It appears that Aldermen Dowd and most of the rest of the Board of Aldermen for the City of Nashua think that the Nashua taxpayers have very deep pockets.

The City of Nashua residents must remember that the city received a total of $44,453,420 in ESSER funds from 2020-2022. That Aldermen Dowd states the ESSER funds were short is a total lie. It seems that the Nashua School District spent the money on other things.

A resident should also remember that ALL of this money only went to public schools, and none went to private/charter schools. Maybe some of the money should have gone to the private schools because they would have tracked the funds that were received accurately.

Currently, the Nashua School budget is $176,664,951, with school bonds totaling $133,011,500 for a grand total of $309,676,451. This is for the lowest enrollment in public schools and in educational scores in the last ten years. Maybe this is why the School District could not keep track of all the money they received.

Last week Aldermen Dowd gave an explanation on the ESSER funds that the City of Nashua received that was appalling. Aldermen Dowd told the board and the public that the city was short on ESSER funds by $4.5 million dollars. Aldermen Dowd said no problem, the School district spent the ESSER funds on other things however that is the school district problem and not the Nashua taxpayer problem.

School officials will just have to cut their spending down by $4.5 million dollars in other places. And whoever made this mistake needs to be fired now. A $4.5 million dollar mistake is no small matter, and someone needs to be held accountable.

Second, if a roofing company gave the City of Nashua a quote to do the two roofs, that is the figure that the Nashua taxpayers should pay. If the roofing company did not realize that there were already two roofs that needed to be removed and now wants to charge the Nashua taxpayers an additional $2 million to remove the old roofs, then maybe taxpayers should not be using them because it appears that they are NOT qualified.

Please stop being so free with the Nashua taxpayer’s money and start holding people accountable for their mistakes.

Nashua residents need to voice their opinions with Aldermen Dowd and other board members. Please send an email to them at boa@nashuanh.gov and tell them that the Nashua taxpayers are tired of paying for other people’s mistakes.

The post Taxpayers Are Tired of Paying for Other People’s Mistakes appeared first on Granite Grok.

There is only one show on network television that I have watched and have for years. Fortunately, thanks to DVRs and streaming services, I have not had to park in front of a television every Friday night for the last 14 years. Blue Bloods has been a constant for over a decade because it is a rarity.

It is quality acting, with great storylines, favorably portrays the police, and has strong family values. For a primetime show with a lengthy history, Blue Bloods has only been nominated for one Emmy, and that was for a stunt performance. No actor has ever been recognized for their work. Why?

I remember years ago reading about why Tom Selleck joined the CBS show. He was brought to tears by the script of the pilot show and wanted to be a part of what he saw as a quality TV series. I am a bit embarrassed to admit that nearly every show has given me wet eyes. Apparently, 15 years later, Blue Bloods still touches Selleck more than just a TV series. Most of the characters on the show have grown up before our eyes, and some have died. This show is a model of quality and consistency in an industry that lacks both. So why the snub by the Emmys? There appear to be many, and none of them are justified.

• Blue Bloods has had consistently high ratings, especially for the Friday night time slot. One of the problems is the age of the audience. The 18-49 age group is not home watching TV on Friday nights. The show is a success, but it is just not popular with the younger set.
• The show’s creators, Mitchell Burgess and Robin Green, were fired from the hit show The Sopranos. This blemish may have harmed Blue Blood’s chances for industry recognition.
• Two female characters, Jennifer Esposito, who played Detective Jackie Curatola, and Amy Carlson, who played Linda Reagan, were both “killed” off the show under questionable circumstances, which may have cast shadows on the show by insiders.
• The Catholic League had always supported the show because of its strong family values but had a change of heart when one of the show’s storylines hinting the Catholic Church was “behind the times” regarding its positions on homosexuality. The episode also featured a cardinal struggling with his sexual identity and a nun who admitted being a lesbian. These views were not received well by the industry.
• Some think Blue Bloods is too pro-police in a time when the police are not in the brightest of lights with the radical left that has deep ties with the entertainment industry.
• Tom Selleck, Bridget Moynihan, and other cast members may have gotten gun permits to carry in New York because of their connection with the show. This preferential treatment doesn’t sit well with some.

Most of these possible reasons seem petty for a show with such success and longevity, but not surprising in an industry so shallow. Fortunately, millions of viewers like me are not hooked on the show because of awards but for the quality of the show. Maybe there is a message there. Not everyone needs a trophy to live a quality life. Just being good at what you do should be enough.

The post What Does Emmys Snub Of “Blue Bloods” Say appeared first on Granite Grok.

I had some thoughts about the person that occasionally (rarely?) sits behind the Resolute desk in the Oval Office. The man can’t seem to find his way onstage. He has difficulty making it to the podium. He appears to shake hands with people who aren’t on the stage.

He frequently speaks to or about people who aren’t there—because they’re dead (e.g., Francois Mitterrand, who died in 1996, Helmut Kohl, who died in 2017, or Rep. Jackie Walorski who died before a conference that she had convened).

He just spoke of asking President Lopez Obrador of Mexico to open the gate between Gaza and Israel. He continues to repeat tall tales about various events that have been fact-checked as false. He slurs words together.

When he is finally done. he can’t find his way off of the stage. Does he seem OK to you?

The latest buzz? The report about the classified documents about Afghanistan and Ukraine found in cardboard boxes in Mr. Biden’s garage and in his office at the Penn Biden Center. As Mr. Biden was the vice-president or a senator at the time, he was not legally allowed to declassify and retain those documents.

Will he be indicted? Per special counsel Robert Hur—no. Why?

Mr. Hur noted that Mr. Biden’s memory was so poor that he couldn’t remember when he was vice president or when his son Beau died, among other things. Mr. Hur stated that Mr. Biden would be a sympathetic elderly defendant and a jury wouldn’t convict. Not that AG Garland would actually issue an indictment against his buddy. C’mon, man

Are you still planning to vote for this person as president of the United States?

The post Night Cap: You Voted for Joe Biden – What’s Wrong With You? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Charging residents for government transparency (see HB1002) increasingly sounds like a bribe to me. Yes, we created these documents at your expense, but if you want to see them, you’ll need to slip us a little cash. It might be a lot of money; we’ll let you know.

The bill passed, was reconsidered, then did not pass but did not fail. It has been rushed back to the Judiciary Committee for emergency resuscitation. The goal of its sponsors [(Prime) Kuttab (R), Michael Cahill (D), Ball (R), Maggiore (D), Ankarberg (R), DeSimone (R), Dunn (R), Nelson (R), Bill Boyd (R), Edwards (R), Grassie (D), Carson (R), Gannon (R), Watters (D), Lang (R), Avard (R)], all of whom have put the state before the people (IMO), is to rearrange the words until it passes the NH House.

The buzz suggests easy passage in the Senate (like sh!t through a goose), and Gov. Sununu signing it seems likely, so this bilking citizens is a wholly endorsed project of the Republican Party.

They are making public document access and, therefore, government accountability a potential hardship.

Ua Nemhnainn, commenting on an earlier article about HB1002, observed that Article 8 of the NH constitution clearly states that “the public’s right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted.”

The only remaining argument against my … points is possibly over the word ‘unreasonable’ in Art. 8. If a fee would impact even a single citizen from accessing government records, it is unreasonable. Overall, this bill would have a chilling effect on low-income and ordinary citizens even making requests, as they would have no way to know ahead of time if they would suddenly be charged $25 or $300 for a request.

This is a point we’ve also made, but Ian Underwood added a new dimension to the conversation – as we expected he would – by pointing out that the system we have without the need for bribes (my words, not his) has things backward from go.

The problem with the current RTK setup is that you have to already know there’s a problem before you can start looking into it. If you want to find the problems, you have to be able to look at everything.

Actual transparency would require towns, municipalities, school districts, and agencies to make all documents that could be subject to an RTK available online as soon as they have been created. That would include all official emails, all RFPs, all bills, all correspondence… everything.

That’s what a Right to Know (RTK) law would require. What we have now is a Right to Ask (RTA) law, which is a very different kind of thing.

We have a “right to ask” but not a right to know, to which the HB1002 sponsors and supporting members of the legislature would like to add a fee, fine, tax, or, as I’ve now suggested, a bribe.

Yes, you can ask, but before you can know, we’ll need some as-yet-to-be-determined sum of money upon whose payment we may then provide the documents we think you requested (if they get it wrong, you’ll likely have to grease their palms again).

All we’re missing is a muscly gold-chain-adorned leisure suit-wearing guy named Vinnie the fixer and a shadowy alley reeking of garbage and piss.

The post HB1002 and Bribery: Give us Some Cash and We Might Share Some Documents You Already Paid For… appeared first on Granite Grok.