$80,000/yr. for a 6th full time cop?

The vote are in, and at least 1,000 people believed the chief when he said he NEEDS a 6th full time officer, and a 12th car for the department that routinely has ON OFFICER ON PATROL ANY GIVEN SHIFT!

Our sleepy little town will now have 6 full time officers, and 10 part time officers. to fight crime in a town THAT ONLY HAD 8 DISPATCHED IN THE ENTIRE MONTH OF FEBRUARY!

For years Chief has tried to get his 6th officer. He likes to cite a 1993 FBI report suggesting guidelines of having 1 Ft officer for each 1,000-1,400 people. he ALWAYS neglects to mention that the FBI ALSO considers 2 PT officers to be the equivalent of 1 FT officer. So by the report he cites Atkinson which has 6,646 people, now has 11 FTE (full time equivalent)officers. This is 1.6 officers per thousand. He also neglects to mention that their report speaks of towns with business districts. It does not deal with bedroom communities like Atkinson.

But, hey, the voters are happy to throw money at this empire building megalomaniac. One officer on patrol per shift, but 12 cars to service this.

As former budget committee chair Mark Acciard pointed out at town meeting a few years ago, The PD in 2008 budgeted 20,000 man-hours. There are 8,360 hours in a year. They had enough money in their budget to schedule 2 officers every shift if they wish. And STILL have TWO full time officers left over. But they continued from that time until now to still maintain one officer per shift on patrol. SO although our bill has grown dramatically we are not getting any more protection than we were in 1998 when we had one officer on patrol every shift.

The problem here is one of management. We have an uneducated, untrained, unappointed police chief, who continually demand more while providing less.

And the voters keep buying it.

Another year, More electioneering by the POLICE CHIEF

Atkinson's chief law enforcement officer, is in full election mode once again. never above using his office, and taxpayer funded resources to tell people how to vote, this year is not different.

Phil has used the Town Report, His title as Elderly Affairs Director, the resources of the Elderly Affairs dept., to advance his cause. Of course ALL of this is a violation of law, but, really, When has that EVER stopped Phil? Laws are evidently for others.

Here is the Statute in Question;

659:44-a Electioneering by Public Employees. – No public employee, as defined in RSA 273-A:1, IX, shall electioneer while in the performance of his or her official duties or use government property, including, but not limited to, telephones, facsimile machines, vehicles, and computers, for electioneering. For the purposes of this section, "electioneer'' means to act in any way specifically designed to influence the vote of a voter on any question or office. Any person who violates this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Now, surely Having his petitions for warrant article signed in the elderly affairs cars during rides violates this.

Surely having elderly people come to the police station to sign petitions as Phil, himself, admitted doing in the Eagle Tribune violates this.

Surely Placing articles in the Carriage Towne News from "the director of Elderly Affairs" and "the police chief" violates this.

Surely his blatant pitches in selectmen meetings for his articles violates this.

Surely his latest postcard, "from Atkinson's Elderly Affairs DEPARTMENT" Violates this.

And of Course his Town Report comments about the warrant articles is much more of a violation the the petty, hope to continue to serve you was, that he demonized Brian Boyle over a few years ago was.

But, as usual with Phil, the recurring issue is that THE POLICE CHIEF IS VIOLATING THE LAW!

I know this is nothing new. Mr. Acciard, six years ago spent his own time and money to get the Court to Order Phil to follow the law, by recusing himself from voting on police matters as a selectman. Acciard stood to gain nothing form this action, and in fact lost alot, But, nevertheless, he won, and Phil was Ordered to follow the law.

Imagine that, A police chief having to be ORDERED by the Court to follow the law. Only in Atkinson. And when Phil ignored the Court's Order, they found him in Contempt of Court!, Again only in Atkinson. Did Phil begin obeying the law then, NO,, in stead he used YOUR money to appeal to the New Hampshire Supreme Court. They told him to go away.

Over the years there have been numerous complaints of electioneering by Phil, evidently he does not think the law applies to him. Isn't it time the selectmen did their job, and put a stop to this?

Residents upset at Chief's slander of Hemlock Heights

Anonymous said...
To the Editor

Tired of Neighborhood Put Down

This letter is in reference to a statement made by the Chief of Police during the Town Of Atkinson’s Deliberative Session held on February 4th. During the public discussion of Warrant Article 2012-24 for a sixth Full-Time Officer, a statement was made by the Chief that one of the rationales for the necessity of a sixth police officer was due to ”other occasions in the summer time where we have an awful lot of activity up in the heights, up on Hemlock Heights. Then, instead of just one officer on (duty), we could have two or three officers.”

As a long time resident of Hemlock heights, I know this statement to be erroneous. After reviewing the police log for the past two years, the number of logged incidents represents less than two percent (1.7%) of the overall log entries for the Town of Atkinson. ( 50 Calls out of 3039 and some of these calls involve medical response support.) The police logs are available to the public on the Atkinson Town web site.

For further clarification, Hemlock Heights consists of Hemlock Heights Road, Hemlock Shore Drive, Ledge Road, Palmer Road, and Boylan Terrace. It does not include Chase Island Road, Valcat Lane, and Rocky Point Lane.

Hemlock Heights is a very strong community and very supportive of its neighbors. I must respond to the incorrect and derogatory statement made. It devalues our neighborhood and possibly our homes.

This is not the first time the Chief of Police has slandered the Hemlock Heights community. While I may not be opposed to hiring additional police staff for the overall safety of Atkinson, Hemlock Heights should not be singled out as a factor for that decision.

Noreen Mercier
Atkinson.

March 8, 2012 5:37 PM