Atkinson Town Hall

Atkinson Town Hall
The Norman Rockwellian picture of Atkinson

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

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

Welcome Message and Mission Statement

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

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

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

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

NECAPS are out! TRHS Achieves SINI statusfor it's 6th YEAR!!!

From Danville Delivery;

September 25, 2010
by danvilledelivery

…and our schools are still terrible.

I have been pointing out since before no tax impact kindergarten was passed that the longer kids are in the Timberlane schools, the worse they perform academically. This year’s NECAP results once again support this observation. Our high school has been categorized as SINI (School In Need of Improvement) for Reading and Restructuring/Level 5 for Math. The math designation means that our high school has not made AYP for the sixth year (it’s a really, really, really bad school — bottom 5%). Our middle school is nearly as bad. Its math status is Restructure Planning/Level 4 which means it has not made AYP for the fifth year (also bottom 5% of schools). All elementary schools except Pollard have been designated acceptable (not designated as in need of improvement). Pollard is SINI Year 1 for both math and reading. If you live in Plaistow, chances are your student has never attended an acceptable school. And we are paying $15k/year for that.

That’s the bottom line. I urge you to examine the school report cards (as well as your student’s individual assessment) to understand how bad our schools are. Be sure to attend the Tuesday 9/28/2010 when ‘experts’ from SAU 55 and the NH DoE try to convince us that there is no need to test our high schoolers.

Report Cards

Report Cards links can be found here

* TRHS Reading:SINI Year 2 Math:Restructuring/Level 5 AYP: No/No
* TRMS Reading:Acceptable Math:Restructuring/Level 4 AYP: Yes/No
* Atkinson Reading:Acceptable Math:Acceptable AYP: No/No
* Danville Reading:Acceptable Math:Acceptable AYP: Yes/Yes
* Pollard Reading:SINI Year 1 Math:SINI Year 1 AYP: No/No
* Sandown Central Reading:Acceptable Math:Acceptable AYP: No/Yes
* Sandown North Reading:Acceptable Math:Acceptable AYP: Yes/Yes

What do the designations mean?

* School In Need of Improvement (SINI) Designation. A school is designated as in need of improvement (SINI) when it does not make AYP for two consecutive years in the same performance indicator (i.e. Reading, Mathematics, Attendance Rate/Graduation Rate). A school can be designated for multiple areas at the same time. The school in need of improvement (SINI) designation is removed once the school has made AYP for two consecutive years in the same indicator that caused the designation.
* Acceptable. A school or district not designated as in need of improvement.
* SINI/DINI Year 1. A sanction for a school or school district not making AYP for two consecutive years in the same performance indicator. The term “Year 1” does not indicate the number of years the school or district may have been in need of improvement; the term indicates the sanction level of the school or district.
* SINI/DINI Year 2. A sanction for a school or district in need of improvement that has not made AYP for the third time in the indicator causing the original designation.
* Corrective Action/Level 3. A sanction for a school or district in need of improvement that has not made AYP for the fourth time in the indicator causing the original designation. Note: Title I schools and districts are subject to federal sanctions under the No Child Left Behind Act as well as state sanctions; non-Title I schools and districts are subject to only state sanctions. At this sanction level, Title I schools and districts enter Corrective Action.
* Restructure Planning/Level 4. The restructuring (planning year) sanction applies only to Title I schools that have not made AYP for the fifth year in the indicator causing the original designation.
* Restructuring/Levels 5 and 6. The restructuring (implementation year) sanction applies only to Title I schools that have not made AYP for the sixth year (Level 5) or seventh year (Level 6) in the indicator causing the original designation.

Aren’t all schools struggling?

No. Despite the rationalizations spewed by the SAU staff, our schools are particularly bad. These spinmasters talk about cohorts, subgroups, and internal metrics, but there is only one important measurement — how much do the kids know when they get out of high school.

The answer is: not much.

For the last year tested, our 67% of our 11th graders were proficient or better in reading, 31% were proficient or better in mathematics, and 40% were proficient or better in writing. Compared to third graders testes in the same year of whom 83% were proficient or better in reading and 86% proficient or better in mathematics.

In 2006, these 11th graders were tested as 8th graders. Before being subjected to our high school, they 73% were proficient or better in reading, 53% were proficient of better in mathematics, and 56% were proficient or better in writing.

My theory is very simple. Pollard is a terrible school. Because Social Engineering Principles will not allow the schools to stigmatize these kids, the middle school lowers its teaching standards to the level of the incoming Pollard kids. After three years of inclusiveness, none of the kids are ready for a high school education.

A new building isn’t going to fix this. Getting rid of Big Tests isn’t going to help. We need new teachers, a new curriculum, and a new calendar that has the kids learning the right things from good teachers 180 full days per year.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Maggie's has ANOTHER neighbor arrested!

Apparently Maggies neighbor Mrs. Dubrov was arrested today on a charge of criminal threatening, based on a complaint from Mrs. Osborn.

For those who don't remember, Mrs. Osborn has filed criminal complaints against her neighbor, Mr. Meatey, Mr. Artus, Another complaint against Mr. Meatey, and now Mrs. Dubrov. This is in addition to her ongoing legal issue with Carol Davis for building a driveway across her land. Apparently Mrs. Osborn is not an ideal neighbor to have. Sources in the police dept. have confirmed that this arrest did occur.

The story goes that Mrs. Osborn has been staying in the house at 8 valcat ln. for the last few nights despite a Court Order evicting them from the house. As most of you know, the town has yet to issue the Osborns an occupancy permit for the house, because it has neither a driveway accessible to a fire truck, nor any kind of sprinkler system.

Although Maggie has made numerous promises to put in; a driveway to a class V road with no more than an 8% grade, a sprinkler system, a cistern and pumping system, alternatively to meet fire codes, she has, as usual reneged on all her promises.

It does seem that she has resumed her old tricks of filing criminal complaints against those who stand in her way, and this new complaint seems to be more of the same. It would appear that Mrs. Osborn graduated Summa cum laude from the Phil Consentino school of retribution. Some of you may remember phil's numerous televised attacks on Mr. Acciard, Mr. Kaye, Mrs. Grant, Mrs. Cole, and many, many others. These people go out of their way to make life hell for those who draq attention to their excesses.

The real question here is with Mrs. Osborn's track record of lying to town officials about "owning a deeded right of way" across someone else's land, Filing plan's to build one house then having it redesigned to be much bigger than the original permit allowed, building a driveway across her neighbors land without her permission, and having all of her neighbors arrested on trumped up frivolous charges( none of which have ever stood up in court), why does the police dept. still jump at her beck and call? Still arrest people with no investigation or probable cause other than her word? And why do the selectmen keep turning a blind eye, both to Mrs. Osborn's abuse of her neighbors, and the police depts. abuse of authority. It was bad enough to have the court set the precedent, in the Artus arrest, that the Pd arrests people on no investigation by having the case dismissed because they could not produce basic discovery materials that he was entitled to. That sets a precedent that may undermine any arrest that the PD makes, if the criminal is smart enough to find that case.

Mrs. Osborn, your fifteen minutes of fame is up.

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Atkinson police lieutenant back from military tour

From the Eagle Tribune;

September 17, 2010
Atkinson police lieutenant back from military tour

By Doug Ireland Fri Sep 17, 2010, 01:38 AM EDT

ATKINSON — As a member of the town's police force, Lt. William Baldwin is ready to respond at a moment's notice while on duty.

But for the last year, Baldwin found himself ready to respond around the clock while with the U.S. military in Iraq. The Coast Guard reservist is back in Atkinson.

"I'm very glad to be home," said Baldwin, who is married and has 11- and 14-year-old daughters. "You get a different perspective when you are away."

A different perspective it was.

While deployed, the local police lieutenant and Timberlane Regional School Board member was part of a multinational force protecting the Basra oil terminal in the Persian Gulf, nine miles off the coast. The terminal is used to export much of Iraq's oil to world markets.

Although Baldwin said he couldn't go into detail about his service in Iraq because it is classified, he did say it was challenging.

"You're always at 24/7," he said. "You know what the risks are. We're just well trained and well prepared. It's a tough area to defend."

Baldwin also said it was a privilege to work with the British Royal Navy as they assisted Iraqi forces and helped prepare them for the task of protecting their own oil terminal once U.S. troops withdraw from Iraq.

"It was a great experience working with different cultures," he said. "The positive part of that is we're educating and training them so they can be on their own."

Baldwin returned to the United States in late August after being deployed in September 2009, and was reunited with his wife, Jennifer, and daughters Mackenzie and Brittany.

"They're very happy," he said.

This wasn't the first time Baldwin was separated from his family for months. In 2003-2004, he served as a gunner on a ship in the Persian Gulf.

Baldwin's family members aren't the only ones happy he has returned.

Atkinson police Chief Philip Consentino is glad his second-in-command is back, making his job much easier since he often found himself handling day-to-day duties Baldwin usually performed.

"It was tough," Consentino said. "Now that he's back, we're in good shape."

Baldwin has been with the police force since 1997. While the department has about 16 part-time employees, it only has five who work full time.

"Everyone else chipped in and everyone persevered," Consentino said.

Baldwin returned to the Atkinson Police Department only days after returning home. He also has returned to his seat on the Timberlane School Board, which met last night.

Although Baldwin is back to his old routine, it hasn't been easy for someone who became accustomed to long, grueling shifts while in Iraq, working all hours of the day and night.

"It's going to take some time," he said. "I'm still trying to get the sleeping habits again."

While Baldwin is glad to be back, he said he is especially grateful to everyone who supported him and the other troops deployed overseas.

"People in this town have been so gracious," he said. "I'm so appreciative of all the packages and well-wishes. It really helps out a lot. You get a little bit of home."

Monday, September 13, 2010

Atkinson teen suffers life-threatening injuries after crashing car into tree

From the Eagle Tribnue;

Atkinson teen suffers life-threatening injuries after crashing car into tree

By Mark E. Vogler Sun Sep 12, 2010, 10:20 AM EDT

ATKINSON — A 16-year-old Timberlane Regional High School student was in critical condition last night at Boston Medical Center after crashing his car into a tree Friday.

Police Chief Philip Consentino said emergency crews from the Atkinson Fire Department had to use a hydraulic device to remove the driver's side door and free Chris DiPietro of Atkinson from the wreckage following the crash, which occurred around 5 p.m. in front of 37 Maple Ave., near the intersection of Kelly Road. The crash forced the closure of Maple Avenue for about two hours.

"His car went sideways right into the tree," Consentino said last night. "Damage to the vehicle was extensive. It hit the tree right on the driver's door and completely demolished the vehicle."

He said the results of a preliminary investigation revealed that speed may have been a factor in the crash.

"We called in the Salem police accident reconstruction team to determine whether it was," Consentino said. "Once we get their report, we'll know more."

DiPietro was initially taken to Lawrence General Hospital, but later flown by medical helicopter to Boston.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Osborn's story changes again!


The Osborn's were back in Court today, trying once more to lay claim to the land they developed, owned by Carol Davis.

Once again, their story has changed.

You may remember the many times Maggie has claimed to "own a deeded right of way" that allowed them to build the driveway. Well they have now dropped that argument. Their NEW line of attack is to claim that they are not responsible, that there was no INTENT to do harm to Mrs. Davis, because they did "due diligence" to see if they could open the road.

They conveniently ignore the fact that the right of way is one Mrs. Davis' deed, and not theirs.

They ignore the fact that it was never granted to anyone.

They ignore the fact that it never appeared on any plot plan until 1995. They ignore the fact that their plot plan specifically refers to the "Stowers plot plan of 1924".

And they forgot to tell the Court that the language in their deed stating they have the right to "pass and re pass over A RIGHT OF WAY" was inserted into their deed BY THE OSBORNS. All the previous deeds in stead have language marking the boundaries of their property.

Their atty. Bernie Campbell, tried to claim that it is a "road by prescription", only to be shut down by Davis atty. pointing out that to be a "road by prescription" it must be in constant and regular use for more than 20 years. It didn't even exist until 1995!

Then Campbell made the argument that the Osborns "opened" the road, because since it was on Davis' plot plan, it could be granted and accepted by the town as a right of way at some point in the future, and then they would have a right to use it.

Quite a bit different from Mags tales of woe to the selectmen.

If the judge ends up siding with the Osborns, he will have made it legal for anyone to use feature of anyone else's deed, as their own, as long as they can make some spurious argument as to a right.

September 1, 2010 5:13 PM

Atkinson Wedding Photog's to go on Trial!

From the Eagle Tribune;

Former wedding photographers go on trial Oct. 4

By Jillian Jorgensen

BRENTWOOD — A judge yesterday granted a $250,000 attachment to the assets of two photographers facing a civil lawsuit from the attorney general's office for allegedly breaking wedding photography contracts.

Michael and Darlene Perrotta, an Atkinson couple who owned Forever in Time Photography in Salem, face criminal and civil charges for allegedly leaving more than 200 newlyweds without the photographs, albums and wedding videos they purchased.

Rockingham Superior Court Judge John Lewis added the $250,000 attachment in the civil case against the Perrottas. The attachment covers the cost of their property at 27 Meditation Lane in Atkinson. It means they cannot sell it until the case is resolved in case it is needed to pay a monetary judgment.

Senior Assistant Attorney General James Boffetti said the $250,000 was not an excessive amount to attach to the case. Boffetti estimated the state would seek around $150,000 in restitution for 206 customers who have filed complaints, some dating to 2001. But the state will seek civil penalties of $10,000 for each violation of the state Consumer Protection Act. With 206 potential violations, if the Perrottas are found liable, that could mean $2 million, Boffetti said.

Lewis already had ordered a freeze on all the Perrottas' property, including their Meditation Lane home. That happened after the judge learned the Perrottas had sold property at 7 Brittany Lane on June 4, after they received notice of the state's petition to attach, but before the hearing. The original attachment was for $250,000 for each property.

The sale of 7 Brittany Lane netted the Perrottas a profit of $71,000, just under $55,000 of which was placed in an escrow account, according to Paul Pappas, Darlene Perrotta's attorney. The judge ordered that money cannot be touched and Pappas must provide the court with a full accounting of what happened to the proceeds of the sale of the property within 20 days.

Pappas disputed the amount of restitution that could be owed to customers. He said the Perrottas had settled some individual lawsuits for between $100 and $300, and the escrow account held "more than enough money."

He said the business was successful for many years, until a September 2008 fire set the photographers back. The business reopened in May 2009. Pappas said the Perrottas did not intend to defraud anybody — the fire and the economy set them back and eventually forced them to close for good in September 2009.

"They didn't will it to happen," Pappas said.

Boffetti said many of the complaints came in the years before the fire — and the Perrottas kept taking new jobs, and money, after the fire, despite their inability to deliver photographs of weddings they had already photographed. Boffetti said 40 complaints were filed for weddings that happened after the fire.

Pappas argued the complaints before the fire were spread over many years. The Perrottas photographed up to 500 weddings a year, he said.

Boffetti said there were two complaints in 2001, five in 2004, four in 2005, five in 2006, and 12 in 2007.

"The events in this case will show a pattern of violations of the Consumer Protection Act," Boffetti said.

Michael Perrotta was in court with a new attorney yesterday, David Horan. In the ongoing criminal trial, the state had argued earlier this summer that it was a conflict for Pappas to represent both Darlene and Michael Perrotta. Darlene Perrotta kept Pappas as her attorney.

Boffetti argued that still was a conflict because Michael Perrotta had told Pappas confidential information while Pappas was his attorney. Pappas could use that information against him in his defense of Darlene Pappas.

"I don't know how a lawyer, once he has received confidential information, how he can continue to represent a client who may have an adverse interest," Boffetti said.

But Horan said the Perrottas already knew everything about one another's legal dealings.

"The reality is that Darlene and Michael, husband and wife, living together, traded massive amounts of information with each other," he said.

Michael Perrotta had signed an informed consent waiver saying he "trusted" Pappas would not use information against him. The judge said that language was unacceptable.

"You can't expect this lawyer (Pappas) to be put in that Catch-22," he said. "He has to fully represent his client."

After a recess, Horan offered a waiver saying Michael Perrotta understood that Pappas "may use any information relating to my representation to my disadvantage."

The judge accepted that waiver.

The Perrottas are scheduled to go on trial Oct. 4 on three charges of violating the Consumer Protection Act.