Kevin Landrigan spoke to the new chair of NH’s Special Gaming Commission, Patrick Abrami, about charity gaming after Andy and Laurie Sanborn’s alleged misconduct over COVID monies and their ownership of a charity gaming establishment (and the new one they want to build).
I know about it, but I don’t know enough to sound smart about it, much less BE smart about it, so I’m not going to write about that. What I am going to do is talk about impropriety. Impropriety is the quality or condition of being improper—an improper act. And in politics, Optics matter. No, not the faux ones that are ramped up by one side or another for political gain. This one is an unforced error. And this from Landrigan caught my eye:
Laurie Sanborn stepped down from the charity casino commission. She has resisted calls from Democratic leaders that she also step down as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which acts on all gambling legislation.
If she and Andy have a gambling establishment whose business comes up before the commission, she should never have been on the casino commission in the first place. Wrong decision to have been on it in the first place.
That ALSO should be a given for ALL licensing boards and commission in NH; if you’re a participant in that particular industry, you shouldn’t be on an entity that has oversight and make rules for it.
This should hold for any elected office holder in the House or Senate as well. The LEAST Laurie should do is make the proclamation that she will recuse herself from ANY gambling mentions, discussions, legislation, or votes that might come up. That’s the BARE minimum.
Better is to remove herself from the Leadership position – Impropriety. Remove herself from ANY situation that could place her at risk of being accused of even the hint of an indiscretion. No, I’m not stating that she should resign from the House, but should make sure that ANYONE (and not just Democrats) could make hay with the issue.
And yes, I walked this talk when I was on my Hamlet’s Budget Committee. As my boys were growing up, they were special needs and receiving services from the School District. Whenever that part of the school budget came up, I immediately said that I was recusing myself from all discussions, budget changes, and votes dealing with the Special Education area. I continued that when I was on the BudComm my last term and we had the Grandson with us – Impropriety.
As opposed to Dale Dormody. He campaigned for the BudComm with the caveat that he would never vote on anything to do with the Library as his wife was the Director. Once on the BudComm, his tune began to change:
- I think about keeping my promise
- OK, I’ll vote for library issues but NOT for anything to do with staff
- OK, I will vote on staff issues but not salaries
- Nah, I’ve vote on everything BUT my wife’s salaries (again, the Library Director)
- Nope, I’m voting on everything. And then, with a smile, said, “And there’s nothing you can do to me about it.”
It became known as “The Dormody Rule,” and there was nothing we could do as a Budget Committee. The rest of us resented him for campaigning on certain promises and then did the slow slide to recant from them. We couldn’t remove him, we couldn’t avoid him, we couldn’t ignore any motions (well, perhaps not give a “second” for them), and we couldn’t keep him from voting (or recording his vote). Why?
He did more research on State Statutes concerning Budget Committees than I had. Being a Dillon’s Rule State, subdivisions of the State (and any subordinate boards and commissions thereof) can only do such things specifically allowed in Law. There is nothing in the BudComm laws that allowed for a recall nor “a throw-off”(of any type from mere shunning to outright removal).
Smuggness.
Impropriety.
So what will Laurie do? Be a Skip or a Dale?
HT | Union Leader
