Sunday, January 31, 2010

Letter from Attorney Generals Office to Gary Phillips, Chris Roberts and Maryan Platz

This letter says it all - the results of an investigation by the AG's office finding Gary Phillips, Chris Roberts and Maryan Platz together manipulated the bylaws of the Winchester Police Association. Together they presented TD Banknorth deceptive documents in a successful attempt to deceive, causing Dan Reppucci's name to be removed illegally, without proper authorization and in violation of the bylaws as they conspired to have Dan Reppucci removed as the Treasurer of the association in an illegal manner. 

HOW CAN GARY PHILLIPS, CHRIS ROBERTS OR MARYAN PLATZ, EVER BE TRUSTED AGAIN TO TELL THE TRUTH AND HOW CAN ANYONE BE CONFIDENT THAT WHAT THEY SAY IS HONEST, TRUTHFUL OR LEGAL, ESPECIALLY IN THE COURTS OR TO OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGNECIES? 

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Warrant Articles inserted by petition ...

On this year's ballot you will find 13 articles submitted by our Selectman, all about more spending of course ; 6 articles inserted by our town's Planning Board, that are so confusing you'd need an attorney to make sense of them and 10 inserted by members of the community inserted by gathering signatures on their petitions on subjects they think are important and that affect many people in town. Below is a list of the citizen petitions and our thoughts on them.

ARTICLE 14. To see if the town will raise and appropriate the sum of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.) for the purpose of subsidizing youth recreation to be paid to the E.L.M. Memorial Community Center on a contractual basis.
This sounds like a good idea, providing the monies all go to youth activities and not paid out in salaries. .. article was passed as written and will be on the ballot.

ARTICLE 15. To see if the town will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $15,000. to be used along with the $10,000. grant money we received to scrape and paint Thayer Library in Ashuelot.
This seems likes an awful lot of extra money just for a paint job. Would it not have been more suitable to put this out to bid first to see if the grant money would have covered all expenses? .. article was amended to appropriate the sum of $2,500 and will be on the ballot.

ARTICLE 16. To see if the town would be in favor of removing 52 streetlights at various locations within the Town.
From people we have spoken with this seems like a really very bad idea. Not only will it leave children going to and coming home from school in the dark as well as others returning from work or the store; but cost us to shut them off and back on if we decide we really do need them. .. article was amended to read any streetlight not necessary and will be on the ballot.

ARTICLE 17. To see if the town will vote to approve the following resolution to be forwarded to our State Representatives, our State senator, the Speaker of the House and the Senate President. Resolved: The citizen's of New Hampshire should be allowed to vote on an amendment to the New Hampshire Constitution that defines "marriage".
Obviously the people who inserted this petition have no faith in the people we have elected to make these type of decisions for all of us and we ask whatever happened to the separation of church and state does this not apply? .. article was voted out by unanimous vote.

ARTICLE 18. Shall the town in accordance with RSA 72:37-b, Disabled Exemption - adopt this property tax exemption for persons eligible under Title II or Title XVI of the Federal Social Security Act for benefits to the disabled in the sum of $750.?
This would obviously help those in our community who are disabled and unable to work even part time to supplement the meager money Social Security gives them to live on and would go a long ways in helping them pay their taxes and be able to buy food and needed medications. There will be no raises given to any Social Security recipient for the next two years by the Federal Government, without this meager tax break many could fall behind in their obligations to the town to pay their property taxes. .. article was passed as written and will be on the ballot.

ARTICLE 19.  Discussed below.

ARTICLE 20. In accordance with RSA 231:62-a and 231:62-b, are you in favor of electing a Highway Agent for a 3-year term?
According to State law, this has always been an elected by the people position, perhaps it's time we left it up to the citizens of Winchester to elect the most qualified person to fill this position. .. article was gutted from original and will not make any sense when seen on the ballot.

ARTICLE 21. Shall the Town, in accordance with RSA 79-A:25, deposit in the Conservation Fund 0% of the revenues, collected in Land Use Change taxes and deposit all such revenues in the general fund for the purpose of reducing taxation?
With over $86,000. already in the Conservation Fund and no tax money coming from property placed in conservation this would be a very good way to supplement the loss of revenue and help lower everyone's property taxes. .. article was amended to give 76% of the money collected to the WCC and 24% back to the General Fund and will be on the ballot.

ARTICLE 22. Shall the Town adopt, in accordance with RSA 31:39-a, a Town of Winchester Conflict of Interest Ordinance as follows?
TOWN OF WINCHESTER CONFLICT OF INTEREST ORDINANCE
1. Town employees and Town officials must avoid conflicts of interest. Town employees and Town officials shall not participate in any matter in which they, or their spouses or any immediate family member have a private interest which may or indirectly affect or influence the impartiality of the performance of their duties and are required to publicly disclose conflicts of interest of which they know or should know.
2. In addition to statutory incompatibility of offices  as defined in RSA 669:7 and 669:8 the following combinations of employment and/or appointed and/or elected positions may not be held by a single person at the same time:
a. any employment position in excess of 16 hours per week and any elected or appointed office. ( Stipends for elected or appointed officials do not constitute employment)
b. Selectman and Chairman of the Planning Board.
c. Chairman of the Board of Selectmen and Chairman of the Solid Waste Distric Advisory Committee.
d. Chairman of the Selectmen and Chairman of the Conservation Committee.
3. Failure to abide by the provisions of this ordinance shall constitute grounds for removal from office upon petition by any person to the Cheshire Superior Court.
As required by RSA 31:39-a, this ordinance exempts affected officers and employees who are in office or employed at the time the ordinance is adopted for a period not to exceed one year from the date of adoption.
Long overdue and will insure that boards, committees and basic employment will not be controlled by a few., .. article was amended to just accept the State mandated ordinance covered under RSA 669:7 and 669:8 and RSA 31:9-a. The remaining language was removed. This article will be on the ballot.

ARTICLE 23. Shall the Town terminate relations with it's current law firm and retain a new firm, to be effective at the inception of fiscal year 2010-2011 ( July 1, 2010 ) for the purpose of bringing fresh legal perspectives to the activities of elected officials?
Would not it be more frugal and better for the town as a whole to seek council from a local Keene or nearby firm, than to continue paying enormous travel pay fees to our current attorney's firm and be able to have council available for local meetings if needed? .. this article was amended to read to commend Barton Mayer for his outstanding service and will be on the ballot.

ARTICLE 30. Are you in favor of amendment by citizen petition for Town zoning ordinance: Shall the Town of Winchester vote to prohibit the installation of any "new" gas stations within a one-mile radius of an existing station?
This would seem to be unenforceable and possibly illegal to stifle free enterprise of anyone wishing to start a business. .. this article was unenforceable and voted down.

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

WHY ARTICLE 19 SHOULD NOT BE AMENDED AND SHOULD GO BEFORE THE VOTERS AS WRITTEN

 In last night's Keene Sentinel there was a letter to the editor, written by, Ms. Bonnie Leveille,  Secretary of the Winchester Conservation Committee. She wrote about how she felt the Conservation Commission was being singled out and that some people in town were rejecting common sense in order to promote their own personal agendas at the expense of the townspeople, protection of our valuable land and protection of our water supply. Because a Warrant Petition was legally submitted and signed by more than the required number of registered voters to abolish the Conservation Committee, she felt it was a misuse of the system and the result of personality problems and that this article in her opinion would hurt the town. She went on to state that we all should do our homework and research and to stop "blogging" and working behind the scenes and get down to real government.

Well, we have done some research and these are the facts that we have come up with to show that whomever submitted this petition had done their homework and had good reasons .. We found that;

1. Winchester has no need to officially “conserve” any more land and renewable resources, nor to reduce the tax base which has already taken a heavy blow due to de-industrialization and earlier land grabs
A. More than 25% of Winchester’s land is comprised of Pisgah State Park. (Seized by eminent domain.)
B. Hundreds of acres of land are under private or public conservation easements.
C. More hundreds of acres are in current use with public access for recreation.

2. The Federal Environmental Protection Agency and NH Department of Environmental Services already have enough regulations and regulatory power to sufficiently protect the environment and water resources. The Conservation Commission has no enforcement authority, nor any authority to create local regulations.

3. In recent years the Winchester Conservation Commission has been taken over by a small handful of elitists with a narrow, aggressive agenda to gather up money, land and control.
Diversity of thought is not welcome.The presumption is that they alone know what is “best for the town.”
A. Membership is based on nominations from within the commission,
B. The Conservation Commission has (Nov. 30, 2009) $86,177.25 in the Conservation Fund, over which it exercises absolute control. The money has, and can be, used to buy land to take out of the tax base, or for projects which have historically benefited very few people. The existing conservation land is little used for “recreation” or any-thing positive. (Musterfield Park goes virtually unused. Pisgah Park and private land are the first choices for hunting, riding, hiking, etc.

C. Records indicate that this commission has paid members and family to do projects which are usually (and were formerly) considered volunteer-type pursuits.

4. Despite its claims of protecting water resources, the Conservation Commission has allowed the town to operate a gravel pit in a town forest closely abutting a town well (near Plumb Pak), thereby putting our town water supply at unnecessary risk. The site is yet to be managed or reclaimed to DES standards.

There are several auto repair shops, one automobile junk yard, a cement factory, a concrete plant, a used diesel truck repair/ used vehicle site and a couple of race tracks all in our protected aquifier and there's the possibility some are even encroaching on conservation land.

5. The Conservation Commission has a clear agenda to support more land grabs.
A. The commission supports and promotes the expansion of the Conte Wildlife Refuge into Winchester on the east side of town. The plan is to take hundreds, maybe thousands, of acres of land ("by eminent domain “only if necessary”) with no economic benefit to the town. It will become more idle land on which a few people “recreate.”
B. The commission, despite Winchester zoning restrictions, has supported the proposed composting facility under the guise of it being a “green” enterprise. 
a. the Conservation Commission stood to receive a conservation easement for land on the site.
C. It’s planning a Natural Resources Inventory, not just on public property but on private land. The hidden goals are two-fold:
(1) to identify resources and land features that are “too valuable” to be left in the hands of a private landowner and must be “collectively” managed and owned (by eminent domain, if necessary); and
(2) to locate and identify “endangered species,” both plant and animal, through which the government can exercise control and/or seizure of private land.

6. The Conservation Commission tries to act with as much secrecy as possible.
Meetings are not held in the main hall; minutes have not been posted on the bulletin board or on-line (until Dec. 21, 2009—under duress?),nor provided to the town office to be kept on file with those of other boards and committees. Requests for minutes have had to wait until Conservation Commission members got around to surrendering them. When minutes are released they are so sketchy as to be of little use in knowing what the commission is really up to.

7. In its lust for more money, the Conservation Commission sought to put a communication tower in a town forest on Meeting House Hill. It failed to read the deed which contains clear restrictions against such enterprises, before it demanded a costly special town meeting to seek approval from the voters. 
Only after more legal expenditures did the potential lessor discover the deed covenant. The commission planned to ask voter approval to put a large portion of the lease money into the Conservation Fund, thus guaranteeing it a consistent source of more money, since the crash in the real estate market has meant a “loss” to its treasury due to fewer Land Use Change Taxes. Whether there will ever be a tower is in question and apparently unlikely at this time.

8. The Conservation Commission has a documented track record of abuse of power, cutting timber on town land NOT within its authority and taking the proceeds (until it was caught in the act and returned some of the money to the general fund without a clear accounting of how much timber was actually cut on such property). See (and print) all the documents at:

http://www.winchester-informed-citizen.org/pdf/TimberSale.pdf


Sunday, January 24, 2010

Our Selectmen Are Clueless, Wednesday's Meeting Shows Their Ignorance

Are these really the people you want to represent our town? Not only are they totally unsympathetic; but are absolutely clueless about their duties and the law. No wonder our town is always ending up in court. Disgusting !!

The Board of Selectman were either asleep at the wheel Wednesday night or as usual none of them have a clue what they are doing.

A family in mourning came before the board with complaints and suggestions for the Evergreen (Musterfield) Cemetery. The family had some dealings with Mr. Clifford Struthers this week that has left them in disbelief and frustrated.

They had been informed that they would not be allowed to bury their loved one until the Spring, despite the fact that it was plausible to dig a hole at this time. He told them that he couldn’t be bothered and it would only set a precedent for everyone, to be buried when the cemetery is closed in the winter. They were discouraged by this news and sought out the Trustees for help, only to discover that the Trustees are the caretaker himself, his assistant and Henry Parkhurst
( another example of illegal boards in our town ).

Not one of the Selectman publicly gave their sympathy to this family for their loss. The Chairman & Berthiame never said a word throughout the proceedings, Gardner pointed out that he had been on the board only a year and had no clue what the rules were and Sherman spent most of the time telling them that they couldn’t do anything about it for a year. Roberta was the only one to mention that they would do something about it as a board, but not in a timely manner that would help them in their situation. Sherman informed them that the board would have to reappoint someone in place of Cliff, since they had researched the rules and regulations to discover that it is illegal for the caretaker/Sexton to be a Trustee. But it was too late to place someone else on the ballot in March and they were not responsible for the cemetery. Too late? The election isn't for another 6 weeks for Godsake and the application process doesn't end until Friday afternoon at 5:00pm. plenty of time for them to appoint another insider.

It would have been so nice to hear one of them say. “This is unacceptable! We understand your concerns and will deal with it immediately. Please accept our apologies and sincere sympathy. Our town has lost a very good man and police officer.”


The Board then went on to go over three financial items in which Roberta made the motion to pay out on all of them, before adjourning into a private session.

Saturday, January 23, 2010

POSITIONS OPEN FOR TOWN OF WINCHESTER MARCH 9, 2010 ELECTION:

SELECTMAN – THREE YEAR TERM - VOTE FOR TWO


KENNETH BERTHIAUME - TERM ENDS 2010

GUSTAVE (GUS) RUTH - TERM ENDS 2010


MODERATOR TWO YEAR TERM VOTE FOR ONE


KENNETH HARVEY - TERM ENDS 2010


TOWN CLERK/TAX COLLECTOR THREE YEAR TERM VOTE FOR ONE


JAMES M. TETREAULT - TERM ENDS 2010


SUPERVISOR OF THE CHECK LIST – SIX YEAR TERM VOTE FOR ONE


CHRISTY MENARD - TERM ENDS 2010


TRUSTEE OF TRUST FUNDS – THREE YEAR TERM – VOTE FOR ONE


HENRY A.L. PARKHURST - TERM ENDS 2010


CONANT PUBLIC LIBRARY TRUSTEE – THREE YEAR TERM – VOTE FOR FOUR


MARILYN BAKER - TERM ENDS 2010

CAROL M. GLABACH -TERM ENDS 2010

PEGGY CUSHING – TERM ENDS 2010

PREVISOULY HELD BY ERIN ROBB TERM ENDS 2012


THAYER PUBLIC LIBRARY TRUSTEE – THREE YEAR TERM – VOTE FOR TWO

LINDA CROWELL - TERM ENDS 2010

PEGGY CUSHING - TERM ENDS 2010


BUDGET COMMITTEE – THREE YEAR TERM – VOTE FOR THREE


ROBERT DAVIS – TERM ENDS 2010

HARVEY SIERAN – TERM ENDS 2010

HUBERT CROWELL – TERM ENDS 2010


PLANNING BOARD – THREE YEAR TERM – VOTE FOR THREE


MARGARET SHARRA- TERM ENDS 2010


DEAN BEAMAN - TERM ENDS 2010

WILLIAM DORDOUNAS (appointed to fill until election) - TERM END 2012


MUSTERFIELD CEMETERY COMMITTEE - THREE YEAR TERM – VOTE FOR ONE


CHARLES GREGORY - TERM ENDS 2010



FILING PERIOD BEGINS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20, 2010

AND ENDS FRIDAY, JANUARY 29, 2010

FROM 3:00 UNTIL 5:00 PM FOR FILING FOR OFFICE ONLY.

NO OTHER BUSINESS WILL BE TRANSACTED DURING THAT TIME.


DELIBERATIVE SESSION, SATURDAY, JANUARY 30, 2010

AT THE TOWN HALL, WINCHESTER, NH

AT 9:00 AM - UNTIL DISCUSSIONS OF ARTICLES END.


Remember, you the voters have the final say on your tax bills, if you don't attend, you have no say.

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Another Fine Mess We're In ..


MINUTES of the
BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
Wednesday
December 23, 2009

EMERGENCY WORK SESSION

Board Members Present: Gustave Ruth, Chairman; Sherman Tedford; Roberta Fraser; and Kenneth Gardner. Also present Robert Gray, Town Administrator and Ellen Cole, Executive Assistant.  Kenneth Berthiaume is absent.  The meeting convenes at 8:05AM.

1st Order of Business: Special Town Meeting Discussion
Chairman Ruth called an emergency meeting to discuss the likelihood of holding a special town meeting by January 8, 2010 to get an additional $500,000.00-$600,000.00 appropriation for the upgrade to the wastewater treatment facility.  Specifically, a House Bill 239, under Chapter 229:14:2II was passed to allow for a shorter period of 7 days for towns to hold a special town meeting.  Winchester is an SB2 town, in which their town meeting consists of a deliberative session, and then a ballot vote.  Bob called the Town’s attorney, who agreed that Winchester would need to hold a deliberative session with a 7-day notice, and Winchester is not in a position to schedule a special town meeting by January 8, 2010 given today is December 29, 2009.  Bob will check with the DRA, to make sure, but based on this information, no one believes Winchester can meet this deadline.  The DES needs a vote by January 8, 2010 in order to process paperwork (20 days) in time.  Attorney Paul Heirtzler further suggested that the DES might be able to subsidize additional monies by 50%.  Rick Meleski is present.  

The Board also has two other options, which are: 1] to do a change order on the original construction base bid (to match the $3.4 million appropriation), or 2] put a warrant article on the March 10, 2010 ballot (which might not be part of the stimulus funding) using a different approach, such as SRF or USDA funding.  Both of these suggestions were posed in the presence of Brian Hilliard of DES, last week, which agreed these were possibilities.  Most important for the Board to remember is the need to award the construction contract so the Town can receive the ARRA funding.  It appears that at this point in time, the Board is not in favor of holding a special town meeting because they cannot meet the ARRA appropriation deadline.  Selectman Gardner stresses to the Board that is a priority to award the construction contract so this stimulus money is committed.  Once the DES approves everything, change orders can be executed.  

Selectman Tedford and the Board members work the numbers and determine a shortfall of $367,000.00 in order to accept Weston & Sampson’s bid, including contingency money set aside and postponing the I&I work.  Bob Gray makes the Board aware that T&H has been checking Weston & Sampson’s references, and there was some negative feedback, but he has not received specifics.  When Bob does, he will forward to the Board for their review.  The Board asks Rick Meleski what the wastewater plant can afford not to do.  Rick would really like to see the I&I work get done, and suggests the rotors could go on the back burner.  The two options at this time are to remove the new headworks ($405,000.00) or oxidation ditches/rotors ($253,800.00 for two).  As of this time, T&H has not negotiated with the contractor to drop these costs.  Tentatively, the Board is in favor of removing this equipment, which will ultimately need DES approval before the plans are changed.  

Chairman Ruth mentions a grant, which the Town may be eligible to receive of up to $400,000.00 for energy efficiency, which will be opened the first week of January.  Susan Olson is the contact person for this grant, and Chairman Ruth was thinking this money could be used for the oxidation ditches.  The Board would like to see Weston & Sampson’s breakdown of expenses on the oxidation ditch rotors, headworks-itself, and the piping to the headworks, which will include elimination of the appropriated engineering fees.  The Board understands that they have $2,816,000.00 to work with to make this project happen.  

2nd Order of Business: Recess
        Selectman Gardner makes a motion to take a 10-minute recess.  Selectman Tedford seconds the motion and it passes 4-0.  



3rd Order of Business: Reconvene Meeting
                The Board reconvenes at 9:10AM.  The consensus of the Board is NOT to do a special town meeting.  

                Bob called Kristine with T&H to discuss some of the Board’s brainstorming ideas.  Regarding the Weston & Sampson complaints, Brian Hilliard advised Kristine that good cause for not awarding the contract to the lowest bidder would be if the contractor walked off the job, the town terminated the contract after work commenced, or bid bond failed, otherwise the contractor would not be disqualified.  Brian further advised T&H to exercise additional due diligence.  Kristine will type this up and forward to Bob and the Board.  If the headworks and ditching is removed, that creates $658,000.00 in savings.  The Board contemplates not doing the I&I or the two ditches.  Selectman Gardner would really like to see a breakdown of these expenses to accurately determine what to eliminate from the scope of the project, and at this time is not in favor of removing the headworks.  The Board starts from the beginning to work the numbers of what has been spent and accounted for, and determines they have $658,000.00 to work with.  Kristine provides the Board with the contractor’s estimates on equipment of: Headworks-$405,000.00; and 2 oxidation ditches-$253,800.00.  If we do not do the I&I or ditches, the headworks would still be short of $113,000.00.  Rick advises the ditches create efficiency; and a new headworks would screen more solids out, instead of grinding.  Rick is still in favor of having the I&I work done, but the Board assures him that it’s a great possibility that the I&I could be done within six months time.  Selectman Tedford makes a motion to keep the headworks, postpone the I&I and two ditches, to make the base bid numbers work.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion and it passes 4-0.

                Bob will speak with Kristine about having the numbers ready by tomorrow night, and Chairman Ruth reiterates that no special town meeting will be held.  The Board has some time if they decide to put an article on the warrant, and First session is scheduled for January 30, 2010.  DES has also suggested more money will be available after March 2010.  Selectman Tedford makes a motion to not hold a special town meeting at this time.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion and it passes 4-0.

4th Order of Business:  Adjournment
        Selectman Fraser makes a motion to adjourn.  Selectman Gardner seconds the motion and it passes 4-0.  The meeting adjourns at 9:48AM.  

Respectfully recorded,
Ellen A. Cole
Executive Assistant

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Budget Committee Disappoints Again

At last night's Budget Committee's meeting, Bob Davis, acting on behalf of the town's taxpayers, made a motion not to approve the town's operating budget as written and to cut an additional 6% from the town budget. Bob cited "the overwhelming burden placed on the citizens of Winchester just to hold onto their homes with today's economy still in a downward turn" and the fact " that the selectmen made no serious cuts in spending" or that "the town and school made no cuts in personnel or hours as most towns across the state had ".

The motion failed, as once again our budget committee showed it has no backbone, nor any concern for the many citizens struggling to make ends meet. Bob Davis agreed the budget committee worked hard to get what cuts they had made; " but that there is enough waste in the town budget to cut even more "
.
Selectman Sherman Tedford, made sure he was in attendance at the meeting and in an attempt to make sure the vote went their way, made the objection that if more cuts were made, " he wondered how they were going to run the town "? Mr. Davis responded, that the town would run just fine for another 100 years or more regardless of what the committee did; but to be fair to the townspeople they should be trimming as much waste as they could. That it was their duty to hold the Selectmen fiscally responsible despite personal feelings.

Colleen Duquette, the school board representative, also in the audience, made the statement that " cuts had already been made to the budget and now you're looking to make more ".  Mr. Davis responded by saying,  he had received many emails from people asking him, to please convince the board to help lower their tax bills by cutting spending and how he had gone door to door, speaking with many people in town, to get a consensus on how people felt about high taxes and runaway spending. He told the board that most people he spoke with, thought that they were not getting a good return on their tax dollars. Mr. Davis stated it was the board's moral obligation to act on the wishes of the people and to put forth their best efforts to give them some relief; but his pleas fell on deaf ears.

Until we elect responsible people with an eye on curtailing unnecessary and foolish spending on big ticket items, like the warrant for $65,000.00 for a new truck, that as a town, we can get along without and are willing to tighten the belts of all of the department heads, making them accountable, we'll continue to see our tax rate jump year after year with no end in site.


Triple T Steps Back .. Withdraws Application at DES

We received good news yesterday from Kirsten Pulkkinen, Wetlands Specialist from the DES Wetlands Bureau, that Triple T had submitted a request to withdraw it's application to build it's recovery park in Ashuelot. This does not necessarily mean the fight is over; but it's a win for all of you who supported the efforts to keep a dump out of our town.

Below is a copy of the email response we received when we inquired about the status of their application and permits.

A request to withdraw the application from the agent on behalf of the applicant was received on 1/13/2010 and approved today. This means there will be no further action on the application and if the applicant chooses to move forward with the project in the future they will need to submit a new application as if the subject application was never filed.

Thank  you,

Kirsten
___________________________________________________
Kirsten Pulkkinen
Wetlands Specialist
DES Wetlands Bureau
29 Hazen Drive, PO Box 95
Concord, NH 03302-0095
603.271.4188
Fax: 603.271.6588


One can't help but wonder if their withdrawal was connected with the defeat of all of the proposed changes Margaret Sharra was attempting to make to our Zoning Ordinances earlier this month ? Seems like quite a coincidence for an organization that was so intent on going against our regulations in the first place and that had spent a very large sum of money for engineering reports and that had submitted an application to DES.

I guess it's just one of those situations where you go hmmm.

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Sharra and Austin are abusing their positions, powers and authority:

We received copies the following letters and a request to publish them on our blog. These letters were sent to our Board of Selectmen  and Code Enforcement Officer in hopes of reaching a resolution .. so far no answers have been received by Mr. Holmes.


To the Winchester Selectmen:
January 13, 2010

Matter of concern. I strongly urge the select board to investigate Leroy Austin and Margarette Sharra for illegal, unethical and unprofessional conduct of a community servant.
The state of NH Fire Marshal is investigating Mr. Austin and should be doing the same for Mrs. Sharra. Steven Sullivan has been doing electrical, plumbing, gas and boiler work at 136 main street for the past year and a half, all with the towns ( Leroy & Margarette ) knowledge and support. Steven is at the towns halls office every day talking with Leroy and Margarette, he then goes around town bragging how he can get away with anything, that they will not touch him, he also talks of other town issues that he should not have knowledge of. Gentlemen, this is a convicted felon, who is on parole and has done serious time in the federal pen, he plays apartment manager at 136 and harasses the tenants, he tries to evict people illegally. Why, I ask is this person allowed to sit in on private town business. He brags how when he was released from prison, he lived with Margarette for a year. Six months ago, he had an incident involving a thirteen year old girl and her mother, the police were called, he called Margarette and that was that...I am asking the select board to connect the dots here. Mrs. Sharra believes that she can run the town, I have watched her try to manipulate the planning board, Leroy and the appeals board. This town has come a long way, to allow two bad seeds to destroy the whole crop is a shame. I ask again, why are these two individuals allowed to be in collusion with Mr. Sullivan, while they all try to get my establishment shut down. A witness heard Steven and Leroy in conversation a few days ago talking about how they could close me down, this person could clearly hear the conversation from the seat next to the office door. I have invested $100.000 on that business, only to have every underhanded, back stabbing trick in the book thrown at me. I am a fighter, I will not allow anyone to get away with this type of, to be blunt, Bull Shit! You do not have to like me, but you damn sure better show me some respect when it comes to being able to make a living, without being discriminated against. Corruption, collusion, racism, discrimination, enough is enough, get rid of these thugs that continue to tarnish the image of Winchester! I hope that the truth will finally prevail, for way to long, too many underhanded, deceitful, illegal practices have gone on in back rooms. I plan on running for selectmen and the planning board, if elected, I will insist on a zero tolerance policy, regarding illegal and unethical behavior, by anyone serving the town.

I will state for the record, that for too many years there has been too much corruption and abuse in this town, the good ole boy network has made a handful of people very wealthy, while suppressing others, who should have had an equal opportunity in prospering within the town.

Lets hope that some redemption is coming...

Larry Holmes


.. and another

To Leroy Austin and the Board Of Selectmen:
January 19, 2010

Mr. Austin, when we talked before New Years, you told me that I could re-open the cafe, that, I had passed all of the violations that Toby and Steve did, that caused the building and my cafe to close. I asked you at that time for my permit of assembly, you stated that because of the holiday it could not be issued, but that I could open and you would issue it after the holiday. It is now almost four weeks later and I still do not have it in hand. I am requesting that the permit be issued to me immediately so that I may re-open, excuse me for not trusting you on your word, that I could re-open without one, but we have traveled down this road before.
On another note, two days after I was allowed to re-open, the new ( very old ) furnace that was installed, stopped working again! Steven came and worked on it and could not get it going, he then called Toby and told him that he thought it was the motor and that he could take the one off the old furnace and replace it and that it should work, Toby came down and Steve replaced the motor, the furnace will now run, but does not heat the space, it blows luke warm air all night, does not shut off the thermostat and uses up $40-$50 in fuel a night. The hot water heater, that supplies all of the hot water to the whole building is wired to my metered panel and I have been paying for every-ones hot water. I would like a written response to the above matters as soon as possible.

Regards

Larry Holmes

Monday, January 18, 2010

Warrant Article submitted by petition .. Your thoughts?

It has been said that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That's why it can be dangerous to mix employment with elected office or to allow a single person to hold too many influential offices.
The following warrant article was submitted by petition to the town clerk last week.  Read it over and share your thoughts with us!
This same article was petitioned in 2006 and at deliberative was changed to read: "Shall the town direct its future employees and officials, both elected and appointed, to avoid all published conflicts of interest as outlined in Town Polices?" At the time, the only such policies related to full-time police officers (and possibly others) having "moon-lighting" jobs that would interfere with their work. If you support this article, be sure to show up at deliberative and cast your vote against any efforts to "gut" it.
 
We the undersigned registered voters of the Town of Winchester hereby petition for the following article to be placed on the Town Warrant in March of 2010:
 
Shall the Town adopt, in accordance with RSA 31:39-a, a Town of Winchester Conflict of Interest Ordinance as follows?
 
 
TOWN OF WINCHESTER CONFLICT OF INTEREST ORDINANCE
 
1.       Town employees and Town officials must avoid conflicts of interest. Town employees and Town officials shall not participate in any matter in which they, or their spouses or any immediate family member have a private interest which may directly or indirectly affect or influence the impartiality of the performance of their duties, and are required to publicly disclose conflicts of interest of which they know or should know.
 
2. In addition to statutory incompatibility of offices as defined in RSA 669:7 and 669:8 the following combinations of employment and/or appointed and/or elected positions may not be held by a single person at the same time:
a. Any employment position in excess of 16 hours per week and any elected or ap pointed office. (Stipends for elected or appointed officials do not constitute employment.)
b. Selectman and chairman of the Planning Board.
c. Chairman of the Board of Selectmen and Chairman of the Solid Waste District Ad visory Committee.
d. Chairman of the Board of Selectmen and Chairman of the Conservation Commis sion.
 
3. Failure to abide by the provisions of this ordinance shall constitute grounds for removal from office upon petition by any person to the Cheshire County Superior Court.
 
As required by RSA 31:39-a this ordinance exempts affected officers and employees who are in office or employed at the time the ordinance is adopted for a period not to exceed one year from the date of adoption.

Thursday, January 14, 2010

“Town Meeting”

There can be a lot of confusion over how town government really works in NH. Every state is different, but you don’t have to be an “outsider” to wonder how a town meeting actually runs and why town residents, new and old, should learn all they can about how it works and why it’s so important for every eligible resident to attend both their annual town meeting and school district meeting.
The residents are the legislative body (that’s you – the registered voter!) that determines very important things like how much the operating budget for the next fiscal year is going to be; if the bond for a new school is going to pass; if your town is going to change any one of a myriad of zoning regulations, tax exemptions, or town policies. All these things have the power to impact your tax rate and your rights (or lack thereof).

On Saturday, January 30, 2010, Winchester will be holding it’s annual Deliberative Session.  We ask that everyone attend!  

Upon arrival, “residents” were asked to sign in so they could be validated as legitimate voters. Usually, the supervisor of the checklist will be in attendance with the voter registration list to verify the voting status of people as they arrive. Non-voters are allowed to attend but are not allowed to vote and can only speak with permission of the moderator and/or legislative body. Typically, they are asked to sit in the back and keep quiet.

The meeting will be called to order and the first warrant article, for the sewer plant will be read by the moderator. A motion will be made and seconded to accept the article as presented. Now this means that the article is up for debate and amendment. Our moderator requires amendments to be in writing (so as to alleviate any confusion of what the amendment really is). If an amendment is made, this becomes the topic of conversation and is what the first vote will be taken on.

Let’s say article one is “Shall the Winchester School District raise and appropriate $15,000,000 to build a new high school at 1 School Lane?” A voter is recognized to speak by the moderator and offers a written amendment to change the article to read, “Shall the Winchester School District raise and appropriate $12,500,000 to build a new high school at 1 School Lane? If the amendment is seconded, the debate will now be about the change to $12,500,000. At some point, the moderator will call for a vote on the amendment with something like “all in favor signify by saying aye” and “all opposed say nay”.

What happens if the voice vote is too close to call? The moderator, or members of the audience, may call for a show of hands. In this instance, the vote will be called for again and people assigned by the moderator or clerk will count the hands to determine the outcome of the vote.

 Debate on an amendment and/or original article can become tedious and repetitive so there will often be a request to “move the question”. At this point, the moderator may announce that debate on this article is cut off and that a vote will now be taken. Sometimes, a moderator will let those people that already had their hands up speak before the vote is called for.

There are a few tricks of the trade that are often used to attempt to control the outcome of these meetings. Since these SB2 town meetings can be really long, people get tired (or bored or frustrated) and go home. But not everyone! The remaining people can make a motion to reconsider a previously debated and voted upon article. If this motion passes, debate reopens and a new vote will be taken that may be substantially different from the first vote. Never let this happen to you! Don’t leave until the meeting is adjourned! Or make a motion to restrict each article from reconsideration once the vote is called for and declared passed or failed by the moderator.

Another tactic taken in traditional town meeting towns is to make a motion to table an article. If the motion passes, this article will be skipped over until someone else makes a later motion to remove that article from the table. If it is not removed from the table before the meeting is adjourned, there will be no action taken on the article (effectively killing the article).

Some articles are sensitive in nature and people may not be comfortable voting for them in public, so a secret ballot may be asked for. In this instance, voters come up to a table to get a sheet of paper which they are to write something like “article one – yes” to indicate that they favor the passage of article one and slip it into a box. When all eligible voters who wish to do so have voted on the article, the clerk will count the ballots and report the tally to the moderator. A secret ballot must be asked for in advance of the moderator calling for the vote and can even be written down and presented to the moderator in advance of the opening of the meeting.

Winchester is an SB2 voting system.  This means Senate Bill 2, which enabled towns to adopt this style of voting.  There are two sessions instead of one. The first session (also called the deliberative session) is where the debate and amendments take place. Then the articles, as amended by this session, are what will be presented on the actual ballot. The second session is the voting, for town officers and on all warrant articles, takes place in the voting booth, affording each individual a private yes or no vote on each article on the second Tuesday in March.

Attendance at the deliberative session in SB2 towns is just as important as it is in traditional town meeting towns. The voters at the deliberative session have been known to radically amend the warrant articles so as to make them unrecognizable. If you wish to preserve language on any warrant articles, leaving it to the voters to decide behind the curtain on Election Day, attending the deliberative session and voting down amendments is the only way.

Please attend on Saturday, January 30, 2010



Monday, January 11, 2010

Why is the Property Tax New Hampshire’s Most Hated Tax?

There are income taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, estates taxes, Social Security tax, capital gains taxes, business taxes and meal taxes, to name a few. A regular cornucopia of contributions for the common good, or so we are told.

But yet, it's the property tax that the public chooses to hate the most. Unlike other taxes that you pay just once, there is no withholding like payroll taxes or added in to the grand total, like when you purchase gas or an item at the store or go out for a meal. It is billed in two large chunks, twice per year, so everyone can actually see the sum total of their obligation. It effects a lot of people directly, every property owner.

Perhaps the most annoying thing about property taxes, the secret thing we won't even admit to ourselves, is that we know, deep down, that it is really our own fault. The property tax is the most local tax. It is directly related to our actions and our votes. With other taxes, you can blame Washington and Concord with their over spending ways; but the property tax is our own doing. We have met the enemy and he is us. It is the sum of the price tag on all of those grand ideas and needed extras that we deem worthy of local funding each year.

There is no shortage of good ideas and people willing to fund them each year, new cruisers, new firetrucks and ambulances, more police, recreational parks, infrastructure repair, etc. sound familiar? Despite hard times these things are debated and time and time again, despite common sense, they receive the blessings of  the majority.


What happens in March that makes voters vote for everything under the sun and that these same people experience the pains of their decisions when the tax bills come due ?


The property tax forces us to look at ourselves in the mirror. On some level it is very discomforting. We see the contradictions of our words, " the damn property taxes are too high ",  and our deeds, "All in favor say aye" . It is the hangover to our annual get together and like a hangover, there are remorse, regrets and promises to never, ever, go overboard again ... until next time.


Wake up people ! If you don't attend the Deliberative meeting and don't get out to vote to put a stop to all of this spending and help those of us fighting to lower our taxes .. well, you'll have no one to blame for your tears the next time you tear open your tax bills and start looking up the phone numbers of local realtors. It's up to you, you control what happens in Winchester, there's no one else to point the finger at or blame if you don't get involved and go to the polls.




Friday, January 8, 2010

Planning Board Nixes Sharra's Changes

We've received word from a very reliable source, that at the December 21st Planning Board meeting, a number of proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinances were discussed by the members and that there was much disagreement when Sharra presented her "new and revised" proposed Table Of Permitted Uses to the board. Sharra was attempting to condense 5 pages of permitted usage, most written up by an attorney; hired by the town many years ago and that has been in effect since January 14, 1971 and the rest voted in by the people for the people, down to a 1 page confusing and cockamamie listing in which she removed more than two dozen permitted uses, changed and renamed many uses and attempted to eliminate several of the District designations, like FLP and W ( floodplain and wetlands ). 

For those of you who don't have a clue as to what we are talking about, we'll try to make it less confusing for you.

Under our Zoning Ordinances, the Town is currently broken up into 9 different and separate Districts, Central Business, Residential, Rural Residential, Agricultural, Commercial, Highway Commercial, Floodplain, Wetlands and Forest Lake Overlay. 

Each District has it's own set rules and regulations, based on structure, height, area, setbacks, lot size and lot width, etc., listing permitted or non-permitted usages and basically what you can and can not do in these designated districts.

Sharra's proposed "new" Table of Usages eliminates over two dozen already permitted uses and several protected and designated districts and combines others under one category which will definitely lead to confusion and more possible lawsuits to sort it all out.

For example..


Under the Residential District designation; 
Sharra has eliminated a couple of the designations
Eliminated manufactured homes on individual lots ( unless you're a contractor, as they would be permitted in existing parks or new PRD's;  which are Planned Rural Developments aka Van Dyke )
Eliminated Conversions of dwelling structures
Eliminated the Motel or Tourist Cabins usage

Under Institutional  Uses, Sharra has;
Eliminated - Public or private day nursery school or kindergarten
Eliminated - Convalescent Home, Nursing Home and assisted living


Under Recreational Uses, Sharra has;
Eliminated - Public Park or playground, including accessory shelter and private grounds for games or sport.
She reworded the other categories and removed Commercial racetracks.


Under Public Service/Utilities, Sharra has;
Reworded and new uses changed for Rural Residential, Residential and the Forest Lake Overlay Districts
Eliminated - Radio, Television, Satellite Dishes and other telecommunication designations
Eliminated - Public Works facility, Fire Emergency and Police Station
Eliminated - Municipal parking


Under Retail Business/ Consumer Services, Sharra has;
Reworded designations and many are no longer distinguished
Eliminated - Theater, Hall or Other Place of Amusement or Assembly
Eliminated - Barber, Beauty Shop, Laundry and Dry Cleaning facility, Shoe Repair, Self-service laundry, Photographer's Studio and/or other similar establishments
Eliminated - Undertaking or Funeral Parlor
Eliminated - Printing Shop, Photo-Engraving Shop or similar
Eliminated - Boarding Kennels
Eliminated - Grocery Store


Under Office Uses, Sharra has;
Eliminated - Bank Office Building, Post Office or other similar establishments
Eliminated - Medical, Dental and other Health Care Facilities
Eliminated - Government Office Building


Under Open Air and Drive In Uses, Sharra has;
Eliminated Drive-In Theater, Stadium or Outdoor Place of Assembly


Under Wholesale Business/ Storage, Transportation, Sharra has;
Removed or reworded a number of uses
Eliminated - Wholesale Business and Storage in a roofed structure but not including wholesale storage of flammable liquids, gas, or explosives
Eliminated - Open lot storage of coal, coke,  sand or other solid fuel or similar


Under Vehicular Service and Storage, Sharra has;
Eliminated - Gasoline Service Station
Reworded and removed other designations


Under Industrial Uses, Sharra has;
Broken this category into two designations; light industry and large industry and removed the "NP" ( not permitted designation ) from the Central Business Distric
Sawmills - now allowing uses in Commercial District and Highway Commercial District categories by "special exemption" instead of the NP ( NOT-Permitted ) designation they were listed under before


Under Other Principal Uses, Sharra has;
Eliminated Accessory Uses
Eliminated - Main Uses of Land, not involving structures
     a. Eliminated - Forestry, growth & harvesting of timber
     b. Reworded to simply read "earth excavation"


This is just a partial list of the changes and designations Sharra is attempting to put into our Zoning Ordinances. This woman is dangerous and is most certainly NOT working for or in the Town's best interest and is out of control and needs to be voted out of office before she turns our town into a lawless frontier for every contractor who wants to build here.

Ken Berthaiume, (sp) the Select Board's representative, after listening to these proposals and reading them over, made a motion to DENY these changes, which was quickly seconded by board member Jack Marsh; however, Sharra flew into a rage and scolded them for making the motion because as she stated; " I have not called for a motion, so I will not accept your motion ". She then proceed to badger the board for nearly an hour, defending her proposed changes, despite their opposition. For those of you reading Sharra's minutes, you'll notice all of this was omitted and that the minutes only reflect that this discussion and changes will be continued next year.


It is obvious Sharra has another agenda at work here and will stop at nothing to get her way. Arguing with other board members, ignoring a motion on the floor and attempting to force the board to accept her changes is a sure sign this woman needs to be replaced and voted out. We can not continue to allow this kind of behavior on a public board, especially one as important as the Planning Board, nor can we allow members of the public to be treated with disrespect and indifference as she has done so many times in the past. Is it any wonder why so many lawsuits have been filed against the Planning Board since she has been in charge?


Throw in the fact, that because of her actions in the Van Dyke matter, she alone is responsible for costing taxpayers thousands of dollars in legal fees, which will increase next year unless the board, without her direction or influence follows it's own rules and regulations and starts doing things in the proper manner. 

The time has come to get rid of the problems that plague our town, voting Margaret Sharra out of office is a good start.