Articles tagged as

Right-to-Know laws

GOP Rising, Part 1: Calling for more openness and transparency in government– A winning issue.

.sunshine.Gilford GOP.

There is no question that in the Granite State, the once-dominant Republican Party faces an uphill battle as it seeks to regain majority status. Many of its long-time leaders appear incapable of engaging in any actions that might cause needed excitement among the voters necessary to make this a reality. Fortunately, there are signs that others within local GOP ranks have had enough and are willing to take action. They realize that if Republicans are to be successful at the ballot box, they must give voters a REASON to actually cast their ballot for them.

In an excellent article appearing in the March 26th Union Leader, Charles Arlinghaus, president of the Josiah Bartlett Center wrote of government openness:

The complete transparency of every detail of government makes government accountable and responsible, is supported by politicians of every ideology, and would eliminate corruption issues that are an increasing feature of our daily news coverage.

He further wrote that using modern technology,

A transparency movement is spreading across the country to open the doors of government.

[snip]

[I]ncreasingly, lawmakers and local officials are passing laws and ordinances to make transparency Web sites permanent.

Wholeheartedly agreeing with Mr. Arlinghaus’ expressed sentiments, members of the Gilford Town Republican Committee have decided to act. After all, who ISN’T in favor of more citizen access to government that, at the end of the day, belongs to all people? A Party that leads the charge on an issue as important as this might possibly be rewarded come election day…

At their monthly meeting last night, the Gilford GOP voted to authorize the Town Chair to send letters to the appropriate officials calling for greater use of the Internet to facilitate the availability of as many public records and documents as possible by Belknap County, the Town of Gilford, and the Gilford School District. The local group issued a series of press releases announcing the details. This refers to the county:

Read more

More trouble for Belknap County

shining light

Belknap County

There’s a lot of news coming from our neck of the woods here in Central New Hampshire– not all of it good. Most major newspapers in the state reported Wednesday that the Belknap County Administrator/Finance Director has been placed on unpaid leave. According to the Citizen (Laconia),

Nancy Cook, who has been the Belknap County administrator and finance officer for a decade, has been placed on unpaid administrative leave and the circumstances behind her suspension are being investigated by the New Hampshire Attorney General.

Belknap County Commission Chairman Philip "Bud" Daigneault confirmed on Tuesday that Cook had been placed on leave effective March 28 and that on the same day, the commission asked Attorney General Kelly Ayotte to look into the circumstances that led up to the commission’s action.

Regular ‘Grok readers might recall that this is the same person I refered to in a prior post about the flawed budget process (which I’ll explain in a moment):

Despite pleas from taxpayers and officials calling attention to fiscal belt-tightening in their own towns and school systems, the Bizarro characters that are the county’s “leaders” and the head administrator would hear none of it. Instead of accepting the input with genuine interest and courtesy, they insulted and sniped at members of the public that dared speak their concerns.

I noted on the Saturday MTNP radio program of March 8th that, after watching the administrator in action and her treatment of the public, if I were a County Commissioner, she would no longer have a job. And now, lo and behold, less than a month later, she’s on the verge of losing it, and then some.

This is not the only big news to come from Belknap County today, as it was also revealed during a County Convention meeting that they have failed to properly follow the law in passing a budget, thereby triggering a "default budget"– the Commissioners’ original proposed budget– resulting in nearly a half million dollars less in spending!

(Of course they’ll "fix" this at some point with a supplemental appropriation, but we can have yet another discussion at the time of trying to cut spending, so it won’t be all bad!) 

For those of you that might be interested, here is my column as written for Thursday’s (04/03)Laconia Daily Sun with a more complete roundup of Belknap County’s woes, lawmakers turned lawbreakers, and how New Hampshire’s Right-to-Know laws help ordinary citizens take back their government:

 

Read more

Right to Know gets day in Court: The Movie

Regular readers might recall that on March 20th, we had our day at the Supreme Court for oral arguments in our ongoing Right to Know lawsuit against the Belknap County Convention et al. Tom argued that the Belknap County Convention unlawfully met behind closed doors and a county employee unlawfully refused to produce documents to … Read more

NH’s Right to Know gets a day in Court [UPDATED & Bumped]

sunshine

Rays of light into dark corners…

Today at 10 a.m., yours truly and former Laconia Mayor Thomas A. Tardif will have our day in court– the NH Supreme Court, that is. In case #’s 2007-0566 and 2007-0685, Tom will argue that the Belknap County Convention unlawfully met behind closed doors and a county employee unlawfully refused to produce documents to which we were entitled per NH’s Right-to-Know laws. As you might recall, all of this involves the procedure by which they appointed a new Sheriff to replace the resigned previous occupant, duly elected by the voters of Belknap County. We contend that it must be open and transparent, as it involves a Constitutional officer, and they contend the position is that of an employee, entitled to the privacy privileges granted in 91-A provisions.

You can listen to or view the arguments live by clicking here. You can read more of the detail as submitted in our brief here and more follow-up here. When I get back, I will update with the notes Tom will use.

[UPDATE]

It went very well for us yesterday. Tom presented the case in a nutshell (These are his notes):

The fatal flaw regarding the matters before this honorable court is apparent in the presiding Superior Court Justice’s Order of 17 July 2007, when it stated:

“The Convention is entitled to hire public employees, including the hiring of an interim Sheriff, in a nonpublic session under the Right-to-Know law. RSA 91-A:3,II …” (On page 4)

I)  The fact is, nowhere does RSA 91-A empower the Convention or any other body to “hire” employees.  RSA 91-A only establishes conditions regarding employees.

II)  More importantly, the County Convention is not entitled to “hire any employee”. 

 

Read more

Powerful Town Administrator Fired

Exit… The story of the firing of the Town Administrator here in the ‘Grok’s hometown seems to have attracted statewide attention. With that in mind, I am posting the following piece with a bit of the backround information for those who might be interested. [Cross-posted at GilfordGrok. Other posts here and here. Excellent Laconia Daily Sun … Read more

I guess it’s becoming a trend… Right to Know lawsuit filed in ANOTHER NH county.

rays of light

Sunshine in those dark corners…

With the March 20th date for oral arguments at the NH Supreme Court in our Right to Know Law violation lawsuits filed against the Belknap County Convention fast approaching, I noted with great interest a NEW RTK lawsuit against county government here in the Granite State. Much like ours, involves a County Convention wishing to conduct business behind closed doors.  Will they never learn? Writing in the NH Union Leader, correspondent Lorna Colquhoun has the details:

A lawsuit threatens to stop work on the $38 million Grafton County House of Corrections.

The suit, filed under the state’s Right-to-Know law by Grafton residents Robert Hull and John Babiarz, contends the vote to approve the jail project came after an illegal "caucus"… [snip]

The lawsuit requests an injunction, which would stop work on the jail. It was prompted by the county delegation meeting held Feb. 11, when the vote was taken on the new jail.

Oh that darned Right to Know Law! Why, without it, politicians could just get the job done as they see fit– without having to bother with us pesky citizens! Anyway, much like what we’ve witnessed here in Belknap County as of late, the UL story reports

The proposal passed by one vote on the second try during a meeting that state Rep. Edmond Gionet, R-Lincoln, characterized as a "circus."

Here’s how it all went down:

 

Read more

When certain people are involved, be suspicious, VERY suspicious!

rays of light
Sunshine in those dark corners…
.
One of the main characters involved in our ongoing Right to Know lawsuits currently pending at the NH Supreme Court is Belmont state representative John Thomas, a member of the Belknap County Convention. He is the brains behind that group’s misguided attempts at hiding from the public behind closed doors when they voted to appoint persons to fill out the remainders of the terms of several elected officials that had prematurely resigned. It has been our contention as pro se plaintiffs in the case that they repeatedly violated the Right to Laws in the process they followed at Mr. Thomas’ recommendation.
.
Yes indeed, if you knew Mr. Thomas, you would know that, despite the pickle into which he has led the county’s delegation, he fancies himself to be an expert on the Right to Know law, self proclaimed, of course. Anyway, this person has sponsored a bill that proposes the most sweeping changes to the law we have seen in many years. Be afraid… BE VERY AFRAID!!! This man has nothing but contempt for ordinary members of the public when it comes to our right to know about what government does on our behalf, and here he is the one re-writing the damn thing!
.
HB1408 claims to update electronic communications definitions and uses outside of meetings in what is a fairly substantial re-write of the existing Right-to-Know law, RSA 91-A. As I noted above, just the fact that John Thomas is the prime sponsor is enough to conclude HB1408 is no good without even reading the thing. Unfortunately, the public hearing for this thing took place today in Concord and nobody I know of was able to attend due to work and other obligations, so who knows how it went– last year, a similar proposal by the same state representative died a well-deserved death. Anyway, for what it’s worth, my co-plaintiff in the aforementioned RTK lawsuit, former Laconia Mayor Thomas A Tardif, has prepared an analysis of the proposal, which I reprint here in the hopes that some state reps will read another point of view. I’m nervous because of all the innocent appearing "minor" word changes. Click here to view the proposed bill as presented with strikeouts and additions. Then read on to see what Tom finds troublesome. His comments were originally prepared to deliver to the Judiciary Committee’s hearing on the matter…

Read more

Shining Light into the Dark Corners of Government: Belknap County Officials to Conduct Open Meeting (For a change)

spotlight
closed door meeting
.
Well well. It took a few tries, but the Belknap County Convention, currently involved in two Right-To-Know Law suits before the NH Supreme Court, faced with the prospect of selecting another appointee to fill the term of a resigned Constitutional Officer, in this case, the Registrar of Deeds, will do so in an open process. Getting to this point was much like watching someone make sausage…
.
As reported on the front page of Tuesday’s Laconia Daily Sun by reporter Michael Kitch, the Executive Committee of the Belknap County Convention
“voted five to one to advise that the Convention, which consists of the 18 members of the House of Representatives elected from the county, conduct its entire proceedings—culling the applicants, interviewing the finalists, and making the selection – in non-public session.” 
They based their decision on rulings by Judge Mohl in the Right-to-Know lawsuits filed by former Laconia Mayor Thomas A. Tardif and me, where he wrote that such an appointment can be made in non public session due to the rights of an employee to privacy in the hiring process. This is, of course, the very crux of our cases and the pending NH Supreme Court appeal— they are appointing a Constitutional Officer, not an employee.
.
In response to the recommendation, Tom and I filed an injunction with the Court requesting that it stop the appointment until a ruling is reached by the state’s Supreme Court. We absolutely believe that elected representatives should not be making secret votes, especially when it comes to filling normally elected Constitutional Officer positions. As some local people might already know, the Convention, faced with this injunction, surely combined with a reaction to the negative publicity generated by their past actions as noted within the ongoing suit, ultimately decided to override the Executive Committee’s recommendation and will choose the new Registrar in an open meeting.
.
As a result of this turn of events, Mr. Tardif and I have withdrawn our request for injunctive relief against appointing someone to fill the position. After all, the only thing that we have ever asked for is that the Convention to simply comply with the law and do the right thing by conducting a fully open process. As representatives in our republican form of government, the 18 Convention members stand in for the electorate in this situation—how can we not know how they act on the peoples’ behalf?
.
While we are pleased with the way things turned out, there are many questions that remain unanswered. One wonders, given the difficulty the Convention has shown in complying with the letter and spirit of NH’s Right-to-Know, how much more they need to learn as the public asks adherence to the very laws that they, as lawmakers, created. It is never good when the lawmakers become lawbreakers.
.
And all was not peaches and cream as the legislative “leaders” reached their conclusion. During the course of Monday’s meeting, Mr. Tardif put a stop to the Convention’s desire to discuss what turned out to be, in fact, our  motion for injunctive relief, in a closed- door session. Again, from the Daily Sun, Kitch reported,

Read more

Sunday read: Right-to-Know lawsuit. Brief to the NH Supreme Court

gavel
.
For those of you that care (given the open-government ramifications, every NH citizen should) I am posting the brief we filed for the second case we have pending in the Supreme Court. In case you don’t recall, former Laconia Mayor Thomas A. Tardif and I have two cases going right now, involving the Belknap County Convention– comprised of the elected House members of the county– in which we contend they violated the Right-to-Know law in the process used to select a replacement Sheriff- a constitutional officer normally elected by a vote of the people. Due to the resignation of our sheriff, the law states that the County Convention appoints a replacement to complete the term.
. 
As previously reported here, here, here, here, here, and here, first they wrongfully went behind closed doors, without having a lawfully allowed reason, then they made a secret ballot vote in a public meeting (for which they have been found in violation), and then, the crux of the second suit, denied access to the documents used in the process that are mentioned in the minutes of the meetings, which were never sealed. We believe this violates our rights as citizens as described in the law.
.
This is the brief we filed with the Supreme Court this week:

Read more

“A striking verdict against government secrecy” Could Tennessee case be prelude to similar Supreme Court case here in NH?

CLosed Door Meeting
.
Imagine my surprise when I discovered the following story from Tennessee on the very day that Tom Tardif and I put the finishing touches on the brief for our second case before the NH Supreme Court involving the Right-to-Know law. You’ll recall that the two cases involve, in whole or in part, members of the Belknap County Convention– made up of the elected NH House members from the county– and the process by which they appointed a replacement Sheriff. It is our contention that they illegally entered into non public meetings– "closed door"– and made their pick. They then erroneously withheld key documents that the Right-to-Know law requires to be available. You can read more detail here.
.
Anyway, when I read this story from the TENNESEAN.com, I just couldn’t believe how similar the story from Knoxville Tennessee was to ours. I hope the judges here in our state come to the same conclusion as they got…
.

12 Knox County officials ousted by open-meeting ruling Jury finds officials selected secretly

By DUNCAN MANSFIELD
Associated Press
KNOXVILLE — In a striking verdict against government secrecy, a judge and jury threw out a dozen Knox County officeholders because they were handpicked behind closed doors.
.
It was the largest housecleaning of public officials ever in Tennessee for violating the state’s Open Meetings Act, and open government advocates hope it serves as a warning to city councils and county commissions around the country.
Pretty good so far, right? There’s even more. It was ruled

Read more

Update on Right to Know lawsuits

Gavel
.
.
Today’s Citizen (Laconia, NH) has a nice synopsis of where the ongoing Right to Know lawsuits we are involved with stand right now. Click here to read Cutter Mitchell’s reporting of our contention that the Belknap County Convention violated the Right to Know law in the process by which they appointed a replacement for the vacant Sherrif’s position. This was further compounded by the fact that the judge reached out and, wrongly, in our opinion, stated that the entire process could have been conducted in non-public session, his assertion being the sherrif is an "employeee." On Monday, we filed our brief for the Supreme Court appeal, Docket #2007-0566.
.
In addition, as reported by Cutter, there is a second suit involving the denial of records related to the process of appointing the Sherrif that we contend violated the Right to Know law also. The Superior Court Judge has issued his second denial of our case this week. We expect to bring this one to the Supreme Court too.
.
This is our Supreme Court brief, as filed Monday:

Read more

Why the “Right-to-Know?” Is it really a big deal?

man behind the curtain
"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"
.
The fight for open and transparent government rages on here in Central NH. As the saga of the Right-to-Know lawsuits we filed here in Belknap County continues, we find obstacles at every step of the way. You know the story– former Laconia Mayor Thomas A. Tardif and I have filed two separate Right-to-Know lawsuits against the Belknap County Convention (comprising of the elected state representatives of the county)- the first alleging they violated the law by the process they used to appoint a new Sheriff to fill the unexpired term of his resigned predecessor, followed by a second violation when they denied us access to records involved in the same event. Details can be found here, here, here, here, here, and here.
.
As we move through the legal system, having won the first point regarding an illegal secret paper ballot vote, which unfortunately included bad language inserted by the presiding judge in the ruling, (thus causing an appeal which we have now lost) we are being looked upon with some derision by some of those involved, including many fellow Republicans. One local party stalwart told my co-petitioner that "you guys are making us [Republicans] look bad." Even though some privately will admit that Tom and I are right in our assertions that what they did was wrong, they will do nothing publicly other than support the ongoing (taxpayer funded) defense of their actions.
.
The judge appears equally determined to protect both the lawmakers and his own reached-for ruling. His basic contention is that the Sheriff is an employee in the eyes of NH’s Right-to-Know law with regards to access and records. We disagree, contending that as an elected public officer, or, in this case, appointed to the position to complete a term, the Sheriff forfeits all rights to such privacy. Anyway, you can go back and follow the hyperlinks above to read the particulars, which are fairly well covered.
.
In addition, the firestorm ignited when "leaders" from both Gilford and Moultonborough (NH) colluded in order to dodge the public’s eye continues as well. As reported on the local outlet of the ‘Grok family of blogs, GilfordGrok.com, two members of the Gilford School Board and the chairman of an official body from Moultonborough schemed to create a "private, closed-door" meeting during a public meeting in order to bar interested citizens from having access to their discussion. Again, you can go here to find out more. (Also, here, here, here, here, here, here, and a Citizen piece on it here.)
.
The point of this post, however, is not so much to delve into the particulars again, but instead to discuss the question of WHY.

"Who cares? Why is a ‘Right-to-Know’ law so important?

"They’re the government, Doug. They always do the right thing, don’t they? Heck– a lot of what they do is for the children… and the poor… and the sick. You know, they do other stuff, too, like inspect highway bridges in Minnesota… Besides, some of the elected local people are my friends!"

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXingYummly