The Union Leader Sunday July 13, 2008
Dover's city council, which has had trouble obeying the state's Right to Know law before, is at it again. On Wednesday the council voted to let its members forward e-mails from their city e-mail accounts to their personal accounts. That's a huge invitation for council members to conduct business out of the public's view.A couple of council members -- Catherine Cheney and Rick Callaghan -- had complained that they could not forward city e-mails to their personal e-mail accounts, Foster's Daily Democrat reported last week. The forwarding was forbidden, and they wanted that changed. On Wednesday they got their wish. Councilor Dean Trefethen said there should be no Right to Know concerns because councilors "are using the city e-mail server and e-mail account to receive the e-mail." Right, but as Councilor Doug DeDe pointed out, it's what happens with those e-mails after they are forwarded to the home accounts that matters here. Whatever discussions councilors have through their private e-mail accounts will not be visible to the public. This isn't the Dover council's first brush with violating the Right to Know law via e-mail. In February, Cheney e-mailed a proposed resolution to all members and asked for their input -- a technical violation of the law. Trefethen accidentally sent his response to the entire board, another violation. Last month, Councilor Karen Weston said she accidentally hit "reply all" in responding to a message sent to councilors from City Manager Mike Joyal. That consituted another Right to Know violation. Callaghan replied to Weston's reply, creating another violation. That Callaghan and Cheney were involved in both of the previous e-mail violations of the Right to Know law might explain why they were the ones pushing so hard for the ability to forward city e-mail to their private accounts. The public could have the last laugh, though. House Bill 1408, passed this year, defines as a public meeting any electronic communication among a quorum of public board members. By forwarding city e-mails to their home accounts, councilors are opening their private e-mail records to possible subpoena under the Right to Know law. The only way to see if councilors are forwarding those e-mails to each other in private would be to go after their personal e-mail correspondence. Council members will want to rethink Wednesday's vote. First, confining all correspondence to the public e-mail system is the right thing to do. Second, it would avoid the potential embarrassment of opening members' private e-mail accounts to public scrutiny. For the good of themselves and the public, council members should undo this policy.
TOP
Leave a comment