame the fabled "Atkinson Mafia". Apparently everyone associated with town government belongs to it. At least in their own scrambled little minds anyway.

Anonymous said...

to 7:27.
You are twisting the facts. The road leading up beside Davis's property IS the ROW. What the Osborns are building not a ROW. Carol's property is not subject to 2 ROWs. Maggie just doesn't want to have to use the road next to Davis's property. It was ok for her to use it while she built her house. But now that it's built she wants her own private entrance. Hence her STEALING Carol's land. People, drive by the excavation that the Osborn's have done and you will understand. The owners before Maggie never had trouble accessing their property up Valcat Lane. Is it that Maggie does not know how to read a map, and thus can not find Valcat Lane.

Anonymous said...

You must be right. The deeds are wrong, the Lawyers who read the deeds are wrong and the engineers who surveyed all the properties up there are wrong too. If you want advice don't pay a professional for it. Get it from Leon (he plays a Lawyer) and his fellow supports on the blog!

Anonymous said...

You must be right. The deeds are wrong, the Lawyers who read the deeds are wrong and the engineers who surveyed all the properties up there are wrong too. If you want advice don't pay a professional for it. Get it from Leon (he plays a Lawyer) and his fellow supporters on the blog!

Anonymous said...

to 7:29. The only deed that is wrong is the Osborns deed. It left out several paragraphs referring to other documents. The Osborns already have access to their property through Valcat Lane. The only reason they are stealing Davis's property is so that they can get away without putting in a sprinkler system like they agreed to on building permit #4. They never intended to carry out their agreement with the town. Now they want a certificate of occupancy which is contingent upon the sprinkler system and a variance granted to them that requires them to remove the shack they call a bunkhouse on the edge of the water that is in violation of the comprehensive shoreline protection act. They claim they have been living at their house on their island not at the new home. Now that the water level has dropped on the lake how can they get to the island. They are going before the Board of Selectman on Monday Oct 19 to attempt to get their C.O. They will probably claim hardship. They have had since the beginning of construction to remove the shack. Now they are trying to keep it. Come Osborns...keep up your end of the bargin and abide by the agreements you make with the town to build your home. It's a pretty house, just comply with the variances & building permits, leave Davis's property alone and enjoy the lake.

Anonymous said...

Osborn's don't want to enjoy the lake without their land, part of Carol's land, and a piece of everyone else’s land around them.

They never intended to live up to any agreement they made and never will unless forced to do so. The ZBA, Selectmen, planning board never held them accountable in any for their construction projects. Why would they think the authorities would do anything different in this project?

Anonymous said...

frankly i am disgusted with the osborns i feel along with alot of other people feel like she is trying to take advantage of mrs.davis and that is disgusting . i belive taking advantage of older people is against the law hmmmmmmmmm.

Anonymous said...

you know waht is interesting?mrs. osborn puts on this show for the bos crying to them about how she and her family are being harrased by neigbors....THATS BULL SHIT ALONG WITH EVERYTHING ELSE THAT COMES FROM HER MOUTH!...harassed the only people being harrased are her neighbors calling the cops on innocent people and playing the i don't feel safe card it's the people that live around her who feel harrassed and taken advantage of and that is not fair. taking pictures of peoples cars without consent calling the police all hours of the night disturbing familys with samll children. and she wants to cry that she is being harrased.just another line off bull shit from you know who.i am a firm beliver of what goes around comes around i am sure that many people would like pay back for everything the osborns are putting the town people through but there is no need to do anything karma's a bitch and god makes the guilty pay!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Witch hunt! Witch hunt the blog is on a witch hunt!

Anonymous said...

you know deep down inside i really feel for maggie and her family.but not as much as i want to she has pushed her neighbors around by photographing them and making false police calls.on people that really have not done anything to her but try to protect their family just like she is trying to protect her's by putting in this row. that is all fine and dandy. but when you are knowingly taking someone elses property to make
this happen that's wrong why do you think carol had the car put there she is trying to tell you people she has had it she is done being walked all over,all i have to say is maggie if you want peace and respect give it to your neighbors and maybee just maybee you will recive it back. think on that!

Anonymous said...

You think you run this town.....Think again!!!!!