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, January 7, 2010

Atkinson residents fight trucking firms

From the Eagle Tribune;

Atkinson residents fight trucking firms
By Eric Parry

ATKINSON — A group of residents is trying to ban trucking facilities in town after the zoning board denied approval for a 24-hour operation in April.

The town has received two citizens petitions, including one that would outlaw trucking companies in all zones. The other petition would limit business hours from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and restrict noise levels.

Resident Ed Tomasi, one of the lead petitioners, said the proposals are intended to tighten local zoning regulations.

"It seemed there was some ambiguity between the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals," Tomasi said yesterday.

The Planning Board initially approved P.J. Murphy Transportation Inc.'s proposal to build the 24-hour trucking facility in the commercial/industrial zone on Industrial Way, but the zoning board denied the plan after months of discussion.

The plan called for seven trucks and 14 trailers transporting petroleum and swimming pool water in the summer.

Atkinson's zoning specifically identifies what is allowed in the commercial and industrial zone but some board members said the trucking facility didn't meet the requirements.

Residents expressed concern about the facility generating noise in the middle of the night and environmental issues.

The Planning Board held a public hearing to discuss both petition articles Tuesday night and decided not to endorse them. The board can't amend citizens petition articles, according to Chairwoman Sue Killam.

Residents will still get to vote on the articles at Town Meeting in March even though they won't have the Planning Board's support.

But some Planning Board members said they would like to draft new versions of the petitions over the next year.

Vice Chairman Paul DiMaggio, who did not support the P.J. Murphy proposal, said the current petitions just had too many errors to support.

"It's tough for people to write a petition and do it right," DiMaggio said.

One issue was that trucking facilities weren't defined in a petition, he said.

Tomasi said the petitions are part of an evolving process and that he is open to working with the board this summer at some of its workshops.

"I'm considering talking to them at that time," Tomasi said.

Paul Murphy, owner of P.J. Murphy Transportation, appealed the town's decision in Superior Court but dropped his lawsuit in November, citing rising legal costs.


Anonymous said...

First we (the Planning Board) must MARGENALIZE then we can discuss the merits. Note that the first Planning Board reaction to others work is to marginalize that persons efforts. “the current petitions just had too many errors……..” Then, we can do it better. Then, we will control the policy. See, you people are stupid and only the planning board is smart enough to tell you what is necessary.
The people who present petitions usually do more research and have considerable knowledge and capability. In many cases they have forgotten more about the subject than the Planning Board will ever know or have any intention to learn.
Understand this first then review the merits as presented by the petitioners. Do not become distracted by the Planning Board’s repeated attempt to marginalize people.

Anonymous said...

I saw it differently than 8:28 AM.

Planning board looked upon the citizens petitions as poorly written.
However, they are sending the petitions to the ballot or warrant for voters to voice their opinion.

I heard the board say that they would like to take up and address the concerns of the petition to make improvements on our zoning ordinances.

I am more concerned that the board's minutes haven't been voted and posted for months.

They need a recorder other than the chairman. The way it is set up now is too much power invested in one member of the board.

Selectmen need to hire clerical for the planning board.

Anonymous said...

"It's tough for people to write a petition and do it right," DiMaggio said."

Wow, not too condescending is he?

I'd like to see the town boards work with the people get what the PEOPLE want. The boards do not represent them as expected.

Anonymous said...

Well 9:06,

A little "inside baseball" there!

What is your investment in the Planning Board?

The Other New Guy said...

Wow. 8:28 and 9:17 seem to have it all figured out. Would you both be so kind as to tell us if either of you watched the budget committee meeting and heard, in its entirety, what Mr. Dimaggio said?

Anonymous said...

to 9:14

Anonymous said...


me too.

The Other New Guy said...

9:52 & 9:53. Thanks both for your incredibly prompt, and almost simultaneous, replies to my question. Did you both miss the part where Mr. DiMaggio discussed that he agreed with the intent of the petition and said it needed to be reworked?

Anonymous said...

All the Planning Board knew that the concerns relating "the intent of the petition" do and have existed. No action WAS taken by the Planning Board so "that" may be taken as rhetoric unless or until action is taken.

Anonymous said...

No action was taken? This is a nontroversy. They only just discussed the petition on Tuesday and they did not approve PJ Murphy's proposed trucking facility. Jeez, give them a little credit here as I think they got, and are getting this, right.

Anonymous said...

ANOTHER spectacular contribution from the Eagle Tribune.

The headline should have ended at

Atkinson residents fight

and then the article should say how much the Tribune does to make sure they twist words around and pour gas on the fire to turn it into a really really really good fight so they can sell newspapers.

THIS is a newspaper? Bird cage liner, fish wrapper maybe but not a newspaper. Cancelled my subscription. What a rag. I reduced my recycling pile by a lot. So glad I cancelled it.

Anonymous said...

The Planning Board is a major problem. For them it is all about their egos and arrogance and not about objectivity or serving or representing the townspeople's interests.

Before we submitted the two petitions, we spent numerous hours at Planning Board meetings and Public Hearings concerning the PJ Murphy Transportation Company proposal. We made very clear to the Planning Board our legitimate concerns. Did the Planning Board listen to our concerns? NO !

Thank you to the ZBA for nullifying the Planning Board's actions and for doing what our Planning Board has no interest in doing: representing the townspeople.

The Planning Board knuckled under and cowered, quaked and trembled before Murphy's lawyer's demands. All someone has to do to get whatever they want from our spineless Planning Board is to bring a lawyer to the PB meeting with them.

After the PB got off their knees (and before it went to the ZBA), did the Planning Board take any action to adjust or make revisions in the zoning regs to handle such situations in the future? NO!

So, we the people, decided to ourselves do what the Planning Board had no interest in. They ignored their responsiblity to act so we acted ourselves to change the zoning regs by signing and submitting a petition.

In total miff that we were doing their job for them, they voted to recommend against our petitions on the ballot. They did that because they knew how bad our petitions made they look for not having done anything themselves. They looked bad, as they deserved to, so they retaliated by voting to put on the ballot that they didn't recommend passage.

If they could have stopped our two petitioned articles from going on the ballot, they would have, but fortunately, state law requires that citizens zoning petitions must go on the ballot as written, without any changes by the Planning Board.

Anonymous said...

To Anon January 7, 2010 5:35 PM

From Leon Artus

Your frustration is not new in the Town of Atkinson. My committee and other committees in town have been raising awareness since 2000 about the failures of town boards and met with the same resistance as you are experiencing. Please call me at 603-362-4814 so we can combine efforts to correct the injustices that have been going on for to long. I think we maybe able to help.

Anonymous said...

I totally agree with 5:35 p.m. The only reason we submitted the petitions was because someone had to do the job the Planning Board had and was failing to do.

DiMaggio, like the other Board members, is full of bull-crap when as a phoney excuse for not supporting the petition, says that 'One issue was that trucking facilities weren't defined in a petition.'

So now he's claiming that he-they need a definition of 'trucking facilities'. What a total hypocrite!

The planning board NEVER ONCE SAID, during all of those hours at meetings discussing the Murphy proposal, they never said that they didn't know the definition of what a trucking facility was.

Do the self-serving lies ever stop?

DiMaggio and the other miserable excuses for planners also had no problem with a definition of a trucking facility when they approved the Murphy plan. Why did the Planning Board then vote to approve what they now claim that they didn't know the definition of.

Their voting for and approving the trucking facility which they now claim they didn't understand what it was is just one more example of their total incompetence and ineptitude.

Anonymous said...

It's nice to see more people coming to understand that the political boards in Atkinson are not working for the taxpayers. Now we all need to come together and defeat the agenda's of thoses boards and the police chief that corrupts our politics.

that's my opinion

Anonymous said...

The fact that you had to act by yourself to change the zoning regs. by signing and submitting a petition tells me the trucking firm WAS ALLOWED ALL ALONG !

Your statement that the PB knuckled and cowered,quaked and trembled before Murphy's lawyers is False.

Murphy's never had a lawyer represent them before the PB. Due to a supposably conflict of interest between the Salem abutters {who had a lawyer} and his lawyer, not lawyer's

The PB worked very hard on this, over a dozen meetings trying to please the abutters in Salem and came to the right decision

Anonymous said...

The problem with the planning board in Atkinson is that the chairwoman and most of the other members are hand-chosen because they are understood to support just about anything any business wants.

There is an inherent conflict of interest when a land developer like Sue Killiam (whose land was used for the big new development on the left when going south on 121 before Academy Ave) runs a local planning board; she is, of course, going to lean HEAVILY towards the needs of developers and construction companies.

If you didn't see it for yourself, Sue's best friend on the planning boards was (hold your breath here)...

HAROLD MORSE, the grand fibber behind Lewis Homes, Hampstead Area Water Company, East Coast Lumber, and the Country Club! They were inseperable, and there were numerous times when Mrs. Killiam would allow Harold to stay on the board despite the fact that he would be voting on issues that directly affected businesses he operated!

Then you had Teddy (who made money from local construction companies renting equipment to them) the old town engineer (who would be hired by the same construction companies he was supposed to police), etc.

Mrs. Killiam also socializes with various buisness representatives that have appeared before her board, a no-brainer no-no for the chairperson of a local board.

Until we get a BOS that is willing to appoint citizens that stand up for local property values and Atkinson citizens over the rights of local businesses we will NEVER have a board that is actually worried about our interests.

Anonymous said...

A good example of that was Jack Sapia, thank goodness gone.

Anonymous said...

2.53 p.m. is so solely focused on defending the Planning Board that one must wonder if he/she is a Planning Board member. In his/her blog posting, he/she doesn't have his/her facts straight.

The Planning Board 'only just discussed the petition on Tuesday and they did not approve PJ Murphy's proposed trucking facility.'
Totally incorrect.
First of all, while technically, it was the first PB meeting to specifically address the petition for the pre-determined decision to come out against it, EVERYTHING that the petition was about was previously discussed for MANY hours at several PB meetings and at public hearings.
Second, the Planning Board DID approve PJ Murphy's proposed trucking facility. It was the ZBA
that acted responsibly and reversed the Planning Board's passage of the proposal.

Your 'give them (the Planning Board) a little credit' is rediculous. Credit for what?
For ignoring the townspeople whose interests they are supposed to represent and care about -- OR --for coming out as a Board to try to block passage of citizens' attempts to clean up, by warrant article petitions, the mess which the Planning Board did nothing about?

Anonymous said...

Post Jan. 7 11:21 PM says it all.
The BOS should appoint citizen that stand up for Atkinson citizens OVER the RIGHTS of local businesses.

This special treatment for a few crybabys is exactly why Atkinson is always in court.The arrogance of some people who think they can change the rules that are already in place whenever thier not happy is just wrong. Local businesses follow the rules only end up in court an win.

Anonymous said...

YES, town officials have the same rights as others to post under 'Anonymous.'
However, we do have a right to expect our town officials to NOT hide under 'Anonymous.' We have a right to know their position by virtue of their being town officials and accountable to the townspeople. When they blog under 'Anonymous', they usually have something to hide, are a party to the misconduct of what the blog article is about, are doing a CYA, or want to dis-associate themselves from something that smells.

Tim Dziechowski is a member of this discredited Planning Board and actively took part in what happened.

Tim also has a well-known egotistical reputation for considering himself a self-important authority on anything and everything. He will blog on any blog item at the drop of a hat.

But, notice that nothing has been posted by him by name on this issue that he was very much a part of. The comments you would expect from him appear instead under 'Anonymous'. He's obviously trying to dis-associate himself.

it is very evident that some of the expected proceding blog articles defending the Planning Board have been written by a Planning Board member.

The blogger cites things which only a Planning Board member would know. For instance, it has NEVER been mentioned in the newspaper or anywhere that this Planning Board has not voted on its minutes for some time -- or ---the fact that Killam, as chair, has also been acting as recorder--or--- the comments about how the board is now is internally operating--or-- the fact that the current operating procedure gives Killam too much power --or-- the fact that some new clerical help is needed. Only a Planning Member would know about these internal operating problems.

Connect the dots: Mr. know-it-all about-anything-and-everything --very much in contrast to his normal operating procedure, has not posted anything under his own name concerning PJ Trucking, yet his normal practice is to pontificate like crazy on anything and everything. The fact that he has not BY NAME commented on the article after being partly responsible for what happened, while those comments are being blogged Anonymously points to Dziecowski.
He made a mistake during his 'Anonymous' pontificating by mentioning items not publicly known and known by only a Planning Board member.

Anonymous said...

"The BOS should appoint citizen that stand up for Atkinson citizens OVER the RIGHTS of local businesses."

To appoint citizens the BOS needs applicants to fill to those positions. It cannot go out and "draft" people. I hear much bitching and moaning here, but I don't see a lot of people clamoring to fill open positions.

And with all the grief you people give these volunteers it is not hard to imagine why no one applies.

You don't like the situation? You think you can do better? Application forms are on the town web site.

It is easy to complain. It takes some intestinal fortitude to do something about it.

Anonymous said...

I agree we need less talk and more action. You want to be on the planning board? Go see the selectmen and apply.

People seem willing to blather useless opinions but unwilling to donate precious time. Its hypocritical. Go DO something about it.

Anonymous said...

Who wants to donate time if they are not going to stop the corruption? I know I don't want to get involved because of some of the officials (one in particular) that I would be exposed to.

Get rid of you-know-who and the band of thieves will disappear, then the town can start to heal.

Anonymous said...

People are sticking their necks out to fix things both on and off boards, but it's never going to work unless the problem chidren are removed.

Anonymous said...

I am a frequent and strong critic of the Planning Board.

To take Tim to task, when he is one of the few people with the guts to stand up to bullies like Morse and others is nothing less than ASSININE and lowers the quality of the discourse here on the blog.

Truth is, we probably shouldn't get too worked up about it because I wouldn't put it past the hacks that support corruption and poor government to post something pretending to be against the board just to slam Tim here.

For those that aren't aware, Tim is perhaps the strongest local force for open government and ethical behavior we have in our government. I know one of the reasons I don't reveal my identity is because my house may need to come before the Planning or Zoning board in the next 5-10 years and with how our local government works currently, I have no doubt that it would be more difficult to get decisions in my favor if I were public.

Without people like Tim who stand up publicly and take the time to know what they're talking about, we wouldn't have made near enough progress as we have the last few years.

Thank you Tim, for your time and your courage; those who watch what goes on in this town closely (and have half a brain) have great gratitude for all you do!

Anonymous said...

January 8, 2010 2:54 PM

You prove my point. Lots of talk but you leave it to others to fix the problems.

To get results, YOU HAVE TO GET INVOLVED. Whether it is volunteering for a board, attending board meetings, sending letters, something, anything. Just shooting your mouths off here accomplishes absolutely nothing.

Getting rid of just one person does not solve all the problems. It just does not work that way. It takes a community working together to solve our kind of problems. That is not happening. If it were then more than the usual bunch would show up at the Deliberative Sessions. There was an opportunity last year to take care of what your referring to. It took Jack Sapia and Debra DeSimone less than 10 minutes to demolish it. Where were you?

This person, Anonymous, has absolutely no standing in the community. You don't like something, you want something fixed, you need to put on a public face.

Anonymous said...

OK, let me respond:

"Just shooting your mouths off here accomplishes absolutely nothing"

Not true. Is personally getting involved better? Of course, and I have been personally involved in a few things. What I'm talking about is facing the "ole boy" and old townie network here blatantly. You state I should come out publicly but you completely ignored my point that coming out publicly could keep me from doing things to my property that I can't take a chance on..

Regarding your point that talking here had done absolutely "nothing":

I'm afraid you're either ignorant of the changes that have happened, or simply exaggerating to make a point.

While change has certainly not come as far as we would have liked, there have been major changes. Consentino and Sapia are both out as selectman; just that change is HUGE. The heat has been turned up on local boards, people are starting to learn more about the selfish and greedy Morse/Lewis/HAWC moves in town, and many public documents are going public. All this has been facilitated by the dialogue here. You can say that means nothing, but no one here is going to buy that for a second.

The BOS only selects "known quantities" for major boards; I'm sure they make sure what they're getting before anyone gets on the planning or zoning boards. I agree that direct involvement is important, and that it will be key for more of us to get to deliberative session. But you're ignoring something else in this equation.

Many of the proposals at deliberative session were shot down because they were drawn up too quickly, poorly worded, and easily shot down because of their haphazard quality. If the person had used THIS BLOG to vet those proposals before they were put forward and they used the brain trust available here to strengthen those petitions they never would have been so easily killed. That's a fact, and one view of the tape would confirm that for anyone. The last group of petitions were a bit of a disaster, as well meaning as the author(s) were. They actually set back the reform movement a bit.

Anonymous said...

Also, if the proposals got aired here before being put out for signatures, people here would feel more connected to them and would be much more likely to head down to the deliberative session to defend them.

Anonymous said...

This guy smells like a mole to me. Not the straight shooter he works hard to make you believe

he mixes truth with lies

reed between the lines.

The constant stating of personal fear is to say...if you were smart like me you would keep your head down

makes a few well known criticisms but don't mean nothing

this is a mole. You want to stop him? Demand this crafty mole step down as moderator

Anonymous said...

Banning cell towers

Banning private water co.

Banning trucking firms

Who's next, It could be you

Anonymous said...

The 2 proceeding messages were brought to you by the Committee to Make Harold Morse King of Atkinson, a non-profit group of spineless suck-ups that think they can create dissention on this blog.

They're scared when they start using tactics like this folks; I wouldn't doubt if this IP address traces right back to Lewis Construction or East Coast Lumber!!!

Anonymous said...

Atkinson does not ban cell towers. In fact, there is one already located in Atkinson at the far Northwestern corner of town. What the BOS is concerned about is loading down a 50 year old tower with no engineering study to verify the whole thing won't come tumbling down. You think it not right the BOS have that concern?

I don't think anyone is necessarily against private water companies. What we would like is one that acts ethically, tells the truth once in a while, and places the concerns of Atkinson's residents somewhere within reach of their concern for their bank accounts.

Trucking companies - No opinion. It's not in my back yard.

Anonymous said...


1) To differ in opinion or feeling ; Disagree

2) To withhold assent or approval

3) A justice's refusal to concur with the opinion of the majority

This is what i'm talking about folks. Some people in Atkinson feel if it dosen't agree with them (legal or not) ban it somehow. Businesses have the same rights as everyone else in this town. I for one encourage dissention in a lively debate. And I will be happy if someone dosen't agrees with me.

Anonymous said...

So let's see...

Hampstead Area Water Company assures us that they have no intention of sending our water into Hampstead, or any other town.

The day after they loose a vote at the polls it comes out that they're connecting the water system to Hampstead, at the same time they'll be pumping water our of OUR aquifer's at TWO golf courses, using a $1 MILLION dollar loan from the state paid by OUR tax money.

Do you have a problem with that, or is all this hunky-doorey with you?

Anonymous said...

hunky-doorey we alot of us state too!

Anonymous said...

I was noticing there is only one post that actually oppose trucking firms in our commerical/industrial zone. I'm sure its coming from the PB sons that are planning the residential development off Haverhill Rd. in Salem that abutt Industrial Way in my opinion

Anonymous said...

Hey does anybody know what happened at the Osborn's yesterday? Late afternoon there was an Atkinson cruiser, a Sherrif's car, and a State Trooper car there for over an hour, and then later that night the chief came by and stayed a while by himself.

All very odd.

Anonymous said...

I saw them to. However it was an Atkinson car, and 2 state troopers. What is going on?

Anonymous said...

The title of this article is 'Atkinson residents fighting the trucking firms.' It's not about the Osbornes. Bloggers wishing to blog about the Osbornes should be posting under the Osborne
lead article -- not taking over this article about residents fighting a trucking firm.

The resident petitioners against the trucking firm should go for it's passage since it's going to be on the ballot with or without Planning Board support.

The petitioners should actively campaign to get their warrant article passed just to get something on the books to prevent another trucking firm or the same one from immediately coming back.

The Planning Board can always tweak/amend the ordinance for the 2011 Town Meeting to cover any of the areas which can or need to be improved on. Until then, the town will be protected.

Anonymous said...

Join the zba board

Work with the likes of Mag Osborn and Frank Polito.

Damn, no wonder no one wants to serve one town boards.

This town is sick and will only get well when voters care enough to take control of their town away from opportunists and control freaks masquerating as public servants.

The revolt is slow but it grows every day. The day will come when ethical people are working for the good of the citizens and the corruption in Atkinson town government comes to an end.

Anonymous said...

Not sure why you think Frank Polito has given the Osborn's anything. Frank did not want to let them build on Hemlock Shore but was forced by law, did not want her on the Board, forced by Sapia, had her removed from the board and has made them agree to remove their bunkhouse/shack, requested by abutters. Frank will also make sure they don't get to keep their bunkhouse/shack. He is the only one who gets the BOS to do what he wants. Frank is a friend to residents and does a lot for Atkinson. It is well known he does not think to highly of Maggie and will hold her to the letter of the law and beyond if he has to. If she tries to keep the shack Frank will make sure it cost her big dollars to do so, years in court. She'll go bankrupt if she tries to keep it.

Anonymous said...

Frank is a friend of the residents?

Which 2?

That's absolutely the funniest thing I've heard ever or the worst spin ever. The poster's obviously not well informed. We lost track of all the lawsuits he's generated. He ADMITTED he doesn't know RSAs in court documents and attributed the Brownfield suit to blaming someone else for a memo or something. Our resident know it all on RSAs no less. You're quite stupid and fooled if you think he's your friend.

Just my opinion of course

I can't wait to go to deliberative session with the new camera I got for Kwanza.

Anonymous said...

Check this out...

The state is blaming Plaistow Police Chief for the missing Atkinson Grant Equipment. How much do you want to bet it's because someone in town set up Savage?

click on: First Responder Grant Documents II [PDF]

Anonymous said...

Ok, so here is what happened;

The Osborns claimed their island hideaway was broken into. They called the police. Apparently the police called the Staties. The Staties are investigating to avoid any conflicts. Funny, I remember when Acards house and car were vandalized, and the paper said he asked for the staties to investigate, but Phil was in the paper saying he wouldn't call them, his dept. was perfectly able to handle the investigation he said, even though it was his name in the guys car!

Here is the funny thing though, if Phil turned this over to the staties, then why did he spend over an hour, on his own, without any other officers, in the Osborns house Sat. nite? Wouldn't that compromise the Staties invetigation?

Anonymous said...

Wow, for years this town has been working to fix a problem that was supposed to be fixed by grant monies already recieved?

That seems like it should be a pretty big story; has the Eagle Tribune been notified/sent the documents around this, or are they sticking their heads in the sand on this (again)?

Anonymous said...

The bigger story is that AFTER this equipment was bought and installed, Police chief Consentino stood in town meeting and told us that we had a communications crisis, and we NEEDED an $800,000 tower IMMEDIATELY to fix it.

That was a lie! And there is a video on YouTube showing Phil Lying to the town about this stuff.

Anonymous said...

The first step to take to resolve all town issues is to have a twin moderator who does not play fast and loose with the rules and RSA laws at deliberative session.

Polito considers himself a lawmaker and this has to change. Instead of moderating he conspires to encourage hacks to turn valid citizen articles into meaningless garbage.

You think your trucking article is not going down to the same fate? If you are not at deliberative session January 30th then you can watch your article go down in flames. That's if the chief or another town official has not called your supporters and asked them "Why did you sign this SHIT".

You want to take back control of town goverment and see real transparancy and punisment for theft of town services?

Then you must come to deliberative session and vote to strike the evil at it's core.

Vote for Frank Polito to step down as moderator for violating the Public Trust.

As a bonus, the new moderator you vote in must give individuals ample time to explain all sides of the issues with no heckling like Polito allows. And follow the laws of the state.

To remove bullies and to protect your state laws and Constitional rights you must strike evil at it,s heart.

Come to deliberative session and vote for the moderator to step down. Then you can freely discuss and vote on the theft of town services, misappropriation of Homeland security grant equipment we are asked to buy twice, Failue to supply legally required police reports, failure of the ZBA board to promote "loopholes" that encouraged the theft of Carol Davis land, the Lachlan of separation of elderly affairs from the police dept sufficient to result in police staff working on the town clock illegally.

As to the last issue the selectmen know it, asked to be paid back the money...but hid the facts from all voters and deliberative session action come January 30th

No more needs to be said. You know your responsibility. Will you come and hold them to account and prevent rampant spending such that your property taxes double..or will you spend your day shopping at Kittery only to find out later you can't AFFORD the luxury of living in your home!!!


Anonymous said...

How the hell could the selectmen make a decision about a town employee paying the town back for funds used for his own personal benefit, in secret? Why wasn't this public? And why does EVERY Fing CONTROVERSY THAT SOUNDS REMOTELY WRONG OR ILLEGAL ALWAYS HAVE TO DO WITH THE FRIGGIN POLICE CHIEF! aaggghhhhhh!!!!

THAT is supposed to be the person you can trust! Not in Atkinson!

Anonymous said...

January 12, 2010 9:47 AM

A fine plan. To bad it is impossible to implement.

First, Frank was elected to the position in a general election. He cannot be removed by the Deliberative Session.

Second, and more to the point, the attendees to the Deliberative Session will be mostly made up of the same people that attend every year. And we've all seen how it votes. Unless you have some plan to increase the attendance, and lower the average age of the group significantly, this is all a pipe dream. Sorry.

You want Frank out as Moderator - run against him when he's up for election.

Anonymous said...

The first step to take to resolve all town issues is to have a town moderator who does not play fast and loose with the rules and RSA laws at deliberative session.

Polito considers himself a LAWMAKER and this has to change. Instead of moderating he conspires to encourage hacks at deliberative session to turn valid citizen articles into meaningless garbage.

You think your trucking article is not going down to the same fate as all the other Citizen Petition Warrant Articles signed by hundreds of others? If you are not at deliberative session January 30th then you can watch your article go down in flames on TV. That's if the chief or another town official has not called your supporters and asked them "Why did you sign this SHIT" an hour after it is submitted.

You want to take back control of town government and see real transparency and punishment for theft of town services?

Then you must come to town deliberative session, January 30th and vote to strike evil at its core.

Vote for Frank Polito to step down as moderator for violating the Public Trust, legal RSA Rules and his own Moderator Rules. If the moderator says he can’t be removed and you are HELPLESS…then you need to decide if the town belongs to you, the honest citizens, or to THEM. If it belongs to the honest citizens and all of you SHOW UP then he will be the one who is HELPLESS.

A new moderator must give individuals ample time to explain ALL SIDES OF THE ISSURES with no heckling like Polito allows. Not to mention… follow the laws of public meetings.

To remove bullies and to protect your state laws and Constitional rights you must strike evil at its heart.

Come to deliberative session and vote for the moderator to step down. Then you can:

1. Freely discuss and vote on the theft of town services

2. Misappropriation of Homeland security grant equipment (we are now asked to buy a second time

3. Failure to supply legally required police reports

4. Failure of the ZBA board chairman Polito so that "loopholes" allowed the theft of Carol Davis land

5. The Lack of true separation of elderly affairs from the police dept sufficient to result in police staff in fact and by admission…working on the town clock illegally (“double-dipping”)

As to the last issue the selectmen know about the “Double-Dipping”, and asked IN SECRET for a check back for the money...then hid the facts from all voters so voters can issue reprimand at deliberative session January 30th

No more needs to be said. You know your responsibility. You will come to deliberative session January 305h…and hold them to account. You will vote to prevent rampant spending such that your property taxes double….or will you opt to spend your day shopping at Kittery only to find out later you can't AFFORD the luxury of living in your own home!!!

Anonymous said...

I think you're preaching to the choir, and that choir is relatively small. Certainly not enough to out vote the established Deliberative Session crowd.

I'm not arguing your points. Just that unless there is a mass movement, and this forum is not it, to get more people involved with the session, it just is not going to happen.

It takes mass mailings, going door to door, newspaper articles, etc. to overcome the status quo. Who is going to arrange that?

Again, I'm not arguing the points, just facing the facts.

Curt Springer said...

Zoning questions can not be modified at the deliberative session. It doesn't matter if they originated with the planning board or by petition. Technically they are not warrant articles, although they appear on the printed ballot along with the warrant articles. They were on the printed ballot before SB2 was enacted, when warrant articles were discussed, amended (possibly) and voted at the traditional town meeting.

If the proposed zoning changes are defective, as has been alleged, it probably would not be a good idea to vote them in just to be seen to be doing something and/or to send a message to the planning board. That happened in Hampton a few years ago, putting the town in position to be sued if the changes were enforced. The selectmen went to court to get a declaration that the changes were null and void. They actually had to name the lead petitioner as the defendant in their law suit. The court ruled in their favor. They spent some money on legal fees but they figured it was less than the town would have to pay if they were sued.

Mrs. Goodridge said...

It does not always take mass mailings to get people to town meeting, but it does require and informed electorate be prepared and show up.

I have been attending town meetings for 40 years now. I was a novice when I started out in Salem, NH.

One of the primary differences between Salem and Atkinson is that Louis Soule, the town council, attended as an advisor and so the old hands could not play fast and loose with the laws or regulations if they wanted to. I have observed many times our town fathers and other residents quote the RSA’s and other regulations, knowing that most of the residents don’t have a clue. I know I was there once, "What the heck is an RSA?", my head couldn't keep up with the various speakers.

Last night at the selectmen's meeting Dir. Of Elderly Affairs (EA) said that the Department of Revenue Administration (DRA) told him that is was ok to place an explanatory before the warrant article for the EA car.
Not so. This warrant article is not a “special” warrant article, under the RSA’s and should not be introduce with an explanation, nor should it be noted as approved or disapproved by selectmen or budget committee. See RSA 32:3 VI.

The town has a Volume of Revised Statutes Annotated (RSA’s,state law) and they were shelved in the Selectmen’s Office. The binders of the volumes showed that they had never been cracked open.
You can ask to see them and look something up, they belong to you. You can also ask for guidance from someone in the office.
The library has a set, if you would feel more comfortable there. I am sure that the Reference Librarian would be glad to assist you.
Last year I requested of Frank Polito that he have the town’s set of RSA’s rolled over, I believe the bookcase is on wheels, to the town meeting. It didn’t happen; I still think that it is a good idea. Attendees would be able to check an RSA’s being referenced.

I also think that the rules Moderator Polito handed out last year were a great help. I also think that Moderator Polito should note and explain what type of nterrogatories he would accept and the timing of same.
Call outs:
Australian Ballot – Secret Ballot and the rules
Question? When you need to know something.
Point of Order. When you feel as though rules are not being followed.
Point of Information When you have information that you feel is valuable to the debate on the floor.
There are more, but you get the picture.
Democracy is not free. We are loosing control of our government at all levels and that boys and girls is perilous.
Sorry to be so long winded today, but it was important for me to share.

Anonymous said...

Another camp, the one on Locke’s Island was broken into next to Osborn's island, or Twin Island. An Atkinson cruiser and one unmarked car were parked near an access to Big Island Pond known as the "Little Beach" in Hemlock Heights. One officer accompanied by an official in a suit, and the homeowner, Mr. Locke were seen coming back across the ice to their vehicles. Mr. Locke indicated that he had not been to the island since last November.
There was a kayak on Locke's Island that did not belong on the island. They took the kayak off the island. It is possible that the breaks on Twin Island (Osborn's) and Locke Island happened before ice in. The water in the pond is lowered at the dam outlet on October 12th each year. Boats with motors are usually removed before then. However, non powered vessels can navigate the pond. This time there didn’t seem to be State Troopers or the Sheriff’s Department responding, as they did for the Osborns. Seems Locke should be getting the same police services as the Osborns. We do know that Carol Davis didn’t get the same police services as the Osborns. When she placed calls to the Atkinson Police Department, she was told that it was a civil matter and that they could not get involved. Same old, same old.

Maggie must have a special friend at the Atkinson Police Department.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Blah...blah blah...blah blah?

These are fantastic posts. Especilly by Mrs. Goodridge. I learned so much. Thanks for your years of teaching us all how to be responsible and to do the what is right

Curt Springer said...

You can't make your moderator step down, but if you have enough people you can overrule him.


Summary of Moderator’s Role at the Meeting
The moderator should take the following steps on each article in the warrant:

• Read the article in full.
• Always secure an affirmative motion and a second on the article. The motion need not be the same as the wording in the printed article as long as it is within the same general subject matter.
• Recognize the selectmen or person(s) responsible for giving the town meeting the necessary background on the article under consideration. • Open general discussion from the floor.
• After the conclusion of discussion, the motion should be restated, with a check to make sure its effect is generally understood.
• The vote should be taken and the outcome announced. If the vote is to be challenged, this is the appropriate time for action.

Moderators can be overruled by the town meeting. Whenever a voter indicates a desire to challenge the moderator’s ruling, the moderator should then poll the town meeting to determine whether that ruling is sustained.

Anonymous said...

The call to step down as moderator will ring forth all day January 30, 2009.

When citizens are violated by their own government this badly, citizens have the right to revolt against said government.

Think revolution Curt. We have had enough. Either announce you will come to our deliberative session and promote justice or keep quiet.

Time to take a side and stand up for something. Otherwise, all your babbling on blogs is empty and meaningless.

Anonymous said...

We need a mass movement at Deliberative Session, January 30, 2009?

NO! We need 60 to 80 or so new attendees who vote!

That is all!

The end.

Anonymous said...

Please catch the latest budget committee meeting if you missed it tonight.

Cue-ball acting like a petulant 4 yr-old and once again he gets what he wants...

Anonymous said...

Poor Phil, selectmen won't put a warrant article forward for him to get a new elderly car. Hey Phil, have you heard about the economy? He actually tried to get them to vote to "withhold the elderly car". He does this so that he can paint them as depriving the elderly, this is what he does when he doesn't get his way, he is like a spoiled three year old.

Remember his performance at town meeting in 2004 when he didn't get his elderly car? He sat at the back of the room heckling the other speakers, saying things like "oh yeah, they will give him $60,000 for a fire truck, but they won't spare a measley 4,000 for the elderly". He was obnoxious!

Anonymous said...

Of course Jack was there putting in his two cents as usual.

Anonymous said...

Ahh yes, Jack. Please, what was his offering?

The term narcissism refers to the personality trait of egotism, which includes the set of character traits concerned with self-image ego. The terms narcissism, narcissistic, and narcissist are often used as pejoratives, denoting vanity, conceit, egotism or simple selfishness.

I think this about sums him up.

Anonymous said...

Noooooooooooo, you forgot Consentino supporter. In other words he wants to be known as "I run this town and don't you forget it". "If you disagree with me, I'LL MAKE U PAY".

Anonymous said...

Oh, how right can u be? Sapia needs to go down just as much as the Chief of Police Consentino. How may lies can one Town be forced to swollow before both go down. There is no better time than this, to flush their corruption down the tiolet. They both are a piece of S..T.

Anonymous said...

I think the anti-Polito rhetoric goes a bit over the top here. Is he a bit of a middle-class snob who "jokingly" asks to make sure a simple resident is going to put in a seeded lawn (is that the chair of the ZBA's business??) even as he advises Howard Morse to stop admitting publicly that he is accepting and storing East Coast Lumber deliveries in the middle of a residential area at Lewis Homes which is against the allowed uses permitted there? Well, yes.

I don't think that necessarily makes Jim one of the chief's cronies. What a few people need to realize here is that it's possibble to drive someone into closer relations w/ the chief and the best way to do that is to act like a bunch of cranks here so that the chief can point to us and go, "see, they attack EVERYONE."

Anonymous said...

Polito conspires to allow the chief and others to heckle speakers at the microphone. It is a form of official intimidation and it is disgusting.

It is not accidental and Polito does not stop it.

A new town moderator would make a warning that another heckling will result in censure or ejection.

Polito does nothing but smile.

This is damaging to the speaker at the microphone, the deliberative session body and the town watching on TV.

Anonymous said...

HECKLING is a big way a BULLY intimidates. (You already learned that as a child walking home from school! You remember? Did it hurt and humiliate you?)

A victim of heckling abuse is more likely never to say what they want at the microphone at deliberative session. Or sit there with extremely hurt feelings if they did speak.

Frank Polito does not stop heckling at deliberative session and as a result, the speaker at the microphone is PUBLICLY SLANDERED AND PUBLICLY HUMILIATED. And it goes out on TV, so it is a form of "Hi-Tech lynching" as well.

A special town meeting can vote to ban Frank Polito from being a moderator in the town of Atkinson. The arrogance, violations and humiliation will end.

This shunning...based on violation of the laws of public meetings and intimidatory acts is warranted. Current evidence is on the January 31, 2009 deliberative session video tape.

With this ban of the voters, new citizens will come forward on the ballot for moderator... or the deliberative session can nominate a moderator from the floor.

We must remove of our current moderator before new people will run for moderator.

This is the only way to break up the Atkinson "political machine vote" that inhibits anyone new from running.

Do you want to continue to be a victim of heckling abuse and violation of the laws of public meetings...or not?

Anonymous said...

What a great idea. Just play parts of the last deliberative session and have a vote.

He will be done and gone.

Curt Springer said...

Anon @ 1:30 wrote:
A special town meeting can vote to ban Frank Polito from being a moderator in the town of Atkinson.

This is nonsense.

Anonymous said...

Curt. Please come to deliberative session in Atkinson.

You can't speak but you can heckle!

Anonymous said...

Whats dat noise I hear?
Whoah, could it be?
Aw, Shucks! I thought that it was Santa and his pack of reindeer.
Darn, it's just a couple of bloggers making tracks in the snow again. LOL
ps: Thanks Curt for telling the truth as usual and dispelling stupid nonsense.

Anonymous said...

No But.. ! The meeting CAN restrict/limit the moderator to the statutory "job" and where the statute has "range of option" the meeting can "locate within the range". "Work To Rule" as a union would call it.

Anonymous said...

You waste our time. Run for moderator when the seat is up for election. All this talk is nonsense.

Curt Springer said...

anon@January 15, 2010 4:31 PM,

Do you make the least effort to look up the law before you spew gobbledygook?

RSA 40:4 Duties. –
I. The moderator shall preside in the town meetings, regulate the business thereof, decide questions of order, and make a public declaration of every vote passed, and may prescribe rules of proceeding; but such rules may be altered by the town.
II. In the event a weather emergency occurs on or before the date of a deliberative session or voting day of a meeting in a town, which the moderator reasonably believes may cause the roads to be hazardous or unsafe, the moderator may, up to 2 hours prior to the scheduled session, postpone and reschedule the deliberative session or voting day of the meeting to another reasonable date, place, and time certain. The date originally scheduled shall continue to be deemed the deliberative session or voting day of the meeting for purposes of satisfying statutory meeting date requirements; provided, that in towns or districts that have adopted RSA 40:13, the postponement shall not delay the deliberative session more than 72 hours. The moderator shall employ whatever means are available to inform citizens of the postponement and the rescheduled deliberative session or voting day.

Anonymous said...

Moderator position is up for grabs.

Who is game?

Sign up between Jan 20 and Jan 2 at Town Hall.

Anonymous said...

the Atkinson "political machine vote" inhibits anyone new from running.

Curt Springer said...

To be clear, your moderator has resigned.

In March 2010 you will elect the moderator for the 2011 deliberative session.

The moderator for the 2010 deliberative session will be chosen by the supervisors of the checklist, if you have such (we do in Danville), otherwise by the selectmen.

669:61 Vacancies in Town Offices. –
I. Whenever a vacancy as defined in RSA 652:12 occurs in any elective town office or whenever a town neglects or refuses to fill an elective town office, said vacancy shall be filled by the action of that body or person authorized by law to appoint or elect such officer for a term ending upon the election and qualification of his successor, unless otherwise provided. Unless otherwise provided, at said next annual town election, the voters of the town shall then elect an officer for the full term provided by law or the balance of an unexpired term provided by law, as the case may be. If a town then refuses or neglects to fill said office, a vacancy shall be deemed again to exist.

669:62 Moderator. – Vacancies in the office of town moderator shall be filled by appointment made by the supervisors of the checklist of said town, or by the town selectmen, where no board of supervisors exists.

Anonymous said...

Yeah springer I can read and understand. Why do U have a comprehension problem? Are U just a contrerian? or what?

Anonymous said...

Polito resigned? Wahoooooooo. Guess he finally figured out he made to many wrong decisions. Atkinson has finally got rid of the "Napoleon Complex" and it only took three years.

Another one bites the dust. Consentino next.


Anonymous said...

wow. that is some deer tracks to worry about. seems they never give up. Bad news for you.

Anonymous said...

Seems Springer and Polito have a direct line of communication as Springer found out before anyone else that Polito resigned all his town offices.

What does that tell you?

Anonymous said...

Well, well, well. It is a three hour time frame from when springer posted "you can't make your moderator step down" his "To be clear, your moderator, (Frank Polito), has resigned"... farewell announcement!!

Seems news travels very, very, very, very, fast from a certain home in Atkinson to Danville or Sandown or whatever other damn town springer irritate.

I have a question, springer. Just what kind of politician are you? I hear you are a politician. Why is it a secret what you do to people? I mean, for people.

Please share with us your egotistical verbiage on your political qualifications; while you are at it, please spout more of your "superior intellect" so we citizens of Atkinson know how to better manage our town's corruption.

Anonymous said...

Okay blog heroes, you bitched about Frank and now he's gone. Let's see if one of you heroes is going to step up and run for moderator. Put up or shut up.

Anonymous said...

C'MON Mark you can do it we'll support you!

Anonymous said...

Mark Acciard would make a great town moderator as he has a strong grasp of budgetary matters and would follow the laws.

Ken Grant. I like his quiet demeanor and his gentle way with people. And he is smart. He would also make a great town moderator.

Two bad we can't have two moderators.

MAcciard said...

Thank you for your kind sentiments, but I made my wife a promise that I would stay out of town politics. She said the cost has been far too high on our family.

But again, thank you for the thought.

Anonymous said...

With Frank Polito gone, we don't have to worry about him intimatating taxpayers this year at deliberative session. The performances he put on last year was disgraceful. Selectmen should have fired him at that time, just like they have to fire Consentino this year. When will they do what has been called for year? We just might have to board this year to do the job.


Consentino, if you are reading this blog, resign NOW. You are the last BIG liability in this town. You have to go.


Anonymous said...

What a sad state of affairs when the "cost" of public service is too much for individuals and families.

Yet it is probably safe to say Mr. Acciard was harassed out of service, and now Mr. Polito has also been harassed out of town service.

When we need more intelligent public servants, we chase away those we have. (And yes, in spite of Mr. Polito's mistake during last year's silliness at Town Meeting, he's still given 20+ years of capable, even excellent service.)

I pity the next Moderator. I hope your insurance coverage is good.

Anonymous said...

Right on anon @ 7:37!

Anonymous said...

Mr. Polito wasn't harassed out of service; his insurance company canceled his insurance for to many claims. Mr. Polito brought these suits onto himself, because his ego and political agenda got ahead of his intellect and public duty. That 's when he stopped working for the people and became a liability for the Town. The same applies to Consentino.

Anonymous said...

NO! You got it ALL wrong. It was Polito who harrased and threated at deliberative session and this initiated a major lawsuit against Polito.

This major lawsuit is now referred to Superior Court from Federal Court and attorney Douglas "doesn't lilt to lose" and he is pulling out the stops and putting all the resources of his firm into action.

If the next moderator breaks the laws, intimidates,allows antics from anyone, then the consequences are obvious.

It will be a major mistake to have a temporary moderator who is also a member of the Atkinson police dept/Elderly affais fiasco...whatever.

The temporary moderator has to be separate from our main town problem area.

He or she must have clean hands.

Anonymous said...

They must choose a neutral party or we may be in for more trouble.

It must be someone who is not involved in controversy, lawsuits, or currently holding a town or state position.

Maybe a former selectman? Maybe a known upstanding figure?

Ken Grant, John Wolters, Brian Boyle, Barbara Stewart, Jane Cole?

Anonymous said...

Anon at 10:04... I believe you are wrong. It was not "referred" from Federal Court to Superior Court. They are 2 separate actions.

I believe (but am not totally sure) the Federal Court, while finding for the plaitiffs (against Polito), found little or no damages. So for Brownfield et al, let's call it a moral victory.

So what do Brownfield et al do next? They bring the exact same suit only in state court. This meets my definition of "hasassment" and whatever sympathy I had for Brownfield et al is gone now. (Brownfield was also partly to blame for last year's silliness; he clearly intended to provoke Polito at the meeting).

Last year's Town Meeting was an embarrassmenbt to us all. Neither Polito nor Brownfield distinguished themselves. But the juvenile behavior should never have resulted in (what I think have been) predatory and repeated legal actions against Polito.

So yes, I believe both Acciard and Polito were harassed (in different ways) out of office, and we are all poorer-off because of it.

Anonymous said...

Jane and Brian are two the supervisors MAY consider. There are more but this can not be a campaign in any direction. Need a serious person for a serious job on short notice.

Anonymous said...

Sorry to POP your balloon (your spin) against Mr. Brownfield but...

The reason Brownfield's case is in Superior Court was that the Federal Court remanded that part of the case to Superior Court as VALID and having standing as originally submitted to Federal Court. That part of the case is solid as granite and will proceed.

The entire original Federal case is now filed in the Superior Court by Attorney Chuck Douglas BUT it is amended with more counts and charges added. Also MORE defendants are added to this case.

This Superior Court case also names the Police Chief and Board of Selectmen for dereliction of duty, multiple violations of the New Hampshire State Constitution and harassment and intimidation of citizenry.


This is the legal system WORKING so ATKINSON public officials answer for their corrupt AND ILLEGAL acts.

The Superior Court will cause them to take responsibility where they would otherwise hide their wrongdoings. This is very bad news for those who violate the state laws and the New Hampshire Constitution.

Chuck Douglas is a Superior Court Justice for over 20 years. He knows the ropes and he doesn't like to lose....

Put that in your pipe and "smoke it".

Anonymous said...

Yes, Brownfield is an angel I'm sure. The guy's an ass. Give it a rest.

Anonymous said...

Lets get back to Springer for a moment.

" Anonymous said...
Yeah springer I can read and understand. Why do U have a comprehension problem? Are U just a contrerian? or what?

January 15, 2010 9:36 PM"

Springer fancies himself a gadfly and contrarian. What an imagination! I'd like to remind everyone that his unwavering support for everything RSA makes him a Statist. Yes, he IS "the establishment". Sad but true.

Curt, you need a little revolution in your life. Forget all those RSAs. The State of NH uses them against the people. Read the NH State Constitution.

Anonymous said...

Uh Oh, goona be damages this time.

Hmmmmmmmm. maybe file for divorces? could protect the house, the fence, barn, barn door, horse.

Anonymous said...

Who is the selectman who gets caught by Paul Sullivan in a major violation of the public trust?

Review the video:

This video will show you citizens of Atkinson harassed by public officials. Not to mention, flat lied to.

Anonymous said...

Paul Sullivan says on the video..

Paul Sullivan: "Let us not forget…and I just finished reading a book by Jeff Shera about the American rebellion…this country was founded by people who had a police state in this country. They had taxation without representation. They paid taxes without representation IN THIS ROOM. I think we have to respect the fact THAT PEOPLE HAVE THEIR RIGHTS. And I think we are violating them when a Police Chief takes it upon himself to enforce a law that is not even within his purveyance. …This town of Atkinson has to take an inventory of what is happening here."

Anonymous said...

Are we simply to assume that if the renowned Chuck Douglas files suit, then it MUST certainly all be true?

I know what my eyes and ears tell me. I saw what happened last year. Neither Polito nor Brownfield acted like adults.

But pressing, multiple lawsuits? Naming others as defendants who, like me, were simply watching the ugly exchanges?

This, in my book, is harassment.

Shame on the Plaintiffs... they did as much harm to themselves with their boorish public behavior as was done to them by Polito.

Yes, they have the courts at their disposal. But I can also call them low-lifes for following that path.

Anonymous said...

The people you call "low-lifes" are modern American patriots who will work to clean up Atkinson if it takes "till the ending of the world".

And what are you? Another town political hack desperately trying to prevent it?

Not worried about Chuck Douglas?
Defendants will "piss in their pants" when he gets them on the stand.

Anonymous said...

No, I'm not a political hack.

Just one who sees all this happening and wondering who in their right mind would choose to serve on a board, or run for Selectman or Moderator.

I fear these actions will chase away the very people we most need to serve.

Acciard has had enough, now Polito has had enough. Who's next? And who will fill their shoes?

Anonymous said...

Brownfield had the guts to stand up for himself when Polito violated the RSA law and his rights at Deliberative Session.

Brownfield went to the microphone repeatedly and asked Moderator Polito to obey the laws of public meetings and allow him his legal rights to photograph. Polito did not comply.

It is comical that Jack Sapia went outside with a police officer and tried to confiscate the camera flash card from Mr. Ed Naile who asked Mr. Brownfield to take pictures for his newspaper!

Whatever names you slander Brownfield with, you can't call him a coward. He had the guts to follow through and sue the moderator and the Selectmen for his rights.

Anonymous said...

Maggie Osborn will. She like Consentino think they can do anything they want in this town and not have to pay. Would be a perfect person to replace Polito. She is the female version of him.


Anonymous said...

"Whatever names you slander Brownfield with, you can't call him a coward. He had the guts to follow through and sue the moderator and the Selectmen for his rights."

You're making my point. I'll grant that Brownfield was wronged by Polito, though Brownfield certainly baited him. But to my eyes, the wrongdoing did not warrant 2 lawsuits. It was more like a playground spat between a couple kids.

But then, what of the additional plaintiffs (Artus, Lewis)? How were they personally wronged in the exchange bewteen Polito and Brownfield? And what about naming the Selectmen as additional defendants? What did they do during the exchange between Polito and Brownfield?

You cannot convince me that these lawsuits aren't intended primarily to harass and intimidate the plaintiffs' adversaries. And to me, that is the tactic of a low-life.

We can agree to view the same circumstances differently. Your patriot is my low-life.

Anonymous said...

I'll second that. Not a patriot, just a low-life. I've no respect for the man.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, we appreciate your opinions.

As soon as Attorney Douglas allows public release of the entire Superior Court lawsuit it will be put on the Atkinson Taxpayer Association Web site for your review.

For now you can review the previous submission by Attorney Douglas to Federal Court. It enumerates several of the facts carried into the Superior Court Case.

Here is the shortcut:

Be sure to review the "tab" evidence. If you do, you will be shocked by what has gone on in Atkinson for a long time.

Anonymous said...

At this point, aren't Attorney Douglas's "facts" actually just allegations?

Has the defense stipulated to the allegations?

Anonymous said...

Facts, allegations, half truths. For some here they're all the same.

Anonymous said...

By the way, how can you classify a town voter, quietly taking 10 pictures for the CHNT newspaper...while seated in his be "baiting"?

There were other people taking pictures that day. Were they also "baiting" the moderator? Was the Eagle Tribune taking pictures "baiting" the moderator? Was the video camera taking millions of pictures of the moderator "baiting" the moderator?

You need to either get your facts straight, or face up to the facts.

When Polito was offered the opportunity to step aside as moderator... if he didn't want his picture taken...he was well advised.

Anonymous said...

To Jan. 17, 2010. Mr. Brownfield was absolutely not sitting quietly in his chair taking pictures. If he had been, Mr. Polito would not have noticed him. He was standing, calling attention to himself, and at one point blocking one of the ACTV 20 cameras. He ultimately followed this up by putting his hat over the camera. It was most obvious that this action was well planned, and I imagine he and his associates are delighted with the end result of their stunt. They didn't fool anyone in the audience however; disgusted many of them, yes, but fooled never.

The Other New Guy said...

Wow. This same discussion has taken place here so many times and it's getting old...especially as 2010 deliberative session is so near.

Frank admitted he broke the law and judge threw the case out of court. So who wins? Brownfield, Artus, Douglas et al refuse to let this go away. From my point of view, both sides are stubborn and dug in too deep to see the forest for the trees here. Atkinson taxpayers lose no matter what. Thanks guys!

Anonymous said...

NO! You are a bald faced liar.

I was there. Brownfield never stood up and took picture.

You lie and the jury will see the evidence on the video.

Too bad for the guilty.

Anonymous said...

Nope! Sorry Mr Sapia but the judge sent your part of the case to Superior Court entire.

You will see your day in court.

As President Bush advised. "Get Ready". Justice is coming

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

2010 deliberative session and the violations of a year ago should be open to public view. That's the only way to prevent history from 2009 repeating itself this year.

The temporary moderator is not voted in by the town, rather "crowned" by three with little experience. One of which recently received special favors from PD/Elderly Affairs. This is a problem.

If PD/Elderly Affairs exerts influence on these three and a poor choice is made this new moderator can be shown the door and a new moderator voted in from the floor.

The temp. moderator is not voted in. The temp. moderator is "anointed" and can be removed.

Please choose wisely or be prepared for a firestorm at deliberative session 2010.

Curt Springer said...

Anonymous@January 17, 2010 9:13 PM wrote:

"If PD/Elderly Affairs exerts influence on these three and a poor choice is made this new moderator can be shown the door and a new moderator voted in from the floor.

The temp. moderator is not voted in. The temp. moderator is "anointed" and can be removed."

More nonsense.

Anonymous said...

Ah what do you know Curt. You're one of "them". Never mind that the RSA's you cite are really the law. You're one of "them". So just quit with your facts. They have no place here in the land of make believe. It's just too bad you aren't Italian. You could be part of the Atkinson Mafia. You know, kind of a special out of town liason.

Anonymous said...

One bit the dust yesterday. Wanna cite the RSA how that happened?

MAcciard said...

To Anon @ 3:58;

You are right, I have had enough, because when I pointed out that the police chief was violating town law, the chairman of the ethics committee told me that "we only listen to legal opinions that confirm the way we are already leaning". The selectmen allowed the police chief to read slanderous statements on live TV destroying my name to the point that one of his supporters evidently took matters into their own hands, gouging the chiefs name into my car while it sat in my driveway, and spray painting it on my home.

I have had enough not because of resident lawsuits, but because of corrupt town officials that are allowed to use their position to destroy their critics. And by the way, was my criticism of the police chief unfounded? The Court didn't think so, Ordering him to knock it off, then finding him in contempt of court when he willfully violated the courts order.

You judge for yourself.

As for Frank having had enough. I have little sympathy for his plight, as he has brought it upon himself via his own actions. For those who are unaware, his problems began with the original Atkinson Reporter. Apparently someone who works at Lucent, made some very nasty posts accusing some of us in town of illegalities as well as just being generally demeaning. The person used an alias, and was particularly venal, using the cloak of anonymity to hid his actions. When, in the course of a lawsuit someone traced IP addresses, and they all led to Lucent, they notified Lucent that someone was spending hours of Lucent time, and Lucent equipment placing them in liability. They gave Lucent the IP addresses, and it was Lucent that siezed Franks laptop, and impounded the required information. These actions combined with his faulty legal information at deliberative session last year, and his boorish behavior towards his fellow citizens, have created his issues.

And I was there last year. Mr. Brownfield was sitting in his chair taking photos of the moderator, selectmen, and budget committee, as is his right under RSA 91-A. At the same time that Frank was misinforming us about the law, a reporter was taking photos, someone at the snack table was taking pictures, but Frank didn't have any trouble with them, just the guy who pissed him off.

As I said, little sympathy here. It is not the plaintiffs that are the problem, it is the town officials who break the law, and bully private residents, and then when challenged use our tax money to pay lawyers to defend them. The chief alone has cost the town and its insurance company hundreds of thousands of dollars in the past 5 years, when is enough enough?

Anonymous said...

From Anon @ 3:58

Mark, I understand your rationale and would do the same.

I only know what I see and as to Polito, as Moderator and on ZBA (last year's childishness with Brownfield notwithstanding) I think he has performed capably.

As to viscious blog posts originating from Lucent, were they conclusively shown to be from Polito? Did the posts result in his dismissal? Did the posts result in legal action and what were the findings?

I am asking because I do not know. But also because this forum is rife with allegations offered as facts, and opinions that probably are slanderous if they can be conclusively attributed to an individual.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Polito wasn't harassed out of service; his insurance company canceled his insurance for to many claims. Mr. Polito brought these suits onto himself, because his ego and political agenda got ahead of his intellect and public duty. That 's when he stopped working for the people and became a liability for the Town. The same applies to Consentino.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Mr Acciard for telling the truth about the corruption of our town officials. Especially Pollice Chief Consentino and X-moderator Francis Polito. When I see the truth written so strongly, it sets me back in my office chair stunned.

My Grandfather was an old time banker. He made loans by talking to you; looking into your soul to see if you were honest and then finalizing the loan with a handshake. My grandfather had such high integrity he could tell an honest man from a dishonest man in a heartbeat.

I have no doubt that my grandfather would loan you, Mr Acciard, a large sum. But Mr Consentino or Mr Polito would leave empty handed.

There was a time when bankers and town officials had very high integrity. Those times need to return. Otherwise, we are lost.

Anonymous said...

I have thought that the chorus against Polito here rises to the level of paranoia too frequently. I'm troubled that he tried to help Harold Morse hide the violations he was committing at Lewis Homes by accepting the large deliveries of East Coast Lumber, his petty actions against Brownfield, and how he has seemed to line up with a goof like Sapia.

At the same time, we don't want to drive people like Polito into the arms of the worse bad actors in town. If we just scream and rant at every public official that does something we don't like we are actually creating more allies for the Sapias and consentinos of the world; what we should be doing is isolating the biggest threats to local government, and working on other issues later.

Regarding some others that were proposed for moderator; our town boards are alreay dominated by builders, developers, and those that earn their money from them (like Teddy Stewart who rents equipment and works with them on the side). As a result, we have boards that are likely to vote for almost any pro-business decision while striking down most any conservation or quality of life zoning. Brian Boyle was okay as a selectman but I'm not sure I want another developer with the town's reins in their hands. I liked Barbera Stewart a lot as a selectman but she's Teddy's sister so I'm not thrilled about that connection.

Oh, and please watch the last planning board meeting; guess who is on the board shooting down a requirement to have Hampstead Water meter the water it has going out of town? (you won't believe this one)...

Harold Morse. Oh, nevermind, of course you believe it. This is Atkinson, where fellow developers and construction buddies sit around and decide each others' cases...

Sick, sick, sick, and then PATHETIC...

Anonymous said...

Excuse me, but could someone answer this question. The announcement that Frank resigned was made by Springer. Now, if his resignation was in an RSA somewhere, he's not my most trusted source of information in Atkinson. I've seen nothing in ET and there is nothing on the town web site.

How does everyone here know that this story is true?

Anonymous said...

Warrants submitted to the Planning Board cannot get shot down, nor can they be modified by the Planning Board. They have to be submitted to the voters as is. All the PB can do is recommend or not recommend.

Also, Harold Morse is an Alternate on the PB, meaning, he cannot vote unless there is not a quorum of voting members.

So, what was the vote. Is the PB going to give its blessing or not?

MAcciard said...

I should make something clear, as to my position. The fact that a town official has a family member as a town employee, or works for a company that does business with the town, does not preclude them from serving as a town official, as long as they disclose that conflict and step aside whenever any town business relates in any way to that conflict.

I had no problem with the chief being a selectman, I just didn't see how he could do the job as he would have to step aside whenever police, elderly affairs or town employee business came before the board. I had no problem with him serving, just with his violations of law, both town and state. It is unseemly for someone sworn to uphold the law, in my opinion. And I agree up until the last 4 years or so when Frank became a partisan political hack in my opinion, he was a really good moderator, although he never should have listened to Chief and Jack and sued the town he moderates for, that was just plain idiotic.

Anonymous said...

Regarding The Eagle Tribune, they take their " marching orders" from Phil Consento. Until he calls, they don't know what to think or what to print.

The Eagle Tribune is a hack run newspaper. This story really screws them up.

They don't know what to print. In investigative reporting they get an "F". They flunk.

Anonymous said...

I would have thought the Town would have called the newspaper about Polito on Friday, before the long weekend.

...then he remembered where he lived...

Anonymous said...

LOL, yes, I'm sure they were just sitting around doing nothing when Frank's resignation came in. Hey, is that someone looking in your window? You better close all your blinds. Could be that one of the mafia members are watching you...

Anonymous said...

Please....they don't tell the residents anything...

Anonymous said...

A lot of entries but no comment on my question.

How are suppose to know if this story is true? I'm not taking Springer's word for it.

Anonymous said...

There has to be a separation of the title of this blog on the trucking issue from the resignation of Polito. Where is it!!

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Go down to towh hall Tuesday and ask for a copy of his resignation letter. Then you can post it here for all to see. Frank has resigned both as moderator and from the ZBA. Curt is correct, although I have no idea how he got the information so fast. Perhaps it was from Tim.

Anonymous said...

I'm beginning to believe, but has anyone seen the letter?

Please don't get wrong and think I'm playing games. I'm not.

If it had come from Tim then I'd have no doubt. Springer - You'll understand my skepticism.

Anonymous said...

I'm afraid another pro-business hack is going to end up with the ZBA chair. If it's Sandy Carter we're doomed. This is a man that votes to give any business anything they want, no questions asked; but if an ordinary citizen comes in (say with a pre-existing non-conforming lot) he's not willing to let them place a prefab house there if it is 2ft larger than the original.

He actually stated that, if it were up to him, he wouldn't offer variances to allow small lot owners to rebuild! All while he gives businesses anything they want!

Anonymous said...

I believe the boards elect their own chairman. I'd say his chances of becoming chairman will have a great deal to do with how the other members feel about him.

Anyone care to speculate whether he's played well with the others?

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


Yes, it's true, Frank Polito has resigned from town politics.

Mr. Polito turned in his resignation letter the end of last week, citing the fact that his homeowners insurance has dropped him due to his personal legal fees. Mr. Polito reportedly said that he couldn't take the chance of moderating town meeting this year and being sued again. That is the official spin, and it is the truth as far as it goes. But as is usual in Atkinson there is a back story, and it goes something like this;

In early 2007, when the original Atkinson Reporter first started, the blog received a number of very nasty personal attacks, against a number of residents. These posts were unprintable, and the blog did not print them but printed them out and mailed them anonymously to the people being discussed. In one of the posts the perpetrator went so far as to accuse one of these people of contributing to the death of Ruth McPherson. Another told of a secret meeting between Fred Childs, Jack Sapia, and town counsel, Sumner Kalman, that then selectman, Paul Sullivan was purposely excluded from, and reported the contents of that meeting.

At this same time the selectmen and Frank Polito were the subject of a lawsuit in town. In the course of this lawsuit all the evidence of the posts was obtained, and laboriously traced IP's and proxies back to the original poster. All these posts came from a single hub in Lucent Technologies. A preservation letter to Lucent with all the details, including the IP's and evidence. The letter notified Lucent that legal action was being contemplated against Lucent and that this information must be preserved. Lucent went about tracing the information, and apparently descended upon Frank Polito's dept. Lucent seized his company laptop, and the relevant Internet server. Frank reportedly received some type of "dressing down" over this incident, putting, as he told the town "his job in jeopardy".

Frank responded to the preservation letter to Lucent, even though he was never mentioned in it, fighting the Grant's in court to try to block the production of this information. He got himself a private attorney to intervene in this matter paid for by his homeowners insurance. When it became clear that the plaintiffs were not backing down, and wanted this information, the insurance companies quickly settled, leaving Frank's homeowners insurance company with not only a lawyers bill, but the settlement check as well. And before anyone asks; NO, it was never proven in Court, due to the early settlement that Frank made those odious posts, But Lucent evidently thought so, they seized his computers, and the insurance company was apparently nervous, they settled awfully quickly after this incident.

Then we have Frank's frivolous lawsuit against the Town of Atkinson. When Brian Boyle started building Winslow Dr., on the original plot plan there was a paved path through the woods connecting Winslow with Woodlawn ave. The path ran off a driveway, and made a 90 degree bend in the woods to come out at the top of Woodlawn. Boyle offered the fire chief two live hydrants that he could put behind the Academy(an area of town that had always been a concern because of it's lack of water) if he would fore go the path. Chief Murphy agreed because the path was useless, he said, due to it's 90 degree bend, and the fact that the first 100' of it was someones driveway. Enter Phil and Jack, Jack was overheard to say in the town hall that they would sue, and the town would end up with BOTH the hydrants and the path as the path was "a life safety issue".

Anonymous said...

Sumner reportedly informed them that as selectman, they could not sue the town, they would be on both sides of the case. Within a week, Frank had filed suit against the Town for alleged public safety violations. It appeared that they were attempting to manipulate the legal system to force Boyle to pay for both. The case was dismissed for lack of standing, the Judge telling Frank that he lived 3 miles away from this path, and therefore was not affected in any way.

Flash Forward to the ZBA meeting where Frank ordered the cameras shut off so that he could berate his board, swearing at Ellen McGrath. She resigned the following week.

And how could we forget last years deliberative session, where Frank told a guy sitting in his seat taking pictures of the proceeding that he was forbidden by law from doing that. Frank has been in town politics long enough to fully understand 91-A, and know that he was misinforming the town about it's provisions. He also had no problem with the other three people in that room taking pictures, only Brownfield. Curious. Brownfield sued, and once again Frank got a private attorney on his insurance, to work along side the town's insurance company attorneys.

In every one of these cases, the town's insurance company had attorneys working these cases, Frank wanted his own attorney to work with them, and his insurance paid for it, right up until they got sick of footing these repetitive and unnecessary bills.

So while Mrs. Childs can decry the "bottom feeders" that drove Frank to this resignation, maybe an objective view of the heretofore unknown details will demonstrate that Frank largely brought this upon himself.

Anonymous said...

Dale Childs IS the bottom feeder, while suggestion that everyone that opposes her are the bottom feeders. SHAME ON DALE CHILDS for attacting her fellow taxpayers. She needs to be taken out of POWER and reduced to paying for all the articles she supports by herself.

Dale Childs is in bed with Consentino, Garrity, Polito, Sapia, Fred Childs and all the corruption that sucks money out of your wallet.

JUST SAY NO to these people.