Who is in Charge at the Town Offices?

The March 26th Seacoastonline and March 27th Exeter NewsLetter articles regarding Darren Winham, the Economic Development Director, performing consulting work for the Town of Waterbury, Vermont are most interesting.  Once again, the question is; who is in charge at the Town offices.  It must not be Russ Dean, the Town Manager.  Mr. Dean described the issue as Mr. Winham simply wrapping up a couple loose ends with his former employer and states “we take full responsibility.”   Who is we?  Why doesn’t Mr. Dean simply state that Mr. Winham has a business that he runs on the side.   

The bigger question is related to Mr. Dean’s performance as Town Manager and in particular his oversight of Mr. Winham’s activities.  First Mr. Dean is quoted in Seacoastonline as stating “It’s my recollection that he told us he had some work to finish up.” He is contradicted by Mr. Winham in the same article when he describes his company, DarWin Dynamic Solutions.   Has Mr. Dean provided the adequate oversight of the Economic Development Director’s work for the Town of Exeter?  Is Mr. Dean able to state that Mr. Winham’s work for other municipalities did not have an adverse affect upon his work for the Town of Exeter?  Does Mr. Dean clearly understand Mr. Winham’s work activities since he was placed on the payroll at an annual cost of approximately $120,000 per year?

The failure of Article 8 in the recent Town Meeting implies that Mr. Dean had a lack of understanding and was not in alignment with Mr. Winham’s activities.   Was Article 8 adequately developed and did it address the underlying problems in Exeter’s regulations?   How could such an important Article fail?  Why was the Epping Road TIF allowed to move forward if Mr. Dean was holding negotiations with Stratham to give away the water and sewer services that Exeter taxpayers are being asked to fund on Epping Road?

Who is in charge at the Town offices? One only needs to reflect upon Bill Clinton’s deposition to understand that it depends upon the definition of “in charge.”

More of the same from Chartrand

Someone brought to our attention another case of Dan Chartrand's distrust of the Exeter voters. It seems that at the last Economic Development Commission meeting, an EEDC member suggested that the EDC meet in non-public session to work on the Master Plan. Instead of pointing out that this is not a permitted use of a non-public session, Danny made a motion to "not publicize the March meeting."
It wasn't clear what he meant by "not publicize" the meeting. Since upcoming EDC meetings are seldom the subject of articles on the front page of the Exeter Newsletter, I assume he meant that Russ Dean should not post a public notice for the March meeting.  I hope that isn't what he meant, because that would be advocating a clear and blatant violation of the state's Right-to-Know law. That would be grounds for calling for his resignation.
Interestingly, according to the town's web site, the March EDC meeting has been "cancelled" (or has it?)
It's bad enough that Chartrand has so little respect for the voters that he wants to conduct secret meetings. (He has a documented history of having secret meetings with Board members.) Now he is making public statements that he wants to conduct the town's business behind locked doors.
Everyone should remember this when they go to vote next Tuesday.  Danny boy may not have an official opponent, but he is not unopposed.

Disdain for the Citizens

     The Board of Selectmen and School District 16 have reached a new low with their demonstration of disdain for the citizens.  They are supporting House Bill (HB) 646, which would allow government agencies to charge for the time it takes to fulfill right-to-know requests that are submitted pursuant to RSA 91A.  The RSA makes it clear that the citizens have a right to information that is not being withheld because it meets confidentiality standards.   RSA 91A provides citizens with easy and affordable access to information held by local and state governments and is a key tool in the protection of citizens from the government.  As the RSA states in its preamble, “Openness in the conduct of public business is essential to a democratic society."
     HB 646 is supported by the New Hampshire Municipal Association and the state’s School Boards Association and the Exeter Board of Selectmen.  Why do these organizations support HB 646 and oppose the citizens right to have access to records?   The answer is simple, they don’t want anyone to oversee their actions and they don’t want to be accountable to the citizens.  The concept of cost recovery is a scheme to make access to public records so expensive that the average citizen will not be able to afford to participate in the process. Once this is achieved, the pesky citizens will go away and they will be able to conduct their business without interference and oversight.  It is important to remind the individuals in these organizations that they are employees of the citizens, and not nobility, and they should be working to help the citizens and not shut them out of the process.

     .

I thought we were supposed to have 5 selectmen?
   
    A funny thing happened last March, we only elected one selectperson, Anne Surman. In place of the fifth selectperson, we got a rubber stamp.
    Have you ever watched the Selectmen's meetings on channel 22? That void sitting next to Chartrand is an inanimate object that does no homework and does not utter an independent, coherent thought.
    Sometimes it seems as though Chartrand has learned ventriloquism and is speaking through the mannequin sitting next to him. Other times, you just hear the sound a rubber stamp makes agreeing with Chartrand.
    It is a shame that this is what the monolith Democrat party has resorted to - elect someone who will just agree with everything their mouthpiece says, regardless of how bad a candidate she might be.
   Have we given over the future of the town to those who don't trust voters and just want to have the Town Manager run the town?  Is Exeter lost?

Left hand, right hand?

 

    Does the left hand know what the right hand is doing?

    We are shooting ourselves in the foot.

    There are so many clichés that seem to apply to our town government.  We hired an Economic Development Director at a cost of about $125,000 per year to bring new or expanded commercial development to town.  The goal is to add non-residential development to help reduce the impact of ever-increasing property taxes.
    The Economic Development Director has been working for months on the Epping Road TIF District, and we are on the verge of voting on it. The expectation is that, by running water and sewer along Epping Road, developers will purchase the commercial property along the road and build multi-million dollar buildings, bringing in scads of tax dollars.
    But wait, while all this is happening, our Town Manager has been negotiating a water supply deal with Stratham that will undermine all the work on the TIF.  How is that, you ask?
    The only impediment to build-out of Stratham’s “Gateway District” is the lack of water and sewer. With Exeter’s water, Gateway District property owners will not be hampered by the septic system setback requirements.  Our water will also supply much needed fire protection water, the single largest impediment to the Market Basket expansion.
     Since Stratham’s property tax rate is less than half of Exeter’s, why would a developer build along Epping Road when they can build in Stratham, have all the water they need and pay significantly less taxes?
     For example, why do you think that Hampton Inn and Fairfield Inn built their motels in Exeter when they could have built them a mile up the road in Stratham and paid far less in taxes? It is because Exeter had what they desperately needed: water and sewer.  If Stratham had even just the water supply, those motels would be sitting north of our town line.
    The proposed $2 million that Stratham would pay to “buy into” our water system is nothing compared to what Exeter will lose in property taxes if developers change their minds about Epping Road and build in Stratham.
    Do our town officials even talk to each other?

    More Budget Games?

     Because there is a lack of guidance on exactly how to prepare the Default Budget, we have long seen our Town Administration play games with the Default Budget to ensure that their Proposed Budget passes. Now, it seems that the SAU Administration is playing similar games with the Cooperative Default Budget.

    The School Board decided to cut Alternative Education from the Budget, reducing the Proposed Budget by about $400,000.  However, they left the $400,000 in the Default Budget.  What gives?

    The Default Budget law says that if a program or line item is discontinued, it should be dropped from the Default Budget just as it is in the Proposed Budget. The SAU Administration didn't do that in this case. As a result, the Default Budget is now $240,000 more than the Proposed Budget.  Was this an attempt to make the Default Budget larger than the Proposed Budget in order to get their Budget passed?

    If you are concerned about these types of games that force us into ever increasing taxes, come to the Cooperative School Deliberative Session on Thursday, February 5, at 7:00pm in the High School.

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who's really doing the posturing?
   
    While watching the Selectmen's Budget Hearing last night, I was appalled by Chartrand's insult of former Selectman Ferraro, accusing Ferraro of "posturing." 
    This coming from the selectman who didn't want to offend either side in the dam removal debate, so he said he "needed more time," even though he and the other Board members had had more than six months to study the report; this coming from the selectman who tried to curry favor from his base by posturing at every hearing on the Gun Club; this coming from the selectman who is the inspiration behind the new drinking game in town: every time Chartrand thanks the Town Manager or Town staff, you have to take a drink. (Consequently, there are a lot of inebriated voters sitting at home after every selectmen's meeting.)
    How long will it take for the voters to wake up to this charade? Chartrand has made it known that he will seek re-election. He has also expressed his distrust for the voters by wanting to take away their right to vote on the Town's budget, on warrant articles and on zoning changes. He is part of the small group of people that know what's best for the rest of us and we should just shut up and stay home.
    Do the majority of voters agree with him?