Please enter the code
* Required fields
Please be aware that the contents of this form are not encrypted
  • Steve (Wednesday, July 18 18 03:59 pm EDT)

    Educator’s comments sound self-serving. Expanding municipal and school staffing and building new facilities is simply growth by government expansion, which will be devastating to the taxpayers of our community, many of whom are classified as working poor. Those who have local government jobs tend to be fairly well off in our community but the same cannot be said for everyone else. Mr. McNutt’s plan seems to be import any kind of people we can get whether they be welfare, low income or indigent refugee population. Hell of a plan and the imbeciles on the city council all seem to be throwing their full support to Mr. McNutt and his terrible plan.

  • Todd (Wednesday, July 18 18 01:53 pm EDT)

    While some may be well-meaning most of the city councilors elected over the past decade are there for their own purposes. Either a self-esteem booster, an ego thing or a political agenda that is more than likely not in the best interest of the Claremont taxpayers. The days of well-educated city councilors are long gone, by well-educated I mean very knowledgeable regarding municipal rules, regulations, finances and the true needs of the city. Today the city councilors simply sit there until they are told to vote the way the city administration wants them to vote. Most of the votes are unanimous with only a few councilors willing to give token resistance to anything that is not the best interest of the citizens of Claremont. Nicholas Koloski is a prime example of the type of councilor representative that Claremont does not need.

  • Educator (Wednesday, July 18 18 01:43 pm EDT)

    It appears that Mr. McNutt is trying to grow the population of Claremont,which in turn means jobs.With the relocation of refugees throughout the country this probably means some will be coming to Claremont.We will need to hire teachers and staff in all subjects for new English as a second language students.
    We may even have to build additional school facilities and staff offices for administrators.I'm sure fire and police,as well as social services will need larger staffs as well.
    These are well paying jobs with great benefits.This is a great growth strategy for Claremont.

  • Kathy (Wednesday, July 18 18 11:52 am EDT)

    I never realized how much it cost to educate Claremont’s school-aged children. Apartment dwellers do not bring in enough tax revenue through their rent to come even close to the price it costs taxpayers to educate their children. I suspect it is a little better with homeowners but I am sure there is still a deficit. Mr. McNutt’s plan to double or even triple the size of Claremont’s population will destroy the finances of Claremont families. As well paid, as Mr. McNutt is I am sure he is well beyond the point of caring because it will not affect his paycheck. Few in this community are as well insulated as he is with extremely large salary and compensation packages. I am very disappointed in Mr. McNutt and with Charlene Lovett, Allen Damren, Scott Pope, Nick Koloski and Abigail Kier where all have been part of the city government for quite some time and they continue to make bad decision after bad decision that are causing huge consequences for the Claremont taxpayers.

  • Tom (Wednesday, July 18 18 10:49 am EDT)

    Face it folks we are screwed. Charlene Lovett and Allen Damren are the Tweedledee and Tweedledum of the City Council with Ryan McNutt performing the duties of the Mad Hatter. Anyone looking at this downtown project with an unbiased rational eye would quickly recognize the deficiencies in the plan so well spelled-out in recent Sullivan Report articles. My point; tax-and-spend lunatics presently run Claremont’s city government.

  • Jim Sullivan (Wednesday, July 18 18 10:36 am EDT)

    Mayor Charlene Lovett emailed thanking me for pointing out which Planning Board Members are in violation of state law disallowing them from serving on other appointed municipal boards and commissions. She stated in her email that they are now working to correct the situation.

  • Industrial Property Owner (Wednesday, July 18 18 09:40 am EDT)

    Excellent exposé. The Sullivan Report continues to be the premier source of local government news. The underlying costs to the community for low-income housing are simply astounding. The Claremont taxpayers cannot afford this misguided attempt at economic development. The unified gung ho attitude of Claremont’s municipal officials both administrative and elected suggests large gaps in their knowledge base regarding the ramifications of their actions or perhaps they are so desperate to accomplish something they do not care what it will do to the taxpayers in years to come. Claremont has always had a leadership problem but it has grown worse in recent years. Something to contemplate for the next election.

  • William (Wednesday, July 18 18 08:52 am EDT)

    Every time city officials recommend a new proposal of any kind, the taxpayers always get the short end of the stick. Of course, city officials will never admit to that instead they concoct a story of how the proposal will greatly benefit Claremont, which is never the truth. This whole Goddard Block project is a Claremont municipal government boondoggle disguised as workforce housing. The Sullivan Report already proved that upon completion of this project anyone qualified to live in the Goddard Block would be dirt poor earning well below the average income for the immediate area. The city manager the mayor and their cohorts are all willing to spend millions of taxpayers’ dollars to fix the downtown infrastructure to accommodate a large influx of welfare residents. This latest Sullivan Report article shows the danger to the taxpayer because the school budget expenses will skyrocket with an influx of many new students and the school district will receive additional zero dollars in new revenue from the buildings where these children will live. If the council gives the Goddard Block owners the maximum number of years for tax relief then it could cost the taxpayers $16 million or more over 13 years just for the Goddard Block. What happens if the owners of three or four more buildings follow their lead and fill up their empty upper floors with welfare families? How many more millions will it cost Claremont taxpayers to fill up the downtown with people who are draining Claremont’s limited resources? This is not economic development folks by any stretch of the imagination.

  • Jim Sullivan (Wednesday, July 18 18 07:03 am EDT)

    New article.July 11 Council meeting synopsis. Proposed tax break for Goddard Block. Full details on the News Flashes page.

  • intheknow (Wednesday, July 11 18 03:09 pm EDT)

    The good jobs are low income/new immigrant related within government.No companies are moving so far north with the highest electricity rates in the whole country.Never mind the heating costs and property taxes,or New Hampshire weather in general.The best you can hope for is jobs within government.

  • George (Wednesday, July 11 18 02:11 pm EDT)

    It's true, our city leaders have all the wrong priorities for Claremont and the taxpayers will be spending millions of dollars we don't to fulfill their mad visions for our city. Adding low income people to Claremont's population is foolhardy to the point of insanity. It makes absolutely no sense but our city leaders seem hell-bent of making their sick dream a reality. The sad thing is there is nothing we can do to stop them until another round of elections comes around. Who knows what madness they will inflict on us until then?

  • Joel (Wednesday, July 11 18 11:10 am EDT)

    If the agenda to the Council meeting tonight is any indication it suggests that Mr. McNutt and the city council are about to give the owner of the Goddard block a nice big tax break as a reward for bringing in more welfare housing to Claremont. Our city leaders are insane.

  • Jennifer (Wednesday, July 11 18 10:47 am EDT)

    What I don't like are all the closed-door meetings. Charlene Lovett and Allen Damren want to have them all the time as if they have things to hide. It just doesn't make me want to trust either of them. As far as Mr. McNutt goes I think he is an incompetent boob that convinced the city councilors that he had a little talent and that he would be a good little boy and do exactly what the city councilors tell him to do. I believe Charlene and Allen are the real ones calling the shots and Claremont is going to be in big trouble because the voters elected too power-hungry citizens without a clue as to how to lead to be in charge.

  • Jerry (Wednesday, July 11 18 08:46 am EDT)

    McNutt was the Council second choice after the other man changed his mind about taking the position. The only the accomplishment he has done is evict everyone from the Goddard building for safety reasons that set the stage for welfare housing and a $5 million Claremont taxpayer funded project to bring in even more welfare housing. Then McNutt does the exact opposite by ignoring several health hazards at the Topstone building where Councilor Koloski has all of his businesses. Not good.

  • Rachel (Wednesday, July 11 18 08:30 am EDT)

    Does anyone think that Ryan McNutt is a good city manager? At the meetings he just sits there like a bump on the log rarely engaging in conversation. When he does talk they are brief and very vague statements because I think he doesn't know what he's talking about most of the time and he doesn't want people to figure out that he doesn't know what he is doing. Mayor Lovett and Assistant Mayor Damren are only interested in creating the impression that Claremont is on the move in the right direction. They focus on frills like the train station, the bus service and the farmers market that the taxpayers are all now supporting. They and their cohorts on the city council keep withdrawing more and more money from the city's cash reserves to prop up the budget spending and soon all that money will dry up in the tax rate will rise at a rate no one's ever seen before because the city manager and the city councilors are out of control. Now they want to spend over $5 million of our tax money on a dying downtown to put in welfare housing and maybe a few new businesses downtown that will pay minimum wage jobs. Again creating the illusion of success when there really is a many to be had. Enough Is Enough!

  • knowbody (Wednesday, July 11 18 08:18 am EDT)

    What you fail to realize is the value of that 7.5 acres of rich farmland can be assessed for a lot more rich tax revenue for the highwayman.
    Wait 'til the farmer gets his tax bill.

  • Steve (Wednesday, July 11 18 07:48 am EDT)

    I think the farmer knew that McNutt is a weak city manager and he stood firm and faced with McNutt's inexperience and his milquetoast demeanor. Reading those minutes indicate the city will only receive frontage along the river for the Riverwalk and I guess most of that land is eroding into the river in exchange for 7.5 acres of rich farmland. Hell of a deal for the city isn't it? Does anyone in this godforsaken city still believe that the city manager and today's city council are the best choices to be running city affairs?

  • Jeff (Tuesday, July 10 18 03:49 pm EDT)

    I remember that it was supposed to be a nearly even swap of land acreage for acreage. The biggest chunk near the ballfields in Monadnock Park to create more recreation opportunities. It looks like Mr. McNutt negotiated a great deal for the farmer and a terrible deal for the city with the city only getting the land for the Riverwalk and if the erosion is really that bad then there will be budget costs to be considered in the future. Mr. McNutt is not a great negotiator and a terrible city manager.

  • Chris (Tuesday, July 10 18 02:35 pm EDT)

    Talk about terribly inaccurate minutes keeping, absent members voting. In all the years that I served on elected bodies, I never heard of such a thing. If Norma Limoges were still the Clerk for the Council this type of unprofessionalism would not occur. I watch the Council meetings today with disgust because it has turned into a three-ring circus with a bunch of bozos and no ringleader. Sad.

  • Jim Sullivan (Tuesday, July 10 18 08:23 am EDT)

    Hush-Hush land swap! For full details go to the News Flashes page.

  • Todd (Tuesday, July 10 18 02:33 am EDT)

    Koloski has always been shady. Look at all the business liens he has against his bar but he is still in business. The Stone Arch Bakery had only one lien from the state and it was immediately shut down at both its Claremont and Lebanon locations but not Koloski’s bar. Look at the special protection and perks the Topstone Holdings owners are receiving from the city officials in regards to their back taxes and environmental issues with their building. It should be condemned and all the tenants evacuated liked what happened with the Goddard building but they have special VIP status like Koloski or could it be through Koloski. This makes the city and the mayor and the councilors all corrupt in my eyes.

  • Gary (Monday, July 09 18 04:25 pm EDT)

    I do not like the double standard in Claremont’s municipal government that continues to prevail to this day. The Goddard Block is condemned and evacuated for safety reasons, a new owner comes in right away to buy the property for a song, and then the developer is showered with government money to fix the place up for low-income housing. Now a $5 million project will soon begin to set the stage for more low-income housing projects downtown. The Topstone building should be condemned but the same folks who shut down the Goddard building ignore the environmental issues that puts the health of everyone that enters that building at risk. Councilor Nick Koloski has all of his businesses inside the building and if no one thinks that matters then they are not looking at this thing rationally. The owner of the Goddard Block received stern, harsh treatment from Ryan McNutt. This no-nonsense no second chances approach led to the eviction of all the tenants. Ryan McNutt is treating the owners of the Topstone property with a velvet glove approach and public funds are used to try to deal with some of the environmental issues for a building that is still owned by a private LLC. This is wrong for so many reasons but it is the way business is conducted these days in Claremont. Mayor Lovett and Assistant Mayor Damren have already given this unethical approach their blessing and the rest of the councilors all seem to be falling in line except for just a few. It will be interesting to see how this all comes out of the wash. Different standards for different people smacks of corruption.

  • John (Friday, July 06 18 09:03 am EDT)

    Unfortunately, I agree with you. It is the evolution of real estate.
    Claremont will never drop its tax rate. The powers that be are always crying poverty saying they never have enough money. An example of that is the request made by DPW for a million dollars and only getting a quarter of that.
    The SAU always claim to have a “bare bones “ budget. I wouldn’t expect that to change, no matter who the Superintendent is.
    So what’s the alternative?
    Improving the infrastructure to justify the high tax rate. People won’t complain about paying high taxes if they see their money being invested in the community.
    Those that expect the State to ride to the rescue are mistaken. The State will not help Claremont until it helps itself and looking for “handouts” is not the way to do it.
    The tax payers should get ready to pay up, in 10 years you will look back on today’s tax rate and get nostalgic about the “good old days”.

  • Tony (Friday, July 06 18 08:19 am EDT)

    Higher taxes. Yes that will help clear away the deadbeats and non productive home owners (elderly) soon. Then the gentrification can begin. Taking the slum lords out of business will be easy with simple code enforcement when the time is ripe, and then the housing stocks can be renovated into the bedrooms for young professionals from the upper valley.

  • Involved (Thursday, July 05 18 04:05 pm EDT)

    Rick, the low income families invited into Claremont are the jobs.Support jobs for low income families are among the best of the area.How many companies in the surrounding Claremont area are starting people at $50k salaries with health insurance,paid sick/vacation time,retirement bennies at 55?
    Low income families and recovering drug addicts are a cash cow friend.Get on board!

  • Rick (Thursday, July 05 18 08:27 am EDT)

    I fear the tax rate is going to explode over the next few years with all the money they want to spend all around town. Spending $5 million on a dying downtown is nuts. Doing it to import more families on public assistance is insane but this is the master plan of our city leaders. The longer these city leaders stay in power the higher our taxes will go.

  • Tom (Wednesday, July 04 18 04:29 pm EDT)

    The problem with the city employees is easy to determine. Most of them do not live in Claremont so they do not pay the high property tax as we all do. So they do not care about Claremont just that their paycheck clears and their insurance and other benefits are all up to snuff. Doing nothing is easier than actually doing something and they do not care about Claremont to want to do anything to make the city better because the pay is the same if they do a mediocre job or a phenomenal job. Since the new city manager is not exactly setting the world on fire the standards are pretty low so the city employees follow his lackluster performance example.

  • Linda (Wednesday, July 04 18 02:08 pm EDT)

    I always liked Scott Pope. He was one of my son’s favorite teachers. However, I have to say is not the man I thought he was. On the city council, he did the bidding of the city manager and the special interests. When he resigned abruptly from the city council, then tried to come back, and then slinked away I thought he was not much of a man. Now he is back on the city council and he is falling into the same bad habits from before. He is representing special interests and not the average citizens of Claremont. Nick Koloski is there for himself and I believe Charlene Lovett, Allen Damren, Claire Lessard and Abigail Kier all have their own personal agendas far removed from what is best for the public. I do not even know where to begin with Ryan McNutt. He just seems out of his depth as he does not seem to have the knowledge or experience to do the job of city manager even marginally well. I believe a complete turnover is necessary inside City Hall as the employees have been there for too long and they have become far too complacent to ever change Claremont into the marvelous community it can be.

  • Madison (Wednesday, July 04 18 12:48 pm EDT)

    Mayor Lovett is a phony as are most of the other members of the city council. I agree with Katherine that Councilors Stone, O’Hearne and Zullo are the only three worthwhile councilors we have. I thought Kier was an excellent choice but she has proven to be just as big a tax-and-spend councilor as the rest and she seems to be on the verge of becoming a Lovett protege, in other words bad news for the Claremont taxpayers.

  • Laura (Wednesday, July 04 18 12:16 pm EDT)

    I blame Mayor Lovett. She is trying to micromanage everything and this is the result. She is trying to keep a lid on everything especially with all the secret meetings but Jim and AJ are phenomenally good at ferreting out information and they are well known in the community for disseminating that information freely for the public good.

  • David (Wednesday, July 04 18 11:32 am EDT)

    Many people thought the previous city administration was corrupt but I think this new administration is even more corrupt. They may not be stealing money but they are certainly abusing their authority and manipulating the municipal government to benefit one of their own. If they are willing to do it for one of them their will do it for all of them.

  • Walter (Wednesday, July 04 18 11:19 am EDT)

    The Topstone building owes the largest amount of back taxes than any property in Claremont and the city manager and the councilors all treat the owners with kid gloves. Councilman Nick Koloski has his businesses located in the Topstone building. Toxic hazardous materials are right in the building right where his businesses are. City officials lie about the cooperation from the owners. City officials use their influence to use public funds to try to fix the environmental issues at the property. Excuse me but I always thought that public funds were supposed to be used for public purposes not for the benefit of private individuals. Our tax dollars should not be used to try to help a private owner deal with his building issues or to keep a Councilman in business. This whole thing stinks to high heaven.

  • Matt (Wednesday, July 04 18 10:44 am EDT)

    I watched last week’s Council meeting and I was left with the impression that the owners of the Topstone building were finally stepping up. I thought that was great. Now I find out that it was a total lie. Not great. Thank you Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Maranville for setting the record straight. I hate being lied to and when I am lied to I never trust the people that lied to me ever again. Lovett, Damren, McNutt and Merrill are all people that I no longer trust. Koloski was already on the list.

  • Katherine (Wednesday, July 04 18 09:45 am EDT)

    The voters need to remember who is really representing them on the Council and who isn’t. In my opinion, O’Hearne, Stone & Zullo are the keepers and the rest of them all need to go. We need councilors representing the taxpayers not the special interests.

  • Charles (Wednesday, July 04 18 09:32 am EDT)

    I agree with IPO that Koloski is the major obstacle to solving the Topstone problem. I believe his presence on the Council is for his own benefit and not for his constituents. Jim and AJ showed proof positive the Mayor, Assistant Mayor and the City Manager for what they truly are, untrustworthy politicians helping one of their own namely Koloski another political bum. If the other councilors have any scruples they will join forces and take the property with the tax deed and paid a clean it up and put her back on the market so the city can start getting taxes for the property again. The same with the Central Street property.

  • Industrial Property Owner (Wednesday, July 04 18 08:57 am EDT)

    Another excellent exposé from the Sullivan Report. The city councilors continue to blunder along making one bad decision after another as a result of a reoccurring absence of germane information necessary to make sound decisions and the councilor’s willingness to move forward without a proper grasp of the situation because of blind trust in municipal administrators. Ignorance is not conducive to success. Of course, the city councilors have another bad habit of procrastinating when faced with difficult decisions and the problems intensify to crisis proportions because of the professional management vacuum in Claremont’s current city government. The contract renewal with United Partners is the result of a one-sided contract negotiation. I do not believe Mr. McNutt knows the first thing about contract bargaining, as he seems to be on the losing end every single time. Since he represents the citizens of Claremont his shortcomings puts us in the unfortunate position of higher taxes, fees, etc. as a result of his inept management and the refusal by the city councilors to recognize the self-evident poor job performance of Mr. McNutt. In regards to the Central Street and Mulberry Street properties subject to tax deeding, the environmental issues of the property are a concern. However, the property taxes, penalties and interest are accruing at an alarming rate and nothing will change as both properties essentially have absentee owners. The owners of the Central Street property are in the wind and the owners of the Topstone building are doing nothing to remedy the situation despite the lies propagated by a few city officials for whatever personal political agenda they are pursuing. The documented proof uncovered in the latest Sullivan Report exposé makes it self-evident that the owners of the Topstone building will not repay the property taxes or clean up hazardous materials on and within their property. In regards to both properties, outside influences will have to intercede to solve these problems. The city should take the properties now, begin the process of remedying the environmental issues of all three parcels and attempt to sell the properties to place them back on the tax rolls. Councilor Koloski should not influence any decisions made regarding the Topstone properties. I am of the opinion that he has either directly or indirectly influenced all past decisions and the countless delays by city officials to do anything. For the good of the community that must stop immediately.

  • Jim Sullivan (Wednesday, July 04 18 05:49 am EDT)

    A correction to yesterday's article has just been published. Full details on the News Flashes page.

  • Sharon (Tuesday, July 03 18 07:18 pm EDT)

    Wow! I watched the city council meeting with my husband and daughter and all three of us thought that progress was underway for tax repayment and toxic hazard abatement for the Topstone building. I trusted our new city manager and our mayor and assistant mayor. I see I was wrong to do that because they all shamelessly lied to everyone. Scruples are not part of their DNA. Thank you Sullivan Report for exposing the truth. The Topstone property owners owe the city almost $250,000 but in the past two years they only paid $3500 of their late taxes. The city manager said the owners were paying back the late taxes. Only $3500 in two years, what a load of malarkey. I would have written something else but I don't want to swear on this forum. Their cooperation with the environmental problems of the building are also a sick joke. Their permit lapsed in 2015 and they stopped taking test samples and turning in the paperwork also in 2015. Taxpayers money paid for the grant that paid for the study that came up with the 504 page report. Mrs. Merrill from the planning office wants to put monitoring wells around the perimeter of the property to take the responsibilities away from the property owners. Sure let the taxpayers pay for all the sample collecting and monitoring. Mrs. Merrill does not care because she does not live in Claremont so she does not have to pay any property taxes here. Now the owners of the Topstone building are crying poverty and they say they have no money to pay for any monitoring or cleanup of the property. This also means they have no money to pay the late taxes. So it looks like we are at a stalemate because Mr. McNutt will not hold the owners of the Topstone property to the same standards that he held the former owners of the Goddard building. Is Councilman Koloski using his political clout to run interference for this property owner? Perhaps because Councilman Koloski's businesses are inside the Topstone building right where it looks to be ground zero for at least some of the contamination. No one should be receiving special favors from the city government especially when it's our tax dollars that are paying for everything. I think it is time for a new city manager and a new group of city councilors. Preferably city officials who will ignore the special requests from the special interests parties that continue to take advantage of the normal taxpaying citizens of Claremont.

  • Jack (Tuesday, July 03 18 07:05 pm EDT)

    Rumor has it that Councilor Nick pays no rent on his multiple establishments.
    No wonder he is still in business he is in partnership with the city.
    Is there any other business owner that is able to conduct business rent free in Claremont?

  • Jim Sullivan (Tuesday, July 03 18 02:04 pm EDT)

    New article. June 2 City Council meeting synopsis. Shocking new information about Topstone Building not stated at Council meeting! For full details go to the News Flashes page.

  • FDR (Friday, June 29 18 11:41 am EDT)

    Well at least Claremont can clearly see that the Republican delegates are the ones who do not take representing the city seriously.

  • Rep. John J.O’Connor (Wednesday, June 27 18 09:36 am EDT)

    In a recent article in the Eagle Times it accused me of missing a large number of votes. In an age of “fake news”, it was refreshing to see the truth reported in the media.
    This past legislative session I missed a number of days due to illness’s
    As we all know it was a long, cold,bitter winter and like a lot of Claremont citizens I suffered from a multiple of illnesses which were adversely affected by extreme cold.
    That is the most explaining I have done in a very long time but I feel the citizens of Claremont deserve an explanation.
    During my time at the statehouse I have consistently voted on the bills that directly affect the citizens of Claremont over my own well-being which led to the severity of the illness.
    As Patrick Adrian points out on that Facebook page that censors all opinions that they don’t agree with, I had the option to call the Clerk and request an excused absence, which is true. As an adult, I never felt the need to notify the Republican leadership of my absence. Leadership has the authority to pull bills at anytime, if they know they do not have the support for a certain bill, they will pull it for consideration till a later date. That seems unfair to me and I was not going to let my illness be used in a political game.
    By the grace of God and excellent care from my wife,I have recovered from my illnesses. Some will say it takes a lot of nerve to seek re-election, I agree it does take a lot of nerve.
    It takes the kind of nerve that stands up to the Governor because he disagrees with your position on the “Right to work” bill,
    It takes a lot of nerve to stand up to your party leadership because you agree with the other side on important domestic issues.
    It takes a lot of nerve to stand up to the numerous lobbyists and special interest groups that run rampant in the Statehouse.
    It’s because I have a lot of nerve that I was able to do these things.
    It’s because I have a lot of nerve I seek re-election.

  • Terry (Wednesday, June 27 18 08:27 am EDT)

    I have always thought that the city's finance director is inept. Whenever a question is asked one of the city councilors she very rarely knows the answer and it is always rounded off numbers that no one ever substantiates except for the Sullivan Report. I remember AJ Maranville speaking before the councilors with proof that the city was running three different sets of books for the community center and all of them had different numbers in them. They called it a computer glitch and the councilors were satisfied with that answer. If this had happened within a corporation there would have been an immediate firing of the finance director and a complete audit to make sure no money was missing. The low standards at City Hall thanks to Mayor Dumb Blonde Lovett and City Manager Do-Nothing McNutt are costing the taxpayers big-time.

  • Jim Sullivan (Wednesday, June 27 18 07:45 am EDT)

    New article. For full details go to the News Flashes page.

  • David (Tuesday, June 26 18 08:48 pm EDT)

    Steve, you are right about it being impossible to represent Claremont when the elected representative rarely shows up for a vote. My point is that Mr. O'Hearne has the same absentee problem as Mr. Gauthier. Whatever excuses they give are relevant the fact remains that neither person bothered to show up for votes when they held the representative seat.

  • Steve (Tuesday, June 26 18 06:29 pm EDT)

    It’s not Rep. Guathier’s attendance record that is concerning, it is his excuse.
    In his own words, he felt he was not receiving adequate compensation and therefore representing the citizens of Claremont was not worth his time.
    I voted for Mr.Guathier because I thought he was the best person to look out for the interests of this city but it’s impossible to do that when you are not there.

  • David (Tuesday, June 26 18 02:16 pm EDT)

    Steve, if the attendance of your state representatives is your primary concern then you may want to rethink your vote for Mr. O'Hearne. During the 2016 legislative session out of 236 votes Mr. O'Hearne only cast 100 of those votes and was absent for the other 136 votes. That means Mr. O'Hearne only voted 42% of the time. Don't believe me? Look it up yourself on the state website.

  • Steve (Tuesday, June 26 18 12:56 pm EDT)

    That’s probably true . What disturbs me is what I read in today’s Eagle Times about 2 of our Republican State Representatives missing so many days.
    Representative O’Connor stated he was ill, considering the recent winter and flu season that is understandable. Representative Guathier (my Representative) basically stated he was not being compensated enough. One is acceptable, the other is not.
    I am sure Representative Guathier knew prior to being elected the time that would be necessary to adequately represent his constituents. He continued to state , he will go to sessions but not committees.
    It seems,it’s at these committees ,where the real work gets done and if Mr. Guathier is unwilling to attend then I am unwilling to vote for him.
    I will cast my vote for Councilor O’Hearn so Mr. Guathier doesn’t have to miss any more days of work.

  • longfellow (Tuesday, June 26 18 09:15 am EDT)

    Maybe Steve,
    but you know as well as I do that Private entrepreneurs and government employees are quite different beasts.
    Let's be honest,government workers would screw up a wet dream Steve.They are just way too lazy,and way too greedy to make a success of anything.

  • Steve (Monday, June 25 18 07:43 am EDT)

    “Break up even venture “ ... are you serious?
    I own 4 / 4 unit buildings in Claremont and my investments are flourishing. Half my tenets are section 8 and I won’t lie, it’s been hell at times. But now I have decent, respectful tenets who are extremely happy to have a roof over their head.
    If I can make a sizable income with just 16 units imagine the money the city can make with 100 units ?
    Owning public housing is like printing your own money.

Print Print | Sitemap