I just sent this to the Gunstock Area Commission members:
—— Original Message ——
From: “Skip” <Skip@granitegrok.com>
To: PeterGNess@gunstockcommissioners.org; dstrang@gunstockcommissioners.org; dlambert@gunstockcommissioners.org; “jwood@gunstockcommissioners.org” <jwood@gunstockcommissioners.org>; “gkiedaisch@gunstockcommissioners.org” <gkiedaisch@gunstockcommissioners.org>
Sent: 5/11/2022 1:26:23 PM
Subject: Re: RSA 91-A Right To Know DemandCommissioners,
I have not yet received a formal response to the below RSA-91:A demand for the public record that President Tom Day admitted existed – either that you require more time or in properly responding with that “Responsive Record”: RSA 91-A:4, IV:
(b) If a public body or agency is unable to make a governmental record available for immediate inspection and copying the public body or agency shall, within 5 business days of a request:
(1) Make such record available;
(2) Deny the request; or
(3) Provide a written statement of the time reasonably necessary to determine whether the request shall be granted or denied and the reason for the delay.While it was discussed during the Public Meeting (I or II) on 5/2, I have not formally received either an acknowledgment of receipt nor a response to its contents. Mere talking about it during a GAC meeting does not meet the requirements of the Law.
Thus, the Gunstock Area Commission is now out of compliance. Do I need to start the process as outlined in RSA 91-A:7 and 8? I showed a willingness to be patient on my demand concerning the GMR Budget at your request. Is this going to be an on-going process?
Further, my RSA 91-A concerning Commissioner Gary Kiedaisch’s emails (that I handed out in hardcopy form at your last Public/Non-Public/Public meeting at the Stockade on 5/2) has but two more business days for action or that goes into non-compliance status as well.
All that I am asking is that the GAC Follow The Law.
-Skip
Skip Murphy
Co-Founder, co-owner
GraniteGrok.com | Skip@GraniteGrok.com
Without repeating the entire demand, here is the relevant point (emphasis mine, again):
The approved Gunstock Area Commission Meeting held on January 19, 2022 at the Gilford Library (Gilford, NH) has the following:
“Rep. Bordes asked for the average cost per skier. Tom said that they have that number, but it is not something they want to share in a public forum due to competition.”
Thus, with that remark, Mr. Day revealed the existence of a government record which IS a public record and subject to RSA 91-A. Thus, this Right To Know is demanding that Gunstock supply the following information:
- The average cost per skier for both last year and the current season just completed
- The average revenue per skier for both last year and the current season just completed
- If Gunstock Mountain Resort has broken out the various categories for either/both #1 and #2, this Right To Know is also asking for those breakouts.
That average cost per skier is a known data point. I cannot ask, in an RTK (Right To Know), that a government agency assemble the data to compute such a data element – but I didn’t have to ask for that to be done. Tom Day, President and General Manager of Gunstock Mountain Resort, told everyone that this data element exists and the work has already been done.
And I also put in the RTK demanding of Commish Gary Kiedaisch’s email interactions with GMR staff, other Commissioners, and Devine-Millimet even if they were with his personal email accounts – he has refused to use his now official one using GunstockCommissioners.org. The response, refusal, delay, or production, is due this Friday.
The NH House will be voting tomorrow on the Amendment to HB1397 that will totally restructure the enabling legislation that created the GAC 60 years ago simply because a few people decided that they could no longer have their political way on the GAC and what/how GMR conducts is business. My fear is that such a GAC, elected in county-wide election races, will be worse to deal with than the present one..
