From the Plaistow Town Crier;
Well the State of New Hampshire has survived two mini-revolution recently. One was started by the Board Of Selectmen over in Newcastle over the state's tax on all the "Property Rich" towns. That's where I first learned about Article 10 of the New Hampshire Constitution, our right to revolt. The next mini-revolution was over the "View Tax". If I remember correctly is was the Board Of Selectmen in Orford that stood up against the state's view assessments, but caved in the end. Let me double check to make sure it was in fact, Orford. Now we have another mini-revolution brewing, this one is over drinking water rights in 4 or 5 towns. Maybe this is the one that will give us "Home Rule". Richard Barnes posted the following article at www.nhinsider.com today. It seems appropriate here. And it fits in perfectly with a comment made on the Atkinson Factor website today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Patrick Henry Dead?
Of course Patrick Henry the man is dead, he died June 6th 1799 but a recent discussion I had off line has me wondering if his spirit died in this country. America was founded by revolution. Men like Patrick Henry stood up to oppression and demanded a better way. They risked their very lives for what they believed in.
Does that same spirit exist today? Are there people willing to put their neck on the line to stand up to corruption?
We've grown complacent as a country, that much is certain. We almost all agree our government sucks and our taxes are way too high but no one does anything about it beyond bitch and complain to neighbors and friends. A small handful may go so far to even complain on a public forum or even write a letter to the editor which others will read and nod in agreement with but where are the people going that one step further? Where are the people going beyond complaining and actually trying to do something about it?
Once in a while you still see people make a stand but they are far and few between and when they do we see time and time again the powers that be attack back. People being so loyal to one party or another find reasons to defend their side when their party attacks those who make a stand often times ignoring blatant hypocrisy of their own parties. A perfect example of such behavior is found right on NHInsider's own forum found here.
The "Change" we need as a nation isn't someone who gives slick speeches while continuing to be embedded in the same political system causing the problems in the first place, no the change we need as a nation are more people willing to stand up for what is right. People willing to tell the government we've given enough and we refuse to allow you to continue raiding our pockets for empty promises. Those who benefit at our expense will always be there supporting those who will give them the contents of our pockets. Those who live off the government will continue to support the system they benefit from. The rest of us however need to stand up and say enough.
We need Patrick Henry!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now from the Atkinson Factor. Sounds like Patrick Henery is alive and well in Atkinson, NH. Over in Plaistow, all we're getting are these pablum stories about a train station. Wouldn't mind having a station, but we've had one before and it's no big deal. Please, driving all the way to Haverill isn't that big a burden. And remember Commuter Rail isn't the same as the Downeaster. The cars are often hot in the summer, cold in the winter, the bench seats are about as uncomfortable as pews and the trains sometime break down or run late. So get real. All this amounts to is a flash in the pan, followed by a new maintenance and insurance burden dumped on the poor Plaistow taxpayer. And about the layover location. Why keep it a secret? It's going to come out sooner or later. At first Plaistow officials were worried about the diesel fumes and early morning noise that come with a layover facility, now they seem completely oblivious.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous said...
Dear Mr. Springer,
Now how can I get my percentage of the profits from HAWC of the selling of the water under my OWN property that impacts the quality of my well? A Priori...The State of NH is not going to protect the citizens fully, the citizens must protect themselves by acute awareness. Citizens must wake up and smell the greed. If they do then they can vote out selectmen and change planning boards who do not act to protect them. The people can silence the selectmen who are in lock step with this attempt of thievery and establishment of a town utility. It is a failure on the part of the education of the citizens, and notification of citizens of Atkinson that must be addressed. This Blog is doing a tremendous job in raising awareness and enhancing notification. And we all need to do more. I, personally, need to do much more SO LOOK OUT! And my intent is to drive as much evil out of Atkinson town government as possible. It is a good thing you are not in Atkinson, Springer, and I so hope the citizens of Danville wake up and take you on and issue you some "attitude adjustment" as to the protection of the basic rights of citizens to protect their water availability versus greed based NH state tactics. If the people are strong enough, they can retake the entire State of NH government away from those hacks just as the people can take their local town government away from the local entrenched hacks. Mr. Springer, are you getting the message that a REVOLUTION is brewing?
Atkinson Town Hall
The Norman Rockwellian picture of Atkinson
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
How about some context around the last part. Seeing the name and knowing his passions, I can make some assumptions, but give us all of it.
Home Rule would require an amendment to the state constitution. It was voted down 8 years ago.
The most important legislative body in any NH town is the state legislature, not the town meeting.
I'm all for "education of the citizens". I suggest that you start with making a reasonable effort to understand how municipal law works in NH.
11:36 PM is a "know it all" who lacks the practical expetience and knowledge of the interactions between State, Local and individual entities in NH. Lacking that the pontifications are a bore.
PS: Even if home rule had been adopted, it wouldn't have made any difference in the case of these local groundwater ordinances. Massachusetts adopted home rule more than 40 years ago. But wherever the legislature has enacted a comprehensive law, local ordinances are automatically preempted. In this case, the state law makes it absolutely clear that the sole process will be as defined in RSA 485-C:21.
The legislature did take note this year of the desire for more local control of groundwater withdrawals. But they could not come to agreement of something that would be workable, so they added this question to the questions to be addressed by a standing study committee.
I read a commentary on Massachusetts home rule that stated that it didn't make much difference in general because the state legislature had been in existence for 300 years cranking out laws, that it continued to crank out laws every year, and therefore there wasn't much left for local municipalities to deal with on their own.
The Mini Revolution in NH post is rediculous. You people in Atkinson are nothing more than a bunch of dummys making up your own crazy antics which have led you down a path to illogical reasoning as Paul D stated. Curt Springer is absolutely correct.
Unless your mini revolution is going to over throw the NH legislative body you can continue writing garbage on these blogs for people to read and follow you down the same unrealistic path.
Mr. Springer, perhaps you should confine your efforts to Danville where you live. Yes, there may be problems with the petitions voted on, one in particulare, but they come about because of our frustration with our public and appointed officials not fulfilling their obligation to protect it's citizens.
If HAWC's request had not been so over the top and if our BOS would see fit to intervene with the DES as other town governments have, these discussions would not be happening. We're angry and what was demonstrated at Monday's Special Session is that we want our PB and BOS to understand we are not willing to just sit by and watch a private company do whatever it feels like doing, and that we expect the PB and BOS to be more proactive in protecting Atkinson's natural resources.
Mr. Springer, this is Atkinson's problem. It's ours to work out. We'll worry about Atkinson, you worry about Danville.
For Mr. Springer's info, every town that has intervened witha reasonable argument, the state has upheld the town!
The other difference here is that this is a private entity, not a municipal water system. Were it a municipal system there woudl be no anti trust issues as there are here.
Third, this ordinance is in place, duly voted overwhelmingly by the people. and It is a health ordinance. giving it a different status. The side issue here is that we are not trying to control the withdrawal of water so much as the moving of it out of town.
HAWC has applied to triple the towns current useage. They want to ADD 570,000 gals a day of capacity. There is no room for the town to doubl in size. There are no storage tanks to hold that much water, so where is it going to go?
The answer to that came this week with their application to link hampstead to us.
Finally, Mr. Springer, you restrict your blog to Danville residents don't you?
Maybe you could respect our sovereignity, and focus your attentions on Danville's issues, and leave us to handle Atkinson's.
Mr. S.'s pontifications are as the blind man description of a elephant. Mostly beyond cavil
To Curt Springer,
You were banned from Atkinson Reporter 1. You are banned from the Plaistow Crier.
When are you finally going to get the idea to butt out of other town's business. Everytime Atkinson has a ballot or voting issue, you butt your un-wanted self into our town business and try to tell us how to vote or what position to take. You always tell us how wrong we are because our position differs from yours. We're perfectly competent to think for ourself so butt out.
You have no credibility with the poeple of Plaistow or Atkinson -- and not even with your own town of Danville.
You're nothing but a self-appointed know it all who offends people with your arrogance.
Atkinson is the master of its own house. Danville residents have no say in our business. So butt out.
To the management of Atkinson Reporter 2. Springer's own blog in Danville bans out of towners from posting on his blog. Yet he repeatedly imposes his un-wanted presence on Atkinson. Please do not post Springer's constant criticisms of Atkinson and its residents' actions. He's an arrogant person with a god-complex.
RE: August 14, 2008 9:42 AM
Well said Mr. D. Calling the residents of Atkinson dummys is a wonderful way to make you point and gain our trust.
Get this through your head. Desperate situations require desperate measures. HAWC made a request that shocked many people. Their public presentation did absolutely nothing reassure us. In fact, it made matters worse. Emery & Garrett's testing on the three sites so far show they had recovery issues. If those very deep wells, can't keep up, what are we to expect when the water table drops when those pumps are in full production.
You, Mr. Springer, Jack Sapia, certain members of the planning board, and the BOS seemed to be far more concerned with a petition article than assuring that all of the citizens of Atkinson will have sufficient water and not a sucking sound from their well. If you are under the belief that there is plenty of water down there, understand we don't sit atop a lake and no one, and I mean no one, knows exactly what the aquifer's capacity is. Again, I go back to the flow rate problems E&G have observed even with limited testing.
Rather than spending all of your energy berating the citizens, channel that energy into getting HAWC to act in a more responsible manner and, getting our BOS to intervene with the DES on our behalf.
You People!!!
To Anon at 9:42
The mini revolution comments came from the Plaistow Crier so don't give all the credit to Atkinson :)(didn't you see the article title?)
Secondly, Paul DiMaggio is the one who is illogical. He stated Monday night that HAWC doesn't intend to move water out of Atkinson. The next day they distribute letters confirming they want to connect two towns. DiMaggio is the one out of touch and dumb. It was blatantly obvious to the rest of us that Atkinson doesn't need this water!!!
Now, what was that you said about being on an unrealistic path? Get a clue.
As an Atkinson resident, I want to thank Mr Springer for his views. I happen to agree with him. I feel the Atkinson citizens concerned with issues on ground water quality and withdrawal would be doing more good service to the community by working toward improving the ever changing DES process on application review and approval.
Aquifers clearly cross town boundary lines needing some review and control beyond the town level.
If the two articles on water withdrawal pass, they will likely end up in court with the State law preemption putting them down.
Maybe spending the effort to add additional controls to the DES process regarding the pipe/flow connections between towns would be more productive. It seems from what I am hearing that restricting the withdrawal from leaving Atkinson would resolve most of the issues.
Maybe allowing inter town flows for emergency protection suach as Fire protection would be reasonable.
Article Submission.
AGO lays down the law! Read the latest letter to the town regarding the illegal funds AND other tidbits.
August 5, 2008
BOARD OF SELECTMEN
TOWN OF ATKINSON
21 ACADEMY AVENUE
ATKINSON, NH 03811
CHIEF PHILIP V. CONSENTINO
ATKINSON POLICE DEPARTMENT
PO BOX 321
ATKINSON, NH 03811
Re: Atkinson Police Department Donated Funds
Dear Board of Selectmen and Chief Consentino:
The Charitable Trusts Unit has received numerous inquiries from
individual citizens and the press regarding certain private donations given to
the Atkinson Police Department, held by the Town of Atkinson, and expended
by Chief/Director Consentino. Our office conducted a three-month inquiry into the questions raised and that process has now been concluded.
The purpose of this letter is to present the Board of Selectmen and Chief
Consentino with a report of our findings based on four components:
background information, our understanding of the solicitation
process and the method of administering the private donations, state law relating to charitable solicitation, and our recommendation for resolving the administrative challenges going forward.
Background
Philip V. Consentino is the Chief of Police for the Town of Atkinson.
Philip V. Consentino is the Director of Elderly Affairs for the Town of
Atkinson.
The position of Director of Elderly Affairs was created by the Board
of Selectmen in 1994 in response to concerns expressed by Chief Consentino relating to the health and wellbeing of the elderly residents of the town. Chief Consentino was subsequently appointed Director of Elderly Affairs. Although Philip Consentino holds two distinct positions in the Town of Atkinson our findings indicate the office of Chief of Police and the office of Director of Elderly Affairs function as a single unit with no discernable administrative or organizational separation. The dual role situation has caused some confusion and concern among town residents.
Solicitation and Administration of Donations
Each year Chief Consentino conducts a donation drive directed to town
residents utilizing Atkinson Police Department letterhead. Donors are instructed to send their checks to the A.P.D. Equipment Fund, c/o Atkinson Police
Department, PO Box 321, Atkinson, NH 03811. The solicitation material
informs donors their funds may be used for various purposes and programs including but not limited to equipment for the Atkinson Police Department, books for the library, ice cream and candy for students, the D.A.R.E. program, and assistance to the town's elderly citizens. Although the solicitation material asks for checks to be made payable to the A.P.D. Equipment Fund the donations are in fact held by the Atkinson Town Office in several specific funds including the "Senior Donation Fund", the "Life is Not Done Group", the "Police Department Equipment Fund", the "D.A.R.E. Fund", and the "Police Fund". The authorization to expend these funds is granted (or denied) by a vote of the Board of Selectmen upon request of Chief Consentino.
State Laws Pertaining to Charitable Solicitation
The solicitation of donations for public or charitable purposes is a
strictly regulated activity in the State of New Hampshire. Organizations
recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as exempt under section 501(c)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code, professional fundraisers/telemarketers, and
municipalities all have the legal ability to ask members of the public for charitable
donations, however, there are specific state and federal requirements that must
be followed by the soliciting entity in each case.
The acceptance and administration of private gifts, grants, donations, bequests, and devises by towns and cities in New Hampshire is a bifurcated process under the NH Statutes. While voters may, through an article in the annual town warrant, vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen to accept gifts, grants, donations, etc. in the name of the town the actual administration of these private donations is under the legal authority and control of the duly elected Trustees of Trust Funds and not the Board of Selectmen nor the Town Treasurer. The Trustees of Trust Funds function as fiduciaries and are legally bound to follow the donor's wishes in making distribution from any particular fund. The Trustees of Trust Funds are accountable to the Attorney General, the Department of Revenue Administration, and the citizens of their town for the proper execution of their duties and responsibilities.
Administrative Challenges
There are three challenges in the present situation in Atkinson:
governance, transparency, and accountability. While we recognize the
donations made over the past fourteen years have improved the lives of many
citizens in Atkinson it is our opinion the current method of administering these
funds in not in accordance with New Hampshire law and must therefore be brought into compliance.
Governance
Philip V. Consentino holds two public offices in the Town of Atkinson:
Police Chief and Director of Elderly Affairs. Because there appears to be no
separation of administrative or organizational function between the two offices it is difficult to ascertain where the office of Police Chief begins and the office of Director of Elderly Affairs ends and visa versa. We have found no documentation describing of the duties and responsibilities of the Director of Elderly Affairs in either the Statutes or in the Town of Atkinson. While it may be desirable to have one or more individuals responsible for serving the needs and interests of the elderly population in Atkinson, if public or private funds are involved the process must be transparent pursuant to RSA 91-A and the individual(s) appointed to serve accountable to the public for their activities. It is our recommendation the Board of Selectmen reexamine the position of Director of Elderly Affairs and, if the Board decides to retain the position, to then draft guidelines specifying the criteria for appointment to the position of Director, draft and adopt written documentation detailing the duties and responsibilities of the position including internal controls and an annual reporting mechanism, and develop a process for choosing the projects to be funded from the donations received. Because the function and accountability of the two positions are distinct the Selectmen must implement a clear separation between the duties of the Police Department and the duties of the Director of Elderly Affairs no matter who holds the position of Chief or Director.
The five funds presently held in the Atkinson town office, the "Senior Donation Fund", the "Life is Not Done Group", the "Police Department Equipment Fund", the "D.A.R.E. Fund", and the "Police Fund" are not currently being administered in accordance with the law, however, the situation may be corrected as follows: The purpose and total dollar amount in each fund must be identified and committed to writing. Once the purpose and amount of each fund has been documented it will be necessary to transfer custody the funds and the documentation to the Trustees of Trust Funds for the Town of Atkinson for administration. The supporting documentation should contain specific instructions on how, when, and by whom disbursements from each fund will be authorized.
Transparency
The situation as it presently exists may lack the transparency required of all
public officials appointed or elected to a municipal position in New Hampshire. For example, we have been unable to determine the criteria used in selecting or rejecting those projects and/or individuals who receive or fail to receive payments from the various funds. Although the Selectmen vote to authorize generally the distribution of money from the five funds it appears the Police Chief and/or the Director of Elderly Affairs has full discretion in selecting the projects and/or individuals that receive distribution from the funds. We recommend the current system be reviewed by the Board of Selectmen with the aim of creating a process that provides greater public disclosure and transparency.
Accountability
The Trustees of Trust Funds are required to file an annual report of
their activities with the Attorney General, the Department of Revenue Administration, and their town or city. In order to promote greater transparency and accountability we recommend an annual report detailing the financial activity of each of the five funds referred to earlier in this letter be prepared and distributed by the Police Chief/Director of Elderly Affairs to the Board of Selectmen and the general public. This report should contain information pertaining to the amount of income received by each of the funds, the name, amount and purpose of the payments made to each project and/or individual from each fund, any administrative expenses charged, and the balance remaining in each fund at the end of the year. The Selectmen may decide whether or not to include this report in the annual town report.
This letter is not designed to diminish in any way the generosity of the
citizens of the Town of Atkinson nor the good works this program has
accomplished over the past fourteen years (former Attorney General Philip
McLaughlin complimented the project and its benefit to the elderly of the town
in an April 8, 1999 letter to all Police Chiefs) but the program does have a
number of significant legal deficiencies that must be addressed going forward.
By this letter we are asking the Chief of Police and the Board of Selectmen to
review our recommendations and to take the actions necessary to bring the
current situation into compliance with New Hampshire law.
I will look forward to hearing from you.
Very truly yours,
Terry M. Knowles
Assistant Director - Charitable Trusts Unit
Dept. of Attorney General
33 Capitol Street
Concord, New Hampshire 03301
603-271-3591 (phone)
603-223-6221 (fax)
terry.knowles@doj.nh.gov
RE: August 14, 2008 12:43 PM
Somebody agreeing with Mr. Springer! Can only be Mr. Springer himself, maybe.
Anyways, after reading everything here and in the other related posts I would like to point out that Mr.'s Springer, DiMaggio and Sapia are free to express their opinions. That is one of our sacred rights. However, I'm reminded of a quote by the late Sen. Hubert Humphrey, "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously."
OK, I will respond to some of the points that have been made.
I am not expressing some oddball opinion about your water ordinances. Your town lawyer agrees. Officials in Nottingham, which voted a similar ordinance this past March, also expressed misgivings.
Not one person in NH who knows anything about municipal law has publicly supported these ordinances.
Contrary to anon@8/14 10:02 am & 10:16 am, I am not saying that Atkinson should not intervene in the state process. I have said consistently that intervention in the state process, as provided by RSA 485-C:21, is the only legal option that you have. I agree that it is Atkinson's problem, not mine. I'm simply stating an opinion on the enforceability of the water ordinances under state law. As I have mentioned, we all live under the same state laws.
Also, to 10:16 am, the attempt to regulate water withdrawals as a health ordinance is disallowed by RSA 485-C:20.
Also, contrary to what was stated in one of the responses, I have no opinion as the the amount of water that is available in Atkinson or whether the HAWC request is reasonable or should or should not be approved.
To anon@8/14 @ 11:14 pm, you are the person who sent one or both of the anonymous hate letters I received in the mail last year. The wording of your posting is similar to the letters. You must be either "Publius", the person behind the first Atkinson blog, or a friend of his, as the letter was based on something that I submitted but which "Publius" refused to post on his blog.
Regarding my banning from Dennis Herrick's "Plaistow" blog, it was because I called him out on his anti-semitic rants. Also because I reported that one of his chief targets, Merilyn Senter, was not even aware of his blog, which is probably read just a handful of people. I put "Plaistow" in quotes because this blog is just Herrick's rants, not a site that average or mainstream Plaistow people participate in.
I was not formally banned from the original Atkinson blog, although "publius" censored me and at one point removed previously approved postings from me and even went so far as to remove postings by other people just because they mentioned me.
Regarding posting in SpeakoutDanville: I am one of four sponsors of the site. The policy is that membership (which allows posting) is intended for people with some connection to Danville. You don't need to be a current resident. You could be a former resident, a nonresident who owns property, somebody who works in town, etc. We have tried to interpret it liberally. This intention is supported by our members. One reason for it is connected to another policy that we have. We verify all of our prospective members. We phone them and verify their intentions before we let them in. So one concern about letting non-Danville people in is the burden of phoning them up and doing the user administration. You can be anonymous to other members, but not to us, the four sponsors.
We have recognized that our policy might shut people out from other towns who could make good contributions to our discussions. We did let somebody in from Sandown not long after the site was established. A gentleman from Plaistow asked to join but then withdrew his request before we had time to consider it. A couple of weeks ago, an Atkinson resident asked to join. Our members agreed that we four sponsors could let in nonresidents at our discretion, so we set him up.
It is not our intention to exclude any legitimate contributions to our discussions. If anybody wishes to become a member of SoD, you can send an email to webmaster@speakoutdanville.org stating why you want to participate. Or if you just want to say one thing, you can send me an email and I will post it as a quote.
But here's the thing, you can't be anonymous, so that rules out 99.9% of you who post in this blog.
Mr. Springer,
With all due respect, This blog, nor the original Atkinson Reporter, would work if identities were required, for reasons obvious if you have read some of the threads on these two blogs.
People post anonymously here because they fear retribution. I have been told by some people who stated that they posted on the original Atkinson Reporter, that they did not wish the same incidents that have been perpetrated upon myself. I post under my own name because my town and some of its officials can do no more harm to me than they have already accomplished.
I hope this explains the need for anonymity in Atkinson. While this pains me, as when I was growing up in Atkinson everyone knew everyone, and the atrocities we have witnessed in the last 4 years would never have happened. I long for the day when anyone may speak their mind without fear of special attention from law enforcement.
Mr. Acciard (BTW you can call me "Curt"):
I understand that people could have legitimate reasons for being anonymous. I mentioned it only in the context of participation in SpeakoutDanville. We allow quasi-anonymity in that you can post under a pseudonym, but known to the 4 sponsors.
We do have a few members whose true identities are unknown to us, as we did not establish our verification policy until a couple of weeks after SoD started in January 2006.
Go to the Atkinson-Factor to see footage of Mr Dimmagio's horrible display of Slapping every resident in the face.
Mr. Springer , You in Danville can run your site the way you want but as I see it you forget that being anonymous is just that. When one or more people know about ones anonymous identity its no longer anonymous nor secretive as is intended. To me your site doesn't allow true opinion with out the fear of retribution by any person using your site. I'm glad I do not live in Danville under your sites rules because I can be very opinionated.
Post a Comment