‘Fire Engine 2 failed inspection. It needs $6k in repairs. It is now out of service awaiting repair. ‘
Isn’t that wonderful?
I know, quick, let’s have the BOS and the town attorney hire her buddy, another attorney, oops I mean ‘investigator’ to ‘investigate’ why engine 2 failed inspection.
Crazy this could happen when 2 members of NFRD testified in court that they were mechanics!
In the name of safety the BOS should check the logs to see if engine 2 was being driven around in an unsafe state.
The public safety could’ve been at risk.
What’s the harm in another $25k+ for an ‘investigation’ plus an additional $80k+ on attorney fees especially since we now have ‘about $12,000,000’ in new taxable property!
Nottingham has been duped hard and taken to the cleaners because of its incompetent board of selectmen, Town Administrator, its former interim Town Administrator (currently causing problems in Deerfield I hear), and the Fremont Town Administrator.
Still staffing issues over at NFRD despite the massive turnover and those generous un-budgeted pay raises handed last year?
I guess approved warrant articles mean nothing to these selectmen.
Get your popcorn ready, a little birdy tells me there’s a strong possibility of an Act II to all this ridiculous self imposed drama and it’s set to pop off in early 2025…… hold onto your wallets Nottingham!
Thanks Doug. Sometimes I don't catch all the comments when the Seclectmen aren't reasonably close to their mics and that's when you and Dr Soreff really come in handy! You said: "The town’s revenue at this point is about $150k less than was projected. About $12 million in new taxable property has been added to the town this year. " Did anyone give explanation as to why that was or was it simply a statement?
There was no direct explanation, but some additional context may help clarify. Last night's meeting was rescheduled from next week, due to the inability to achieve a quorum. So the data available for the third quarter are not quite complete. Therefore, except about known expenditures, there's some uncertainty. The board's primary focus was on the expenditure side. Keeping the town within budget this year is exceptionally difficult.
I suspect there was also no discussion about the projection because it was not an actionable item. The board was looking to see if there were any departments they needed to have a talking to, as was done with the Highway Department at the beginning of second quarter.
New taxable property is being added to the town all the time.
‘Fire Engine 2 failed inspection. It needs $6k in repairs. It is now out of service awaiting repair. ‘
Isn’t that wonderful?
I know, quick, let’s have the BOS and the town attorney hire her buddy, another attorney, oops I mean ‘investigator’ to ‘investigate’ why engine 2 failed inspection.
Crazy this could happen when 2 members of NFRD testified in court that they were mechanics!
In the name of safety the BOS should check the logs to see if engine 2 was being driven around in an unsafe state.
The public safety could’ve been at risk.
What’s the harm in another $25k+ for an ‘investigation’ plus an additional $80k+ on attorney fees especially since we now have ‘about $12,000,000’ in new taxable property!
Nottingham has been duped hard and taken to the cleaners because of its incompetent board of selectmen, Town Administrator, its former interim Town Administrator (currently causing problems in Deerfield I hear), and the Fremont Town Administrator.
Still staffing issues over at NFRD despite the massive turnover and those generous un-budgeted pay raises handed last year?
I guess approved warrant articles mean nothing to these selectmen.
Get your popcorn ready, a little birdy tells me there’s a strong possibility of an Act II to all this ridiculous self imposed drama and it’s set to pop off in early 2025…… hold onto your wallets Nottingham!
Thanks Doug. Sometimes I don't catch all the comments when the Seclectmen aren't reasonably close to their mics and that's when you and Dr Soreff really come in handy! You said: "The town’s revenue at this point is about $150k less than was projected. About $12 million in new taxable property has been added to the town this year. " Did anyone give explanation as to why that was or was it simply a statement?
There was no direct explanation, but some additional context may help clarify. Last night's meeting was rescheduled from next week, due to the inability to achieve a quorum. So the data available for the third quarter are not quite complete. Therefore, except about known expenditures, there's some uncertainty. The board's primary focus was on the expenditure side. Keeping the town within budget this year is exceptionally difficult.
I suspect there was also no discussion about the projection because it was not an actionable item. The board was looking to see if there were any departments they needed to have a talking to, as was done with the Highway Department at the beginning of second quarter.
New taxable property is being added to the town all the time.