As a longtime resident of Hooksett I am very concerned. As I understand things, according to the investigation by the Sheriff's Department the Hooksett Police Department has not been found of doing anything wrong. The comment was that there was an appearance of wrongdoing, and as far as I know this is not a crime. However, we do seem to have a "clique" forming on our Budget Committee. Fourmembers-JR Ouellette, David Pearl, Marc Miville, and John Peroni (the Budget Committee chairman!) regularly attend Police Commision and Town Council meetings and present a negative point (yes, you have a right to your opinion) of view towards our police department. I ask that the Town Council take the advice of these four citizens, and instead of leaning on the Police Commission take a closer look at our Budget Committee. I find it interesting that these four individuals who are so critical of our police deaprtment publicly have gotten involved in the budget process. JR Ouellette-who's wife was often at odds with Hooksett PD while schoolboard chair; David Pearl who owns a business that relates to the media and facilitates Hooksett Issues where a great deal of the one sided accusations take place; Marc Miville who appears to have a grudge personally against the Chief; and finally John Peroni who obviously has a personal political agenda. If it does come out that my perception is wrong, and that the Budget Committee is only giving the appearance of wrongdoing than this committee should afford the Police Department and Commission what they would demand for themselves-exoneration. I implore the Town Council to sit down with this committee, refocus their energies on the budget, and change the leadership on this committee before we have another legal incident that gets us on the National News. Hey Budget Committee-If our Police Department is so rotten at the core how do you explain such a low crime rate with our proximity to the City of Manchester?

Stanley, Once again, another Townie chimes in to try to discredit the person stating valid events and facts. Sir, how are your comments based on valid points of contention, when all you are doing is slandering and attacking those persons who discuss publicly known facts that have occured in town? Cite the factual basis of your claims, and not just whine about those who cite truthful events on what is happening in town. Debate the facts, defend your position with your own version, and leave personalities out of it. Comments made in public input are always based on factual statements made by officials found in their meeting minutes. Nothing is being made up - their behavior is self-inflicted, and their statements consistently shoot themselves in the foot. No one is making this stuff up. They are doing wrongful things to themselves. Their mismanagement is measurable in the real empirical numbers. Their treatment of the police staff is historically vindictive and disrespectful. Talk to any Hooksett rank and file officer, and learn the truth for yourself. You will discover, Stanley, that "this is another fine mess that you've gotten yourself into!"

Stanley, I have no personel agenda other than sevice to the town of Hooksett. The only Police Commission meeting I have attend is one I was invited to by the Police Commision to discuss budget issues and it was avery succes full meeting.

Stanley I am glad you are concerned, but where are your facts. Things I present at meetings are facts and questions, it seems you have neither. When you get some, please come balance out "Hooksett Issues where a great deal of the one sided accusations take place", we are listening. David Pearl

Stanley, The budget committee in our town does an amazing job. Thank you to all of them who volunteer their time. I sit on another committee with John Pieroni and he has never been anything but a professional gentleman. It is my understanding he has devoted years of his time to public service. I encourage anyone who thinks that Mr and Mrs Ouelette, Mr. Miville, or Mr. Pearl are wrong about the operations of the Police Commission to attend a meeting of the Police Commission. Investigate the issue for your self. The Sheriff's report said that the poor communication created the illussion of wrong doing but their was no wrong doing. Hence the PR problem our Police Commission and Command staff have. That is a problem in of itself. We also have a horrible attrition rate which costs this town thousands and thousands of dollars. We also have a legal budget in the Police Department higher that the entire towns legal budget. Just some food for thought. I encourage you to attend the meetings, volunteer your time as the Ouelettes, Mr. Pearl, Mr. Miville, and Mr. Peroni.

Stanley is well intentioned; however, the facts are crystal clear. As a new member of the community (~3 year) what I witnessed during the last twelve months does not come close to Mr. Stanley’s interpretation. People conveniently forget the catalyst that brought us to this current point – the decisions by the Chief to use the SRO as what could only be called a political football, then the Chief refuting Maura Ouellette, when she publicly expressed concerns about drug and weapons-related incidents at Cawley Middle School [Union Leader Jan 6, 2009]. If memory serves me right, Ms. Ouellette’s concerns, both officially and diplomatically asserted, were disregarded by the Chief and Commission as an exaggeration. I would say that it is disingenuous for Mr. Stanley to say Ms. Ouellette was at odds with the Chief, when in reality she was seeking sincere dialogue and when it was clear information was not being provided. In the end, Chief’s assertion of 5 incidents, versus the real tally of 50+ is an indication that Ms. Ouellette’s situational awareness of school safety could be considered more finely tuned than that of the Chief. The entire saga has highlighted the problem the budget committee identified and what the tax payers have begun to realize, the Chief and Commission’s apparent position; that they are not to be asked tough questions because they are above criticism and they should not be held accountable to the school board about safety issues or the town when it comes to decisions that affect the tax payers. The Chief and the Commission for whatever reason, "failure to communicate", decided to clamp down on information, it was their decision or what could even be considered indecision, which created this controversy. The Chief and Commission feel they are being unfairly criticized; I believe it was a self fulfilling prophecy of their own design – it is hardly the fault of anyone but themselves.

I would like to respond, if I may. To Ollie-thank you for describing me as a "townie". I have never been accused of that before, and it does have a rather nice ring to it. Your response has a tone that being a townie is something to avoid. I think and feel the opposite for I have made my home here. You stated that I was "whining" and making personal comments-nothing of the sort. I made observations based upon the appearance of actions of some members of the Budget Committee. (Which as many people have pointed out are all reflected on Hooksett Issues, the meeting minutes of differing committees and boards, as well the video clips provided by David Pearl.) Ollie-your response is rather personal itself which has negated your point. Trisha- I did not refer to the entire committee, only those elected members who as a voter I feel have made some of the comments that are not only innapropriate but appear to have an agenda. The other members seem to be rather quiet and it would be interesting to know what they think. Any person who stepped back and took a look at all of this must raesonably question why has only one member of the Budget Committee (Chairman Peroni-thank you for your response and I apologize for any offense) stated that he did not have an agenda. Mr. Pearl-if Hooksett Issues is really an open forum how is it that the discussion is one sided? Why are there so few people posting comments, and why do they appear for the most part only agree with your point of view? The population of Hooksett is over 10,000 so where is the huge public uproar that is often alluded to? Who are the dissatisfied officers at Hooksett PD? I have talked to a few officers (by the way) and I personally have not found an employee of our department that is unhappy with their employment. If this is truly going on, these officers should step forward, get it out in the open and put the issue to rest. Otherwise all we are doing is slinging mud which is of no benefit to Hooksett. Yes, "we are listening" Mr. Pearl.

Stanley, Is there a reason you won't use your real name? Hooksett Issues is an open forum, how many times will I have to say this before you understand. Go there, it's free, you don't have to sign up, or you can sign up as Stanley if you like. All messages submitted to Hooksett Issues are posted, it is not moderated. Are the videos of the Police Commission meetings one sided? How about the videos of the Defina hearings are they one sided? How about the fact that in ten years we have had 94 internal investigation? ( I got that one from the Chief). So maybe the reason the other side isn't posting is because they have no facts to support their case. Now I see your second post and still no facts. You can talk about appearances, observations, tone, uproar and agendas, I prefer the facts.

Stanley, Those sour grapes you're eating must have pits in them. Your comments are void of any factual basis of actual events, minutes, or actions. You did not respond to any of my direct comments with any of your own legitimate facts. Instead, you continue to slander fellow citizens for their opinions without justification. I also have no agenda other than the pursuit of the truth, for the benefit of the taxpayers. I am for transparency and accountability. There are officers. citizens, and town officials who are encouraging me to continue my tone and they respect my efforts for exposing the truth, as thers are doing. I do it for them, and to fix what is wrong. Please response in kind, and not resort to personal attacks. A year ago, I was a nobody in town. Now that I speak my opinions publicly, and expose the truth, I am suddenly the subject of spiteful childish retribution. What a difference a year makes. I suppose if I shut up and went away, the personal attacks would go away... that's what you want, right? That is a Townie reaction, in my way of thinking of its definition. It is not a compliment. I am a manager by occupation -- I put the skunks on the table and get rid of the smells. If I managed my work duties as they do, I would have been fired by now. My reactions to the Chief are not personal; the Chief's and Commission's actions and statements are highlighted by me during meetings, using their OWN WORDS and votes. I ask them for clarification, to which they rarely respond with an acceptable answer. Rather, the citizens get a masterfully worded semantic answer, that sidesteps and dodges the desired response. I do not attack them personally, and they know that themselves. As an example, when a parent disciplines a child, the parent does not say "naughty boy...the parent tells the child the BEHAVIOR is naughty, and the behavior must be corrected." Respond to that, Stanley, using factual debate. Don't blame the parent for attempting to correct misbehavior. These are serious and costly issues to the taxpayers. Why would verbatim minutes not be allowed to be entered into the official record, when presented to the Commission for submission? Answer me that, without semantics. Why is the legal budget reaching $150,000, Stanley? The officers can't talk out loud, for fear of retribution, which already takes place. As the presumptive nominee, you should know that already. Why would they talk to you about their feelings? Bad street cops? I don't think so. Bad management? The buck stops at the Chief's desk for everything that transpires in his department. In this self-proclaimed para-military organization, that is the factual nature of its structure. Yet we see other command staff officers field questions instead, per the Chief's request. Please respond to that with your own clever factual comeback, if you can muster one. You want to know how many citizens are involved and concerned about controversies in the department? Witness what happened at the deliberative session and election day, when an overwhelming majority of voters resoundingly voted against any attempts to vote in favor of more money being given and spent on the Police budget. I got that message loud and clear, and you should too. My definition of a Townie is one who does not accept the truth, supports the old way of town government, and loves inertia or hates attempts at progress and pursuing the truth, wherever it leads for the official record.

Mr. Pearl-Stanley is my real name, thank you very much. The illusion that you and Ollie are right and those that do not agree with you are always wrong is getting rather tired, and to me the two of you sound paranoid. You both certainly seem to get very defensive when somebody offers a different point of view from your own. You haven't said anything new, and if you say something enough it becomes the truth and you start to believe it. A post from a "former employee of Hooksett Police" is hardly solid evidence. Many former employees of any company or organization have negative comments to offer, regardless of their reason for leaving. From the text, I suspect that "Ollie" is "Rudy" (who in reality is Marc Miville), and if that is so why is he not using his real name? Here is someone who is not using his real name, but to my knowledge you have not criticized this person for actually hiding his identity. Isn't it true that many other people do not use their real names on your website? Have you criticized them? If not, is it because they agree with you and I do not? As I close my last response to this article, I would like to offer a piece of advice for you and "Ollie"- when you point a finger at someone three are pointing back at you.

As a former employee, or bad apple, of the Hooksett Police Department I want to first thank that small group of people that are causing the Police Department to be in distress. Second, here is a newsflash to the drafters of that letter, the Police Department has been in distress for ten years, and it has nothing to do with that small group. Think about this… The Hooksett Police Department was once going for a national accreditation, where is it now? The Police Department used to have an active Association, where is it now? The Police Department used to have employees with over ten years experience, what do you have now? All in all, what do you as taxpayers get from your Police Department? If you read the papers from other communities, their police department strives to be part of the Communities. Police Chief Stephen Agrafiotis asked citizens to come to meetings, ask questions and decide for themselves. Well, people have and they have come to the conclusion that there are serious issues in the police department. Some believe that Chief Agrafiotis needs to go. Now there are desperate ploys by Chief supporters to sway the lime light onto this small group. Facts are facts and they are right here on the videos. Chief Agrafiotis can no longer say that it is just bad employees, he did this to himself. There is a reason why people are sending clippings of postings from this blog to the Manchester Police Department because a former Hooksett Officer wrote on here. It is a tactical manuever to get that person to keep quiet. That is the reason why many of us can not and will not speak publicly in fear of retaliation. Chief Agrafiotis is well known for that and unless you worked there you won't know anything about this. Herb, you are so right… Chief Agrafiotis will never look you in the eye when he is nervous. He is not a leader. He is not someone that the troops will want to follow. There is a reason why people that leave Hooksett NEVER look back! It is a part of our lives that we want to forget about. So yes, someone please start asking former officers why they left and you will eventually come to the truth! Then the drafters of this letter will owe all of us former employees a public apology

I posted my final response to this article on Thursday morning (almost five hours ago, actually). I find it interesting that my response was not posted. This action gives credibility to one of my points-that those who disagree with the opinions/thoughts that I expressed truly don't want an open forum. Yes, this does unfortunately in my opinion include the Hooksett Banner, for it is a fact that the editor of this newspaper participates in the "forum" on Hooksett Issues. What is it that those who disagree with me are scared of? Is my opinion really that damaging to the argument against the Hooksett Police Department? Getting to the truth, or the real issue can only happen when all sides are truly considered, which is something that both Hooksett Issues and the Banner claim to do. "When you point a finger at someone, three are pointing back at you."

Stanley wrote "I have talked to a few officers (by the way) and I personally have not found an employee of our department that is unhappy with their employment. If this is truly going on, these officers should step forward, get it out in the open and put the issue to rest." Stanley when we are in uniform working the road we are constantly approached by citizens who ask us how we like working for Hooksett PD. Some genuinely want to know, while others who are friends of the chief are just trying to set you up and see if you will talk negatively about him. We have all experienced this over the years with the, "how do you like working for Chief Agrafiotis?" Of course we all answer "its fine". To have her (DS) then say, “I used to work for him and he was the best boss I ever had!" Anyone how knows him or has paid attention over the last 10 years knows that the public perception is that officers don't like working for him. It's written all over the head lines and backed up by the sheer numbers of employees who leave. The police commission used to do exit interviews with the officers who were leaving but they put a stop to that. I guess they don’t care why officers are leaving. They must just take the chiefs word for it. I would think it would be a great way to get some constructive criticism about what they liked best and what they didn’t like so much and a good tool to improve the PD. Even his supporters admit that the officers don't like working for him but they blame it on the fact that the officers don't like discipline or it's because he runs a tight ship. News Flash! A lot of us have prior military experience and this Para-military BS doesn't come close to discipline. It doesn't bother us one bit. It's the management practices that bother us. So if you don't know the officers you ask about how they like working for the Hooksett Police Department they're not going to give you an honest answer. The Chief has lived in Hooksett a long time and has old time supporters everywhere from way back that will stand by him till the end. It's just too risky to speak how you feel. But Stanley we have "stepped forward, gotten it out in the open and tried to put the issue to rest", We brought those issues forward in 2005 to the police commission and they did nothing but waste A LOT of taxpayers money by starting an investigation based on a complaint which they asked us to write, then suspending the chief which they told us ahead of time they were going to do, then they interfered with the investigation by not letting certain witnesses be interviewed, then they said nothing was wrong, then they said they were going to meet with us for a win win situation which they never did, then they paid for the Chief’s attorney’s fees and brought him back with the “full support of the commission”. Then they said we could no longer talk to them because it violated the chain of command. So we went from open door policy with the police commission where they actually gave me their home phone numbers to post in the patrol room in case we needed to contact them about something going on within the PD, to no contact at all? We’ve even had officers ask to speak to the police commission who were denied by the chief. And when we first stepped forward and met with police commission chairman (TURK) to get it out in the open and put the issues to rest, he told the 11 of us that met him at PJ O’ Sullivan’s that night that this man (chief) can’t be left in charge and he (chief) had to go! The commission saw this in 2005. We didn’t meet with TURK to see anyone go. That was their idea. We just wanted things to change for the better. We wanted the PD to attempt to work with the employees. No one can work in an environment of black and white all the time where you are guilty until you prove your innocence. Where they hold all the keys to all of the information and you are constantly kept in the dark and 10 steps behind. Where they decide what they think has happened is the truth and talking to the officer involved is just a formality. Where their default is being on the defensive because everyone is out to get them. “The patrolmen are out for your stripes,” chief’s words to the sergeants. ect. I have personally stepped forward and just look what has happened to me! Last year when I took over the failed and suspended SRO program I was just trying to keep my head down and stay off the radar. I had given up the union steward position because no one man should ever have to handle that much stress. Fighting for the fair treatment of the employees was like a full time job at the Hooksett Police Dept. This came with lots of write ups and suspension. My wife told our marriage counselor at one of our sessions that she could no longer count on both hands the number of times that we had been out to dinner where I would take an emergency cell phone call from an officer who was being harassed by the police department and she would be left sitting by herself at the table in the restaurant for 45 plus minutes while I was out in the parking lot trying to handle the situation and help this employee out. I never realized until I heard her say that, just how much life this job takes from you. But I gave that up and laid low for a while. I hadn't gotten in trouble or been part of any internal investigation in a while and was just trying to stay off the radar. Last year I took the SRO position and 2008 was a banner year for me. I had received numerous commendation letters from the commands staff. I received an award at the state level from the New Hampshire Police Standards and Training Council for "Looking beyond the traffic stop" because I caught two burglars in the middle of the night. I even responded from inside Cawley School one day and was first on scene to catch a burglar red handed and take him down at gun point. There were positive articles in the paper about me which seemed like every other week talking about how great the SRO program was and how great a fit I was. I was doing a great job and had resurrected the SRO program and brought the Hooksett Police Dept. into a positive public spot light. ALL of that changed when The Chief decided to pull me from the schools. The community spoke out and I didn't even ask them too. They just liked the job I did and wanted me back in the schools. Police Commissioner Gagnon even blamed me one day before a police commission meeting. I was standing out in the parking lot of the PD with a friend and He walked right up in between us and asked me who my friend was. Like it was any of his business? He wanted to know why there was so much bad press about me being pulled out of the schools and blamed it on me. I told him then that there wasn't a budget issue or a manpower issue and the people knew it and were upset because they felt the Chief was playing games with their children’s safety. Once the chief was forced to put me back into the schools everything changed and things for me took a turn for the worst. By the way, the Police Dept. said at a police commission meeting that there weren't the issues going on in the schools that Mrs. Ouellette said there were and said their records prove that. Then in the same breath said were putting the SRO back in the school because Mrs. Ouellette says there such issues going on. If the PD is saying that they DONT have the Manpower or the Budget to keep me in the schools and they are supposed to make decisions based on what’s best for the whole town, then why put me back in the schools? Just because one citizen says so? How much sense does that make? None of it made sense to me. But after that, all of a sudden “I needed baby sitter”. The chief’s words not mine. All of a sudden a program that was running better than it ever had been isn't working at all according to them. And “I can’t do things that a first year patrolman can do”. The chief’s words not mine. The same reports that I had been turning in the same way all year now have problems. All of a sudden I'm being pulled into meetings where I'm being handed multiple suspensions. The union (Teamsters) immediately steped up and got me an Attorney because they say they can see that “I'm clearly being targeted". I file grievances which no one responds to. The whole grievance process is supposed to force both sides to meet at different levels and try to resolve the issue. But I turn in a grievance, and instead of someone meeting with me, the chief’s attorney calls the union attorney who calls me to tell me they received the grievance. But no one will sit down from my own PD and talk to me. No wonder the legal fees hit $150,000.00 this year. The Police Department set up those interviews last year with the news papers. They made me the face of Hooksett PD and now the Chief and Police Commission are taking behind closed doors and trying to make me Public Enemy Number One! They say "I'm too passionate for the SRO program!" What does that mean? Excuse me if I take offence to poor decisions being made about the safety of the kids who they told me to look out for. If you put me in a position where I’m responsible for the safety and well being of the children of this town, how do you think I’m going to feel when you actually hinder me from doing that job properly? If they haven’t noticed by now, the reason the town’s people loved the job I was doing, was because the job was simply to me. All of my decisions were based on “What was best for the children, their families, and the schools.” No politics, No agenda, No BS! There is too much at stake to let those other things get in the way. So Stanley in my 10 years at HPD with all of the tough times, I have never felt the hopelessness that the last 8 months has brought. I have stepped up! The whole town has seen that! And since I did, this has been the worst year of my life! Yet at the same time my quintessential greatest. Spending this year with those students and their families has been the greatest time of my life. Watching them grown and watching the 8th graders graduate from Cawley and go on to High School with the hope that I have shown them a path that they didn’t know existed. That a path of honesty, integrity, and following the rules, can coexist with a life full of fun things like skateboarding and surfing and snowboarding. That a 35 year old police officer who would typically be at the opposite end of a teenager’s cool spectrum can still be a good friend and a lot of fun, even if he has to live his life by society’s higher set of standards. And the hope that they will become better people because one time when they were in 8th grade they had a conversation with someone in the community whom they respected and trusted, and they learned the importance of patience and kindness and compassion, things that at a very young age they are taught in school, but are far forgotten by the time they get to the real world. Stanley, I don’t know what’s in store for me. Many before me wanted to work their full careers in Hooksett and I would love to spend my remaining 10 working as the SRO. But if the Police Department wins, and I leave like those before me, although a loss for myself and the people of Hooksett, this last year would have made it all worth it. Jay Defina

Oh... I'm mortally wounded by Stanley's revelation of my identity... duh. Stanley & Ollie......get it?? "Another fine mess you've got yourself into"...get it?? I use humor to illustrate the absurd, as my writing style. Rudy is my nickname, from the motivational movie of the same name. Does Stanley want to slander my nickname too, or does he ever want get around to truly debating the facts? Apparently not, as he has not responded with repeated requests from everyone for him to do so. I don't have the time to sink to his level of character assasination. We have real issues to address, and nothing moves forward in a positive way when time is spent criticizing the messenger of the facts. Hey...I wrote that in a letter to the editor too! What a coincidence! We STILL have not heard any facts from Stanley to back up his statements though. Boy Staney, you do sound paranoid and defensive in your responses, an devoid of any factual foundation for your comments. Rudy / Ollie / Marc

Oh Stanley, there you go again. I didn''t criticize you about your name, I asked you a question. If you are so interesting in identifying everyone why not add your last name? ( Just another question) . Now you have your third post and congratulations you have stated a fact. "A post from a "former employee of Hooksett Police" is hardly solid evidence." But it sure make you wonder,do you think he is lying? Any comments on the fact I gave you last night about the 94 internal investigation in ten years? Did you know that last year the Police commission spent more time in non public session than public? How about that legal line, it's over $ 140.000 ( public information ), any comment? Are you calling me paranoid? I use my full name, I speak at public meetings why I even ran for public office, sound paranoid? Stanley, if you are dissatisfied with the post time here come over to Hooksett Issues it's instant. I don't block anybody, I welcome your opinion. We need balance, you said so yourself and seems you are already familiar with it. I am really looking for some fact too.

In defense of officers who post but use different names. Would you post your name if your spouse or significant other was afraid of retailations? Yes, we have officers in our town that are afraid. Shame on us for letting this continue and putting those families through the hell they feel the Hooksett PD is. to Ginger, thank you for always being a profession. Anyone who says differently needs to go back and read what you have written. You present the facts and the speak for themselves. to any and all officers past and present. Thank you for your service to our town. Thank you for trying to help shine the light on the truth. Stanley, you are right about when you point your finger at someone you point three fingers back at you. Why is that the rule for the people questionning the police and not the Chief? I think for those of us who are looking for the truth. Which personally, I am. I'd like a straight answer when I ask a question and not because of personal issues and budget contraints. My question is now and has always been. What am I suppose to say to my children (and the children of this town) about why the SRO is treated so badly by the very department he represents? I got involved in this issue when my son read the hooksett banner and asked what was I going to do? I've asked the Chief in a public meeting what am I suppose to say to my sons regarding "Why the SRO is in the school then pulled out?" He said it is a budgetary reasons. Give me a break----with a $30,000 sign, $150,000 legal line. I was born at night just not last night. Stanley, Why is the legal line $150,000? Why did we purchase a $30,000 sign when the previous sign was an Eagle Project of a resident? Why do we have more vehicles parked at the PD then some Car Dealerships in town? Why have 57 people left Hooksett for other opportunities? Why 90 plus internals in 10 years? Why can't the commission or the Chief speak to the public at a meeting? Why is the Hooksett Police Department considered a joke by other law enforcement in this state? Trisha Korkosz

live in hooksett , have for 20 years secrets... thats what we all know....