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, December 21, 2011

Budgetary Attrocities

Our Selectmen have requested $100,000 in the "other professional services-Legal line item, in the Town's operating budget. The line was funded at $10,000 last year, and was promptly overspent by $70,000 by our spendthrift BOS.

A little history is in order here.

This line was added to the budget by the budget committee last year at the request of the selectmen, because Primex had dropped the town's insurance coverage over the ongoing lawsuits, and the selectmen knew that a new insurer would not accept liability for the ongoing case, which was being wrapped up at that time. They asked for $10,000 to wrap up the Artus case. Now, that case is long over, we have a new insurer, and the selectmen want this line INCREASED to $100,000, WHY?

Fred claims it is for "the lawsuits coming down the pike", but THAT feeble excuse doesn't hold water, because any new lawsuits would be covered by our new insurer. In addition to the insurance, we pay Town Counsel $42,000 per year to defend the town. SURELY between the insurance, and our town counsel we can handle all these future mythical cases coming down the pike?

And what ARE these mythical cases, Fred cites? In the last five years the Town has been in court constantly, ALL over Phil Consentino's abuses of authority. There was the ethics case brought by Mark Acciard in 2005, which resulted in the Court ordering Phil to recuse himself form any selectmen's meetings that were delaing with police, elderly affairs, or town employee issues. Phil ignored the Court's Order, as we are sure every good law abiding chief law enforcement officer would do, right? and the Court then found him in Contempt of Court, and ordered him to now LEAVE the ROOM when those issues were being discussed, since he failed to follow their order the first time. Phil Ignored this order as well, preferring to spend MORe of the taxpayers money to appeal to the Nh Supreme Court. They dismissed. Then there was the Grant case, You all remember THAT one, Phil fresh off his Court Order to leave the room when police, elderly, or town employee matters were being discussed, sat in his selectmen's chair, when Carol Grant, came in to read a short statement about Phil's verbal abuse towards her in the lobby of the Town hall, Thus violating the Court's Order once again. he slammed his hand down on the table ROARING to the officer's he had directed Russ to call, to "GET HER OUT OF HERE". The officers dutifully evicted Carol, Her husband, and her wheelchair bound son out into the cold winter night, without even allowing them to stop and put coats on. This resulted in the Grant case, which after two years was settled with the payment of $30,000 to the Grants. Then there was the Acciard civil rights case, which dealth with phil's diatribes in publis official town business meetings, his letters to Acciard on official stationary threatening action, verbal threats in public, following him and his family through town, and other abusive actions, 3 years, and over $100,000 in legal fees later this case was merged into the Artus case. This new one over Phil calling elderly people that signed petition warrant articles and screaming at them "why did you sign this shit?"

So it is fair to say that if they want to cut legal costs they need to get phil to retire. It would save the town hundreds of thousands in legal fees and settlements.

And true to form, the budget committee, did not question the validity of the line, but began haggling over the amount! THE LINE SHOULD NOT EXIST! IT'S PURPOSE HAS BEEN FULFILLED! The question needs to be asked WHY DO YOU REALLY WANT $100,000?

42 comments:

Anonymous said...

The only legal bill I'd be willing to pay is one that gets rid of Consentino.

Anonymous said...

Budcom should not recommend this, it's not good for the town.

Anonymous said...

Hey Selectmen and Budget Committee, stop the legal slush fund. you're crossing the line to protect Phil.

tim dziechowski said...

Other professional services legal also covers the costs for the town to investigate and prosecute zoning scofflaws. Several recent cases on Big Island Pond come to mind.

No, this is not covered by Sumner's retainer. The retainer is just for him to be at the beck and call of town government to answer legal questions and give advice.

Our old liability insurance didn't cover zoning legal issues, and our new liability insurance won't either.

I would imagine the selectmen are also planning for some legal expenses over the train layover.

MAcciard said...

I am sorry Tim, but I think we are talking about different lines. This line was just created less than 1 yr. ago. Further, this line was created for a specific purpose, that purpose has now ended. I see no reason for a 1000% increase in the line.

There has always been money in the budget for the types of issues you are talking about.

Anonymous said...

It's cost us more than money to have Consentino as the Police Chief. It has cost us a whole Police Department.

We do not have any protection from crime. When was the last time you heard of an arrest not politically motivated? How about the burglaries in your neighborhood, did they ever catch anyone and prosecute them? Did they do anything when your car was broken into, your mailbox destroyed, your family threatened? No, nothing ever happens to protect us or to prosecute criminals here. If it hasn't happened to you yet, it might and if it does, you will see that you can get no satisfaction.

It certainly is quite an arrangement. Make friends and influence people by doing favors for them and they give you cash in return. They support your fund and your politics and you get a free pass on your traffic ticket. One hand washes the other.

Now if you don't go along with the plan, you will be targeted. Those criminals have a debt to pay and they come in handy. Someone slashed Mr. Acciard's car and spray painted his house, here in Atkinson. It could be the person living right next to you or the one you voted for across town, who knows. It was not what I expected to see in this little town.

The closer you look, the worse it gets. Many people are complicit. How do you feel about that, is it ok with you? What about the officers who are willing to do the bidding of the Chief just for a paycheck? How would you feel if that was your son or husband? Are you proud of them or ashamed? What about Jody, she knows nepotism is against the town's ethics ordinance, yet she continues to take a paycheck knowing this is not ethical. Would they allow this at your work? No, it would never be tolerated. What about Lynne Cunningham? Do you think she only worked on the Chief's fund once? Most likely it happens all the time and we pay her salary while she does it.

I have a problem knowing that the town has a pretend police department with pretend cops and we are paying with our money and our safety.

Anonymous said...

It's the only way an untrained, uneducated person could hold onto this job for so long. He ingratiated himself now holds us hostage.

MAcciard said...

To 2:12am;

Actually the town had a Nepotism ordinance up until 2005. When Russ and the selectmen(of which Phil was one) updated the Employee handbook, Nepotism disappeared.

Anonymous said...

They don't an ordinance to know nepotism is very wrong, it should not be allowed under any circumstances.

It goes deeper still. The Chief is targeting people who call to report crimes then he goes out of his way to try to discredit them and get them shut up and go away.

Why is this? I could be that he doesn't know how to handle the issues (untrained) or that he's afraid to (unsuited) or just plain doesn't feel like it (unsuited).
There is really no good reason for him to respond to calls to the PD in such a manner. The bottom line is that he does do this and he is not doing his job as a cop. He doesn't seem the least bit interested in being a good Chief or making this town a safe place to live.

He really has to be let go.

Why do the cops go along with it? Maybe they don't really know what's going on, though I'm sure they can find their way here. Maybe they are lied to, convinced some residents are evil and 'deserve' to be mistreated. I don't know about the rest of you but those paying my salary would not allow this insubordination. Yes, it is insubordination, since he works for us and won't do the job he is paid to do.

Anonymous said...

need legal money for the fire station roof bid

Anonymous said...

fred said the windows for the kimball house are in does any body know where they are at

Anonymous said...

why did the bos sent the old windows to the scrap yard and where did the money go

Anonymous said...

I hear the town is paying a law firm to represent them during their negotiations with the PD, how much does that cost? What the firms name? anyone know and who is the lawyer? Anyone know?? HMMMM

Anonymous said...

no one will know bos keeps every thing a secret

MAcciard said...

They HAVE TO make that decision in an open public meeting. They CAN NOT make decisions in non public, nor can they spend money in non public.

Anonymous said...

This is the most corrupt town in the world.

Anonymous said...

How can Consentino draw any paycheck if he not even legally appointed as Police Chief? And also, as far as the town paying his legal fees, if they deal with him as ''phoney un-appointed chief'', how can we be made to pay his legal costs. As far as police matters, without a legal appointment to the APD, he's just another civilian, non-town official.

Anonymous said...

the bos will do what it wants

Anonymous said...

Mark, are you sure about that. pretty sure devine millemet is on the payroll.

Anonymous said...

I'll bet we could sue Sumner personally for allowing this moron to stand in as a police chief.

Anonymous said...

or have him disbarred

Anonymous said...

Sumner is making a lot of money off the Chief's dishonesty. He should be disbarred.

Anonymous said...

In all fairness how can you blame Kalman? He didn't allow or make the Conman chief. Before he became the town lawyer did his predisessor do any thing about the Conman becoming the chief? The towns people let the Conman become the chief as did the selectmen when he did become the chief. Over all how can you blame Kalman when he is a lawyer making his living as he does when others are to blame for the Conman becoming the chief and who was also an elected selectman. When you try to place blame ask yourselves who really is to blame. I think you'll find it is the selectmen ,past and present ,and the voters who allowed the Conman to become a selectman and the chief . Todays selectmen are not doing the bidding of its voter taxpayers to remove the chief from all his duties which include his pet project of Elderly Affairs.

Anonymous said...

The town never, ever, never elected Consentino.

How can I blame Sumner? Has he recommended removal? If he ever has recommended he be fired, it would have happened. Sumner has reaped the benefits of the on-going lawsuits by increased retainers, caused by the on-going business of Phil COnsentino.

How can you not find Sumner culpable? How can we not find him, the TOWN ATTORNEY responsible for allowing this man to continue to haunt this town? Has he recommended firing, retiring, not allowing him to be inside the PD? Where is Sumner now? WE hire him and pay his salary.

If he has any moral fortitude, he knows what he sould be doing. I can't see it happening and I raise questions here that folks are asking on the street.

Anonymous said...

friel getting a bigger cookie jar for x mas, that is were his hand allwaise is

MAcciard said...

Dec. 23, 1:52pm;

Am I sure of what?

as for Devine, I believe that is the firm the town hired out of the fund in question when Primex dropped us.

Anonymous said...

12:23 @ 5:43 - How can you say the Conman wasn't elected to the selectmens position. He served more than one term did he not? Mr. Kalman may not have recommended any thing at all to remove the Conman but did any one else do that in an official town position to do that at any time. [Except for the MAcciard situation and the more recent others on this site that is.] You have to remember that the Conman was a selectman at some point of Kalman being hired as the towns lawyer. I'm not a true fan of Mr.Kalman but I do try to look at the overall and make issue with a view and opinion after looking into the issue[s] before passing judge mental blame with my opinions. There can be no doubt that the Conman should be out of the towns employment and that is what most in town think. If there is so strong a removal of the Conman then the selectmen should do their duty now and not in future tomorrows.

Anonymous said...

I didn't say the Conman wasn't elected to the BOS. I spoke only about him as Chief.

Anonymous said...

Agreed. The Selectmen need to do their duty now.

I didn't know that Sumner was hired by the Chief, which solidifies my position even more so.

Anonymous said...

New Warrant Article:

BOS's lawyer, Sumner Kalman has become too expensive.
and has a conflict of interest if he's representing Chief Consentino privately. New blood is needed. Put Sumner's legal line out for bids.

Anonymous said...

I agree that this line item is way over priced, but it's the Selectmen and the Budget Committee that put the dollar amount there.

If you don't like it, remember it at the polls.

Anonymous said...

I work for a company that had a long running contract with a security company. The same guards worked with us for years and years. That all changed one day. We arrived for work and the new folks running the reception desk were wearing hats and jackets from a different company. Later we learned that in an executive purge, the COO and the CEO's Executive Secretary had been fired. It seems the COO was planning a purge of his own. He was using the Security Guard and the Executive Secretary to dig up dirt on the CEO.

Maybe it's time for the BOS to end this overly chummy relationship they have with Attorney Sumner Kalman and bring in someone new.

Anonymous said...

Selectmen are afraid to get rid of town attorney. Consentino is responsible for getting Kalman a $30,000. raise up from $10,000.. This happened a few town meetings back.

If nothing else they should not allow him to consult Kalman, alone or at all. He has $20,000. in his budjet to do so. That's a conflict of interest. Guess who gets legal advice for free on how to keep your job as thief of police.

Anonymous said...

The Selectmen should do it anyway, afraid or not. If they cannot do their job, go home. Lots of afraid people get up everyday and put on a uniform and face scary things for the higher good.

Just do it.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know what's going on with the Osborn case? The house that they're supposedly not living in looks great with the giant lit wreath and candles in the windows.

The town doesn't seem to have the testicular fortitude to get them out of there.

Anonymous said...

I don't care. Far more important issues out there.

Anonymous said...

Osborn issues have not been dealt with by selectmen for over a year. Time to resolve them now before they sell the property and move out leaving us holding their bag of problems.

Anonymous said...

I'll bet they don't even collect the fine from Osborn, and it's bad enough but they paid for Polito's lawsuit but they didn't even make a dime but Polito did on our dollar. BOS is not for us.

Anonymous said...

Good point. Where are the selectmen regarding the Osborn's living illegally in their ILLEGAL house? What are they doing to correct the situation? What do they intend on doing about the Osborn's living there illegally, Are they going to wait another winter for summer to come and allow them to continue living at 8 Valcat for another year? Are they still willing to have taxpayers pay for their kid to go to our schcols and pick up their garbage for free? Are they going to continue to take the Osborn payoffs in exchange for letting them live there?

Any HONEST BOARD OF SELECTMEN would have had them evicited after the judge ordered them out. Any HONEST BOARD OF SELECTMEN would have had their police chief knock on the OSBORN door and escorted them out, but not our selectmen. Our Selectmen have done nothing to get rid of the Osborns.

Wanna know why? Osborn's have our illegal Police Chief in their back pocket.

Need we say more?

Anonymous said...

no, please stop. We've heard it enough. We get it, you live next door.

Anonymous said...

Looks like Maggie just chimed in again from her computer located inside her illegal home.

Can you see the new cameras from where you sit Maggie? Hmmmmmm?

Bet you can't!

Anonymous said...

Who wrote this article. I often see articles posted from the Eagle Tribune with the byline noted. But then other times the articles have no author. How does one know whether these facts are correct or not?