So yesterday, I went down to Concord for two meetings. The first was a luncheon meeting of the SDGA of NH: School District Governance Association. Think of it as a conservative alternative to the NHSBA (NH School Board Association) which trends from “liberal” to “militant Progressive”, especially concerning its Policies.
Anyways, it was great to see everyone. And as to be expected with people who like to yak, the meeting went far longer than I thought it would last.
I called Tom Kehr on Monday to touch base and ask if I could stop in and introduce myself to him. Unfortunately, I had to leave a voicemail.
Fortunately, he called back, and he’d be happy to do so after my SDGA meeting. So after the long SDGA meeting, I strolled to his office across from the State House, checked in with the Administrative Services Commissioner’s Assistant, and she brought me to his office. Surprisingly, he had been waiting patiently and we ended up having a good productive meeting.
Right now, the operative mission of the Right To Know Ombudsman is to fulfill the philosophy expressed by RSA 91-A and Article 8 – a Government that is Open and Transparent. The emphasis, while knowing that Requesters (those using RSA 91-A to get information from NH governmental entities) have the responsibility to use this tool correctly, is for those entities to do one thing: Follow The Law. If it isn’t under one of the stated Exceptions, that public body must give the Requestors what is being asked for. After all, Government is to serve the citizens.
However, he has to consider that not all Requesters are “good ones” (like the story I heard of someone RTKing all the K-12 curriculum that took three months to assemble and she never picked it up), and certainly, as I have found out, not all Governmental agencies are not “good” either and believing that their Governmental records are THEIRS and not wanting to give those records to those “outside interlopers making their lives busier than necessary”. Thus, we both could come up with examples where that relationship was turned upside down. I had to be careful with my stories as they might end up as an instance that I’d have to bring before him to be adjudicated by his new office. He did enjoy how my Berlin School District story turned out (and how – see here).
So he has his work cut out for him – he is starting from scratch other than his experience and RSA 91-A. There is no structure, process, history, or preconceived idea of how the office will work. That’s his job between now and the end of January, when the Office is supposed to go live. During that time, he needs to construct everything to be able to intake new cases, hear them, talk with the Requesters and Government representatives, and decide the merits of both sides.
The one thing that I took away from talking with him was that openness and transparency philosophy that kept coming up. He’s now thinking that perhaps a mix of informal and formal processes will be needed – quick talks versus longer hearings (but still within the 30-day limit specified in HB481 that created the Office). He has to figure out how to catalog the materials, build up a history file, manual vs automated systems, tracking processes, notification process – and everything else that will be needed.
So, given that we Citizens have the ability to influence and suggest, let’s do so, shall we?
If you have ideas, especially if you have done RTKs with both good and bad outcomes for you, leave them in the comments below. I’ll take groups of them and forward them to Tom Kehr.
We NEED to do this as you KNOW that Governmental agencies are going to be doing the same thing to “protect” their interests – I am fairly sure that the Municipal Association and the NH School Board Association and all of the other lobbying groups dealing with any number of government employees will be weighing in as well.
Let’s make sure our voices, and concerns, are heard.
So GET STARTED!
