Recently in Public Access Category

We like this editorial by the Meredith News and here’s why. Finally, local representatives that actually keep the very people that they represent informed, without making them spend countless hours researching the happenings in Concord. It’s too bad that this is not happening in our town of Moultonboro. We would like the same here, as well as in Tuftenboro and Wolfeboro that are represented by our own Betsey Patten. We would like to encourage her to do the same for the good folks that elected her.

Fall may not officially be here for a couple more weeks, but with schools starting this week and Labor Day weekend right in front of us, it’s about time to say goodbye to summer. As cooler weather approaches, so will the return of news from the State House, courtesy of our local state representatives. What we’ve seen in the past year from reps like Kate Miller in Meredith, Bill Johnson in Gilford and Belmont, and Liz Merry in Sanbornton is not only willingness, but an eagerness to provide constituents with the lowdown on House debates and votes through their local newspapers. Before the summer break, Johnson had been regularly submitting capsules of pertinent information regarding what he saw happening in the House of Representatives. This has accomplished a couple of things: first, it has made state news more accessible, particularly because Johnson writes in layman’s terms and with a bit of color, so readers aren’t wading through the typical political jargon. Second, Johnson gives us insight into the whys and hows of the House voting process, candidly noting the reasons behind his decisions while acknowledging the other point of view as well. For Meredith, Miller has regularly submitted letters to the editor to keep her constituents informed. Although her district doesn’t cover Moultonboro, Sandwich or Center Harbor, what Miller has to say is pertinent to all of our Meredith News readers. Like Johnson, she provides updates of the goings on in the House and continuously invite conversation from her constituents. Merry has done the same for Tilton and Sanbornton with her letters and updates. At Salmon Press, we’re grateful that our towns’ representatives are readily providing vital statewide information to our readers, because while we pride ourselves on bringing readers news at the most local level, we also recognize the importance of knowing what’s happening at the state level, that the impact of House and Senate votes are often widely felt by the residents of our towns. The downside to being a truly local, weekly paper is that we don’t have the resources to report on state affairs ourselves – we’re busy attending local board meetings – and have to rely on outside sources to gather that information. Until this past year, our papers didn’t have a single state representative from any of the districts we cover actively sending us news we can use. Now, true to their campaign word, reps like Miller, Johnson and Merry are channeling such vital information through us. We hope their updates continue in the coming year, and that you appreciate reading them as much as we do.

Now, we are not out to point fingers here, but only to highlight that there is a general lack of understanding of New Hampshire statutes.  The recent “issues” with the formation of the  Heritage Commission and the Capital Improvement Program Committee are two examples. The exclusion of the school district from the proposed “ordinance” for the CIPC is another.

The right to know laws are another area where we believe more education is essential. That is why the MCA hosting a Right to Know Seminar as a useful and helpful event for all citizens, whether in the private sector or in public office.

  ‘I urge every citizen, every school child, and every student of government to study the Right to Know Law’ Kelly Ayotte NH Attorney General.

Please come and find out for yourself! Mark your calendars: Monday August 10, 2009 at 7pm at the Moultonboro Library. There will be guest speakers: Ed Naile, from the Coalition of NH Taxpayers; Doug Lambert of Gilfordgrok; and Tom Tardif, former Mayor of Laconia.

  This is not a political event, nor is it a partisan event. This is an educational opportunity open to everyone.

All are welcome!

The Meredith News

June 4, 2009

Editorial

Everything about public meetings should be made as public-friendly as possible. That means posting agendas online (consistently, and as far in advance as possible, please), holding non-public sessions at the end of meetings whenever humanly possible, and allowing the public the most convenient method for making comments about town affairs. Recentdecisions and conversations of various local boards and committees have stirred up some controversy regarding how public comments should be handled at public meetings. In Sanbornton selectmen had to reprioritize after backlash from residents about moving public input sessions to the end of meetings. The move angered some,who said the change was an attempt to keep them from being heard, specifically because Sanbornton’s meetings can run late. Ultimately, the board put the sessions back to the beginning of each meeting, which we think was the right thing to do.

Moultonboro changed its policy recently as well, also drawing fire from the town’s more vocal citizens. Instead of allowing residents to comment and ask questions as the meeting progressed, it restricts public input to the beginning and end of each selectmen’s meeting. It might be more conducive to informed input if the board would consider handing out packets of information prior to the meeting. It’s difficult for members of the public to do more than ask questions to figure out what the issue is – and after the vote is cast and the decision made, everyone just wants to go home. It’s unlikely that a vote would be changed, once cast, as the selectmen have suggested they could do if swayed by public input. In its organizational meeting just last week, the Gilford Budget Committee discussed the issue, trying to decide where to place public input on the agenda so residents would have a fair shot to voice concerns or make comments at a relevant time. They, respectably, want to ensure that the public can talk freely before a vote, but perhaps after committee discussion so the speakers are informed. Also making an effort to respect the public, the Tilton Board of Selectmen just started holding a public input session at its meetings. Often there is no input, but occasionally the opening has given interested residents a chance to speak informally without having to make an appointment. It hasn’t appeared to slow the board down in terms of getting things done, and citizens have peace of mind that, should they ever want to throw out a comment or raise a concern, they will have the opportunity and ability to do so. Boards and committees are meant to be working for the residents of a town, so it doesn’t make sense to us when they make residents jump over hurdles to get a chance to speak (or get a hold of an agenda or meeting minutes, for that matter). We understand that they need to get things done, and that sometimes public comments sessions can get out of hand in terms of length or topic, but the board does have the ability to limit speaking time, or to offer a timeslot on the agenda should the topic warrant one.

Residents vote down video production warrant article

SARAH SCHMIDT

SSCHMIDT@SALMONPRESS.COM

The Meredith News March 19, 2009

MOULTONBORO — After passing a $13 million budgetand other monetary budget items, it was an article for student audio/visual classes without funding attached that residents debated on for the greatest length of time, eventually voting it down. A petitioned warrant article on the Moultonboro School District Warrant asked residents to decide whether to create an educational program for students to record, produce, and broadcast Moultonboro Town and School public meetings before the end of 2010. “We really want to make the selectmen and the school board television stars,” said Jim Morrison, speaking in favor of the article. “This is all about the process of education, all about teaching the students and giving them tangible new skills. We live in a world of new media.” Morrison pointed out in the school’s 2008 assessment report that 41 percent of graduates agreed that Moultonboro Academy had prepared them to enter the work force in a “good or excellent” manner. He said that giving students the ability to study audio and visual technology would help to better prepare them for the work force. Passing the article would “kill two birds with one stone,” Morrison said. Al Hume also spoke in favor of the article, noting that the game won by the Moultonboro Academy boy’s basketball team could have been broadcast on local cable to residents. School Board Chair William Blackadar spoke against the article, however, and said that the board hoped that the residents would vote against the article. If they wished, students at Moultonboro Academy could enroll in a video program at the vocational school in Wolfeboro. “This is an educational program without much envisioned at this time,” said

Blackadar. “We prefer not to have the education program dictated to us.” Advisory Budget Committee Chair Jean Beadle also spoke against the article and said that before the issue could be seriously considered, the total cost of teachers and equipment should be studied and brought before the town. The article was defeated in a voice vote. The entire meeting finished in about 30 minutes. Residents approved the $13,826,135 budget for the Moultonboro School District, along with $50,000 for the buildings and grounds expendable trust fund, and $2,000 for the “Chele” Environmental fund.

Editor, The Citizen

December 10, 2008

Moultonborough recently completed their policy for how they want to deal with both the Public Access Chanel (PEG) and the folks who would want to broadcast programming, after over two decades of no policy. While no blame is being pointed at the present selectmen for not having policy for the most of those years, I would note that a policy only came about when the Moultonboro Citizens Alliance (MCA) began working with Time Warner Cable (TWC) to air taped, unedited video of the selectmen's meetings AT NO COST TO THE TOWN. To date PEG (for Public, Educational and Government) has had little use by the public, the school or the town. However, as area towns have been utilizing their PEG channels to air meetings, MCA felt they could do something similar AT NO EXPENSE TO THE TOWN. An FCC fact sheet says when there is no policy public access channels are "usually administered by the cable operator or a third party designated by the franchising authority." Since there was no policy or designee when we approached TWC we assumed we were not violating the sanctity of the selectmen's authority.

While the selectmen were right in finally acknowledging the need for a policy, the vitriol that was laid on the MCA was gratuitous and less than professional from those who we look to for leadership. Unedited broadcasting of public meetings at no expense to the taxpayer ... how sinister is that? Other broadcasts have been and continue to be aired without the accusations of abuse, misrepresentation and "lack of respect for the selectmen". And they have been aired with no policy in place. But this bitter opposition towards the MCA is not new.

The selectmen were quick to combat SB2, a voting initiative that allows ALL voters to vote on ALL town issues. They lobbied hard and duplicitously against this measure that allows voters who are out of town or otherwise unable to get to day-long town meetings to have a say as to how their tax dollars are spent. "You can't tell me a person who spends six months away really cares what goes on here" (Selectmen's hearing on SB2) was the statement from the chair.

• Why wouldn't they want all voters to vote on all town issues? Don't know.
• Why wouldn't they want the average citizen to see the selectmen's meetings on TV in the comfort of their home? Don't know.
• When a citizen stands and asks to read a letter into the minutes of the meeting (because they won't) the comment from the chair was "If you must". Why? Don't know.
• Why would the selectmen say they were unwilling to support the building of a multimillion dollar recreation facility one day, and then 4 of the 5 flip flop to support it being on the warrant? Don't know.

Why are the selectmen so opposed to a group of citizens that are the eyes, ears and voice of voters and property owners (resident or non-resident)? Don't know.

MCA's goal of full compliance of the Right to Know Law leads to open and transparent government. We (MCA) want all citizens to be able to vote on all issues (SB2). Another goal is to inform and educate the voter and property owner. We advocate sensible spending and community involvement. However, because we are not always in lock step with the selectmen, we are labelled as negative and purveyors of misinformation. While MCA is not interested in signing the potentially litigious contract to air the video on PEG, the meetings may be viewed on the MCA website, www.moultonborcitzensalliance.org .

Rick Heath, MCA

HOME

MCA

These are "draft" minutes and not verbatim as provided by the Selectmen's Officc. We encourage attendees to comment on any errors or inconsitencies so we can provide the public with correct and complete minutes

• While not seen anywhere in the "draft" minutes, it was clearly mentioned a number of times during the agenda item: Authorize Letter of Intent for LWC Grant & Expenditure for C/SC Reserves  that there were no plans for any new recreation building and that site planing is soley based upon the exisitng Lions Club building footprint. Unless you were there ( or watch the video on this website) you would never know this important fact.  

Present: Selectmen:  Karel A. Crawford, Edward J. Charest; Joel R. Mudgett; Carter Terenzini, Town Administrator; Hope K. Kokas, Secretary.
 
I. CALL TO ORDER:  Karel called the meeting to Order at 7:00 P.M.

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. REVIEW/APPROVE MINUTES:  Joel Made the Motion to approve the Minutes of September 18, 2008 as written.  Betsey Seconded.  The Motion carried unanimously.
 
IV. NEW RESIDENTS:  Peter J. & Julia E. Velie, David E. Shapiro-Barnard, Linda R. & John H. Allen, Robert J. Ladd, Corey A. Voivin, Mark E. Hagopian, Leo J. & Linda B. Ward, Peter C. & Eileen M. May, Brenda E. & Daniel W. Dimeo, Peter G. Smith, Heather Dean, Daniel O. Hogan, Richard P. & Nancy L. Zeloski, Anne Marie E. Maroun, Norris Viviors, Freyer Sverrisson, Janet L. Sawin, Marie A. Costanza, Bruce W. & Charity E. Parker, Gary G. Wallace.
 
V. PUBLIC MEETING:

1. Susette Remson, Tax Collector, Tax Deeding:  Susette reminded the Selectmen that the tax deeding was to occur on September 24, 2008, but on that day their office received a telephone call from one tax payer requesting an extension.  Susette explained that only the Selectmen can grant an extension and they would vote on it at their next meeting.  She added that since September 24th, this resident has paid the 2005 taxes due.  This leaves one delinquent property tax payer and they are now requesting an extension to October 15, 2008.  Susette explained that previously her office wasn’t able to talk to this property owner, but communicated with their real estate agent who forwarded the message.  The property owner has just recently called and asked for the extension.  Susette added that they have made a partial payment toward the 2005 taxes and if the property was tax deeded this amount would need to be refunded to the property owner.  Betsey Made the Motion to grant an extension to Glen F. and Wendy Crosby, 175 Long Island Road, Map 271 Lot 004 until the close of the business day, 4:00 p.m. on October 15, 2008.  Betsey added that she wanted the Crosbys to know that this is the “drop dead” date.  Ed Seconded the Motion.   The Motion carried Unanimously.
2. Public Hearing:  Proposed Policy Adoption PEG Channel Access:  Karel opened the meeting for the public to comment.  Al Hume asked if the Selectmen had received any communication regarding the proposed policy....

HOME

To MCA Supporters

Email Comments to Carter Terenzini

Your comments are needed by 4 PM tomorrow (Thursday), about

Moultonborough’s Public Access TV  ( Click here for proposed policy)

Just a reminder, this may be your only opportunity to speak out about the proposed cable TV public access policy.  The town administrator expected the Selectmen to adopt it at their last meeting on September 18^th and they appeared ready to oblige.  We convinced them to delay their vote and instead make their final draft available for review by the public.  It seems that everyone except the public at large has had a chance to comment.  They seemed unenthusiastic about delaying their vote, but did agree.  We suggest you view the September 18^th video, on our website, and judge for yourself. 

A notice in the Meredith News announced that you can submit comments, in writing to Mr. Carter Terenzini, Town Administrator, by mail PO Box 139 , Moultonborough , NH 03254 , by fax to 603-476-5835, or by email to mborota@worldpath.net, by 4pm on (Thursday) October 2^nd.    

If you want your email read, at the Selectmen's Meeting on October 2nd, please attend the meeting at 7 PM in the Town Hall.  If you can not attend and want your it read, email a copy to MCA and if appropriate one of our members will read it.  

Here ere are a few questions you may find helpful while considering your own comments.

Why do you think there was a rush to vote to accept the town administrators proposed policy without a period of public review and comment?

Does it really fulfill the needs of our townspeople or does it instead discourage or limit public access?  What do you believe the intention of those behind it is?

Why was the final draft document only posted at the town office, library and school? 

Less important information is posted on the town website, why not this?

Why does Mr. Terenzini refer to “the so-called Public Education and Government Channel(s)”, when that is exactly what it is meant to be?  Do you feel he believe in true Public Access when he says “the so-called”?

How do you feel about a non-elected town employee administrating scheduling and access on the public access channel?  Do you feel it would be too much consolidation of power in the hands of a hired employee who is not accountable to the people and who works largely out of public view?  For example, many communities have a public access committee composed of citizen volunteers and town officials.

How do you feel about a hired town employee being in control of administering the PEG (Public Education and Government) channel and providing only one (annual) report to the Selectmen covering just the numbers and types of programs authorized and aired?   It could be as bad as the incomplete and misleading minutes that the Selectmen currently accept for their own meetings.

How do you feel about the low priority placed on Public Access to the cable channel, with programs by the municipal government airing first, then the school and last of all the public?  Consider that the municipal government and the school already have their own websites, news letters and regular public meetings..

We hope you will take a few minutes to consider the importance of public comment on such an important policy and choose to make your suggestions and concerns know to the Selectmen and the Town Administrator.

 

Moultonboro Citizens Alliance (MCA)
PO Box 678
Moultonboro, NH 03254

Note from the MCA: A citizen asked Mr. Terenzini if the town of Amherst, a town used as a model for the Moultonboro public access policy has a public access commission or it it was administered under the Twon Administrator. He replied that Amherst has a commission.

MCA

The Citizen  September 19th, 2008

Note from the MCA: We applaud this independent effort to place these important videos on the web. The MCA has been videotaping many public meetings in Moultonboro and began placed them on this website to an excellent public response.

MCA

The Meredith News September 18^th, 2008

SARAH SCHMIDT

SSCHMIDT@SALMONPRESS.COM

MEREDITH — Whether or not voters approve funds for broadcasting their meetings on television, the Inter- Lakes School Board meetings are being taped and slated for broadcast via the Internet. Lisa and Steve Merrill, parents who attend meetings, brought videotaping equipment to the last school board meeting, Lisa Merrill working the equipment. Steve Merrill wrote a letter to the board earlier this year calling for them to begin broadcasting their meetings on the Lakes Region Public Access channel. The board has been wrestling with the question for a few months, given the fact that district residents in Sandwich and parts of Center Harbor have no access to cable. The board recently voted to bring the question to the Inter-Lakes School District Meeting in March. “This is somewhat of a first,” said Chair Jack Carty, beginning the meeting. “We’re being taped. It’s the right of anyone to tape public meetings.” Lisa Merrill said that she was taping the meetings with the intention of broadcasting them in sections on the YouTube.com Web site. Merrill said she will be linking the clips on YouTube to a new Web log (blog) of her own to allow parents to communicate on concerns about the school district. Merrill said that the equipment she used to tape the meetings was on loan, and another person was helping her work on the tape to ready it for YouTube. Afterwards, Merrill said she wants to bring the DVDs of the meetings to a local library in the district. “In the interim (between now and March), this is to let people know,” said Merrill. “There are a lot of concerns, and this way,we can get frustrations out and connect on the blog. People can connect on issues they see - basically, anything you’d like to write about.” Merrill said putting these clips of the meeting on YouTube and linking to it from the blog will show that “this stuff can be done for very little money,” and can reach anyone in the district with the ability to access a computer with an Internet connection. The work is still in progress, though, and Merrill said that she was still working on getting the clips online, and hoped to have them up soon. The clips will likely be of “hot topics,” she said, such as the recent debate about dress code. The board continued its own work on effective mediums of broadcasting their meetings in different forms. They watched about five minutes of a Meredith Board of Selectmen workshop that had been broadcast earlier this summer, in order to get a sense of the facilities available at the Meredith Community Center, and to see it met with their standards for audibility and visibility. Earlier in the year, the board listened to a presentation from District Technology Director Allan Hale, on the possibility of taping the meetings to air via media streaming server, straight to the computers of anyone with an Internet connection. The difference in putting the video on the Web instead of handing a tape to the LRPC, Hale explained, was in finding a host company to supply them with a media streaming server and bandwidth. The school would create the video and send it to the host company,who would provide a link on the school district Web site with direct access to the video, a service that would cost a flat fee per

month, unless more than a set number of people tried to watch the video. Merrill’s blog is at www.interlakescitizens.blogspot.com.

 HOME

Why the opposition?

Editor, The Citizen September 15^th, 2008

 While we wait for full compliance of the Right to Know Law in seeing public meetings broadcast on cable's Public Access Channel the selectmen of Moultonborough have attempted to develop policy. In June the Moultonboro Citizens Alliance (MCA) started working with Time Warner Cable (TWC) to air the selectmen's meetings (as well as other public meetings) on the PUBLIC ACCESS CHANNEL as a public service. The selectmen had no policy regulating the Public Access Channel. The FCC offers a fact sheet that says public access channels are "usually administered by the cable operator or a third party designated by the franchising authority." Since there was no third party designee when we approached Time Warner Cable both they (TWC) and MCA assumed we were not violating the sanctity of the selectmen's authority. After all, THEY HAD NO POLICY IN PLACE AFTER MORE THAN TWO DECADES.

I will state here that MCA was willing to do this at no expense to the taxpaying public, where other towns are wrestling with a budget of $14,000 to $20,000 or more for this right. Unedited broadcast of public meetings at no expense to the taxpayer ... how sinister is that? Other broadcasts have been and continue to be aired without the accusations of abuse, misrepresentation and "lack of respect for the selectmen". And they are aired without any policy in place. But this bitter opposition towards the MCA is not new.

• The selectmen were quick to combat SB2, a voting initiative that allows ALL voters to vote on ALL town issues. They lobbied hard and duplicitously against this measure that allows voters who are out of town or otherwise unable to get to town meetings to have a say as to how their tax dollars are spent. "Anyone spending months in the winter away doesn't care what goes on in Moultonborough" was the statement from the chair. Why wouldn't they want all citizens to have a vote on the town warrant if the law is available to do that? Don't know.

• Why would they not want the average citizen to see the selectmen's meetings on TV in the comfort of their home? Don't know.

• When a citizen stands and asks to read a letter into the minutes of the meeting (because they won't) the comment coming from the chair was "If you must". Why? Don't know.

• Why would the selectmen say they were unwilling to support the building of a multimillion dollar recreation facility one day, and then 4 of the 5 flip flop to support it being on the warrant? Don't know.

• Why would a selectman accuse a citizen of spreading lies and misinformation in arguing against the multimillion dollar recreation center when he was using information directly from the Master Plan Survey? Don't know.

It has been the exercise of some selectmen to practice personal politics rather than objectively sticking with the issues that the town needs to address. Perhaps this is the reason they hesitate to allow these broadcasts to be aired.

MCA's goal of full compliance to the Right to Know Law leads to open and transparent government. We want all citizens to be able to vote on all issues (SB2). Another goal is to inform and educate the voter and property owner. We advocate sensible spending and community involvement. However, because we are not always in lock step with the selectmen, we are labelled as negative and purveyors of misinformation.

Until the selectmen allow the airing of the public meetings on the public access channel, they may be viewed on the MCA website, www.moultonborcitzensalliance.org .

Rick Heath

Moultonborough

HOME