Around Town with Dick Patten
The 59th annual Concord Christmas Parade is scheduled to be held Saturday, Nov. 20 at 9:30 a.m. on the Concord Heights. However, there is a slight problem; the participants are doing very well, in fact Joe Joyce, meteorolgist from WBZ TV 4 Boston will be a grand marshal this year, with more participants every day signing up. The problem is no money. As of today, no donations have been received and I am extremely worried.
I know the parade sponsors from past years including Pineconia Grange, Concord Kiwanis Club, Stove Barn will continue to support it. But am waiting for checks and others such as Rowley Agency, Laconia Savings Bank, Merrimack County Savings to come in. There are not many communities having Christmas parades any more. Let's not lose ours in Concord.
Our parade has become one of the biggest in New Hampshire, if not in New England. We need to raise $4,000 for the expenses. WJYY 105.5 and the Wolf 93.6 are also announcing donors on the air.
Please contact Dick Patten at 496-2917 or James Cusano for information.
The Concord Christmas Tree Lighting Celebration is also making plans for the 24th event at the State House Plaza. Nasseau Broadcasting, WJYY 105.5 and 93.6 Wolf are helping to raise funds for the fireworks display put on by TeleStar from Keene.
I need to raise $8,000 dollars to cover expenses from fireworks, petting zoo, horse drawn wagon rides, music and more.
Please send donations to Dick Patten at 30 Pinewood Trail, Concord 03301.
Also a colored star will be placed on the big Christmas Tree during the evening for people to see. WJYY will also announce on the air all donors and their various designation. This event will be held the day after Thanksgiving, Friday, Nov. 25, at 4 p.m. More events are being planned. I need someone who can do face painting, if anyone is interested. James Cusano is assisting with the planning of the event.
I want to apologize for my absence recently, due to my being seriously sick. I have been trying to recover from bronchitis, ear infections, sore throats, etc. It was not the best time, believe me. I would like to thank Jim Cusano for all he has done.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Food, gas prices going up ...
I don't know if anyone else has noticed this but food and gas prices are going up in town.
First, in the last two weeks, gas prices at the Irving station at the corner of Penacook and North Main have jumped from $2.59 to $2.73. This is simply amazing. I offhandedly made a comment about it to the clerk and he said, "Holiday travel." And I said, "Holiday travel? Please ..."
Second, food prices at Market Basket, the cheapest place in town, have also increased. Here are a few price increases I have noticed during the last couple of weeks: First, boneless chicken breast has gone from $1.99 to $2.99 a lb. Butter has gone from $1.99 to $2.69 in recent weeks. And sour cream - a must have for nachos or tacos, at least for the wife - has gone up from $0.99 to $1.19 in a week. Bananas have also gone from $0.33 a lb. to $0.49 a lb.
There are still bargains to be had at Market Basket. But these kind of price increases during a one or two week time period is a little ridiculous.
First, in the last two weeks, gas prices at the Irving station at the corner of Penacook and North Main have jumped from $2.59 to $2.73. This is simply amazing. I offhandedly made a comment about it to the clerk and he said, "Holiday travel." And I said, "Holiday travel? Please ..."
Second, food prices at Market Basket, the cheapest place in town, have also increased. Here are a few price increases I have noticed during the last couple of weeks: First, boneless chicken breast has gone from $1.99 to $2.99 a lb. Butter has gone from $1.99 to $2.69 in recent weeks. And sour cream - a must have for nachos or tacos, at least for the wife - has gone up from $0.99 to $1.19 in a week. Bananas have also gone from $0.33 a lb. to $0.49 a lb.
There are still bargains to be had at Market Basket. But these kind of price increases during a one or two week time period is a little ridiculous.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Signs for Charter Commission candidates Cogswell, Lane, and Ellinworth emerge
Some candidates for the Charter Commission are clearly taking the race seriously and Auburn Street residents are staking out their candidates.
At-Large candidate and current School Board member Clint Cogswell has a sign on his lawn and is also supporting Ward 1,2,3,4 candidates Peter Ellinwood, owner of GreenPoma.com and Connie Boyles Lane, an attorney with Orr & Reno. Some of his neighbors are doing the same.
Since Cogswell has already told the Concord Monitor that he feels the scope of the Commission is limited, is it safe to say that Lane and Ellinwood agree? Maybe, maybe not. We'll have to wait and see.
Also running for the two Ward 1,2,3,4 seats are Robert Gile, Roy Schwieker, Kathy Connors, Jim Baer, and Matt Newland.
I know both Baer and Connors will be quality candidates on the Commission. Schweiker has also indicated from his letter in the Monitor that he understands the importance of the seat and how citizens should have control of the school board charter, without delay. Voters in those Wards should give those three serious consideration.
At-Large candidate and current School Board member Clint Cogswell has a sign on his lawn and is also supporting Ward 1,2,3,4 candidates Peter Ellinwood, owner of GreenPoma.com and Connie Boyles Lane, an attorney with Orr & Reno. Some of his neighbors are doing the same.
Since Cogswell has already told the Concord Monitor that he feels the scope of the Commission is limited, is it safe to say that Lane and Ellinwood agree? Maybe, maybe not. We'll have to wait and see.
Also running for the two Ward 1,2,3,4 seats are Robert Gile, Roy Schwieker, Kathy Connors, Jim Baer, and Matt Newland.
I know both Baer and Connors will be quality candidates on the Commission. Schweiker has also indicated from his letter in the Monitor that he understands the importance of the seat and how citizens should have control of the school board charter, without delay. Voters in those Wards should give those three serious consideration.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Monitor decides to send out a survey
Some of you may have read the newspaper story and letters in the Concord Monitor concerning the extensive Concord Taxpayer Association survey I sent out to the 27 people running for charter commission seats.
The CTA survey went out to candidates two weeks ago, asking them about their positions on potential school board charter changes. The deadline is Monday and then, after that, the candidate answers will be on the CTA site.
However, two weeks later, the Monitor has decided to send out its own survey, three weeks before the election, to gather information from the candidates.
According to sources, the survey, sent out by City Editor Hans Schulz, featured the following questions: Have you ever been elected to public office? Why do you want to be on the Charter Commission? There has been disagreement about whether the law that created the Commissions limits it to proposing a way to amend the Charter or allows it to recommend broader changes: What do you think?
So, instead of talking about some of the things the Charter Commission could do, the Monitor is using its questionnaire to filter the candidates into candidates who think they can amend the Charter and candidates who don't. I wonder if they will use this information to endorse too.
The CTA survey went out to candidates two weeks ago, asking them about their positions on potential school board charter changes. The deadline is Monday and then, after that, the candidate answers will be on the CTA site.
However, two weeks later, the Monitor has decided to send out its own survey, three weeks before the election, to gather information from the candidates.
According to sources, the survey, sent out by City Editor Hans Schulz, featured the following questions: Have you ever been elected to public office? Why do you want to be on the Charter Commission? There has been disagreement about whether the law that created the Commissions limits it to proposing a way to amend the Charter or allows it to recommend broader changes: What do you think?
So, instead of talking about some of the things the Charter Commission could do, the Monitor is using its questionnaire to filter the candidates into candidates who think they can amend the Charter and candidates who don't. I wonder if they will use this information to endorse too.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
NH AG: Concord school attorney broke lobbying law
Investigation reveals collusion between state, school officials regarding charter study commission
EXCLUSIVE: Must credit OurConcord.com
The N.H. Attorney General’s Office has found that Concord School District attorney John Teague, of Upton & Hatfield, LLP, violated the state’s lobbying statute in 2009. During the investigation, the AG’s Office also revealed information showing that state and school officials worked behind closed doors to rig the public process surrounding the creation of the charter study commission.
In a warning letter to Teague on Sept. 23, Matthew Mavrogeorge, an attorney with the AG’s civil bureau, stated that Teague violated the law on May 4, 2009, when he – along with Concord School Superintendent Dr. Chris Rath and Board President Kass Ardinger – met with state Senate President Sylvia Larsen and state Sen. Betsi DeVries, a Manchester Democrat and chairwoman of the Senate Public & Municipal Affairs Committee, to discuss HB319. This bill, which was approved by the House, would have turned over regulation of Concord’s school district charter to Concord residents.
At this meeting, which was private and held in Larsen’s office, Teague, Rath, and Ardinger discussed “concerns” they had with the bill. Rath requested that Teague attend the meeting; he was paid $270 to prepare for and attend the meeting.
According to Larsen’s statement to the AG’s Office, Teague, Rath, and Ardinger “expressed ideas” about “how to respond to HB 319 and were looking for Senate support for these suggestions.” Larsen told investigators that Teague came up with the idea for a Charter Commission to study the school district charter.
In the AG’s investigation, Teague admitted that he was asked by Larsen and Rath to “come up with a draft of what the Charter Commission might look like.” Teague gave the AG a copy of the draft that he “ultimately created for Senate President Larsen,” according to the warning letter. The AG determined that Teague’s participation in the meeting constituted lobbying, and since Teague was not registered as a lobbyist at the time, he violated the statute. The AG stated that Teague believed he did not have to register since he was “promoting alternative language as legal services on behalf of a long time client.”
The AG’s office requested Teague “make a retroactive registration with the Secretary of State regarding this lobbying activity and fulfill the public disclosure components of the lobbying registration statute.” Teague, in a letter back to Mavrogeorge, stated that on Sept. 24, he requested forms from the Secretary of State’s Office but that office was “uncertain as to what was meant by this request and was unable to provide me with any forms.”
Interestingly, violations of RSA-15 are misdemeanors, according the the statute: "CHAPTER 15: LOBBYISTS, Section 15:8 Penalty. – Whoever violates any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person. Whoever shall make and file any statement under this chapter which is to his or her knowledge false shall be deemed guilty of perjury and punished accordingly."
Instead, it appears that Mavrogeorge is saying to the school board's attorney, “Well, you engaged in criminal activity, but we're not going to charge you with that because you didn't think you were,” which is a strange thing to be saying to an experienced attorney who violates this kind of law.
An odd conclusion
The AG Office’s opinion apparently found that Teague did not violate the lobbying statute during his May 14, 2009, testimony before the state Senate Public & Municipal Affairs Committee hearing, 10 days after the secret meeting.
This is odd since, in the warning letter, Mavrogeorge determines that Teague should have been registered as a lobbyist for the May 4 private meeting and has requested that he retroactively register as such. If this is the case, before Teague testified on May 14, it seems that he should have been wearing the lobbyist tag, since he would have been registered as a lobbyist the week before.
As I have written in other posts and as is noted in the AG’s warning letter, the law was amended in September 2009, which was included in the warning letter: “’[p]ublic testimony before a legislative committee or subcommittee’ are considered communications that are ‘excluded’ from the registration imposed by RSA 15 ‘and shall not be considered in a determination of whether a person is required to register or report as a lobbyist.’”
The AG’s decision seems to say that Teague’s testimony on behalf of the school district didn’t trigger the need to register. However, his actions before his testimony triggered the registration requirement. While I’m not a lawyer, I’m puzzled how this was not a violation of the law at the time.
A rigged public process
The larger and, frankly, more frightening and repulsive point, is what a charade this entire process was. Many of us testified at the Public & Municipal Affairs Committee hearing, thinking that our ideas, thoughts, concerns, and request to control our own school charter would be taken seriously by DeVries and the other members of the committee. Every citizen who spoke or signed in that day was in favor of the legislation that Rath and Teague opposed.
However, unbeknownst to us, the fix was already in, as noted in the Mavrogeorge’s finding: Teague, requested by Larsen and Rath, with DeVries in attendance, was to draft new legislation that, later, magically appeared, squashing the bill that had already been approved on the House side.
Neither Teague nor DeVries mentioned the previous May 4 meeting during the May 14 committee hearing. Neither mentioned that there was a revised bill coming. Every single person who forwarded legislation, amendments, testimony, both written and verbal, thought they were getting a fair hearing, but they weren’t. The entire process was a sham.
What does this say about our legislative process when a handful of officials can meet behind closed doors and create a backroom deal that strips away the ability of parents, taxpayers, and Concord citizens to have the power to change their school district charter?
Conclusions
Everyone involved in this incident stole the public process away from the people and rigged everything to a predetermined conclusion. The Legislature, its legislation, committees, boards, and study commissions, are not supposed to work that way. Preservation of their flawed elementary school consolidation plan, a scheme that tears down historic buildings, warehouses our children into four schools, raises taxes, and spends more than $150 million, is what motivated all of this. If this is such a great project, there would be no need for all of these shenanigans. However, here it all is.
It is clearly time for a public hearing by the Concord school board and complete airing of all the materials, documents, emails, and information regarding all activities surrounding this incident in public. The public deserves answers to the many unanswered questions and heads should roll. And yes, there is more coming, too – I have a stack of documents with more to write – so stay tuned.
EXCLUSIVE: Must credit OurConcord.com
The N.H. Attorney General’s Office has found that Concord School District attorney John Teague, of Upton & Hatfield, LLP, violated the state’s lobbying statute in 2009. During the investigation, the AG’s Office also revealed information showing that state and school officials worked behind closed doors to rig the public process surrounding the creation of the charter study commission.
In a warning letter to Teague on Sept. 23, Matthew Mavrogeorge, an attorney with the AG’s civil bureau, stated that Teague violated the law on May 4, 2009, when he – along with Concord School Superintendent Dr. Chris Rath and Board President Kass Ardinger – met with state Senate President Sylvia Larsen and state Sen. Betsi DeVries, a Manchester Democrat and chairwoman of the Senate Public & Municipal Affairs Committee, to discuss HB319. This bill, which was approved by the House, would have turned over regulation of Concord’s school district charter to Concord residents.
At this meeting, which was private and held in Larsen’s office, Teague, Rath, and Ardinger discussed “concerns” they had with the bill. Rath requested that Teague attend the meeting; he was paid $270 to prepare for and attend the meeting.
According to Larsen’s statement to the AG’s Office, Teague, Rath, and Ardinger “expressed ideas” about “how to respond to HB 319 and were looking for Senate support for these suggestions.” Larsen told investigators that Teague came up with the idea for a Charter Commission to study the school district charter.
In the AG’s investigation, Teague admitted that he was asked by Larsen and Rath to “come up with a draft of what the Charter Commission might look like.” Teague gave the AG a copy of the draft that he “ultimately created for Senate President Larsen,” according to the warning letter. The AG determined that Teague’s participation in the meeting constituted lobbying, and since Teague was not registered as a lobbyist at the time, he violated the statute. The AG stated that Teague believed he did not have to register since he was “promoting alternative language as legal services on behalf of a long time client.”
The AG’s office requested Teague “make a retroactive registration with the Secretary of State regarding this lobbying activity and fulfill the public disclosure components of the lobbying registration statute.” Teague, in a letter back to Mavrogeorge, stated that on Sept. 24, he requested forms from the Secretary of State’s Office but that office was “uncertain as to what was meant by this request and was unable to provide me with any forms.”
Interestingly, violations of RSA-15 are misdemeanors, according the the statute: "CHAPTER 15: LOBBYISTS, Section 15:8 Penalty. – Whoever violates any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person. Whoever shall make and file any statement under this chapter which is to his or her knowledge false shall be deemed guilty of perjury and punished accordingly."
Instead, it appears that Mavrogeorge is saying to the school board's attorney, “Well, you engaged in criminal activity, but we're not going to charge you with that because you didn't think you were,” which is a strange thing to be saying to an experienced attorney who violates this kind of law.
An odd conclusion
The AG Office’s opinion apparently found that Teague did not violate the lobbying statute during his May 14, 2009, testimony before the state Senate Public & Municipal Affairs Committee hearing, 10 days after the secret meeting.
This is odd since, in the warning letter, Mavrogeorge determines that Teague should have been registered as a lobbyist for the May 4 private meeting and has requested that he retroactively register as such. If this is the case, before Teague testified on May 14, it seems that he should have been wearing the lobbyist tag, since he would have been registered as a lobbyist the week before.
As I have written in other posts and as is noted in the AG’s warning letter, the law was amended in September 2009, which was included in the warning letter: “’[p]ublic testimony before a legislative committee or subcommittee’ are considered communications that are ‘excluded’ from the registration imposed by RSA 15 ‘and shall not be considered in a determination of whether a person is required to register or report as a lobbyist.’”
The AG’s decision seems to say that Teague’s testimony on behalf of the school district didn’t trigger the need to register. However, his actions before his testimony triggered the registration requirement. While I’m not a lawyer, I’m puzzled how this was not a violation of the law at the time.
A rigged public process
The larger and, frankly, more frightening and repulsive point, is what a charade this entire process was. Many of us testified at the Public & Municipal Affairs Committee hearing, thinking that our ideas, thoughts, concerns, and request to control our own school charter would be taken seriously by DeVries and the other members of the committee. Every citizen who spoke or signed in that day was in favor of the legislation that Rath and Teague opposed.
However, unbeknownst to us, the fix was already in, as noted in the Mavrogeorge’s finding: Teague, requested by Larsen and Rath, with DeVries in attendance, was to draft new legislation that, later, magically appeared, squashing the bill that had already been approved on the House side.
Neither Teague nor DeVries mentioned the previous May 4 meeting during the May 14 committee hearing. Neither mentioned that there was a revised bill coming. Every single person who forwarded legislation, amendments, testimony, both written and verbal, thought they were getting a fair hearing, but they weren’t. The entire process was a sham.
What does this say about our legislative process when a handful of officials can meet behind closed doors and create a backroom deal that strips away the ability of parents, taxpayers, and Concord citizens to have the power to change their school district charter?
Conclusions
Everyone involved in this incident stole the public process away from the people and rigged everything to a predetermined conclusion. The Legislature, its legislation, committees, boards, and study commissions, are not supposed to work that way. Preservation of their flawed elementary school consolidation plan, a scheme that tears down historic buildings, warehouses our children into four schools, raises taxes, and spends more than $150 million, is what motivated all of this. If this is such a great project, there would be no need for all of these shenanigans. However, here it all is.
It is clearly time for a public hearing by the Concord school board and complete airing of all the materials, documents, emails, and information regarding all activities surrounding this incident in public. The public deserves answers to the many unanswered questions and heads should roll. And yes, there is more coming, too – I have a stack of documents with more to write – so stay tuned.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
EXCLUSIVE: AG reportedly investigating school attorney
The state attorney general is reportedly investigating Concord School District Attorney John Teague and whether he broke the law while not identifying himself as a lobbyist during testimony before the Legislature and other potential conflicts regarding the charter commission process, OurConcord.com has learned.
The investigation arose due to late 2008 and 2009 testimony concerning a number of bills in the Legislature which would change the school district's charter. Since the Legislature controls Concord's school district charter, the only way residents or officials can change the charter is to propose bills, get them approved by both houses, and signed by the governor.
Frustrated by the lack of accountability with the current school board, especially regarding the multimillion elementary school consolidation process and plan, a number of residents proposed bills in 2008. One bill included a proposal to force any district bonding more than $5 million to go before Concord voters for approval. Another proposed changing the way school board members were elected.
During those hearings, Teague testified against bills but never identified himself as a lobbyist, something that the law required at the time. Before the law was recently changed, lobbyists were required to wear an orange ID badge, so that both legislators and citizens knew that they were lobbying for a paid interest. Teague never wore the badge and never identified himself as a lobbyist (I know, I was there, and wrote previously about the issue here: ["Five alternative reasons why people don't attend school board budget hearings"]). Teague even argued that there was nothing wrong with the current system and that the Legislature had been doing a fine job of oversight of Concord's school board charter, much to the chagrin and giggles of everyone with a brain at the hearing.
But it potentially goes further, because Teague didn't stop there.
There was a move afoot by the House to wash their hands of all of this and give the charter back to the citizens of Concord. The bill was approved easily and then was sent to the Senate.
But in the Senate, something strange happened: At Teague's urging, state senators (who don't live in Concord, BTW) rewrote the bill and instead of giving us all the ability to change our charter, created a study commission to look at the issue.
The study commission spent months analyzing the issue with Teague repeatedly testifying and offering up more delays to the process. Instead of returning the charter to the citizens, he argued for an elected charter commission. The commission, he proposed, would be elected in November 2010 and would study the issues during the year and then return a proposal to the voters in November 2011. Shockingly, or not so, since the study commission was stacked with school supporters (["Well folks, the fix was in ..."]), by a 7-6 vote, this is what the commission agreed to do.
This delayed the process of gaining our rights back - rights that nearly everyone in the Granite State and virtually everyone in the nation has - even longer. It also put in limbo legislative initiatives forwarded by residents who were playing by the rules.
According to a source, the AG Office's has been talking to everyone involved in the charter commission study committee process as well as elected officials in Concord. Some have lawyered up, potentially worrying about whatever influence Teague may have wielded over the process.
This story is potentially huge ... it shows you everything that is wrong with some of our current elected officials, whether on the state or local level. It shows you exactly what is wrong with Concord, where a handful of connected people and one attorney can keep people from getting their rights back. And this is all breaking right on the eve of the election of the charter commission that could potentially vote to keep things as they are, with the Legislature controlling our school district's charter. If this happens, it means we have gotten nowhere ... for years. All because some attorney was able to weasel his way into the hearts and minds of people who should know better, while breaking the law.
More later ...
The investigation arose due to late 2008 and 2009 testimony concerning a number of bills in the Legislature which would change the school district's charter. Since the Legislature controls Concord's school district charter, the only way residents or officials can change the charter is to propose bills, get them approved by both houses, and signed by the governor.
Frustrated by the lack of accountability with the current school board, especially regarding the multimillion elementary school consolidation process and plan, a number of residents proposed bills in 2008. One bill included a proposal to force any district bonding more than $5 million to go before Concord voters for approval. Another proposed changing the way school board members were elected.
During those hearings, Teague testified against bills but never identified himself as a lobbyist, something that the law required at the time. Before the law was recently changed, lobbyists were required to wear an orange ID badge, so that both legislators and citizens knew that they were lobbying for a paid interest. Teague never wore the badge and never identified himself as a lobbyist (I know, I was there, and wrote previously about the issue here: ["Five alternative reasons why people don't attend school board budget hearings"]). Teague even argued that there was nothing wrong with the current system and that the Legislature had been doing a fine job of oversight of Concord's school board charter, much to the chagrin and giggles of everyone with a brain at the hearing.
But it potentially goes further, because Teague didn't stop there.
There was a move afoot by the House to wash their hands of all of this and give the charter back to the citizens of Concord. The bill was approved easily and then was sent to the Senate.
But in the Senate, something strange happened: At Teague's urging, state senators (who don't live in Concord, BTW) rewrote the bill and instead of giving us all the ability to change our charter, created a study commission to look at the issue.
The study commission spent months analyzing the issue with Teague repeatedly testifying and offering up more delays to the process. Instead of returning the charter to the citizens, he argued for an elected charter commission. The commission, he proposed, would be elected in November 2010 and would study the issues during the year and then return a proposal to the voters in November 2011. Shockingly, or not so, since the study commission was stacked with school supporters (["Well folks, the fix was in ..."]), by a 7-6 vote, this is what the commission agreed to do.
This delayed the process of gaining our rights back - rights that nearly everyone in the Granite State and virtually everyone in the nation has - even longer. It also put in limbo legislative initiatives forwarded by residents who were playing by the rules.
According to a source, the AG Office's has been talking to everyone involved in the charter commission study committee process as well as elected officials in Concord. Some have lawyered up, potentially worrying about whatever influence Teague may have wielded over the process.
This story is potentially huge ... it shows you everything that is wrong with some of our current elected officials, whether on the state or local level. It shows you exactly what is wrong with Concord, where a handful of connected people and one attorney can keep people from getting their rights back. And this is all breaking right on the eve of the election of the charter commission that could potentially vote to keep things as they are, with the Legislature controlling our school district's charter. If this happens, it means we have gotten nowhere ... for years. All because some attorney was able to weasel his way into the hearts and minds of people who should know better, while breaking the law.
More later ...
Monday, September 20, 2010
School board candidates escape challenge
Only three candidates have come forward to run for school board, meaning that none will be challenged in November and they will win by default. Incumbents Jennifer Patterson and Bill Glahn will return to the school board. Former state Rep. and City Councilor Tara Reardon is also running.
As someone noted to me today, isn't it interesting that 27 people (!) have come forward to run for nine seats on the Charter Commission, which could potential change improve the charter and empower parents and taxpayers in Concord, and no one is running for the school board.
It just goes to show us all that people in Concord want to be on the board that will actually create change and make things better - and not on the board filled with many people who don't seem to have a care in the world about what other people think.
As someone noted to me today, isn't it interesting that 27 people (!) have come forward to run for nine seats on the Charter Commission, which could potential change improve the charter and empower parents and taxpayers in Concord, and no one is running for the school board.
It just goes to show us all that people in Concord want to be on the board that will actually create change and make things better - and not on the board filled with many people who don't seem to have a care in the world about what other people think.
Correction: 27 people run for 9 seats on Charter Commission
Correction ... 27 people are running ... my source missed one. Here is the final list of candidates running for the Charter Commission. I can't believe that 27 different people filed to run. This is just amazing:
City-wide/At-Large (3 seats): John Andrews, current school board member Laura Bonk, former school board member Barbara Brown, current school board member Clint Cogswell, Phil Donovan, a member of the Concord Heritage Commission, former Mayor Mike Donovan, former school board member Betty Hoadley, attorney Charlie Russell, and former school board member Rod Teney.
Ward 1, 2, 3, 4 (2 seats): Former at-Large City Council candidate Jim Baer, preservation activist Kathy Conners, Peter Ellinwood, owner of GreenPoma.com, Robert Gile, husband of state Rep. Mary Stuart Gile, Connie Boyles Lane, an attorney with Orr & Reno, Matt Newland, a former candidate for an at-large Concord City Council seat, and local commentator and frequent city board meeting attendee Roy Schweiker.
Ward 5, 6, 7 (2 seats): Current Ward 6 City Councilor Allen Bennett, former state Rep. Jessie Osborne, James Leon, former school board member and critic John Stohrer, William Ardinger, husband of School Board President Kass Ardinger, and Ken Wiswell, a principal in the Gilford school system.
Wards 8, 9, 10 (2 seats): Former judge and U.S. Rep. Chuck Douglas, former school board member Gerald Eaton, former school board member Martin Honigberg, Robert Munson, and Rob Norton.
City-wide/At-Large (3 seats): John Andrews, current school board member Laura Bonk, former school board member Barbara Brown, current school board member Clint Cogswell, Phil Donovan, a member of the Concord Heritage Commission, former Mayor Mike Donovan, former school board member Betty Hoadley, attorney Charlie Russell, and former school board member Rod Teney.
Ward 1, 2, 3, 4 (2 seats): Former at-Large City Council candidate Jim Baer, preservation activist Kathy Conners, Peter Ellinwood, owner of GreenPoma.com, Robert Gile, husband of state Rep. Mary Stuart Gile, Connie Boyles Lane, an attorney with Orr & Reno, Matt Newland, a former candidate for an at-large Concord City Council seat, and local commentator and frequent city board meeting attendee Roy Schweiker.
Ward 5, 6, 7 (2 seats): Current Ward 6 City Councilor Allen Bennett, former state Rep. Jessie Osborne, James Leon, former school board member and critic John Stohrer, William Ardinger, husband of School Board President Kass Ardinger, and Ken Wiswell, a principal in the Gilford school system.
Wards 8, 9, 10 (2 seats): Former judge and U.S. Rep. Chuck Douglas, former school board member Gerald Eaton, former school board member Martin Honigberg, Robert Munson, and Rob Norton.
Patterson to run for re-election
Current School Board member Jennifer Patterson, first elected in 2007, has opted to run for another term.
She, along with incumbent Bill Glahn and former state Rep. Tara Reardon have taken out papers to run for school board in Concord.
There are three seats with three-year terms up in November. The deadline to sign-up to run is today.
She, along with incumbent Bill Glahn and former state Rep. Tara Reardon have taken out papers to run for school board in Concord.
There are three seats with three-year terms up in November. The deadline to sign-up to run is today.
More charter commission candidates come forward ...
As of 2:30 p.m. this afternoon, here's the latest candidates running for charter commission:
City-wide (3 seats): John Andrews, former school board member Barbara Brown, current school board member Clint Cogswell, Phil Donovan, former Mayor Mike Donovan, attorney Charlie Russell, and former school board member Rod Teney.
Ward 1, 2, 3, 4 (2 seats): Former at-Large City Council candidate Jim Baer, local commentator and frequent city board meeting attendee Roy Schweiker, Matt Newland, a former candidate for an at-large Concord City Council seat, and Robert Gile, husband of state Rep. Mary Stuart Gile.
Ward 5, 6, 7 (2 seats): Current Ward 6 City Councilor Allen Bennett, former state Rep. Jessie Osborne, James Leon, former school board member and critic John Stohrer, William Ardinger, husband of School Board President Kass Ardinger, and Ken Wiswell, a principal in the Gilford school system.
Wards 8, 9, 10 (2 seats): Former school board member Gerald Eaton, former school board member Martin Honigberg, Robert Munson, and Rob Norton.
This, however, is not a final list yet. When the final list is put together, I'll post some thoughts on the matter.
City-wide (3 seats): John Andrews, former school board member Barbara Brown, current school board member Clint Cogswell, Phil Donovan, former Mayor Mike Donovan, attorney Charlie Russell, and former school board member Rod Teney.
Ward 1, 2, 3, 4 (2 seats): Former at-Large City Council candidate Jim Baer, local commentator and frequent city board meeting attendee Roy Schweiker, Matt Newland, a former candidate for an at-large Concord City Council seat, and Robert Gile, husband of state Rep. Mary Stuart Gile.
Ward 5, 6, 7 (2 seats): Current Ward 6 City Councilor Allen Bennett, former state Rep. Jessie Osborne, James Leon, former school board member and critic John Stohrer, William Ardinger, husband of School Board President Kass Ardinger, and Ken Wiswell, a principal in the Gilford school system.
Wards 8, 9, 10 (2 seats): Former school board member Gerald Eaton, former school board member Martin Honigberg, Robert Munson, and Rob Norton.
This, however, is not a final list yet. When the final list is put together, I'll post some thoughts on the matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
