Potential Changes for Town Meetings

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 

The Meredith News  January 22, 2009

SARAH SCHMIDT

SSCHMIDT@SALMONPRESS.COM

 

LAKES REGION — A change could be coming for all Town Meetings next year, as the state considers whether or not to increase the number of people required for a secret ballot vote. The bill was sponsored by Representative Betsey Patten of Moultonboro, and went before the Municipal and County Government Committee last week to begin hearings. If passed, the bill would increase the number of voters required to request secret balloting and ballot recounts......  

HOME

at Town Meetings in New Hampshire. “Sometimes, there’s a small group of people who like to hijack a Town Meeting (with secret ballot requests),” said Patten. “If more people were involved in requesting a secret ballot, it might not prolong meetings.” In the original proposition, in a Town Meeting with a population of more than 500, 50 voters, rather than five, who are present at the meeting, would be required to make a request for a secret ballot, and 25 would be required to conduct a recount of any such ballots. For a town with a population of 500 or less, 10 voters would be required for secret balloting or recounting. Patten said that in the committee hearings, the figure they discussed for the required amount had been brought down to “10 or 15, or five percent.” “We came no closer than that to talking about whether they actually like it or not,” said Patten. Under present law, the five people who sign a request to hold a secret ballot must be present at the Town Meeting for the request to go through. Chair Karel Crawford said that if the board was in agreement, they would sign a letter of support to send. The board agreed, and authorized Town Administrator Carter Terenzini to draft the letter. If passed, the bill would not take effect for another 60 days. With the next hearing on the subject set tentatively for executive session at the end of this month, any action on the bill would not affect this year’s Town Meeting. Not everyone agrees with Patten’s attempt to raise the number of people requiredfor such a vote. Jim Leiterman of Moultonboro attended the hearing in Concord, and said he disagreed with raising the requirement. “To get five people is difficult, and when things are difficult, to try to deprive citizens of being able to have a secret ballot?” said Leiterman. “This is not just about Moultonboro, but a statewide initiative.” Leiterman also disagreed with the initial “unreasonable” requirement of 50 people, when the representatives brought the number down to 10 or 15 in discussions. He said that the bill should have begun with a requirement “within reason.” At the 2008 School District and Town Meeting of Moultonboro, several residents requested that all warrant articles calling for more than a certain amount of funding be put to secret ballot. After several hours of deliberation and several secret ballots, the residents requesting the secret ballots told the moderator that they withdrew their

requests.

.

HOME

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Potential Changes for Town Meetings.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://moultonboroughcitizensalliance.org/blog/mt-tb.cgi/441

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Otis published on January 22, 2009 8:31 AM.

Legislation takes away voters' rights was the previous entry in this blog.

NH Local Government Center ordered to open their books is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.01