BOW – Eleven Bow High School students are being punished after they were involved in an “incident” Saturday night at the school district superintendent’s home in Bristol.

Superintendent Dean Cascadden said the students, including his son Ian, violated the athletic department’s code of conduct that banned drinking, drugs and smoking or being at a party where minors are drinking or using drugs.

Read More…

According to the Bow selectmen’s August 19 minutes, the person hired by the selectmen for assessing said that prices on homes sold so far in 2009 are 8 percent below last year. Condo sales are 16 percent lower. And Bow is currently assessed at 106 percent. What will stop the selectmen and the town from assessing at 200 percent? Or 500 percent?

If the value of my home based on sales has dropped 8 percent, then why is the town of Bow raising the assessment on my home by 2 percent? Trust me, when our tax bills come in December, they will hit us hard.

Call or write your selectmen now.
Bryan Milazzo
Bow

Rich’s attempt to tie SB2 and the failed pay-as-you-throw program into her argument was very weak seemed to expose her disgruntlement over someone else exercising their right to a secret ballot and her inability to influence their vote by intimidation.

How do BCC feel about people trying to take other people’s rights away?

Town Meeting Moderator started the meeting with a long drawn out discussion describing how he will try to be impartial by following the rules of the meeting published in our Town Reports. BCC is opening up the discussion asking the website viewer for their observations on how did Imse do?

Here are a few observations to get the discussions started: Imse stated that the State Attorney General suggested that he appoint someone else count the ballots because Imse promoted his bias against in a letter to the editor. Imse appointed a well respected Bow citizen to oversee counting the ballots, John Lyford but John is a well know opponent to SB2. If Imse would have chosen a well respected Bow Citizen who was an SB2 supporter to oversee the counting of the ballots his credibility would be much better.

For a period of time Imse allowed the Recycle Committee Rep. to rebut Bow Citizen’s comments. This breaks the rules of allowing all the speakers to speak once before a repeat speaker. In fairness to Imse he recognized that this was not appropriate and stopped the practice but it should not have been allowed from the start. A well know citizen was immediately challenged for doing just trying to speak twice before every one else got their first shot. Imse’s double standard was apparent when he quickly stopped this citizen from speaking and not doing the same with the recycle committee..

Imse also failed to recognize a motion to call the question. The motion was seconded so Imse has no excuses for not recognizing the motion. The person was even asked to recognize himself for the record on the motion.

Bow Town Manager who is not a Bow Citizen or voter was given free reign to express his opinion on a matter. The town manager should only be addressing a direct question and response should only be made in fact expressing his opinion is not appropriate and Imse should recognize that.

Imse is well aware that a motion to restrict reconsideration is non debatable he almost allowed debate on the issue but well informed voters expressed stopped his attempt.

BCC viewers are encouraged to add their two cents worth in the comments section.

Election Day will tell whether or not the voters of Bow will fall candidates and issues being propped up in nicely stapled booklet with pretty colored pages or for a team of candidates and issues that will move Bow forward to the 21st century with candidates that will go beyond saying they are fiscal conservatives they govern as fiscal conservatives. This article is a segway to comments of campaign literature being passed out in Bow.

School Board (Select 1): Tom Keane is by far the most taxpayer friendly candidate. His opponent has a long voting record of excess spending while Tom has a long record fighting for the little guy.

SB2-School: SB2 Yes is not only the taxpayer friendly choice it also expands personal liberties because you can vote if you are not present at the meeting. You can get information from any choice you choose, you can vote from 7 AM-7PM and you can even vote absentee. SB2 does not eliminate Town Meeting just the high spending tactics of Town Meetings. SB2 only changes the way we vote.

The Bow–Town Tea Party Recommendations for selectman (Select 2): Robert Louf & Eric Anderson. The third candidate in this race is a very big spender and very un-taxpayer friendly.

SB2 Town: SB2 Yes gets all the accolades as with the school and also combats intimidation and protects against voter disenfranchisement. Town Meeting form of government is heavily flawed and riddled with possible voter fraud, (allows non voters to vote easily), intimidation, and voter disenfranchisement.

Budget Committee (vote for 2): By far the best two candidates are incumbent Cindy Martin who has a strong track record for fighting for Bow Taxpayers and Jim Hoffman who voice for strong fiscal discipline is loud and clear.

Please review every one of these recommendations. They are a huge step forward towards lower taxes, and increase personal liberties. If you agree first get out and vote and second get everyone you know to get out and vote. Knock on a few doors. Go down to the polls and hold a sign for your favorite candidate. Wave signs for your favorite issue. Get involved change you local government.

Submitted by taxed2death, Bow Tea-Party Grass Rooter

The Town Moderator Peter Imse, created a buzz last week when he identified himself as the Bow Town Moderator in an opinion piece in the Concord Monitor that told voters to defeat SB2. The Town Moderator who is the chief election official raised a lot of eyebrows last week because the state law states: RSA 659:44: No election officer shall electioneer while in the performance of his official duties. For the purposes of this section, “electioneer” shall mean to act in any way specifically designed to influence the vote of a voter on any question or office. Any person who violates this provision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Mr. Keane did not challenge the legality of Imse’s opinion piece but his judgment by saying: “It is disheartening to see a well-meaning public servant urging residents to vote to maintain the status quo in which only 1 percent of the voters decide what is good for the remaining 99 percent of Bow residents.” Keane went on and stated; “SB 2 is a voting rights issue and nothing more. In 2007, less then 1 percent of Bow’s registered voters attended and voted on the school district’s $24 million budget. Many of our neighbors have lost their right to vote because they cannot attend a meeting that runs from 7 p.m. to midnight. By passing SB 2, the town will restore that most precious right to their fellow residents. Voters can either vote in person between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. or cast an absentee ballot, something not currently allowed.”

I think SB2 is the way to go for my fellow seniors in Bow. I went to the Bow School District Meeting in March but had to leave before casting a single vote because my oxygen tank malfunctioned. There is nothing worse than to be deprived your right to vote because of your health and that is exactly what the town meeting did to me. I’m sure the restrictions of town meetings deprived a lot of other Bow seniors their right to vote just like me. It is time Bow had fair elections that are friendly to seniors and move away from the nostalgia of the horse and buggy days to the 21st century by voting for SB2.

Before I was forced to leave the School Meeting I was made uncomfortable by all the students with signs telling me how to vote. I know on Election Day I will be able to vote in private. I hope the town moderator will be watching for, and preventing people from campaigning inside the building like at the school meeting.

I also will be supporting taxpayer friendly candidates like Tom Keane for School Board and Eric Andersen for Selectman on May 12th. On May 13th I will be voting to keep town meeting and elections in May. It is much easier for seniors to attend May meetings. I hope hundreds and hundreds of my fellow seniors get out and vote Election Day May 12th and Town Meeting Day May 13th.

Paul Hammond
19 Bow Center Road
Bow, NH 03304

As the May 12th Bow School board race between Selectman Tom Keane and School board member Steven Elgert comes into focus it is my hope that the race will be decided on the issues and not decided on a popularity contest. The race pits two public servants whose respective public record is diametrically opposed. These differences in service to the people of Bow couldn’t be more apparent than at the SB2 public hearing. Selectman Keane presented the facts in favor of adopting SB2. One of those facts was that Town Meetings are restrictive and prevent voters, who can’t make it to the meeting, from voting. While SB2 in inclusive and allows everyone who is eligible the opportunity to vote. Mr. Elgert supported the status quo and that status quo impacts a vast majority of Bow voters.

In fact Mr. Elgert’s status quo affected me personally. Two members of my family were restricted from voting for school district warrant articles because they were out of town. My best friend showed up at the meeting but because his oxygen tank malfunctioned he had to leave the meeting and forfeit all his voting rights. Another friend could not make it because his spouse was sick and he would not leave her. All these people wanted to exercise their right to vote but were prevented by Mr. Elgert’s status quo.

Last year Mr. Elgert supported the very unpopular IB program which was targeted to a very small percentage of elite Bow students at a huge cost to the Bow Taxpayer and most Bow Students. While Mr. Elgert was trying to raise Bow taxpayer’s taxes Mr. Keane was successful in lowering Bow’s taxes.

Earlier this year Elgert stated that he was not interested in seeking another term but changed his mind. Every voter in Bow should question whether or not Elgert is really running to serve the people of Bow or just to serve as a place holder for the school board to pick the next school board member.

The School Budget makes up approximately 70% of Bow property taxes please support a candidate who is a friend of the Bow taxpayer. Please mark your calendar for Tuesday May 12th and vote Tom Keane for school board.

Van Mosher, Bow

I am writing to you because I am concerned about the state of the enrichment programs in the Elementary School and Middle School. At Friday’s School Meeting it was confirmed that funding for DI and the after school woodworking programs are cut for next year. I think that the board could have made different decisions especially in light of the NECAP results that showed while our kids scored better than the state on average in science, the scores were very low. At the same time Dr. Cascadden showed that enrollment in the schools will be dropping by half over the next few years, spending $60K to build more parking spaces is a greater priority than funding enrichment in the early years of education. I wrote a letter to each School Board member, Dr. Cascadden and Principals Gibbens and Spofford prior to the School Meeting. None of them acknowledged my letter.

I’m not going to try to change the outcome of any of the meetings, but if you share my concern that the values shown in the budget are inconsistent with the values of at least a significant part of the community seeking academic enrichment for our kids I would appreciate knowing – it’s not in my nature to be confrontational, but it is my nature to try to fix problems that I see. An interest in the School Board is not in my future, I have enough on my plate between family and business, but I do want to do something to make a lasting contribution for our children.

I am thinking that our community needs something akin to the Bow Athletic Club for academic enrichment. BAC has been a great way for kids to have the opportunity to discover different sports and develop their athletic potential. I think it’s possible for us to do something similar from an enrichment point of view. If we pool our resources and talents, we’ll have more to offer the community, too.

I am pretty booked up with DI activities until the States at the end of this month, but email always works well for me in the meantime. If you are interested in getting together in early April to start some brainstorming I would be happy to coordinate these activities. If you’re not interested, just let me know and I won’t bother you. If you think someone else would be interested in participating, please pass around the email and let’s build up the network.

Thanks very much for your time and consideration. This could be really fun!

Best regards,
Sharon Eng

Cindy made these concerns at the microphone at the school district meeting and at that time she stated that this was her own opinion. The tone of Lagos’ ire at Cindy’s quote was unmistakable in his letter. He was not pleased with her expressing her opinion because it was different from that of the Budget Committee in general. How the editor or reporter presented Cindy’s quote in the paper can’t possibly be the fault of Cindy but Lagos was implying likewise.

Also in his letter Lagos stated that the school district operating budget was reduced and the Budget Committee supported the teachers’ contract. His letter was clearly directed to the poorly informed Concord Monitor readers because informed readers on this website already know that point. BCC website viewers also know that Lagos’ claim that the budget is being reduced can easily be challenged because of the dramatic overestimate of the cost of health insurance of $330,000 that the school board promises to return this year.

Time will tell whether or not Lagos is correct when our Christmastime tax bills come out later this year and we can compare it to our June bill. My educated guess is the June bill will be lower meaning Lagos was wrong.

My name is Harold Judd and I am here to speak in opposition to Senate Bill 152. A statute of this nature is unnecessary, and I believe ill-conceived.

By way of background, I have been a Selectman in Bow for seven years and a resident of the Town for nearly twenty years. I am well acquainted with Public Service Company of New Hampshire and the electric utility industry generally having been involved with utility regulation for thirty years. I began my career as the NH Consumer Advocate in the 1970s and after serving at the US Department of Energy in Washington I returned to NH as a Senior Assistant Attorney General where I was the lead counsel in the PSNH bankruptcy and the NH CO-OP bankruptcy. Presently, I am a principal of a consulting firm advising regulators and utilities in many states, including the siting and development of new generation. In the past five years my firm has participated in many regulatory proceedings and has evaluated proposals for the acquisition of over 60,000 MW of energy and capacity.

This is the equivalent of 48 plants the size of Seabrook or over 100 Merrimack Stations. The units we have evaluated range from two 1,000 MW nuclear stations to 1.5 MW wind turbines. Fuel types include nuclear, wind, solar, wave action, natural gas, bio-mass, hydro, and coal. We do no work for PSNH. Our current work for the State of NH is limited to advising on the design and financing of the decommissioning of the Seabrook Station.

I urge this Committee to find the bill Inexpedient to Legislate for the following reasons. First, the legislation is unnecessary. The PUC will conduct a full audit and prudence review, before the cost of the improvements at Merrimack Station are permitted in PSNH’s rates. This is a standard procedure before any significant capital addition is approved and it is sure to be done for this project. I have been involved in numerous prudence reviews, and seen significant cost disallowances due to imprudence, construction of unneeded assets, and waste. I have no doubt the PUC will be thorough and aggressive in conducting a prudence review of the Merrimack Station.

Second, the effect of delay could result in abandonment of the project, which would result in the closing of the unit. PSNH is mandated to have the scrubber technology operational by July 1, 2013, and the delay proposed in this bill would most likely make that an impossibility. Without scrubbers the plant will not meet EPA standards, and will be forced to close.

Third, regulated entities are entitled to regulatory certainty. The relevant provisions of RSA 125-O were enacted after thorough vetting with all parties of interest. I believe that if the state reneges on the regulatory compact established in RSA 125-O it would face serious consequences. In the near term, it is likely PSNH’s ability to gain financing would be adversely effected. At a time when obtaining credit is a major challenge for businesses I think it ill advised for the state to make it even harder for one of our major businesses to get financing. In the long term, this legislation could make it more expensive for all regulated companies, and could well adversely affect the way credit markets view the state government as well.

Fourth, if delay results in closing the plant, the reliability of energy supply in NH will be jeopardized. Diversity of generation is essential to prudent utility planning and for cost control. For example, natural gas today costs around $4.00/mmBtu, but last September it was closer to $13.00. The fact that the price of coal and the cost of nuclear and hydro-electric generation have remained relatively stable and predictable as compared to the costs of oil and natural gas, makes each a reasonable part of a well balanced generation portfolio. In turn, avoiding this uncertainty contributes to a utility’s ability to predict future rates, which benefits all customers, but especially business customers. Elimination of a generation type will expose NH to greater rate swings driven by fuel price market forces.

Fifth, the Merrimack Station is a baseload unit. It is dispatchable, meaning it will be on-line when needed to meet demand. Evolving technologies, such as wind and solar, have yet to evolve into dispatchable generation.

Sixth, PSNH is a good corporate citizen, both in Bow and in NH. The current management has demonstrated a recognition of the need to be responsive and accountable to customers and to the areas in which it operates. It appears the company pursued that approach when working with this body to craft RSA 125-O. As a matter of public policy, I believe all citizens, including corporations, should be encouraged to work with the state to address our collective needs, and in turn be respected by all parties standing by their commitments.

For these reasons I urge you to find this Bill to be Inexpedient to Legislate, honor the commitment the State made to PSNH and its customers to see the Merrimack project through to completion, and then permit the PUC to compete the prudency review that will determine the portion of costs to be included in rates.

Harold T. Judd
Accion Group, Inc.
244 North Main Street
Concord, NH 03301
603-229-1644
hjudd@acciongorup.com