Milton Observer

By Muriel Bristol | March 15, 2019

Milton had the second part of its annual Town election (the first being the Deliberative Session), on Tuesday, March 12, 2019.

Only about one-third (32.4%) of the electorate chose to participate: 1047 / 3232 = 32.4%.

Town offices appear first, followed by Town Warrant Articles. (Both are listed in the order of the percentages of votes received).

---

Town Offices (in Descending Order by Percentages Received)

Town Clerk / Tax Collector – One for Three Years

Michelle Beauchamp won the seat with 903 (86.2%) votes. She ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 6 (0.6%) votes.

Library Trustee – One for Three Years

Miranda Myhre won the seat with 844 (80.6%) votes. She ran unopposed. “Scattering” had 2 (0.2%) votes.

Cemetery Trustee – One for Three Years

Bruce W. Woodruff won the seat with 840 (80.2%) votes. He ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 7 (0.8%) votes.

Treasurer – One for One Year

Mackenzie Campbell won the seat with 836 (79.8%) votes. He ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 11 (1.1%) votes.

Trustee of the Trust Funds – One for Three Years

Brittney Leach won the seat with 814 (77.7%) votes. She ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 2 (2.0%) votes.

Planning Board – Two for Three Years

Joseph A. Michaud won a seat with 791 (75.5%) votes. He ran unopposed. Nick Philbrick won a seat with 20 (2.0%) write-in votes.

Budget Committee – Two for Three Years

Thomas McDougall won a seat with 700 (66.9%) votes. Humphry Williams won a seat with 575 (54.9%) votes. They ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 45 (4.3%) votes.

See also Wintry Mix – Budget Committee and Meet Mr. Williams

Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) – Two for Three Years

James M. “Mike” Beaulieu won a seat with 646 (61.7%) votes. Sean Skillings won a seat with 618 (50.0%) votes. They ran unopposed. “Scattering” received 16 (1.5%) votes.

Fire Chief – One for Three Years

Nicholas Marique won the seat with 630 (60.2%) votes. Stephen D. Duchesneau received 396 (37.8%) votes. Neither of the above received 21 (2.0%) votes.

See also Wintry Mix – Fire Chief

Board of Selectmen – One for Three Years

A total of 963 votes were cast for the five candidates for the single three-year seat on the Board of Selectmen.

Andrew “Andy” Rawson won the seat with 311  (33.9%) votes. (That would be 9.6% of the total electorate).

Laurence D. “Larry” Brown received 250 (23.9%) votes, Billy Walden received 223 (21.3%) votes, Adam G. Sturtevant received 104 (9.9%) votes, None of the above had 84 (8.0%) votes, James M. “Mike” Beaulieu received 72 (6.9%) votes, and “Scattering” had 3 (0.3%) votes.

See also Wintry Mix – Board of Selectmen

Budget Committee – One for One Year

Dennis Woods won the seat with 154 (14.7%) votes. That would be 56.6% of the 272 write-in votes.

---

Town Warrant Articles (in Descending Order by Percentages Received)

Article 15: Eradicate Invasive Species – Passed – 740 (70.7%) in favor, 275 (26.3%) opposed, and 32 (3.1%) neither

Article 17: Milton Cemetery Expendable Trust Fund – Passed – 715 (68.3%) in favor, 248 (23.7%) opposed, and 84 (8.0%) neither

Article 18: Community Revitalization Tax Relief Incentive RSA 79-E – Passed – 673 (64.3%) in favor, 286 (27.3%) opposed, and 88 (8.4%) neither

Article 2: Amend Zoning Map – Passed – 632 (60.4%) in favor, 408 (39.0%) opposed, and 7 (0.6%) neither

Article 14: Bridge Capital Reserve Fund – Passed – 626 (59.8%) in favor, 379 (36.2%) opposed, and 42 (4.0%) neither

Article 5: Operating Budget – Rejected – 382 (36.5%) in favor, 614 (58.6%) opposed, 51 (4.9%) neither

Article 3: Zoning – Rejected – 382 (36.5%) in favor, 609 (58.2%) opposed, and 56 (5.3%) neither

Article 6: Highway and Road Reconstruction Fund – Passed – 595 (56.8%) in favor, 406 (38.8%) opposed, and 46 (4.4%) neither

Article 13: Geographic Information System – Passed – 583 (55.7%) in favor, 419 (40.0%) opposed, and 45 (4.3%) neither

Article 16: Conservation Commission Casey Road Fund – Passed – 576 (55.0%) in favor, 431 (41.2%) opposed, and 40 (3.8%) neither

Article 11: Milton Free Public Library Capital Reserve Fund – Passed – 576 (55.0%) in favor, 429 (41.0%) opposed, and 42 (4.0%) neither

Article 7: Fire Department Equipment and Apparatus Capital Reserve Fund – Passed – 551 (52.6%) in favor, 455 (43.5%) opposed, and 41 (3.9%) neither

Article 12: Town of Milton Technology Fund – Passed – 549 (52.4%) in favor, 452 (43.2%) opposed, and 46 (4.4%) neither

Article 19: Town Boat Ramp Revitalization and Construction (Submitted by Petition) – Rejected – 412 (39.4%) in favor, 546 (52.1%) opposed, and 89 (8.5%) neither

Article 4: Zoning – Passed – 546 (52.1%) in favor, 428 (40.9%) opposed, and 73 (7.0%) neither

Article 8: Highway Department Special Equipment Capital Reserve Fund – Passed – 539 (51.5%) in favor, 455 (43.5%) opposed, and 53 (5.0%) neither

Article 9: Highway Department Capital Reserve Vehicle Fund – Passed – 513 (49.0%) in favor, 495 (47.3%) opposed, and 39 (3.7%) neither

Article 10: Municipal Buildings Capital Reserve Fund – Rejected – 497 (47.5%) in favor, 500 (47.8%) opposed, and 50 (4.8%) neither

---

See Town Election Results for March 10, 2020 and Town Election Results for March 9, 2021. (See also School District Election Results for March 12, 2019)

---

References:

Milton Town Clerk. (2019, March 14) March 12, 2019 Town Election Results. Retrieved from www.miltonnh-us.com/sites/miltonnh/files/news/march_12_2019_town_results.pdf

By S.D. Plissken | March 10, 2019

The Milton Meet the Candidates night went forward as planned. The winter storm had largely dissipated by late afternoon. High winds followed.

As for the presentations, they were … interesting.

Continued from Wintry Mix – Fire Chief

---

New Hampshire’s Daniel Webster (he of the Daniel Webster Highway) observed that

There are men, in all ages, who mean to exercise power usefully; but who mean to exercise it. They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters; but they mean to be masters.

---

Candidates for Selectman – Five for One Three-Year Position

The five candidates for the single three-year seat on Milton’s Board of Selectmen are James M. Beaulieu, Larry Brown, Andrew Rawson, Adam G. Sturtevant, and Billy Walden.

Messrs. Beaulieu and Rawson

Former selectmen Beaulieu and Rawson did not appear at the Meet the Candidates Night event.

Mr. Dennis Woods, a write-in candidate for the one-year slot on the Budget Committee, asked this question on the Milton, NH Community News Facebook page:

Why would we re-elect [former] Selectmen that are, at least in part, responsible for current conditions?

That is a good question, Mr. Woods. These are the very men, along with current Chairman Thibeault, that created the 2017-18 valuation fiasco. (Mr. Beaulieu’s responsibility, if any, is not as clear as Mr. Rawson’s).

Now, it might be, just possibly, that they have seen the error of their ways since and wish to repair, to the extent possible, all of the damage that they have done?

Mr. James M. “Mike” Beaulieu has not explained his absence from the Meet the Candidates Night event, nor has he issued any statement as a substitute. It is rumored that he might favor cutting taxes, but that is perhaps an uncertain foundation on which to build the necessary reforms.

He is said to be available by phone to answer any questions. (I will not give the number here because … the internet). At any rate, Mr. Beaulieu’s “retail” campaign strategy does not suggest someone running seriously to win. (He is engaged also in an uncontested race for a seat on the ZBA).

Mr. Andrew “Andy” Rawson explained in a statement that he was away on a vacation that he had planned for two years. Okay. The remainder of his statement does not suggest that he has learned anything at all since he was turned out of office last year (by current Vice-Chairwoman Erin Hutchings with a very narrow margin).

Mr. Rawson arranged for a statement to be handed out, which the moderator read into the record. It did not address any tax reduction, as such, except to provide the usual formulation about being “careful” when spending tax money. Translation: he would not be cutting taxes. Former Selectman Long, who completed Mr. Beaulieu’s last term, used his question time to instead make an endorsement of Mr. Rawson.

The Question

Messrs. Brown, Sturtevant, and Walden all appeared at the Meet the Candidates Night event.

No one in the audience asked The Question, as such, although they were restive. Mr. Bailey asked something similar of his own.

Moderator Jacobs: Alright, next question. Anyone. Sir.

Glen Bailey: I was just wondering … a couple of people behind me asked, “was there a limit to all this … this taxation?” I was a little disappointed … this is the School Board, obviously … I was a little disappointed that they didn’t seem to think there was. Or they were confused, one or the other. So, the same question for you – which of you, or maybe all of you, is going to cut my taxes? Not cut the rate of increase, not everything else on the planet. Who is going to cut the bottom line of my taxes?

Moderator Jacobs put in his oar to argue for the status quo of increasing taxes. (You will want remember to thank him at his next election). He asked Mr. Bailey the “muh services” question.

Jacobs: Can I ask a counter question? I one time thought we could just shut down the transfer station and send everybody to Rochester – when I was a selectman – close out the fire department and just go to Rochester; close the ambulance service and ask Rochester, Frisbee, to come up here; and contract out with somebody to plow the roads.

Bailey: Don’t forget the police.

Jacobs: It meant a huge level of service decrease. Is that acceptable?

Bailey: It’s not acceptable to keep raising the taxes to the point that you’re driving people out of town.

Audience member: That’s happening a lot.

Bailey: It’s not acceptable, so something has to go. So, which of you will cut my taxes?

Thank you, Mr. Bailey, for helping us cut the … get to the point.

Messrs. Brown and Sturtevant

Messrs. Brown, Sturtevant, and Walden were present and answered questions. Our interest here is in whether the candidate would work to reduce taxes.

Mr. Adam G. Sturtevant went first. He spoke of efficiencies of scale, return on investment (as well as its acronym ROI), brick and mortar, “muh services,” etc. When prodded, he offered this final answer:

… I’d be lying if I said I’d be cutting your taxes without seeing the full budget and knowing what you’d be getting. So, the answer is I would cut it if it was possible, but I don’t know that answer.

Mr. Laurence D. “Larry” Brown went third. He used his time, but did not need to be prodded for his conclusion. His final answer:

… I’ll say it straight: I don’t think I can reduce your taxes in any substantial fashion. The structure of Town government, the structure of the School system, the structure of New Hampshire State tax system preferences are stacked against the lower income property owner in New Hampshire.

Mr. Billy Walden

Mr. Billy Walden went second. His final answer:

[Regarding Milton Town taxation as an “existential threat”:]. Yes, it is. You hear a lot of people say that. Older folks. I don’t want to be eating cat food. But the way the Town is going right now, with the tax increases and things like that, that’s where it’s headed. I am going to do whatever I can, within my capacity, to lower taxes. I mean, that’s the goal. It really is a sinking ship when you look at the amount of people that are trying to possibly move out of Town or find a better place with a lower tax rate. What I really want to do is try to grab a bucket and bail some of the water out of the ship. That’s really my goal. And whatever I need to do to make that happen, that’s what I’m going to do. Within my capacity, because I’m one of three.

The Answer to The Question

Of all the five candidates only Mr. BILLY WALDEN committed himself to work, vote and act to reduce Milton’s oppressive taxation.

He purports to be not another George. It might be that we will get to see.

---

See also Wintry Mix – School Board Candidates, Wintry Mix – Budget Committee, and Wintry Mix – Fire Chief.

---

References:

Town of Milton. (2019). Meet the Candidates Night. Retrieved from youtu.be/nOmRUcqTf08?t=6803

By S.D. Plissken | March 8, 2019

The Properties

According to the Town’s Avitar listings, the Plummer’s Ridge Schoolhouse No. 1 property at 1116 White Mountain Highway is valued at $89,600. That includes $29,800 for 0.18 acres of land, $59,000 for the Schoolhouse itself, and $800 for its 10’x15′ wooden shed.

The “Blue House” property across the street at 1121 White Mountain Highway is valued at $168,300. That includes $40,400 for 2.64 acres of land, $124,200 for the house itself, and $3,700 for its “features” ($749 for its 18’x20′ wooden shed and $3,000 for its Fireplace 1-Stand). (I know the features do not add up).

Now, we all know that Town valuations are questionable at best. Few will ever realize the inflated bubble prices that the Town asserts for tax purposes. But, for the sake of argument, let us suppose their valuations are accurate.

The Proposal

Board of Selectmen (BOS) Chairman Thibeault proposed “selling” both properties – valued together at $257,900 – to the Milton Historical Society (MHS), on whose board he sits, for $2. The whole BOS was on the verge of rubber-stamping this proposal as a Warrant Article on this year’s ballot.

It so happens that BOS Chairman Thibeault and the MHS’s own Vice-Chairman Thibeault are the very same person; just as BOS Vice-Chairwoman Hutchings is a member of that same society. Outgoing Selectman Lucier has never announced his affiliation, if any there be, with the MHS.

A Question

An audience member asked if the BOS were not concerned with the apparent conflict of interest: BOS members arranging to virtually “give” away “Town-Owned” property to a private society in which they have an interest.

Mr. Larry Brown, helpful as always, pointed out that it was for the board alone to decide if they had a conflict of interest. According to Mr. Brown, it would not be a conflict of interest if they received no money and did not hold paid positions with the society.

The audience member pointed out that money need not be the only consideration. Which is why legal boilerplate is often included in real estate deeds that mentions also “other valuable considerations.” Thank you, Mr. Brown. (You have an opportunity of thanking him yourself, if you wish: he is a currently a candidate for a seat on that same Board of Selectmen).

That proposed Warrant Article did not go forward. Vice-Chairwoman Hutchings and Selectman Lucier apparently saw the problem and voted “nay” in a rare 2-1 split. (Chairman Thibeault dug in his heels).

Nobody with a lick of sense supposes that the Town will ever realize anything like its fantasy valuation of $257,900 for the two properties at an auction. The “Blue House” was seriously overvalued. (Its original Corcoran valuation of $208,600 dropped by 19.3% to $168,300). It has developed serious problems since. But those are the absurd values that the Town claimed as being valid when it was busy over-assessing, overtaxing, charging penalties and interest (I have heard 18%, like some kind of insane credit card), and finally seizing the property.

Even so, the Town will likely realize much more than the $2 that Chairman Thibeault was proposing – the difference being at least some tens of thousands of dollars. And that difference – four orders of magnitude – belongs to the taxpayers.

So, “No” Means “Yes” Now?

At this most recent BOS meeting, that of March 4, 2019, the BOS, Town Administrator, and Town Assessor went around in circles again on “Town-Owned” properties. (They seem to enjoy covering always the same ground).

There are three-year properties, for which the dispossessed owner will get nothing at all; less than three-year properties, for which the dispossessed owner might get some residue; as well as phantom properties, slivers, old fire stations, gifts versus seizures, etc., etc.

Chairman Thibeault: I think the ones that we’ve had for three years were all set to go for auction. The only one that I would not support selling was the 1121 White Mountain Highway … until there’s further discussion with the Historical Society and what that could potentially become … but other than that, all the three-year ones?

Well, we knew the Chairman never “supported” selling that one – at a market price – because he wanted to give it away to his other board. He lost that vote. Even the other selectmen could see that it was a “questionable” proposition, but the erstwhile Chairman just can not give it up.

Not Yours to Give

Thanks to these same selectmen, there are fewer saved dollars – less actual capital – going spare in Milton these days.

Whether fairly or foully obtained – these “Town-owned” properties belong now to the taxpayers. The BOS has no right to give away taxpayer properties – valued together at over a quarter-million dollars ($257,900) – to Chairman Thibeault’s buddies at the Milton Historical Society for a measly $2. For philanthropically-minded selectmen: these properties are just not yours to give.

If the Milton Historical Society wants to pony up the $257,900 right now, or even bid some much smaller amount at a “tax-title” auction, they can make it happen. The BOS can set the auction date and the society can start its fundraiser.

Or the Chairman, who feels that the taxpayers just cannot give enough, can prove the strength of his own “support.” He can take out another mortgage on his own home, buy the properties in question, and donate them to the Historical Society himself.

---

References:

Lilley, Floy. (2012). Not Yours to Give | Davy Crockett. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=daay8yvgsGM

Town of Milton. (2019, March 4). BOS Meeting, March 4, 2019. Retrieved from youtu.be/-io2f380xjE?t=3478

 

By S.D. Plissken | March 5, 2019

The Milton Meet the Candidates night went forward as planned. The winter storm had largely dissipated by late afternoon. High winds followed.

As for the presentations, they were … interesting.

Continued from Wintry Mix – Budget Committee

For Fire Chief – One Three-Year Term

Incumbent Fire Chief Nicholas Marique provided handouts. One was his resume and the other a description of the interim pumper truck. The challenger is Mr. Stephen Duchesneau, a former Milton firefighter, who has run several times before.

The Point

Lest we forget: the point of this exercise is to determine which candidate can perform this task adequately at the lowest cost to the taxpayer.

Much concern arises from the vast sums of money that have been spent already, such as the exceedingly expensive Fire palazzo, for which Chief Marique claimed the credit and responsibility. I have heard many, including some highly-placed officials, question the basic wisdom of this purchase. Whether it was money well spent is perhaps no longer an issue, but the scale of it hardly whets the appetite for still more. Many are feeling fairly “stuffed” right now, thank you. And engendering that overfed feeling was a part of the station’s cost too.

Chief Marique claimed that, in terms of such grand and ever increasing expenditures, we are very nearly there. If we will just stay the course – the one he has set – we will very soon reach an equilibrium point where the CIP plan can maintain us.

Of course, that plan is itself very much in question. It fuels constant spending at a level that one might well dispute. CIP oversight seems quite weak, both as regards the additions to the plan, the size of the expenditures, and the pace at which those acquisitions are scheduled.

The EMT Department

The moderator, Mr. Jacobs, helpfully pointed out that it might be possible to just eliminate the fire department altogether. It also emerged in discussion that the fire department spends 70% of its time on EMT ambulance service. Perhaps even calling it a fire department is then a bit of misnomer: it would seem to be principally an ambulance service that spends some of its time fighting fires.

Mr. Duchesneau, put forward an overall claim that he could run the EMT Department at a lower cost than the incumbent, Chief Marique.

In broad strokes, Mr. Duchesneau’s plan seems to be that he would “Stop the Spending.” He spoke to increasing the proportion of resident firefighters relative to the number of out-of-town firefighters. The need to pay out-of-towners for sleeping-over would be reduced thereby, if not eliminated. Other cost-saving measures were on the table also.

He seems to assume, at least for daylight hours, that the resident firefighters would be drawn from the extremely small segment of Milton’s population that actually work in town. Otherwise, they would also be coming from afar.

That Pumper Truck

A brand-new $550,000 pumper truck was rejected on last year’s ballot and many were surprised and displeased to see it appear again this year. Because “‘no,’ should mean ‘no’.” Chief Marique heard them (somewhat belatedly) and substituted in a used pumper, at a very good price, but as a stop-gap. The planned $550,000 expenditure did not go away. It is still lurking around as a part of the CIP plan.

Chief Marique explained at one point that a thousand-gallon pumper truck will dispense water for about four minutes only. Two will do so for eight minutes, and so on. Not mentioned was how much time was required to put out the average house fire.

It might be argued that Milton should never buy a brand-new pumper truck. I have known people who have never had a new car in their entire lives. For them, that is basic frugality. Milton’s small (and stagnant) population size might require us to restrict ourselves always to the used market.

Uneven Coverage

It also emerged that the average response, given the distances involved and the need for firefighters to assemble, is about fifteen minutes. The response times should be shorter for those closest to the Fire palazzo, or, to some extent, for those near the Milton Mills substation.

The longest response times would be experienced by homeowners in South Milton, West Milton, outlying stretches between the two stations, and out on NH Route 153.

The time differential of a response to fires close to the Fire palazzo and those occurring on the outskirts is far greater than the additional four minutes that another pumper truck provides.

You have parts of town that are basically in the “Fire District” and those that are not. Not unlike the Water District. Perhaps that basic fact of uneven coverage should be reflected in the assessments and the bottom line of the taxes paid by those with the lesser coverage.

That Truck Fire

Mr. Duchesneau cited a truck fire that occurred near the fire station as an example of the current situation not working. The details remain hazy. It seems that there were two staff firefighters (rather than the volunteers) who were both out of town when the truck fire took place. They were picking up a vehicle that had undergone some maintenance. It seems that both staffers had been required for this vehicle pick-up because that is the minimum required to “man” this sort of vehicle.

I am not persuaded that this was in fact necessary. Has no one ever seen a taxi or bus with an “out of service” sign? This vehicle was out of service while being serviced and could no doubt continue to be out of service while some single firefighter or even some non-firefighter returned it from out-of-town. Where it could then be put back “in service.” Meanwhile, there would have been coverage.

But neither am I persuaded that this single fumble tells the tale all by itself. The point remains: who can maintain a fire department that we can actually afford?

Mr. Duchesneau’s points spoke largely to improved coverage, rather than reduced costs, except to the extent that it might reduce or eliminate the need for paid sleepovers. A smaller – but closer – staff might reduce costs (including breathing and other per-person equipment outlays).

Per-Person Expenses

A $70,000 expense for replacement breathing devices has been much mentioned lately. Each firefighter, or perhaps each seat of the fire vehicles (?), needs one of these. The Chief has said that they have a life-span of fifteen years and that ours are at the ten to twelve year mark.

Some have questioned why this expense comes all at once and not in some “rolling” sequence of, say, three or four a year. The Chief says that the equipment changes over time – their features, capabilities, and the placement of their dials and settings – and differences in equipment would emerge with phased purchases. That would be confusing at critical moments.

No one doubts the necessity for such equipment. But, if this is a per-firefighter expense, the size of Chief Marique’s roster has been questioned. A smaller personnel roster would require fewer personal devices.

Veering Off the Point

Unfortunately, both the challenger, the incumbent, and the audience seemed to veer off the point: coverage at the lowest possible cost.

There seemed to be a strong animosity between the two camps, whose origin remains unclear. Mr. Duchesneau said that neither he nor the Milton-resident firefighters that he would engage will work (or work again) for the current Chief. The reason – assuming they all have the same reason – was not explained.

Many of the questions seemed designed to highlight a perceived difference in qualifications between the two candidates. The difference seemed rather slight – one having, I believe, thirteen years experience versus the other’s twenty years. The Chief has been chief for over nine years.

Were Mr. Duchesneau’s firefighter’s certifications current? No, you need to be an active firefighter for that, which he would be if he won the election. Was his EMT license current? Yes, he has a national one. And so on.

This line of attack – it was quite heated, and repetitive – seemed weak to me. Ad hominem arguments – arguments against the man, rather than against his premise  –  are by definition fallacies.

First of all, licensing is when your right to do something is taken away and then sold back to you.

Secondly, all of the licensing demanded by the inquisitors – both the firefighter and the EMT certifications – were of the sort that only current employees may hold. There is no way that an ex-employee – even one with thirteen years experience – may secure the licensing in advance. This is the case in many fields. Mr. Duchesneau claimed to have the necessary classes and experience and, if he won the election, licensing would drop into place.

Mr. Duchesneau may have given the impression that he had more certifications than he presently does. He should clarify that in some way.

But this absolute faith in certifications and licensures is puzzling and somewhat misplaced. The College of Cardinals is not required to pick a cardinal, or even a Catholic, to be the Pope. Theoretically, anyone  in Christendom might be selected as Pope. Likewise, there is no requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be selected from among judges of lower Federal courts, or State Courts, or even country lawyers. Anyone at all can occupy that seat.

Likewise, another firefighter/EMT with similar experience, though with a slightly briefer tenure, could be Fire Chief. It might even be that someone with no experience or licensing at all could occupy that position, albeit in a administrative or managerial capacity only.

We will likely never know the cause of all the animus on display. But, that does not mean we do not note that it was present.

One might wish the inquisitors had stuck to the relevant issue: which candidate will run this department with the lowest possible tax expenditure?

---

See also Wintry Mix – School Board Candidates, Wintry Mix – Budget Committee, and Wintry Mix – Selectmen.

---

References:

Town of Milton. (2019, February 24). Meet the Candidates Night (Fire Chief). Retrieved from youtu.be/nOmRUcqTf08?t=9986

Wikipedia. (2019, January 31). Ad Hominem. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem