Portsmouth Town Council Seeks Report on Elmhurst By 2013
The Portsmouth Town Council held a meeting Monday night.
The Portsmouth Town Council met Monday night to discuss various issues. Featured above is a report of the actions taken during the meeting.
[Updated at 11:15 p.m.]
After an hour of debate Monday night, the council voted to support a statement drafted by President Joe Robicheau.
The vote was 4-3 with Keith Hamilton, Liz Pedro and Michael Buddemeyer opposed.
The statement reads as follows:
The Portsmouth Town Council embraces the concept presented by the ALT to the Elmhurst Reuse Committee and, subject to a satisfactory due diligence outcome, that the council endorses the placement of a referendum question on a ballot for an election to be held no later than 4/30/2013; and directs the town administrator to complete the RFP process and begin negotiations with the ALT on language for a conservation easement on the Glen property so-called; and that council task a committee to work with the AIPC staff to evaluate the chapel and so-called out zones potential and report back to the council by 1/31/13.
However, despite the support for a ballot question, the council would need to vote by Aug. 3 to place a referendum question on the November ballot. The support of the statement above postpones action on this issue.
The council also made the following late night actions:
- Took no actions on complaints made on a Stagecoach Road residence. A neighbor complained of mice coming from the property.
- Tabled a discussion and possible vote to eliminate personnel resolution 2007-04-23 B. President Robicheau asked the council to consider creating a Personnel Panel, which would interview candidates for town jobs (except police officers) and conduct hiring instead of the council.
- Voted 7-0 to renew the Glen Manor House managers' contract.
- Approved a request to issue a RFP for security services at the Portsmouth Transfer Station.
Islander One
11:14 am on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
I am just wondering if anyone else is feed up with the Republican members of the Portsmouth Town Councils not allowing discussion or comments from the people in the audience. In particular there is absolutly no discussion about important things such as the School Committe appointment. It is amazing how they can just 'channel' each others thoughts without speaking. You might think that would make for short meetings however they spend literally hours on nonsense. The next appointment was to the Design Reveiw Board and it had just1 appilicant. Don't you think that positon should have been re advertized in that case?
East side
11:53 am on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
that's because the town council is "in bed" with the ALT. forget a vote, the ALT and town is already crafting a deal for the Glen's land. Worse, there was a committee formed to come up with a future plan for the old school. Did this ever make it to the public?
J. Lane McMahon
1:19 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
The Elmhurst Re-use commitee did make a report to the TC, and if you go to youtube a look at Portsmouth this Week you can watch Steve Kirkpatrick of the commitee explain their view. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22ZmKNA9KiA. That being said, the issue of the Glen and the AILT is a matter for the people of the town. This needs to be addressed with a referendum, not by the TC. Before April.
If we take the 1M from the AILT we would be giving up some control of the future of the property. But at this point, the TC is not letting us have control of it either. Selling the development rights would be forever, I do not think we should be locking in future generations. As Councilor Seveney said in his PTW taping, we already have a conservation plan in place, it's called the will of the people.
Mike P.
9:52 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
@J. Lane McMahon - sounds like they need to put more people on the fire department. Overtime = people on in the station = calls for help answered. Which calls go unanswered so we can save a buck? Maybe somebody you care about is left waiting.
If there is person qualified in that department to be chief there is no reason to go outside. It crushes morale and removes incentive for employees to better themselves...more harm then good, I'd say.
J. Lane McMahon
8:42 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
By the way East side, the Elmhurst Re-use report has been on the town website for some time. I believe it was put up within a day or two of it being presented to the town council.
Mike P.
6:15 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
John Klimm, "We are bleeding money from the fire department"; what a stupid comment. Give facts! How much? Compared to who? These are comments are unprofessional. Beginning to understand why Barnstable paid 250K+ to get rid of him.
If this is the only consideration for hiring a Chief, we are all in trouble.
How much more damage will this council do before November...Any guess?
East side
6:48 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Mr. Klimm no longer writes articles on Patch. doesn't surprise me, especially when I asked about his 10% increase in wages. This was pushed to the side and said it was for a secretary or admin support. So, the admin support makes around 13K a yea? Try again, try again.
J. Lane McMahon
9:32 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
It's pretty obvious. FY 2011 Overtime budgeted $319300....Actual expenditure $642883. Double....Yeah, I'd call that bleeding.
J. Lane McMahon
9:33 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
And on the police side, they came in $6000 BELOW budget.
getreal
7:58 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Shame on you Mr. Klimm for doing the bidding of the PCC ! This town has never had to go out of town or hire a company to find them a chief.....You have sent a strong message back to this great group of public servants saying you and the PCCC 4 think we need someone from the outside.....November can not come fast enough ! I just hope the new council and fix what YOU and the PCCC 4 have done to this town.
J. Lane McMahon
9:35 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
I have to ask. What is wrong with bringing in someone from the outside once in a while? A fresh perspective might actually be a good thing.
A really concerned citizen
9:31 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Oh Mr Klimm, now you have shown your true colors, really, a chief from the outside, where are we NYC ? What a morale killer. Don't expect any support from anyone in this town, and don't be surprised by the "new" council in November, not supporting you, you will get to see first hand what Mr. Driscoll had to deal with for many years. Better update that resume :)
J. Lane McMahon
9:40 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
I support him. And I'm a Democrat. To be honest, I don't support anything the "4" have done. But I don't get your thinking. We brought in a fiscally conservative town Administrator to get us back on the path. Time and time again we have raided our reserve fund and it has put us road to financial ruin. A fresh set of eyes, and owing no debts to locals might actually be a good thing.
J. Lane McMahon
1:10 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
@Mike P.
Come on. That's just try to play on emotions. No calls went unanswered and no one is suggesting that.
Please try to remember, Chief Lynch submitted a budget for FY 2011, then overspent his overtime budget by more than $300000. You don't see a problem with that?
Anyone qualified in the dept has the same opportunity at getting the job as an outsider. Portsmouth has a long history of hiring from within for the fire dept. As a matter of fact, every chief has been promoted from within. Maybe changing the status quo would do us some good since we have never had a fresh set of eyes.
Mike P.
5:29 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
And so is throwing a number out there without explaining the story behind it is not playing on emotions? Where there any people out injured? Deployed in the military? Has the council just not hired anybody new in a while?
A couple of weeks back I saw Tiverton ambulance parked in front of a house on my street; I would consider that a missed call...thank you Tiverton Fire Department and taxpayers.
Are you naive enough to think the Chief's budget was what he needed / asked for or that this year's budget is any better /realistic?
Agreed, there is benefit to going outside but there is negative too. The negative may outweigh the positive.
You are obviously well informed, I think your inability to see the whole picture may be by choice.
old timer
9:52 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
I also take offense to Mr. Klimm's comments. Saying we are bleeding money from the fire dept. and we need a new chief to fix it implies money is being spent in a wasteful manner, on this chief's watch. This council campaigned on a new Fire Dept contract negotiated by Jeff Plumb, et. al. It saved money on health care but changed the staffing requirements. So there goes your OT. At the Jan. 23 meeting the Council hired an outside firm (again) to "assess the staffing levels at the fire dept.". Where is the report? Is it finished ? If it is finished, why isn't it public? Does it not fit in with the Council's and Administrator's contention that there is something wrong with how the PFD manages its budget? Are we understaffed, causing excessive overtime? Are we dangerously understaffed causing risk to the public? Where is the transparency promised by this group? I have no issue with hiring a chief from outside but why do we need to hire an outside firm (again) to conduct the hiring process? Why can't the Administrator and Finance Director do it? Other towns do. We may need to go outside the dept. because we have also lost 2 deputy chiefs recently. If the chief hadn't been chased out perhaps his present deputy could have acquired more seasoning and made an in house hire more likely. The talent drain under the PCC has been drastic, Driscoll, Lusi, Town Planner, Asst. Superintendent, 2 Vice Principals, Chief and 2 PFD deputies, School Dept. Finance Director. Who's next?
cheeeze
10:31 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Well said, Old Timer. Maybe Sandy could ask the "powers that be" if the manpower study has come back. I too would like to see the results.
getreal
5:12 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
I asked Sandy this same question about 2 weeks ago and I am still waiting for a response.......
getreal
5:20 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
FYI, this study did come back and it came back not with the results the PCCC 5 ( I now add Klimm) wanted so thats why it has not been released .....You payed for it and the ( Open Goverment) council is keeping it under raps..
East side
5:58 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
So why do we have all of these committees? They provide no value even when tasked to do something and have results. Would someone from this committee please stand up and provide your results to the taxpayers of this town.
This is another example of why Mr. Kimm no longer writes on this post. Because the truth comes out.
J. Lane McMahon
8:38 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
The Fire Dept study hasn't even been presented to the TC yet.
And this study was not conducted by any town body, it was done by an outside auditing firm.
Mike P.
8:53 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Something tells me it never will be
Cape Crusader
6:50 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
They need to hire the Chief from within the Dept. Instead of complaining about the Fab 5 , November is right aorund the corner. We need to vote them out and make sure we know who is running... What good is bashing them ? Nothing they are used to it now and will keep running the town into the ground. Time for a big change. I hate to admit it but John Mcmahon is correct on alot of the issues. Remember also Mr. Klimm walked into this mess. It will take time to correct. IF You East side or anyone else thinks they can do a better job, PLEASE step up or volunteer your time.
Mike P.
6:51 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Sandy,
Maybe a member of the press can get access to the study. We paid for it, we should see the public information.
Old Timer, thanks for the post, that was a real eye opener. Would love to see a story about the exodus of employees.
And while we're at it, a story about why klimm got fired from Barnstable.
A really concerned citizen
7:12 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
I agree, there is lots of talk about transparency, yet the report regarding staffing at the Fire Dept, paid for with our tax dollars has not been shared with the taxpayers. Let's be transparent folks, if the results favored the PCC members of the council you know it would be available. The Fire Station is very understaffed and peoples lives in this community are at risk as a result. Overtime was spent for minimum staffing requirements, that's minimum not any more or less, minimum, anybody else frightened by this ? I am.
old timer
8:40 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
@east side - please, this has nothing to do with volunteer comittees. It was a professional consulting firm hired by the town to conduct a study and produce a report. Who knows, we may not all agree with whatever conclusions are drawn by the consultants but with PFD coming in for such criticism we should be able to see the report and judge for ourselves.
The Conductor
11:41 am on Thursday, June 14, 2012
The overtime budget issue is not new or mysterious; this has been an ongoing issue for more than a year.
http://portsmouth.patch.com/articles/town-to-replace-firefighters-with-civilian-dispatchers
http://portsmouth.patch.com/articles/fire-department-union-supports-switch-to-civilian-dispatchers
http://portsmouth.patch.com/articles/council-tables-plan-to-replace-firefighters-with-civilian-dispatchers
http://portsmouth.patch.com/articles/portsmouth-council-looks-at-combining-police-fire-dispatch-services
The council even met with the union at a public Monday night council meeting to investigate the issue. Which only highlighted the PCC lead councils in ability to act on real issues.
http://portsmouth.patch.com/articles/portsmouth-town-council-questions-fire-department-s-overtime-spending
http://portsmouth.patch.com/articles/town-advertises-for-civilian-dispatchers
This council has had a viable option sitting in their lap for over a year and instead they have done nothing with it. $90,000 of savings is just that, here we are a year later with $0 of savings and still no closer to a solution to the problem. The councils solutions is to spend an additional $15,000+ which puts the total loss over $100,000. The council has been totally irresponsible on this issue.