Recently in Right-to-Know Category
The MCA thanks the citizens of Moultonboro for their support and trust on our 3rd Anniversary. We filed paperwork with the NH Dept. of State as a nonprofit corporation and were certified July 13, 2007. This corporation’s information has been available on the State of NH’s website since then.
The object for which this corporation was established is:
An informal alliance of citizen volunteers promoting the ideals of an informed citizenry, protection of voters’ rights, sensible spending, and limited government.
We have been successful in this short period of time in these areas:
A. Select Board Meetings and some major meetings are available on our web site www.moultonborocitizensalliance.org and www.moultonborocitizensalliance@yahoo.com .
B. We have been a major promoter of the Right to Know Law RSA 91-A and sponsored a seminar to make the Right to Know Law clearer to our town boards and surrounding communities.
We are promoters of Senate Bill 2 (SB2) in our town. As times change, and populations grow, the Town Meeting format becomes outmoded and impractical. SB2 allows all voters a vote on Election Day from 7am to 7pm in the privacy of the voting booth. It eliminates having to raise a hand or stand and be counted. Absentee ballots can be used when voters are unable to attend.
We all do this for no wages, only pride in helping to improve our community. We always welcome new supporters and financial help.
We proudly are the MCA at Box 678, Moultonboro, NH.
Officers: Linda Punturieri-President, Terence Jatko-Vice President, Jim Morrison-Treasurer, Al Hume-Secretary.
By RAY CARBONE
New Hampshire Union Leader
Monday, Jul. 19, 2010
The New Hampshire Attorney General's office has issued a cease-and-desist order to five people, including a Moultonborough selectman and a former school board member, for their roles in distributing political flyers last year.
Assistant Attorney General Matthew Mavrogeorge said the five violated the state's election laws by failing to identify the flyer as "political advertising" and not including information identifying who was sending it out.
"(You) are hereby ordered to cease and desist from distributing any future political advertisement without first complying with the signature (identification) requirements contained in RSA 664:14," the order reads.
The flyer urged voters in March 2009 to turn down an article on town and school ballots regarding adoption of Senate Bill 2, which would replace town meeting with voters going to the polls on town election day. Voters turned down the SB2 idea at both the town and school district meetings. The district vote was 746-975, while the town vote was 704-975.
Selectman Karel Crawford and former Moultonborough School Board member and current Supervisor of the Checklist Laurie Whitley are cited by the Attorney General's Office. The three others are Lisa St. Amand, who has been a member of the town's Recreation Strategic Planning Group, Mary Ann McRae and Anita Blood.
Efforts to reach the five yesterday were unsuccessful.
According to the report, investigator Richard Valenti began looking into the issue last July after state officials received a formal complaint from resident Paul Punturieri. He charged that Whitley had violated RSA 664 by sending out the election flyers without identifying who was responsible for the material.
"It states at the bottom that the Selectmen, School Board and Advisory Budget Committee do not support SB2, but nowhere does it mention that she is a member of the School Board and running for office, nor that this flyer was not actually sent by the School Board, Selectmen or Advisory Board," the complaint reads.
In the interviews recorded in Valenti's report, none of the five reported knowingly sending out a flyer without their signature, but said that it was possible some flyers could have gone out unsigned. In his interview with Whitley, Valenti said she noted that "SB2 has been on the ballot two years in a row and it has come close to passing." Whitley said no town funds were used to mail the flyers.
Just days before the election, the flyers were criticized by the Moultonborough Citizens Alliance -- on whose website Punturieri identifies himself as a one-time member.
In his letter to the state, Punturieri said he feels as if voters did not get a fair chance to hear both sides of the issue before voting. Previous votes on SB2 in the town and school district have been close, (but) "I do not believe it was a fair fight (this time) as powers that be did not play by the rules."
Yesterday, School Board Chairman Mark Borrin said he would issue a formal statement this afternoon, but added he did not believe the report or the orders have anything to do with either the school board or the district.
"It never became an issue the board talked about," he said. "The issue involves individuals who are on the board, but it wasn't a board matter."
Wednesday, July 1, 2010
SB2 is the shorthand title for the Official Ballot Act, RSA 40:13, which allows voters in towns and non-city school districts to decide budgetary and other matters by secret ballot during pre-set polling hours rather than through the traditional Town Meeting format at which those matters get debated, possibly amended and ultimately decided by the vote of those attending the meeting.
Since RSA 40:13 took effect in the 1990s, the consideration on whether to adopt it has been hard-fought. Not only have officials and private citizens strongly argued its pros and cons but, quite often, the protagonists impugn the motives — and sometimes even the decency — of those on the other side of the question.
This should not be all that surprising. The SB2 debate strikes at the core of a community's identity and the place that heritage and tradition play in that identity.
An example of how these feelings can play out is in Moultonborough. Efforts to get the town to switch to the SB2 format have so far failed.
As a result of the last effort to pass SB2, some supporters went to the state Attorney General's Office to complain that there was an organized anti-SB2 effort underway which was in violation of the state's political advertising laws. Those lodging the complaint to the AG's office alleged that the anti-SB2 group in its campaign was sending out flyers which failed to explicitly state that the circulars were political advertising and in addition did not identify who was behind the campaign.
The Attorney General's Office last week issued a cease-and-desist order, saying such efforts in the future must conform to the law's disclosure requirements.
This issue might seem to some like a tempest in a teacup, but the fact that the anti-SB2 group included a selectman and someone who at the time was serving on the School Board raises some issues.
Elected officials certainly are well within their rights to offer their opinions on public issues, and there certainly is no reason for them to feel they need to apologize for doing so. Therefore, why would elected officials want to be less than forthcoming about their views on a critical issue?
As so often is the case in controversial matters, members of official bodies are not of one mind. Some, therefore, question the propriety of one member of the group taking a stand when that view does not reflect the overall sentiment of the group.
Nothing should inhibit elected officials from speaking their minds, but they should do so forthrightly and with complete transparency. If a group, like a board of selectmen or school board, wishes to take a stand, that, too, is their right. Or, if they choose not to do so, they should not stand in the way of the individual members from exercising their rights as individuals.
Wise decisions are reached when discussion and debate are open and vigorous and in a way in which the public can assess the credibility of the arguments.
That means openness and playing by the rules
It is up to the various boards in our town to adhere to the RSA laws and provide meeting minutes to the public within 5 business days. Some boards have expressed their concerns that there are discrepancies with the meeting minutes that need to be reviewed by board members before the minutes are made available to the public, thus violating RSA laws.
A mere suggestion to board members, take better minutes! Ask any college student about the importance of taking high quality notes during lectures/classes. It ensures accuracy and understanding of the discussion held.
If accurate meeting minutes are not produced, one can’t blame the public for that. Ownership falls on the writer of the minutes; thereby the direction of precision should be addressed to said writer and corrected for future meetings.
The MCA is pleased to publish this article, not to bemoan our selectmen, but rather to point out serious violations involving the Right to Know Law. This is an oft misunderstood and easily ignored law. However, when repeated articles are posted on our and other websites regarding the selectmen’s history of conducting business outside of the public’s presence, it is hard to tolerate continued defiance of the public’s right to know. We hate to see things go so far as a lawsuit, but unfortunately, change comes about when and only someone is willing to file such a suit.
It is our sincere hope that the selectmen will understand the error of their ways, and frankly those of our town manager, and conduct their business in public sessions. According to RSA 91, non public sessions are very specific about what can and cannot be discussed. We also suggest that our town officials learn and truly understand this law thoroughly. It is complex, but worth knowing.
www.citizen.com September 14, 2009
A Moultonborough resident's right-to-know lawsuit against the town, claiming selectmen met illegally in a nonpublic session on an unannounced date to discuss, plan and coordinate the process it would use to hire a new police chief, may have been stalled because of a failure to deliver copies of the legal documents to town officials.
Petitioner Paul Punterieri of 22 Nelson Road said last Wednesday that he called the Carroll County Sheriff's Office and discovered that the petition had never been delivered — or served — on the town. He was told the paperwork would be served in the next several days, most likely resulting in a new date for the hearing being set.
A scheduling notice in the court file notes that Punterieri "shall serve the petition upon the town" and that failure to do so may result in the action being discontinued without further notice.
Punterieri filed his petition in Carroll County Superior Court in Ossipee on Aug. 27 and a court hearing was scheduled for this Tuesday.
The suit names Selectmen Karel Crawford, chair, Ed Charest, Jim Gray, Joel Mudgett and Betsey Patten as respondents. It also names Town Administrator Carter Terenzini.
Terenzini said last Wednesday he has not been served with the suit and could not comment on anything regarding pending litigation.
Terenzini also declined to comment on whether the suit has stalled efforts to hire a new chief or the status of the search process.
Punterieri argues that any and all discussion of how Police Chief Scott Kinmond's successor would be named, if and how a search/screening committee would be formed, and who would be appointed should have occurred in public session.
Kinmond, the town's current chief who has served for 24 years, is retiring from that post and will become the town's road agent.
"The plaintiff is contesting that the decision to appoint a committee (or accept volunteers), the membership of that committee and the process leading up to the interviews violates RSA 91-A as they were never held in public session," the suit states.
In the suit, Punterieri argues that the town set precedent when it filled two key positions — the first-ever town planner and a town engineer — by hiring them in full public session. He maintains that a similar process should have been following for naming a new police chief.
Volunteers who have agreed to serve on a committee looking for a new chief, according to minutes of the committee's work, are Belknap County High Sheriff Craig Wiggin, Merrimack County High Sheriff Scott Hilliard, Auburn Chief of Police Ed Picard, Moultonborough citizen Peter Whelley, and Peterborough Town Administrator Pam Brenner.
|
This is just a reminder to all our viewers out there, to attend a Right to Know Seminar Monday night August 10th at 7pm at the Moultoboro Library.
The Right to Know Law, known as RSA 91-A, is one of the most violated law by officals in NH. Many do not feel that they need to change the way they have always done things as they are above the law and do not feel they have to answer to their constituents.
We have had a recent violation of this law by our town officials in the procedures taken to hire a new police chief.
Please come and learn the proper way to adhere to this law.
Editor, The Citizen:
The Right to Know law is as vast as it is sometimes confusing. The NH Bar Assoc. states the "purpose of New Hampshire's Right to Know Law (RSA 91-A) is to make state and local government accountable to the people by requiring that meetings and records be open to the public as much as possible." Article 8 of the New Hampshire Constitution is the impetus for this oft misunderstood and sometimes pesky law. It states that "All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and AT ALL TIMES accountable to them. Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive. To that end, the public's right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted".
With this fairly simple but comprehensive language those who would be the "people" and those who would be their "substitutes and agents," from time to time, find themselves at opposite ends of the table. What constitutes a public meeting … what notes or records need to be kept and made available … what is fair notification of meetings ... and what about emails, letters, and telephone conference calls?
All these topics will be the subject for a Right to Know Seminar coming your way on August 10th (7 PM) at the Moultonborough Public Library. Sponsored by the Moultonborough Citizens Alliance, both the public and members of the various boards of area towns are invited. Ed Naile of the Coalition of NH Taxpayers, Tom Tardif, former mayor of Laconia, and Doug Lambert of GraniteGrok.com, all knowledgeable RTK experts, will be there to explain the "ins" and "outs" of this ubiquitous statute and field a Q & A session.
Bravo and kudos to the MCA for reaching out to both the public and their "substitutes and agents" to for a great opportunity to end up on the same page. The good folks who serve on the boards and the volunteers for committees who have to deal with this law on a daily basis should embrace this effort as a learning event to make their job a bit easier. What a great opportunity for all sides to learn, discuss and educate … all at the same time. I would encourage all to attend.
Now I know that at least some of you will consult the Web to see what Article 8 of the NH Constitution says and check this humble scribe's accuracy. While you are there, jump down a couple articles and take a look at my personal favorite… Article 10. You won't find that in any other state constitution!!
Rick Heath
Moultonborough
