May 2008 Archives
The Meredith News May 29th, 2008
SARAH SCHMIDT
correspondence. “At the May15 selectmen's meeting they (selectmen) refused to read into the minutes a letter to them that was asked to be "read not summarized" in their usual manner,” wrote Heath. “It was then barely summarized, after some rather condescending comments by the chair. It is a sad note when a taxpayer cannot have a note read into the minutes of a selectmen's meeting because it is in disagreement with them.”
The board’s decision last week means that all letters from citizens will be accepted, but not read aloud in either entirety or summary. If a citizen wants the letter to become part of the minutes, the letter must be read at the meeting by the citizen, or by their representative. TownAdministrator Carter Terenzini said that selectmen were concerned about “being taken to task” for how the letters were read or summarized. Terenzini said that letters will still be put in public record, alongside the meeting minutes. “If we keep doing it, we may put the wrong inflection on it, or the wrong summarization,” said Selectman Ed Charest. “It also takes a lot of time to read them all aloud, and Hope (Kokas) has to transcribe the entire letter into the minutes.” Charest said that selectmen were concerned that one summary might be considered to have been read more favorably than another. Punturieri expressed disappointment in the selectmen’s decision, calling it a less transparent method of operating. He said that people might not know what is being asked when selectmen summarize it. “To not read every letter equally seems prejudicial,” said Punturieri. “There can be many missed points when summaries are made. In my opinion, they’re only reading letters they want to read”
By DEROY MURDOCK
Union Leader May 25th, 2008
LAST WEEK, Americans finally started working for themselves rather than for their government masters. This milestone arrives two days later than in 2007, clearly proving that the era of big government is back with a vengeance......
Union Leader May 25th, 2008
GOV. JOHN LYNCH was supposed to be a kinder, gentler Craig Benson. He'd be the millionaire former business executive who balanced the state budget without raising taxes, but also without angering state employees by slashing jobs or upsetting the apple cart too much. Oops. During four years in office, Gov. Lynch has shown that he has no interest in cutting taxes, but lots of interest in raising them to pay for increased state spending.The governor cannot hide behind the excuse that he had to raise taxes because the economy is bad. He raised taxes his first year in office -- when the state budget was in surplus. In 2005, he proposed and got a 28-cents per pack cigarette tax increase. Last year, he got another 28-cents increase. This year he proposed a 25-cents per pack hike. That's three cigarette tax hikes in four years.Last year the governor proposed -- and got -- tax increases totaling more than $100 million. They helped pay for the largest general fund budget increase in 20 years -- 17.5 percent. Unfortunately, they didn't pay for all of it. ....
The Citizen Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Editorial
Now that the state's Right-to-Know Law has entered the electronic age, it is important that communities, school districts and other governmental entities which fall under the law's purview take steps to ensure that they abide by the requirements involving email access.
The law requires documents created or maintained in electronic form to be accessible....
6 HOLLAND STREET
PO BOX 139
MOULTONBOROUGH, NH 03254
Selectmen’s Meeting May 22, 2008
DRAFT
MINUTES
Present: Selectmen: Karel A. Crawford, Edward J. Charest, James F. Gray, Joel R. Mudgett, Betsey L. Patten; Carter Terenzini, Town Administrator; Carol A. Fucarile, Executive Secretary.
I. CALL TO ORDER: Karel called the meeting to Order at 6:30 P.M.
6:30 Non-Public, Personnel Matter: Jim Made the Motion for the Selectmen to go into Non-Public Session per RSA 91-A:3 (a). Betsey Seconded the Motion. Karel called for a roll call: Jim – Aye; Betsey – Aye; Ed – Aye; Joel – Aye; Karel – Aye. The Selectmen went into Non-Public Session at 6:36 p.m.
Betsey Made the Motion for the Selectmen to come out of Non-Public Session. Joel Seconded the Motion. Karel called for a roll call: Jim – Aye; Betsey – Aye; Ed – Aye; Joel – Aye; Karel – Aye. The Selectmen came out of Non-Public Session at 6:50.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. REVIEW/APPROVE MINUTES: Ed Made the Motion to approve the Minutes of May 15, 2008 as written. Betsey Seconded. The Motion carried unanimously.
IV. NEW RESIDENTS: Jarvis M. Jayne, Donald A. McDonnell, Alexis Iriana and Joseph T. McGonagle.
V. PUBLIC MEETING: Karel announced that, in Non-Public Session, the Town hired a new patrolman, Jared Beaulieu, who will start with the Town of Moultonborough on June 9, 2008.
VI. NEW BUSINESS:
1. Presentation Re: Fox Hollow Task 3 Direction: Carter read his Memorandum to the Board of Selectmen which explained the three basic issues...
The Laconia Daily Sun May 23rd, 2008
Letter to the Editor:
The Moultonboro Selectmen recently decided to hold their meetings on the second and fourth Thursday’s during the month of June rather than weekly. Selectman Ed Charest was quoted as saying that the agendas are usually lighter in the summer months, so it makes sense to have fewer meetings.
He further stated that, ‘It could be a good thing. My reading folder is so thick each week. I hate coming here and making decisions with material I haven’t even had time to think about’, as quoted in the Meredith News.
I have to wonder just what he is implying buy such a statement. Is he saying that he is not fully informed when he is voting on how the town spends it's tax dollars? One might conclude that he may be following the votes of his fellow selectmen and not voting being fully informed himself of this issues set before the committee.
This is not unlike the tendency to follow the flow as it may be for many folks at Town Meeting. The idea of not voting along with the majority is intimidating to people at Town Meetings, that’s why SB2 is so important.
Linda Punturieri
Moultonboro, NH
Editorial
The Meredith News May 22nd, 2008
In the 1960s and 70s there was a large voting group dubbed “the silent majority.” When government strayed from its path its members quietly and politely walked into voting booths and changed the direction of the country.We can only hope that there’s a “silent majority” waiting in the wings to turn things around in Meredith. Frankly, the town is becoming a mess.......
The Citizen May 20th, 2008
Editor, The Citizen: The selectmen just don't get it. At the May 15th selectmen's meeting they refused to read into the minutes a letter to them that was asked to be "read not summarized" in their usual manner. It was then barely summarized, after some rather condescending comments by the chair. It is a sad note when a taxpayer cannot have a note read into the minutes of a selectmen's meeting because it is in disagreement with them.
The letter that caused her disdain was one that challenged the issue of closing all town facilities for Town Meeting Day. On the surface, closing these facilities to allow all town employees to go to Town Meeting would seem a noble effort, at the very least. However, let's take a deeper look at this inane endeavor. If the town proceeds with this false nobility, as they have firmly stated, they will close all facilities "except emergency services". Well where does that leave those that would use the waste management facility? "Go another day" was their firm take. What if the working stiff only has that one day to go? Those non-citizen taxpayers that are forking over the lion's share of our taxes may have something to say when they are refused access to that facility before they want to return to their residences south of here.
How will they manage the "fairness to all employees" issues? Those that will be working are being paid… are those that are taking the forced day off being paid? If not is this to replace their regular day off; or do they just lose that day's pay? If they are getting the day off to go to Town Meeting, will there be a roll call of those employees to assure that this farce is successful? If they are getting paid and they are expected to go to the meeting could this be perceived as collusion for a supportive vote?
Let's jump to the private sector. How do we handle those would-be voters that work on Saturdays for businesses in the area? In this Orwellian World would we expect to see those employees get that day off by edict of the Moultonborough Fiefdom town fathers? Or should all businesses in town be ordered closed for that day? Rather strong you may say. Well the comment was made, seconded and reaffirmed (in a letter answering the protesting citizen) that "town meeting is a part of this town and everyone should be in attendance". We know what they think of those retirees that are enjoying the warmer climes in the south when Town Meeting is being called to order. "Those people that spend months away in the winter don't care what happens in Moultonborough". (Note to Moultonborough retirees: be sure to get your "permission slip" from the selectmen before you head south)
This is not about the good town employees who I think should be able to vote on all town issues. No, this is about all registered voters that should be allowed the same right. The selectmen can't have it both ways. Maintaining the "functionally obsolete" town meeting form of voting but disenfranchising all except town employees (and not all of them… remember "emergency services") is duplicitous, disingenuous and discriminatory. This "noble" effort is no more than a ploy to sidestep the real issue. SB2 is the only fair way to serve all voters and be nonprejudiced to those that are otherwise unable to comply with the demand of the selectmen that we "be in attendance".
Rick Heath
Moultonborough
The Laconia Daily Sun May 20th, 2008
Letter to the Editor
Many of us in Moultonborough are aware that the “minutes” posted by the Selectmen are not always an accurate reflection of what actually occurred at the meeting. When I read the “draft” minutes of the May 1st meeting there was no explanation of the reason for closing the town non-essential services on Town Meeting day other than “to allow everyone to participate”. As I stated in my letter, town employees are hardly "everyone", just a very small minority of the voters. I will say that I have no issue with any town employee, only compliments for the fine work they do. I merely disgree with the Selectmen's decision. As such, I wrote a letter for inclusion at the May 15th meeting and requested to have it read into the record. It was not. It was instead dismissed with the comment from Chair Karel Crawford that” I’m not going to take the time to read this”.
Knowing how past “summaries” have been mangled and skewed by Ms. Crawford ( the meetings after all are being taped by a citizen) the public at the very least has a right to hear letters in their entirety and the letter posted with the minutes on the town web site. This is 2008 with most everyone having internet access. The excuse that the information is available at the Town Offices is (to use a very old cliché), a cop out. A 10 year old could scan the correspondence and post it so everyone can read it. That would be real transparency.
Our Moultonborough Selectmen have proven that they don’t represent all the citizens of Moultonborough equally, only those that agree with them. Actions speak louder than words.
For the record my letter to the selectmen (all 130 words) follows:
This is a brief letter and I would ask that it be read not summarized.
As I read the meeting minutes from May 1st it seems the Selectmen voted to approve the following:
"it is recommended that all Town services, except for public safety, be closed for the day (Town Meeting) to allow everyone to participate".
I am not in favor of this. Many people only have Saturday to go to the recycling center or library. It hardly allows everyone to participate as you claim. The vast majority of voters are not municipal employees and many including myself, have to take a personal day off from work to attend. Many cannot. Can the board explain the rationale behind this decision? I would like a written response please.
Paul Punturieri
Moultonborough
The MCA is a non-profit citizens group. We rely totally on volunteer efforts and donations. If you are interested in supporting this important effort and wish to make a monetary donation please mail your donation to:
Moultonboro Citizens Alliance
P.O. Box 678
Moultonborough, NH 03254
If you can contribute time and talent, please email us at MoultonboroCitizensAlliance@Yahoo.Com or drop us a line at the above mailing address.
MCA
6 HOLLAND STREET
PO BOX 139
MOULTONBOROUGH, NH 03254
Selectmen’s Meeting May 15, 2008
DRAFT
MINUTES
Present: Selectmen: Karel A. Crawford, Edward J. Charest, James F. Gray, Joel R. Mudgett, Betsey L. Patten; Carter Terenzini, Town Administrator; Hope K. Kokas, Office Secretary.
I. CALL TO ORDER: Karel called the meeting to Order at 6:30 P.M.
6:30 Non-Public, Personnel Matter: Joel Made the Motion for the Selectmen to go into Non-Public Session per RSA 91-A:3 (a). Jim Seconded the Motion. Karel called for a roll call: Jim – Aye; Betsey – Aye; Ed – Aye; Joel – Aye; Karel – Aye. The Selectmen went into Non-Public Session at 6:35 p.m.
Joel Made the Motion for the Selectmen to come out of Non-Public Session. Jim Seconded the Motion. Karel called for a roll call: Jim – Aye; Betsey – Aye; Ed – Aye; Joel – Aye; Karel – Aye. The Selectmen came out of Non-Public Session at 6:55.
Joel Made the Motion to Seal the Minutes....
The Citizen May 19th, 2008
By CUTTER MITCHELL
jmitchell@citizen.com
Selectman Gus Benavides has begun to question how Gilford stores its email and whether those methods follow the requirements of the state's Right to Know law.Benavides' main concern was the preservation of emails, which become public records when they have to do with town business otherwise not excluded by statute.According to RSA 91-A: 4 I, "every citizen during the regular or business hours of all such bodies or agencies, and on the regular business premises of such bodies or agencies, has the right to inspect all public records, including minutes of meetings of the bodies or agencies, and to make memorandums, abstracts, and photographic or photostatic copies of the records or minutes so inspected, except as otherwise prohibited by statute." Benavides pointed out that currently there is no backup to the town's emails. This means should any be lost, so would the public record of such a communication.He explained to his fellow board members that this material, "must be available to the public," in order for the town to be compliant with the state's Right-to-Know law. At this point, only the emails of the department managers are backed up and recorded under the town's current computer system. However Interim Town Administrator Debra Shackett did say with the installation of new computer servers, set to happen this year, all emails remaining at the end of the day will be recorded and backed up. This bit of information did not relieve the bulk of the concern, as Benavides pointed out the logging of emails would only happen to those remaining at the end of the day. This seems to overlook those emails that may be deleted during the business day, which would be lost as if "you crumpled up a piece of paper and threw it away," explained Shackett. She continued by saying the best way to make sure public record emails are not deleted by employees is to properly educate those employees about what they have to save and what is acceptable to "throw away" Shackett advised that the software needed to capture all the town's emails would cost an estimated $10,000, with the cost being the reason such a system is not already in place. There has been an occasion where public records in Gilford were lost. The Citizen recently reported on the destruction of meeting minutes through "an error in procedure" by Shackett. The minutes affected were the minutes, and by extent the public record, for the meeting where former Town Administrator Evans Juris was terminated. Just before bringing up this issue, the board heard from budget committee member and chairman of the Gilford Town Republican Committee Skip Murphy about a more open and transparent government through the Internet. Murphy was requesting that the town post much of its public information on the town website, with the bulk of the request focusing on the financial data from the town.
While the board did not take any immediate action, members did approve Benavides to explore how to make such a thing happen after he volunteered for the assignment. Selectman Chair Connie Grant advised Murphy that there is a lot the board wants to do this year and information sharing of this kind would have to come after other goals were achieved.
Laconia Daily Sun May 13th, 2008
To the editor,
Last Wednesday, the Senior Needs Committee held their second open meeting and again asked those seniors (and those not so senior) to come and present any ideas, requests and needs to them in an informal format. It was slated to be a brain storming session of sorts. In attendance and speaking at some length was our new Town Administrator. Carter Terenzini comes to Moultonborough with a lifetime of experience in government administration and a mandate from the selectmen to resolve the challenges regarding the recreation proposal and the needs of the seniors. I had my first opportunity to meet Mr. Terenzini and I found him to be well spoken, focused, affable and dedicated to accomplishing that task (among many others) presented to him by his five bosses. He related a story that he once had his office door removed from its hinges to emphasize his “open door policy”. I had the sense that he is a fair man and will be working diligently towards his goals. This observer will be hopeful throughout the process, that he is successful. I predict that he will find the need to call on the supporters of the expansion of the recreation department and the selectmen as well to compromise as much as those of us that oppose the original RSPT report are expected to compromise. Last week I called for some common ground. My meeting with Tom Howard proved, to me at least, there may be that possibility. For disclosure, I need to state that Tom and I are friends, colleagues and once shared an office. I know him to be an honorable man notwithstanding the opposing sides of this issue we stand on. As a follow up to that letter of last week I would have a couple of suggestions. The first has in some element begun to take shape. The other needs to come from those that hold the keys to the town property that is the Lions building. The seniors have to decide what programs are needed and are affordable. From that process they will determine how much and what space, manpower and transportation needs will be critical to the success of this effort. The Senior Needs meetings that have taken place, I suggest have begun that process. On the recreation side, there needs to be a call for sensible spending and a more gradual approach towards the resolution of their needs. Please note here that I said “needs”... not “wants”. For the present, the space that the town owns and the Lions Club leases should be opened and available to these two venues. I believe at this time the Lions hold their meetings there, the meals program utilizes it at mid-day and there are some scattered rentals of the facility by the Lions. It would help the recreation department if they were able to use of the much larger space in their after-school programs. While I am not an advocate of burdening seniors with youth and youth with seniors, I believe there could be a time when the seniors could utilize this space as well. This initial first step could go a long way in resolving the issues of both recreation and seniors for the short term while a more conservative and acceptable approach is carefully and reasonably planned. As for the long term, I would rather see the town put $300,000 into updating and expanding the present facility than $5-million into the original proposal. This building that has been labeled as “functionally obsolete” has a new roof, new windows, and a commercial
grade kitchen that is about 4years old.
Moultonborough
The various Master Plan Work Groups have been meeting for many weeks and now they are having a joint Group Member Meeting. It is an opportunity for the various groups to discuss their Master Plan report status for their particular interest in our town The groups will also do information sharing as it could be one group has developed some new information that will also strengthen another groups final report.
If you plan to attend this public meeting, I suggest you go to the Master Plan Update website for additional information and to read minutes of the previous meetings. http://moultonboroughsfuture.com/
Attendees will find what the groups have developed through this time and possibly what they are tentatively going to recommend. This is the first time all the various Work Group Members have met to discuss their reports.
The meeting will be at the Moultonborough Public Library in the Program Room, on Tuesday May 20, 2008 at 6:00 pm,
The Master Plan Steering Committee members and the Municipal Resources team Leaders will meet from 5:00 pm to 6:00 pm. and that is a public meeting.
MCA
Friday, May 9, 2008
The good news is that many communities are taking steps to get official information online. The challenge is to expand the amount of information that is available and to get the information up in a timely fashion.
The term “public record” is one to be taken literally. Whatever is contained in a public record is what the public has an unquestionable right to view and examine.
Until the recent past that meant going to the appropriate government facility — a city or town hall, school district administrative offices, a courthouse — to view the various documents during business hours, usually in view of one or more government employees as well as other members of the public who might come to the office to transact business. Now, the Internet provides the opportunity to view these records from anywhere Internet access is available at any time of the day or night.
Many local communities are including on their websites such information as meeting agendas and minutes, budgetary information, tax maps and even information about property assessments. The variety of information varies depending on the municipality or school district. The same is true on the time it takes to get information up online. For example, the most recent Gilford Selectmen's minutes available on the town's website are for the April 9 meeting, while the last minutes of the Laconia City Council online are for the meeting of Feb. 25.
Officials should do everything feasible to get as much public information online as possible, as quickly as possible. This goal needs to take into account staffing and budgetary realities. But having said that, this is something which officials need to make a priority.
More and more, the Internet is the way in which people are getting their information. Government cannot expect that it is going to be untouched by this trend.
In making records available to the public, government officials must at the same time ensure that they are secure. Considering the legal weight that this information carries, they cannot afford to do otherwise. And it is possible that there might be personal information contained in certain public records that should not be available online, such as people's Social Security numbers.
But due diligence and common sense are not impediments to making access to the workings and business of government more efficient and more convenient
6 HOLLAND STREET
PO BOX 139
MOULTONBOROUGH, NH 03254
Selectmen’s Meeting May 8, 2008
DRAFT
MINUTES
Present: Selectmen: Edward J. Charest, James F. Gray, Joel R. Mudgett, Betsey L. Patten; Carter Terenzini, Town Administrator; Hope K. Kokas, Office Secretary.
I. CALL TO ORDER: Ed called the meeting to Order at 6:30 P.M.
6:30 Carla Taylor, Non-Public, Personnel Matter: Joel Made the Motion for the Selectmen to go into Non-Public Session per RSA 91:A-3 II (a). Jim Seconded the Motion. Ed called for a Roll Call: Jim – Aye; Betsey – Aye; Joel – Aye; Ed – Aye. The Selectmen went into Non-Public Session at 6:32 p.m.
Betsey Made the Motion for the Selectmen to come out of Non-Public Session. Joel Seconded. Ed called for a Roll Call: Jim – Aye; Betsey – Aye; Joel – Aye; Ed – Aye. The Selectmen came out of Non-Public Session at 7:01 p.m.
Joel Made a Motion....
The Laconia Sun May 12th, 2008
To the editor,
I would like to know why the seniors of Moultonborough are not getting there needs met like they should. Seems everything is about the KIDS KIDS KIDS. I love kids like everyone else does. But enough is enough! The seniors seem to be left out and put on the back burner. They are not looking for a free ride only respect of what they have brought to the community. They need stimulation of other people. When the school is empty why not have something going on there for the seniors. Isolation is a bad thing. I know many that are alone and no one has checked on them. They deserve more then what they are getting. I am not talking about the recreation center. That is geared more for the kids and a country club for some people. You know who I mean. Don’t get me started on that one — another time maybe.
Anna DeRose
Moultonborough
The Citizen May 10th, 2008
Editor, The Citizen: I would like to commend Paul Dascoulias for his letter to the editor, of May 7th, addressing the intimidation experienced at Sanbornton's town meeting. I understand his plight as it is similar to what some towns encounter if they do not have the SB2 form of government.
As a matter of interest, petitions were circulated, which RSA 40 allows, in Moultonborough for secret ballots for seven warrants, most were $100,000 or more, for the Town Meeting this past March. Some people blamed the resulting voting delay on citizens that backed the SB2 plan for Moultonborough. The real fact is that citizens from both sides of the SB2 issue signed the same petitions for the privacy of the vote and it had nothing to do with intentionally delaying the meeting. It is puzzling to me what all the fuss is about when it comes to voting by secret ballot. We vote by secret ballot in the local, state and national elections.
The beauty of SB2 is the 30 day "cooling" off period between the deliberative session and the actual ballot, giving the voters the opportunity to think about, research and speak with others about the intent and ramifications of each warrant article and especially any amendments. There is no pressure to make an immediate decision or be swayed by a clever on the spot argument that may present only one side of the issue. The polls are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. giving everyone a chance to participate and allows for absentee ballots for those unable to be present on ballot day. It's a fact that more citizens participate in the process when they are able to vote at the polls vs. a town meeting.
SB2 encourages more voter participation, isn't that what democracy is all about?
Jim Leiterman
Moultonborough
The Citizen May 10th, 2008
Editor, The Citizen: As Sanbornton voters goes to their town meeting next week, participants should be aware that the right for secret ballots for any articles voted on during the town meeting is prescribed by State Law: "RSA40. Government of Town Meeting. At any meeting of a town with a population of more than 500, 5 voters who are present may make a request in writing prior to a vote by voice vote or division vote that the vote be taken by secret written ballot. Upon receiving such a request, the moderator shall conduct the vote by secret "yes-no" ballot."
While some in attendance may feel this is a delaying tactic, it is not. It is a means to allow a fair vote without intimidation... and it is the law. It should be noted that only the moderator (or designee such as town clerk) has the authority to verify the minimum 5 petitioners, not the audience. Per "40:6 Penalty for Default of presiding officer. Any moderator or other officer presiding who shall willfully neglect or refuse to follow the procedures for voting established in RSA 40 or who shall willfully violate or neglect to enforce any rule of proceeding which shall have been established by vote of the town or otherwise, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor."
As a proponent of SB2 and therefore full voter participation in government, I support Sanbornton's efforts to get SB2 passed on this years ballot.
Paul Punturieri
Moultonborough
To the Editor:
After so much rhetoric back and forth, there comes a time for some sensible dialogue.Sometimes as I have said, reasonable people can disagree. Sometimes those same disagreeably reasonable people can agree. Here in lies the starting point for a new tone of discussion as to the whole recreation project and meeting the needs of those seniors that deserve some long overdue attention. Don’t think I am appeasing or placating those folks that have been the object of my barbs on these pages. I am not. I will attempt however, to begin a dialogue in the spirit of controlled spending and moving forward with a reasonable solution to two challenges that need to be looked at… individually. I can accept that there may be some need for more recreation space. However I need to hear from someone out there that there is an equal or greater (or more urgent) need for space and programs for our senior citizens. I am defining seniors as they have not been defined in the past at least as far as the RSPT has defined them in Moultonboro. There are seniors that are maybe 60, 75 or even 90 that
are active enough for tennis, basketball, jogging or calisthenics. Good for them and God bless them for their fitness and gift of good health. These good folks are not the seniors of which I speak. These active adults are probably already part of the recreation department. I am concerned for those folks that have needs for a place to walk (not run), gather to network as to who their favorite orthopedic MD is, have a low cost meal
at midday, have a place to be cared for while their “Family Caregiver” is working (yes, adult daycare) or have help with personal needs like writing checks and finding help with oil bills or just plain intellectual conversation. There are those that are well enough to live at home but may need a ride to the store or the doctor. I have not heard much of these seniors from those that would be combining senior needs and recreation into the single venue of the so-called “Community/Senior Center.” Presently, the Recreation Department has little or no time or space for these types of programs. Nor should they… and here is where we need to look at a split. In a recent conversation with Tom Howard, head of the RSPT, I believe we found some common ground. I will not attempt to quote him here for fear of misquoting or misrepresenting his thoughts. However, I was able to make the suggestion that these two venues be administered by different departments and for the most part occupy separate space. I would further suggest that we address our seniors’ needs and services prior to an expansion of the present recreation department. Those that run the recreation do a fine job designing and managing sports programs for youth and adults. They are not qualified for the needs of those seniors of which I speak. The fine job that the meals program does in administering both eat-in, and ‘meals-on-wheels’ should be continued and enhanced. The Lions Club building is not functionally obsolete, but does need updating and upgrading. I urge those “powers that be” to support the Senior Needs Committee as a stand-alone department that would deal with these critical needs for our aging seniors. I would further suggest that the “fix” for the recreation department be on a gradual scale with a large percent of the focus being on much more restrained and reasonable spending.
Rick Heath
Moultonboro
To the editor Laconia Daily Sun May 8th, 2008
On a cold, dark and windy March evening a small group of citizens assembles to participate in what some have called “the purest form of Democracy,” the Town Meeting. The assembly of citizens in small
assembled to discuss the past and the next year’s goings on and then enjoyed a pot luck supper are long gone. Today we routinely fi nd that a small minority of the few thousand citizens in a town show up for the annual Town Meeting. Ten percent, or less, is a good estimate. Are they informed? The presumption of the “traditionalists”seems to be that they are, or will be, once they hear the arguments for and against the various issues to be brought before them at the town meeting. The belief of the “reformists,” or those who support Senate Bill 2, is that there is no way that anyone should be asked to listen to both sides of a debate and make a decision when someone who feels that the “tide” is fl owing in their favor yells: “Call the question.” “Wait a minute, I still have a question,” many say as they look to the left and right confused and concerned. “I don’t understand ...” “Sorry, it doesn’t matter whether you understand or not, .......
The Citizen May 6th, 2008
Editor, The Citizen: Concerned Moultonboro seniors met on April 30th from 10-11:30 a.m. at the Public Library Program Room. Nineteen seniors participated expressing the ideas they find to be of the utmost importance. There was much discussion of several items such as helping seniors cope with everyday living, financial forms, knowledge of how to deal with insurance companies, Medicare, etc., and handling junk mail; what to save and what to throw out. Who exactly are the agencies that are out there to help seniors and what exactly do they offer?
It was clear from this group that recreational activities are not a priority. The group identified about 20 local organizations providing recreation and social activities that we want to consolidate and communicate, not duplicate.
Our next meeting will be on May 7th at the Moultonborough Public Library from 10-11:30 a.m. Moultonborough seniors are welcome. Bring your ideas and a friend. Afterward, plan to scoot over to the senior meal at the Lion's Club at noon (chicken breast, potato and vegetable). Any questions, please call Joanne M. Farnham at 476-5556.
Joanne Farnham
Moultonboro
The Citizen May 7th, 2008
Editor, The Citizen: Sanbornton voters will go to the polls on the 13th of May and assemble for Town Meeting on Wednesday the 14th at 7PM. It looks like, with the proposed budget, taxes will increase significantly. As all who've attended know, Town Meeting, especially in Sanbornton, can be contentious and manipulated by a majority of the few voters that attend. Last year we started the meeting with about 165 of the 2,000 registered voters in town present – very poor attendance.
One of the problems with Town Meeting is intimidation. Any time a vote is due on increasing police or fire budgets, for example, many who oppose the increase are afraid for numerous reasons to raise their hands. Last year several ballot votes were requested on such issues. Ballot votes are permitted under the law when requested in writing by 5 voters in attendance and allow people to vote their consciences in secret and without fear of intimidation. A number of people at last year's meeting were outraged and incensed that, although due process, these ballot votes were in their minds slowing down the meeting. In fact, the meeting was totally turned on end by people yelling that they wanted to know who signed the requests for ballot votes as if to say: "How dare they?" Once names of ballot vote requestors were made known some even proceeded to verbally assault them. Their effort to intimidate failed.
This year there will again be ballot votes requested. These votes will be requested by five voters who will be in attendance for the duration of the meeting. Anyone attending the Sanbornton Town Meeting should be prepared for such. This is not an effort to slow the meeting down, but to allow people to make their decisions on sensitive issues privately, just like they do in the voting booth on Election Day.
We could eliminate all this. If we voted in Senate Bill 2 (SB2), The Official Ballot Referendum, we would have Town Meeting (the Deliberative Session) just like we do now with the moderator working through the warrant. Discussion and amendments would occur, just like now. Voting would take place a couple of weeks later by ballot in the privacy of a booth. This would allow time to mull over/ discuss issues and eliminate having to vote while there are still unanswered questions. It would also remove the intimidation factor.
Peter Dascoulias
Sanbornton
A letter writer from Sanbornton wrote a letter published in Friday’s edition of your paper regarding SB2 and asking voters to turn it down. The “facts” stated in the letter are completely erroneous. She said that voters in Sanbornton have a “chance to affirm our town meeting form of government by rejecting SB2.” False. SB2 is a form of Town Meeting that separates discussion from voting. That’s all. She goes on to state that “SB-2 includes the idea of holding debate and amending warrant articles on one night and then voting on these warrant articles a week or two later.” False. All warrant articles are discussed and amended during the Deliberative Session. Voting on those articles takes place 30 days later during Election Day. Voters now have 30 days to review and understand articles. During Town Meetings, the amendments are coming at the participants in such a manner that may be confusing and not well understood. Voters need to make a rapid decision without time to review the issues. She also stated that “Officials from other towns tell of having articles amended beyond recognition the first night resulting in an uninformed electorate voting on those articles at the later second meeting.”. False again. There have been few incidents of this occurring. In fact the opposite is true. The sky is not falling due to SB2. The reality is that no school districts and only three (3) towns have rescinded SB2. Of those towns, two (2) were tiny with budgets less than $500,000. Lastly, many votes are disenfranchised by Town Meetings as they cannot get there due to work, illness or even military service. Under SB2 their votes count. A vote for SB2 is a vote for more inclusive participation in local government. The only change under SB2 is when and how you vote. Everything else remains the same.
Paul Punturieri
Moultonborough
Please click here for : Moultonborough Selectmen's Meeting Agenda May 8th, 2008
6 HOLLAND STREET
PO BOX 139
MOULTONBOROUGH, NH 03254
Selectmen’s Meeting May 1, 2008
DRAFT
MINUTES
Present: Selectmen: Karel A. Crawford, Edward J. Charest, James F. Gray, Joel R. Mudgett, Betsey L. Patten; Hope K. Kokas, Office Secretary.
I. CALL TO ORDER: Karel called the meeting to Order at 7:00 P.M.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. REVIEW/APPROVE MINUTES: Ed Made the Motion to approve the Minutes of April 24, 2008 as written. Betsey Seconded and asked to amend the Minutes to strike Joel’s name as he was not in attendance last week, and replace it with, Jim Seconded the Motion to approve the Minutes of April 17, 2008. The Motion carried Unanimously.
IV. NEW RESIDENTS: Kathryn R. Blanchuk, Pamela J. Urda, Keith A. Walker.
V. PUBLIC MEETING:
1. Hollis Austin commended the Selectmen for their Letter to the Editor that appeared in the Laconia Citizen regarding the educational funding crisis and the need for a constitutional amendment to provide aid to needy towns versus bringing back donor towns as proposed by SB 539. He added that their argument was well presented and appreciated by the Town’s people. Mr. Austin asked Betsey what can be done to change the Legislators thinking. Betsey replied that this will only occur with upcoming elections.
VI. NEW BUSINESS:
1. Action Re: Local Government Health Trust LLC Participation: Karel explained that this is the Town’s annual agreement with LGC for the provision of health and other benefits. Betsey requested that they table this until Carter’s return in order to receive more information. Approved. Tabled.
2. Action Re: Recommendation on Town/SAU Common Annual Meeting Day (03/14/09): Ed reported that based on the meeting of the Common Annual Meeting Day Ad Hoc Committee held on April 24, 2008, they recommend to hold the 2009 Town and School District Annual Meetings on the same day, Saturday, March 14, 2009, at the Moultonborough Community Auditorium, to start promptly at 9:00 a.m. Voter registration would begin at 8:00 a.m. in the auditorium lobby, which should allow the meeting to start on time. In addition, it is recommended that all Town services, except for public safety, be closed for the day....
On April 29th, 2008 the House Finance Committee passed the bill to Cost an Adequate Education 13-9. The committee then amended the bill to hold the donor towns harmless and set a transition plan so that no community will receive more than 15% above their current grant, and no community will receive less than their current grant. The following link ( SB539HsFin.pdf ) is from the New Hampshire School Board Association. The chart estimates the impact to towns of the House amendment. Moultonborough is on page five.
MCA
When you get your property tax bill later this year, add your state senator to the list of people to whom you should complain.
The Senate is on its way to gutting HB 1645 — a measure designed to give the state retirement system long-awaited and badly-needed reform. The bill was initiated in and passed by the House earlier this year, but advocates for the state's taxpayers knew the Senate had the trump hand and leaders of unions representing public employees knew it, too.
After all, it was the public employees unions that were calling the shots.....
The Gilford Republican Committee has taken one of the founding principles of the Republican Party to heart, seeking to have basic public information more accessible.
The group has sent letters to the Gilford Board of Selectmen and the Gilford School Board, along with
"We decided if we really do embrace a transparent government, we should ask for something to be done," explained Gilford GOP Chair Skip Murphy.
The initiative started with a visit to a website called......
By
Union Leader
Thursday, May. 1, 2008
The Senate Executive Department and Administration Committee voted 6-0 yesterday to approve the plan.
The Senate version of the House's reform bill will give annual 2.5 percent cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) to all New Hampshire Retirement System retirees on July 1. The increase would apply only to their first $30,000 in annual pension payments. Retired workers who make more than $30,000, about one third of all NHRS pensioners, would see a $750 increase next year.
Those who make $20,000 or less would see a $1,000 bonus check each year, plus.....
