Recently in ELECTION DAY Category

Selectmen ( Two Open Seats)

Al Hume

Terence Jatko

Joel Mudget

Jim Gray

School Board ( One Open Seat)

Kathy Garry  ( Uncontested)

Road Agent-

Scott Kinmond,

 Dave Rossetti,

Ed Wakefield,

Daniel Burbank, Sr..

Zoning Board ( Two Seats)

Raymond Heal

Herbert Farnham

Jerry Hopkins

Treasurer ( Uncontested

Laura Hilliard

Trustee of the Trust Fund ( Uncontested)

 Kenneth Taylor

Supervisor of the Checklis ( Uncontested)

 Laurie Whitley

.

Library Board of Trustees ( Two Seats Uncontested)

Barbara Putnam

Roger Simpson.

Moultonboro Planning Board ( Three Seats Uncontested)

Jane Fairchild

Joanne Coppinger,

Natt King

.

Laconia Daily Sun     August 8^th, 2008

CONCORD (AP) — Both Republican Sen. John Sununu and Democrat Jeanne Shaheen say tax incentives for developers and users of renewable energy can help bolster the nation’s economy as well as relieve the pain of high fuel prices. The Senate candidates promoted the tax breaks in response to an Associated Press survey on a range of economic issues. Though they disagree on the extent to which the United States should pursue offshore oil drilling, Shaheen and Sununu found some common ground on alternative fuels. Asked what steps Congress should take to stimulate the economy, Sununu said any long-term plan should include “a balanced approach to energy that includes conservation, incentives for clean, renewable energy and greater production of oil and gas deep offshore.” “We should encourage the use of wind, solar, biomass and other clean, renewable energy by extending tax credits to homeowners and businesses investing in these technologies,” he said in answering a question about how Congress can help stabilize energy prices. “We need to produce more energy here at home by opening up promising areas for new exploration. ... We should remove the ban on new offshore exploration and give willing states a voice in opening up new reserves.” Shaheen opposes lifting that ban, saying oil companies should be drilling on land they already lease. She said Congress needs to “stop taking advice on energy policy” from the oil industry and could immediately help bring down prices by cracking down on speculation on the price of oil, and closing loopholes that allow traders to manipulate oil markets. Longer term, she said the country should focus on investing in alternative and renewable energy sources and tax incentives for those who make buildings more energy effi cient. “I also believe that we should end the billions of dollars in tax giveaways to Big Oil and use that money to invest in the development of alternative and renewable energy sources that are going to create jobs and move us off our dependence on foreign oil,” she said. The two recently held competing conference calls on energy prices. Sununu criticized Shaheen for not supporting new offshore drilling; Shaheen faulted Sununu for voting against Senate Democratic proposals to spend more on federal home heating assistance and to further restrict oil speculators

HOME.

A response to questions about Moultonborough

www.Citizen.Com  

April 1st, 2008

Editor, The Citizen: Since Mr. Kim Dubuque wrote an "open letter to me" I must respond and expand on my points in a factual manner. I also must apologize for referring to Kim as "her". We have never met and I just made a wrong gender assumption.

In regards to the secret ballot petitions, you stated: "Could the motivating factor be that you and your core group were trying to make a point? In my opinion you were. I feel you accomplished your goal." The goal was not to make a point. The goal was to assure a fair and equitable means of voting on contentious issues. And yes, on that level it worked. As to your point, "Why were the last two petitions withdrawn"? While it may seem odd that this year there were so many petitions, I was not the only one requesting secret ballots in Moultonboro's Town Meeting. I didn't sign all of them. As for why the last two were withdrawn, I really wouldn't know as I was not one of those that requested that they were withdrawn. Perhaps that can be answered by those that did.

You further stated, "What I think, is that the petitioners became aware of the will of the overwhelming majority in the room and realized that what they were doing caused more harm than good". No. Harm or good were never factored in to the equation. Look at the issues that were on the table. I signed the secret ballot petitions that I felt strongly about. Period. Others did the same. I would tend to doubt that they withdrew the petitions as they were "swayed by the overwhelming majority" as evidenced by dwindling volume of voters after the community center vote.

As to the volunteers, you stated, "Another point I would like to make is I find your insinuation that the citizens who circulated and presented the petition for the community center intentionally inflated or sought out non registered voters to sign it, at the very least offensive. Anyone who knows the people involved with this project knows them to be hardworking and well intended members of our community". The point that was finally made successfully by voting down the $375,000 study funding is that most agree that a community center is worthwhile. The RSPT however drew a line in the sand and never looked for a middle ground. It was all or nothing and a very valuable lesson learned as evidenced by the new strategy of this team to think about how to phase this out and make it more palatable for the public. I have no doubt that those involved in any of the projects on any of the committees works hard. That was never an issue for me. I commend them for their hard work. I commend the selectmen for doing the jobs that they do. The issue I have is when they are swayed by a petition that is one third invalid and never thought it relevant. The RSPT and supporters continually referred to the opposition as a "small vocal minority". Apparently it is not.

As for your last issue, "I would also like to address Mrs. Punturieri comments about our select board. It is easy to accuse using generalizations. For those accusations to be plausible you need to use facts. Knowing the members of our select board, I find it highly unlikely that any of them would publicly ridicule a citizen for speaking his or her mind". I would invite Mr. Dubuque to take a look at some of the film footage of some of the selectmen's meetings available in the library, to view for himself some of the indignities that transpired. They are too numerous to mention and the issues have been decided. Enough said.

Linda Punturieri

Moultonborough

www.Citizen.com 

March 26th, 2008

Editor, The Citizen: This is a reply to Mr. Tolman's 3/21/2008 letter that questioned my comment about voters feeling "comfortable to express their true feeling" in secret balloting. I have spoken with people that refrain or are reluctant to attend Town Meetings as they are hesitant to openly vote their true feeling because of possible retribution by fellow citizens that see their hand vote or hear their voice vote. That includes business people, parents, etc. I also know people that have attended Town Meetings and stopped voting after a few votes saying, what is the use? Sometimes people feel that way when voice votes seem to be disproportionately louder than the actual number of voters. A vulnerability with the present system is that non registered voters could join in on the voice vote and for that matter the hand vote, but with SB2 that is not an option.

Mr. Tolman made a number of statements and charges in his letter such as "We, as citizens, are not guaranteed or entitled to feeling 'comfortable' in the exercise of our democracy." He apparently finds this to be acceptable in the face of a loud and boisterous opposition and a moderator manning a bully pulpit. It seems to me that Mr. Tolman has no tolerance for true democracy where all votes count and the persons race, creed, loudness of voice or intimidating personality do not matter. Where I do not "have to look one's fellow citizen in the eyes while (voting). "

The answer to his question that " Every major legislative body in our country is held accountable for their individual votes in the public record; would we ask any less of ourselves at the most basic level of self-government?" is a resounding yes! I would ask Mr. Tolman, why do we vote in private for general elections? Why, when we turn in our ballots no one has the right to look it over? I'm not an elected or public official and my right to vote my conscience in private should not be infringed upon by anyone. That is true democracy.

On a more factual note, and for the benefit of the readers, with the SB2 form of government there is a Deliberative Session which is just like the Town Meeting; articles can be debated and amended. The major difference with SB2 is that there is a 30 day waiting period, before voting, that gives voters ample opportunity to read editorials, letters to the editor, talk with others to comprehend any changes made to any articles an yes, even look your fellow citizens in the eye. One then can come to a personal decision on how to vote with a secret ballot.

I believe that debate is a very good thing, but for voting I prefer the ballot box where my vote is between me and my conscience and not between me and my neighbor.

By the way Mr. Tolman, you made one statement that I totally agree with: "SB2, as enacted in our state right now, does not change the fact that we, as voters, have a responsibility to get out and attend an annual meeting where we can discuss and debate the articles before our town."

Vote for SB2

Jim Leiterman

Moultonborough

I am writing to thank the Citizen Alliance for all the information and posts regarding the recent elections in Moultonborough. I would also like to congratulate the Alliance for requesting for a recount of the SB2 questions in the form of a manual count. The hand count process is the most reliable way to tabulate ballot votes.

Electronic counting is subject to error.

The vote counting machines in New Hampshire have already been the focus of citizen efforts to point out the shortcomings of these machines. Please click on the YouTube video link below. It is quite shocking to see how a vote tabulating machine can dramatically alter election results. After watching the entire five minute video, I am sure you will agree with me that the hand count is the most reliable and trustworthy way to count ballots.

I want to be clear that I believe our local elections are run with the highest degree of professionalism and integrity but even so vote tabulation machines have and can make gross mistakes. I would also like to thank the Town election officials for their efforts in advance.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=PiiaBqwqkXs&feature=related

James R Castleberry