Recently in SB2 Category
Laconia Daily Sun August 6, 2010
To the editor,
This is a response, and correction to Marty Valengavich’s July 30 letter in The Laconia Daily Sun. I finally got to talk to him on the phone (nice guy) to find out where he ever got the idea
that I was in anyway opposed to anybody being allowed to vote. Even he couldn’t recall when I ever wrote such trash, but, eventually we related it to a letter I wrote supporting SB-2 in
Moultonborough. Seems that Marty had the idea that SB-2 was a way to block people from voting, when in fact, it is exactly the opposite of that: SB-2 is a way to conduct local voting
in a fair way with secret ballots, with greatly improved ways to educate voters about what they are to vote on. ALL of the opposition to SB-2 comes from those few local politicians who
don’t want the voters to know what those politicians are trying to sneak through! With SB-2 you get the usual Town Meeting (informational session) with discussions of issues, but only as an educational exercise, with chances to correct errors (accidental or intentional) THEN, before the final vote later (that’s the part the political thieves oppose). The actual vote comes much later, AFTER everyone has time to checkout all that was said at the informational meeting (“old
Town Meeting”). THEN every voter has a chance to vote SECRETLY over a full day, whenever they can (unlike the antiquated “Town Meeting” which eliminated those who couldn’t get to
or endure a late night of many hours of boring meeting). Sneaky politicians HATE that freedom for the electorate! Obviously we need that system at the state and federal level, where they
routinely pass bills they never read! NONE of Obama’s bills would have ever passed if all who voted for them had to prove they read and understood them first! Marty tried to exceed my humor about idiot ways to block illegals, and I think he won with the hiring of I.N.S agents. He should have stopped when he was the winner! Canadians are not a major problem to the USA, BUT, it does seem that many of the worst enemies of the USA come in legally through the Mexico and Canada borders. They are very few compared to the masses of Mexicans invading
our southern border with the aid of the Mexican police and army. Okay Marty, the old duck joke is often correct: in your case, it indicates you are a radical left wing socialist opposed to the U.S. Constitution, looking for Obama to take over the USA as Hitler did Germany. Any truth in that? I doubt it. Sorry, but I see you as a nice guy, upset with the crap our government has dumped on you, wishing that somehow the government can fairly take care of major long-term medical problems (a valid function of government). Many years ago Teddy Kennedy gave an excellent speech about government medical care (which everyone totally ignored, despite being the best
speech he ever gave). Talking about current medical problems, he noted that the super rich Kennedy’s could afford their outrageous medical costs, but most other can’t. He correctly suggested that the Feds must cover ALL major medical costs that might exceed the person’s annual income (please, someone get the actual numbers on that). With a provision like that, medical insurance costs will drop to under 10-percent of current prices. A good local person like Marty deserves at least that much from our government!
Jack Stephenson
Gilford
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
In light of the recent Cease and Desist orders issued by the Attorney General's office towards former Board of Selecetmen Chair and current Vice Chair Karel Crawford, and former School Board Chair and current Supervisor of the Checklist, Laurie Whitley, we at the MCA feel it is appropriate to comment.
We fought a fair fight for SB2 in March of 2009. We now find out that the election may not necessarily be reflective of the voice of the people perhaps as a result of the actions of the above board memebers.
Editor: The Meredith News March 19, 2009
The town of
Mark E. Lamprey
The Meredith News March 19, 2009
Editorial
At almost every town meeting we covered this year, there were debates about whether town employees and/ortown officials should get raises. The results were mixed.In Tilton, an amendment to cut the 3.5-percent raises allocated to all town employees – a total of more than $14,000 – was voted down. An amendment in Moultonboro that would have nixed 2.5-percent raises, plus step increases, for town employees was defeated. On the flip side, two towns’ residents voted down raises of much smaller doses. In
Editor: The Citizen March 18, 2009
On Saturday afternoon shortly before 3:30 p.m., 194 of the approximately 4,000 registered voters in Moultonborough (less than 5%) cast their vote on the $8,249,747.00 town operating budget. Such apathy is inexcusable. Those voters who were UNABLE to attend (work, health, travel,etc.) have my understanding. Those who CHOSE not to attend have no right to complain about EXCESSIVE SPENDING in these economic times.
Would I have preferred to be doing something else on a beautiful Saturday? - ABSOLUTELY! Sometimes you just have to do the right thing.
Penny Morrison
Moultonborough
To the editor, Laconia Daily Sun March 17, 2009
We just came back from the Moultonborough Town Meeting. It was a joke. The selectman are still
snaking all the ball field at the Lions Club, which they should hold off on. The economy is falling apart
and people are hurting. Ball fields are NOT needed at this time. What are the selectmen thinking?
Now they say the Town Hall needs a new roof because the roofer who put it on did not do a good job and it isleaking. So why not take the money you want to use for the ball fields and use that for the Town Hall roof? Now that makes more sense. The ball field proposal is a joke. Where is the reason for this? Don’t you think the roof is the towns first concern and NOT the ball fields. Next you will be telling us the safety building needs a roof and the library. Where does it end? Our hard-earned tax dollars are being wasted. The selectman snake anything and everything they want. Our votes do not mean much. This is another reason why SB-2 should have gone through. We need to take the power back to the taxpayers, not the special interest. They know who they are. Someone needs to tell
them we are in a bad state of the economy.
Anna DeRose, Moultonborough
Library closing for town meeting
Editor, The Citizen: March 12th, 2009
Gentlemen, I see that the selectmen have closed the library this Saturday so the employees may attend town meeting. I had intended to go to meeting too but must work and so my right to vote on matters that affect me is denied. I have been disenfranchised. I went to the town office to talk to someone from the selectmen's office, no one was in. I did talk with the town administrator, he suggested I take a "personal" day off from my job at Aubuchon Hardware. He must not have worked in the private sector for some time as one does not just do that. I tried to find someone to trade days with, no luck. There are only four of us working that day so if I just didn't go to work they would be put in a bad bind and I wouldn't get paid.
I find it insulting that you would give the good folks at the library a chance to vote when the working stiffs in town don't get that opportunity (those of us not working for the town make on average $200 a week less than public employees by the way, I got that from the Moultonboro.gov site). A cynical person might surmise that town workers are free to over represent themselves at meeting while those working to pay their salaries lose our chance to have our voices counted.
Finally I would like to know if the person or persons who mounted a phone campaign telling residents that out of state property owners would have voting privileges should SB2 pass when that is not the case can be investigated for knowingly lying to affect the outcome of Tuesday's election. At least one of the callers might have an official connection to the town. I feel that that person or persons did a dishonorable thing and should at least issue a public apology.
Would like to say "see you Saturday" but I am not allowed to vote.
Michael Brooker
Moultonborough
