GilfordGrok

Posted by Doug at 02:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Scott Laliberte

Former Gilford Elementary Assistant Principal

Moultonboro Central School Principal 

With the crashing of GraniteGrok a couple of weeks ago, I've been rather busy shuffling data around as we picked up stakes and moved from Yahoo to our new hosting company, Nexcess.  This site, GilfordGrok, will be following its big brother blog over to Nexcess as well over the next week or so.

And that's one reason why posting has been light from me for the most part.  But this situation with Moultonboro's Study Committee (the committee to see if Moultonboro should have a Budget Committee) seems to get bigger and more convoluted.

And now there's another local connection (besides last week's visit that turned from a public meeting to a closed door meeting, thanks to two of our elected leaders).

I mentioned in my second post on this subject that Doug and I met Hollis Austin, a taxpayer from Moultonboro.  Well, even though he is being to be made out as a bit of a crank by some of the long term  powers that are not used to being challenged, we found him to be thoughtful and polite (if insistent on his rights) and a nice guy.  And takes lots of videos at the various official meetings that he then distributes free and unedited to anyone that wants to see what their elected and appointed representatitives are saying (a process that seems to be making a number of those representatives, especially Jerry Hopkins, very uncomfortable).

In fact, Hollis gave me a VHS of the previous meeting of this study committee that announced the meeting here in Gilford, and a whole lot more.  My impression after watching that hour and a half meeting is that most of the folks on that committee are already predisposed, via the use of stereotypes, against forming such a committee.  But that's just my opinion.

And that is the opinion of Mr. Laliberte who made the Gilford Budget Committee and the budget process, sound quite badly.  I'm going to be putting up a transcription up here as soon as I can, and I'm willing to make DVD copies for anyone that wants one (thanks for the permission Hollis!) to see for yourself.  No, no stark raving, no maniacal utterances, but certainly riddled with biases and mangled facts (some not quite right, some really not right). 

If the MSC is getting "advice" like this, I feel sorry for the taxpayers of Moultonboro. 

Posted by Skip at 08:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

A Connecticut company testing for wind power potential and impacts on the 24,000-acre Phillips Brook property in Coos County said it is looking at developing a 100-megawatt windpark by 2009. The 33 to 67 turbines -- each about 400 feet high -- would be spaced just over 1,000 feet apart.

Meanwhile Tillotson Corporation, owners of The Balsams Grand Resort in Dixville Notch, is looking at a smaller field of wind turbines to the north of Phillips Brook on its North Sanguinary Ridge, said Richard Harris, spokesman.

The article further reports that thus far there is no opposition to the project. If built in the range as proposed, the electricity generated will supply power to 16,500 homes with 33 turbines and as many as 33,500 if 67 are erected.

I still think Belknap County should be looking into wind power of our own. We have the mountains. We have the wind. We have the need. The question is, do we have the foresight?

Posted by Doug at 08:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

As they filed out to go downstairs to the kitchen, I ended up talking with Hollis Caswell, a computer and management consultant that was on the MSC.  He generally asked a few questions.  A specific that I honed in on was when the BudComm put money back into the budget (that the Selectmen had removed) to allow the DPW "reconstruct" a truck for the Fire Dept.  I also was upfront with the "divisive"  issues with the School Board this past year of football and health insurance.

He got called downstairs and I asked if I could join him; he answer was "sure'.  So I followed him into the kitchen and plunked down into a chair away from the table that runs down the middle of the room.  One of the MSC folks asked Doug (with his camera running) and I if we were on the BudComm and we answered in the positive, and then were asked to join them at the table.  Questions ensued.

Although I kept wondering when the School Board reps were going show, I kept answering questions about the mechanics of what we do and why.  Again, I reviewed what can be strongly debated issues, using football and insurance as the flashpoints (petition warrant vs budget inclusion, fairness of SAU support staff not assisting with the cost of their health insurance vs the taxpayers).  The biggest item that I tried to stress is that the BudComm is the watchdog for taxpayers - not bound to either the Town or School Board budgets, policies, or people, we are supposed to watch the dollars for the taxpayers.  I hope that any and all questions got answered and let them know that I'd be willing to travel if they wanted more info.  I also suggested that they speak to Dick Hickok (Gilford BudComm Chair) as well.  I also suggested that since not all people are going to agree with my stances that they talk to others that disagree with me so that they would get a more balanced opinion. 

And why not?  I have nothing to hide.  Whil being called "divisive" is supposed to be as bad as "mean spirited", all that it really means is "you're bad because you don't agree with me".  Frankly, that can be said in either direction, can't it?  Speaking of which....

Well, at some point, it turned out that Sue Allen and Derek Thomlinson of the Gilford School Board decided that they did not want to meet in public session.  From the Citizen's report:

This was something that Allen and Tomlinson apparently were not comfortable with as they refused to have a discussion about Gilford's Budget Committee in open public session.

"As soon as Sue Allen saw me in the corner with my video camera there was a commotion," said Lambert.

Some time later, whispering went on between the MSC Chair, Mr. Hopkins, and another person.  Then it was announced that he was going off to a private meeting with Sue and Derek and that he would return later.

Instead of canceling the meeting outright, Allen and Tomlinson elected to meet with Moultonborough Study Committee Chairman Jerry Hopkins behind closed doors to continue the discussion.

Well, this is a bit of a problem...as he is the head of a publicly appointed, official committee of Moultonboro.  As a former Selectman, he should know well the Right To Know law and its ramifications of doing the public's business in private.

My take on this was since it was a publicly noticed meeting and since there were two citizens from Moultonboro present, he was depriving them of that open meeting.  Frankly, his response when challenged was obvious that he did not like being challenged at all.  I won't go into the details as my memory would not do it justice (and I did not take any notes at the time), but am quite sure that Doug will post the video.  I'll also note that when he returned, Hollis Austin wanted to make sure that any notes that were taken would be made available. 

BTW, Mr. Hopkins also made it quite clear that he was not in favor of being videoed during meetings ("it is intimidating").  Maybe, maybe not - I believe that if things are conducted totally in the open, there should be no fear at all.  The public's business should be as open as possible with no backroom secrets and no handshakes in the dark.  Discussions should be made available by any means necessary so as to ensure the information gets out to the most number of people.  In this vein, I CANNOT wait for Gilford to start broadcasting over the "Gilford Channel".

Thus, there was a bit of a tense time.  I too, wondered why neither Sue or Derek would be willing to speak in public.  Certainly I have a sufficiently thick skin to listen, even if asked to not respond at that time.  But given the "spirited debate" of last year's session, I am probably not on Derek's A list.  But that is personal, and I'm stopping there.

What DOES concern me is that this was a publicly noticed meeting for the Moultonboro folks and yet it does concern me that some Gilford officials opted to not keep discussion public....

Anyways, the summary is that that the MSC did get some information from the Administration, the Selectmen, two members of the BudComm, and I believe two members of the School Board.  I know that the first two gave an endorsement to having a budget committee.  Certainly, both Doug and I believe in it, but also realistically gave notice that not everything is cookies and cream.  

The School Board?  Not so sure.  I hope we find out.  Will Sue and Derek present what they said to Mr. Hopkins?  Or will we have to wait for notes to arrive from Moultonboro?

Posted by Skip at 08:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

UPDATE: Citizen has now put the story online (Thanks Cutter!)

======================================== 

Curious and Curiouser...

At the end of my last post, I wondered why the Moultonboro Budget Committee Study Committee (ok, you come up with a better name!) was going to meet with the School Board.  And yet, coming all the way down, not meet with the BudComm itself.  

Also read the Citizen article (promotion denied -> Frank Tilton is still the Belknap County Republican Chair! Oh well, it was nice while it lasted....I think!  The dead-tree version has it, not the online one yet)

Oh yeah, back to the events of last night.  It seems that when the Moultonboro Study Committee's ("MSC") notification for last night's meeting was posted, according to Hollis Austin of Moultonboro who we met after things broke up, it stated that they were going to meet with the Selectmen, reps from the School Board, and reps from the BudComm.  Also, the location was just posted as Gilford and not a specific time.  He had to call their Chair to get the specific information. 

Why did I note this?  It is hard to have an open meeting when those that are an official committee of a town do not give sufficient notification to its citizens so as to participate.  Chance meetings are one thing; deliberately not providing information is another so as to make having open and transparent government is another. 

Note: speaking of Hollis - you know, you gotta like a guy that is videoing meetings and is willing to make copies of the whole thing for anyone who want to see it.  Tip - use DVDs and not VHS!  Better yet, YouTube it! 

Anyways, this meeting was news to me!  If I hadn't been down there and noticed all these "new" people and called Doug to ask what was going on, we wouldn't have been a part of it or known anything about this.

After all, even Dick Hickok, the BudComm Chair, was unaware of a meeting that had been set up between the MSC and our Board......

Er, are you getting the same impression that I am?

More later 

Posted by Skip at 08:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

UPDATE:

I got a promotion!  At least according to the The Citizen, I'm now the Chair of the Belknap Country Republicans!  Actually, I'm not...just the Gilford Chair.  The County Chair is filled, quite well, by Frank Tilton.

As I said at the end of this post, I'll be commenting more on this event in my next one....and will comment on some of what the Citizen reported as well. 

=============================================== 

Growing up, we've almost all done it.  As parents, we've probably almost all seen it in our kids.  You know the look....caught red handed in the cookie jar when they know they shouldn't.  And as they turn the corner out of the kitchen and run smack into you, the look on their faces are priceless.  Yeah, we put on the stern face, just hoping that we don't break out into laughter before we send them on their way.  And even let them keep the cookie sometimes!

But after a couple of times, it isn't  isn't funny any more.  And it has to be a habit that has to be broken, quick.  Because then you graduate to times when you arrive just before "the crime" has happened and you see the same face, quickly followed by that "darn" face.  Or, if they get away with it, it continues unless there are consequences applied to their decisions and actions.

And as parents, we know that there are consequences to our inactions (with respect to our offspring's behavior as well). 

And it isn't cute in adults at all. Especially when they are caught in something that you know that they now realize that perhaps they shouldn't have been doing. 

And especially those that are tasked to govern and the expectation is that they know the laws regulating how they are to behave.  Or worse, they don't understand that there are rules that govern how they should govern, and then blatantly ignore them. Or decide that the laws that govern the rest of us can be bent or rationalized away for their purposes.

No, I'm not talking about our County Delegation. A judge has already decided that issue, at least the first iteration.  And will again, very soon.

Normally, I cannot attend our Selectmen Board meetings....it is impossible when one works during the day.  While it may be more convenient for Town employees, it effectively discriminates against the working class.  But today, given a later start and knowing the agenda, I hopped it down to Town Hall to try to catch some of it (figuring that they put Doug and the Energy Committee proposal off before, maybe I could catch part of it).  

Well, I walked in, sat down, and discovered that I had done so just in time to leave....but the meeting was not yet over.    

Evans Juris (Town Administrator) announced that he had some news on "litigation" issues to cover and asked to go into non-public session.  Connie read the RSA 91 notice (as required) then then it was time for the public to walk out. And then when Connie Grant came out and opened the door, we filed back in - including a whole lot of people that I did not recognize. 

I saw a couple of folks on the "desk" starting to pick up their stuff when it was announced that no, they were not adjourning, that the Selectmen meeting was not over.

And then some folks had "that look" on their face (and one, a very small Mona Lisa type smile).  Kinda perked me up a bit. What was up?

I get all of the agendas in Town emailed to me (nice feature of the Town web site!).  Here's the agenda:

GILFORD BOARD OF SELECTMEN
JULY 25, 2007
3:00 P.M.
AGENDA

1.0     PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

2.0     REVIEW/APPROVAL OF MINUTES – of the Selectmen’s meetings of July 9, 11 and 16, 2007 (regular and non-public).

3.0     APPOINTMENTS
        3.1     Doug Lambert – Gilford Energy Committee
        3.2     Attorney Patrick Wood – Woodland Avenue Driveway Permit
        

Imagine my surprise when it turned out that there was an additional item that was not on the agenda - a visit from an official Committee from Moultonboro that was tasked with gathering information about forming a budget committee to report back to their Selectmen about a recommendation (yes / no, appointed / elected, etc) about a new Budget Committee.

Alice Boucher made a quick introduction about this item and then asked if they had a "leader" that wished to ask questions and a Mr. Hopkins (missed his first name) took the podium as their Chair.  He asked about make up of our board (10 elected plus three appointed), when they work (Aug to Jan, weekly plus), and the process (present the budget, split into sub committees, review each dept., review the sub committee meeting, present to the entire committe, then vote on the sub committee recomendations the following week).

I was startled when Evans said that the BudComm members Were renumerated for their time - he smiled as I said "Where have I been?".  All in good fun.

I was surprised, however, that Debbie Shackett did most of the speaking for the board and the Administration.  I kinda figured that the since they came all the way from Moultonboro, they would have wanted to hear more from the Selectmen.  However, most of the conversation was held with Evans and Debbie, especially when the Moultonboro Chief of Police stood up in full uniform to the podium and addressed Evans as "Chief".

All together, I thought that the Selectmen and Administration presented a favorable impression of having a Budget Committee.  Evans, when questioned about his choice of having an appointed or elected board, made it quite clear that his clear unequivocal choice would be for an elected board.

And then it was over - about 15 minutes (I think) of time - for all that traveling for the six folks that came from Moultonboro (4 in the Chief's Moultonboro's Police SUV and two in another car).

Then they announced that they were leaving to talk to the School Board.  Why would they be talking to the Gilford School Board about the Budget Committee?  Why not talk directly to the BudComm itself (and I was unaware of ANY meeting with the Gilford BudComm was scheduled to meet with Moultonboro contingent) at the same time?

Huh?  

More in my next post. 

Posted by Skip at 08:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR GILFORD ENERGY COMMITTEE

 

 

Name
The name of this committee shall be the Gilford Energy Committee; Also known as the “GEC”

 

Purpose
The GEC is established pursuant to the result of the 2007 Annual Town Meeting’s passage of Warrant Article # 30 to pursue goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase energy efficiency, decrease air pollution, and reduce energy expenditures.

 

Duties and Functions Relative to Purpose
The GEC shall advise the Board of Selectman for approval what methods to use to pursue its purpose. The GEC shall work with town departments, officials, businessmen, citizens, and environmental experts to develop an action plan to achieve purpose and a framework by which environmentally responsible decisions should be made. The GEC shall make recommendations through the Board of Selectmen to town departments to implement the action plan and provide continued evaluation and report the progress of the town in meeting these goals to all interested parties. In addition, while recognizing the lack of any formal or legal obligation to the Gilford School District, the GEC hopes that it can include the school district and their departments in a meaningful way as well.

 

In support of this purpose, the GEC shall have the following duties and perform the following functions:
            1. Conduct research on methods to reduce greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions.
            2. Conduct research on methods to reduce overall energy usage, encourage conservation, improve efficiency, and seek alternative environmentally-friendly, renewable sources of energy whenever feasible for the town and school district.
            3. Seek to coordinate the activities of unofficial bodies organized for similar purposes.
            4. Keep a spreadsheet of resources available on related topics.
            5. Investigate available technology and software to assist in the creation of an overall energy usage plan, with monitoring and analyzing capabilities.
            6. Recommend to the Board of Selectmen (and School Board) specific programs necessary to implement the action plan.
            7. Research funding sources to implement the action plan.
            8. Keep accurate records of its meetings and actions.
            9. File an annual report with the Town Clerk to be included in the city’s annual report. Any savings (expenses) realized through the GEC’s recommendations will be included, recognizing some figures may be estimates.
            10. Attend events, conferences and meetings, as necessary, to develop and retain contact with organizations and agencies working on similar programs.
            11. Organize or participate in any activity necessary to further implement the action plan.

Structure of the GEC

1. General

The GEC will consist of 13 people. Seven (7) community members, at large, all of whom are appointed by the Board of Selectmen for a one year term. In addition, at least one (1) member will be appointed to represent each of the following boards and departments: Board of Selectmen, Department of Public Works, Police Department, Fire Department, School Board, and School District Buildings and Grounds.

Officers

1. Chair

            a. Election and Tenure

 

The Chair shall be elected by and from the membership no later than the second meeting of all the GEC each calendar year. The Chair shall serve for a term of one calendar year and may be re-elected for successive terms.

            b. Duties

 

The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the GEC at which he is present and direct the work of the GEC. He shall direct the calling of meetings of the GEC. He shall appoint all committee members. c. Vacancy

In the event of a vacancy in the office of Chair, the Vice-Chair shall assume the office of Chair for the remainder of the term.

 

2. Vice-Chair

            a. Election and Tenure

The Vice-Chair shall be elected by and from the membership no later than the second meeting of the GEC each calendar year. The Vice-Chair shall serve for a term of one calendar year and may be re-elected for successive terms.

b. Duties

The Vice-Chair shall preside at all meetings of the GEC in the absence of the Chair and shall perform all duties and have all powers of the Chair in case of temporary absence or incapacity of the Chair.

c. Vacancy

In the event of a vacancy in the office of Vice-Chair, a special election shall be held to fill the office for the remainder of the term. The special election shall be held no later than the second meeting after which the vacancy occurred.

 

3. Clerk

            a. Election and Tenure

 

The Clerk shall be elected by and from the membership no later than the second meeting of the GEC each calendar year. The Clerk shall serve for a term of one calendar year and may be re-elected for successive terms.

            b. Duties

 

The Clerk, or his designee, shall keep accurate records of the meetings and other proceedings of the GEC in accordance with RSA91-A. The Clerk shall notify each member of each meeting of the GEC, which shall be posted in accordance with RSA 91-A. He shall prepare and file an annual report with the Town Clerk.

            c. Vacancy

 

In the event of a vacancy in the office of Clerk, a special election shall be held to fill the office for the remainder of the term. The special election shall be held no later than the second meeting after which the vacancy occurred.

 

Committees and Consultants

            1. Committees

Committees shall be established by vote of the members of the GEC for any purpose deemed necessary in accordance with the purpose as detailed above. Committee members shall be members of the GEC and shall be appointed by the Chair of the GEC as provided above. Each Committee shall report to the GEC as necessary or upon request.

2. Consultants

By vote of the members of the GEC, Consultants may be selected for any purpose deemed necessary in accordance with the purpose above. Each Consultant shall report to the GEC as necessary or upon request.

 

Meetings

The Chair shall direct the calling of at least one (1) regular meeting of the GEC each month. The GEC shall communicate its schedule for the upcoming year, to the extent it can, to the Town Administrator’s Office. Such regular meetings shall be held on the __________ ___________of each month at ______p.m. at Town Hall, unless otherwise specified by the Chair. Additional meetings may be held, if necessary, at the discretion of the Chair. It shall be the duty of the Chair to call such a meeting when requested to do so within reason by any of the members of the GEC and when such request specifies the purpose of such a meeting. All meetings will be held in full accordance with all provisions of RSA 91A

Transaction of Business

            1. Quorum

A majority of members in current standing shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of any business.

2. Conduct of Meetings

All meetings shall be conducted pursuant to Roberts Rules of Order, unless changed by a majority vote of a quorum of the members.

3. Agendas

All agenda items shall be identified by title or subject matter both on the written notice of each meeting and prior to consideration at any meeting. All requests for items to be included on the agenda shall be filed with the Chair at least 7 days prior to the meeting. Any matter not requiring prior legal notice may be placed on the agenda at any meeting by a majority vote of the members present.

4. Voting

A vote of the majority of the members of the GEC present at the meeting shall be sufficient to decide any matters. Any member may request that his vote on any issue be recorded as an abstention and may withdraw from consideration on any issue. At the request of any member, the Chair shall call for a recorded roll call vote on any issue.

5. Right to know

All meetings of the GEC shall be held in accordance with the provisions of RSA, Chapter 91-A, as amended, relating to meetings open to the public and executive sessions.

 

Public Hearings

1. The GEC may, at its discretion, hold public hearings or informational hearings when it determines that such hearings will be in the public interest. Notice of such hearings shall be published or posted at least fourteen (14) days prior to the date of hearings. The matter before the GEC shall be presented in summary form by a member of the GEC or by a person designated by the GEC. Any parties in interest shall be privileged to appear before parties not in interest.

2. Testimony or other evidence shall not be presented under oath. A record shall be kept of those persons testifying and/or presenting evidence at such hearings and, if appearing on behalf of another person or entity, the name of such person or entity.

These are links to two sample documents I will present for the Selectmen's perusal. A matrix of actions and the ability to measure progress is key:

 

http://www.cleanair-coolplanet.org/for_communities/GreenTeam_Links/Green%20Tea.pdf

 

http://www.gonashua.com/filestorage/1715/5207/Anti-Idling_Campaign_Flyer.pdf

 

 

Posted by Doug at 01:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Petitioners assert that the Chair of the Belkap County Convention & administrative assistant violated NH's Right-to-Know law on Monday, July 23rd.

Every citizen during the regular or business hours of all such bodies or agencies, and on the regular business premises of such bodies or agencies, has the right to inspect all public records, including minutes of meetings of the bodies or agencies, and to make memoranda, abstracts, and photographic or photostatic copies of the records or minutes so inspected, except as otherwise prohibited by statute or RSA 91-A:5.

 Each public body or agency shall, upon request for any public record reasonably described, make available for inspection and copying any such public record within its files when such records are immediately available for such release.

LAWMAKERS HAVE BECOME LAWBREAKERS.

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

 

BELKNAP, SS.                                                                     SUPERIOR COURT
Docket #______________                                             July 23, 2007

 

 

Thomas A. Tardif & Doug Lambert
v.
Stephen H. Nadeau, Chairperson and
Angela Bell, Clerk Belknap County Commission

 

PETITION FOR DELARATORY JUDGMENT

 

 

            NOW COMES, Thomas A. Tardif, ProSe and Doug Lambert, ProSe, in the above entitled matter says as follows:
Parties
1.  Mr. Thomas A. Tardif, Petitioner is a resident and taxpayer in the City of Laconia, Belknap County, having an address of Laconia, NH 03246
2.  Mr. Doug Lambert, Petitioner is a resident and taxpayer in the Town of Gilford, Belknap County, having an address of , Gilford, NH. 03249.
3.  Stephen H. Nadeau, Clerk Belknap County Convention a resident and taxpayer in the Town of Meredith, Belknap County, having an address of 46 Pleasant Street, Meredith, NH.
4. Angela Bell, Clerk Belknap County Commission, records keeper of the Belknap County Convention having an address of 34 County Drive, Laconia, NH. 03246.

 

            NOW COMES Thomas A. Tardif, ProSe and Doug Lambert, ProSe, the Petitioners in the above entitled matter say as follows:

 

1.              On 29 May 2007 the Belknap County Convention held a meeting. The 14 member quorum, by roll call vote, entered non-Public session per RSA 91-A-2. No Exemption cited, in violation of RSA 91-A:3, II.
                   The minutes, as published, states on Page 2 that:
       “Chairman Nadeau announced that the applications for seven candidates have been sent to each Delegation member, and that letters of recommendation are on file in Angela Bell’s office, and will also be sent out.  The Delegation agreed that all seven should be interviewed, and asked specific questions.  Each Delegate will have a score sheet for each candidate.” (Emphasis added)
(Attachment #1)     
2.              On 11 June 2007, Belknap County Convention held a meeting.  On or about 6:35 p.m. the quorum entered non-Public. No exemption was cited, in violation of RSA 91-A:3, II. They interviewed seven applicants and using score sheets rating applicants, voting by majority reducing the field of seven to two.
 ( Attachment #2)
3.              On 23 July 2007, the petitioners having read the County Convention meeting minutes, knowing that the non-public meeting minutes and documents cited were not sealed, desired to review the afore cited documents.
4.              On 23 July 2007, on or about 11:45 a.m. the petitioners presented a written Right-to-Know Request per RSA 91-A to Angela Bell, the pronounced records keeper for the Belknap County Convention.
5.              On 23 July 2007, Ms. Bell read the RSA 91-A request and stated “she was working on the payroll and could not copy them”, clearly indicating they were immediately available.  The petitioners clarified the request; “We only wish to review the documents”.  “Ms. Bell stated she would have to make a call and would let us know”, absent any definitive time or day.  The petitioners asked if the documents were in fact available?  Ms. Bell’s answer was in the affirmative.  At this point the petitioners suggested that it was she who was denying access to documents that were admittedly immediately available, and that she should make that call ASAP.  She directed us to take a seat.
6.              On 23 July 2007, Ms. Angela Bell returned from making the call cited in paragraph 4.  She stated to the petitioners “that Mr. Nadeau told her not to let us have the document requested”.  She followed by saying “He said,” he “would have to call the County Solicitor”.  Ms. Bell returned the Right-to-Know request. (Attachment #3).
7.              On 23 July 2007, on or about 12:30 p.m. returned to the Belknap County facility so that Ms. Bell would know who to call with an answer.  The petitioners gave Ms. Bell a signed original.  However, Mr. Lambert had failed to affix his signature and Ms. Bell came out into the parking lot to obtain his signature, which he willingly complied.
8.              On 23 July 2007, on or about 12:35 p.m. the petitioners requested Ms. Bell in kind, give us a receipt or sign the other original as a receipt.  Ms. Bell refused.
9.              On 23 July 2007, at the close of the normal business day the petitioners did not receive a call informing them of when they would be able to review the documents that are or should have been immediately available for review.
.      

                  NOW THEREFORE, according to the ongoing violations of RSA 91-A. such as but not limited to:
a)    Ignoring the Right-to Know’s Preamble. –“ … The purpose of this chapter is to ensure both the greatest possible public access to the actions, discussions and records of all public bodies, and their accountability to the people”, then
b)   Denying a citizens right to inspect records clearly embraced by RSA 91-A:4, II. After the completion of a meeting of such bodies or agencies, every citizen, during the regular or business hours of all such bodies or agencies, and on the regular business premises of such bodies or agencies, has the right to inspect all notes, materials, tapes or other sources used for compiling the minutes of such meetings, and to make memoranda, abstracts, photographic or photostatic copies, or tape record such notes, materials, tapes or sources inspected, except as otherwise prohibited by statute or RSA 91-A:5, Then
c)    In spite of a clear, well described request to review certain records, the designated keeper of the Convention’s records denied access to documents that in fact, were as they must be immediately available. RSA 91-A:4, IV. Each public body or agency shall, upon request for any public record reasonably described, make available for inspection and copying any such public record within its files when such records are immediately available for such release. …”, Then
d)   RSA 91-A:3 I, (a) Bodies or agencies shall not meet in nonpublic session, except for one of the purposes set out in paragraph II. Both the meeting of 29 May 2007 and 11 July 2007 ignored the requirement of RSA 91-A2,2
e)    RSA 91-A:3, III. Minutes of proceedings in nonpublic session shall be kept and the record of all actions shall be promptly made available for public inspection, except as provided in this section. Minutes and decisions reached in nonpublic session shall be publicly disclosed within 72 hours of the meeting, unless, by recorded vote of 2/3 of the members present, it is determined that divulgence of the information likely would affect adversely the reputation of any person other than a member of the body or agency itself, …”.
f)    RSA 91-A:8, I,. If any body or agency or employee or member thereof, in violation of the provisions of this chapter, refuses to provide a public record or refuses access to a public proceeding to a person who reasonably requests the same, such body, agency, or person shall be liable for reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred in a lawsuit under this chapter provided that the court finds that such lawsuit was necessary in order to make the information available or the proceeding open to the public. Fees shall not be awarded unless the court finds that the body, agency or person knew or should have known that the conduct engaged in was a violation of this chapter or where the parties, by agreement, provide that no such fees shall be paid. In any case where fees are awarded under this chapter, upon a finding that an officer, employee, or other official of a public body or agency has acted in bad faith in refusing to allow access to a public proceeding or to provide a public record, the court may award such fees personally against such officer, employee, or other official. 
.           

            III. In addition to any other relief awarded pursuant to this chapter, the court may issue an order to enjoin future violations of this chapter, I-a. The court may award attorneys' fees to a board, agency or employee or member thereof, for having to defend against a person's lawsuit under the provisions of this chapter, when the court makes an affirmative finding that the lawsuit is in bad faith, frivolous, unjust, vexatious, wanton, or oppressive.
g)   RSA 91-A:9 Destruction of Certain Information Prohibited. – A person is guilty of a misdemeanor who knowingly destroys any information with the purpose to prevent such information from being inspected or disclosed in response to a request under this chapter. If a request for inspection is denied on the grounds that the information is exempt under this chapter, the requested material shall be preserved for 90 days or while any lawsuit pursuant to RSA 91-A: 7 - 8 is pending.

 

       WHEREFORE, the petitioners pray the following:
A         Declare the Belknap County Convention on 29 May 2007 and 11 July 2007 met in nonpublic session in violation of RSA 91-A, and

 

B         Order Belknap County Convention Defendant to make immediately available documents in its “File” regarding the appointment to fill the unexpired term of Sheriff Collis, and

 

C         On 23 July 23, 2007, the defendant, with malfeasant or miss-feasants violated RSA 91-A, by denying access to public records not sealed and immediately available. In fact intentional knew or should have known was a violation of RSA 91-A, and

 

D         Order that the defendants comply with RSA 91-A, now and in the future, and

 

E          This honorable court order the defendants to pay petitioners all out of pocket expenses incurred in bring this action.

 

                                                                        Respectfully submitted,

 

 

                                                                        _______________________
                                                                        Doug Lambert, ProSe

                                                                        Gilford, NH

                                                                       

 

 

                                                                       ______________________

                                                                        Thomas A. Tardif, ProSe  

                                                                         Laconia, NH

If only they would simply comply with the law and always default to a position of sunshine and openness. Why do they do this? What are they trying to hide? Or is it just a matter of ignorance of the law? Not a good thing when you fancy yourself a lawmaker...

Posted by Doug at 01:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"the violation of the specific command of RSA 91-A is plain and indisputable. The county delegation should have known that a secret ballot vote in a public session violated that Right-to-Know law on its face."

Posted by Doug at 01:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 07:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 08:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

 1. Conduct research on methods to reduce greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions.
 2. Conduct research on methods to reduce overall energy usage, encourage conservation, improve efficiency, and seek alternative environmentally-friendly, renewable sources of energy whenever feasible for the town and school district.
 3. Seek to coordinate the activities of unofficial bodies organized for similar purposes.
 4. Keep a spreadsheet of resources available on related topics.
 5. Investigate available technology and software to assist in the creation of an overall energy usage plan, with monitoring and analyzing capabilities.
 6. Recommend to the Board of Selectmen (and School Board) specific programs necessary to implement the action plan.
 7. Research funding sources to implement the action plan.
 8. Keep accurate records of its meetings and actions.
 9. File an annual report with the Town Clerk to be included in the city’s annual report. Any savings (expenses) realized through the GEC’s recommendations will be included, recognizing some figures may be estimates.
 10. Attend events, conferences and meetings, as necessary, to develop and retain contact with organizations and agencies working on similar programs.
 11. Organize or participate in any activity necessary to further implement the action plan.

Posted by Doug at 09:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

    [Cross-posted at GraniteGrok]

Letter to the Editor,
 
After reading the Citizen's article, "Judge won't block Belknap County Sheriff appointee" and Laconia Daily Sun's article, "Judge won't stop Wiggin from becoming sheriff but wants time to determine if process was proper", it appeared obvious to me that there's some confusion between a "public officer" and a "public employee".

.

In the Laconia Daily Sun it says that,

"Mohl interrupted to point out the Convention could have treated filling the vacancy as making an appointment or hiring an employee and, while complying with the Right -to-Know law, held all its proceedings in non-public session.  "Given that they could have done that, if I'm right," he asked, "what's the harm of doing part of it by secret ballot in public session?"  

In the Citizen it says,

"Mohl did say that if the process was an appointment, as Lambert and Tardif contend, the delegation would have been well within their rights to enter a nonpublic session for the vote." 

The position of Belknap County Sheriff is that of a public officer as defined in "TITLE LXIII ELECTIONS Chapter 661 vacancies among public officers elected at state elections"  "RSA 661:9 County Officers."  Officers are elected positions like, City Councilors, Selectmen, County Delegation, County Sheriff, Governor, etc. these are not employees.    The Right-to Know Law RSA 91-A "TITLE VI PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES Chapter 91-A Access to public records and meetings Section 91-A:3 Nonpublic Sessions."  Section II says what matters may be acted on in NONPUBLIC SESSION.  Section II. (b) says, "THE HIRING OF ANY PERSON AS A PUBLIC EMPLOYEE."  The title of 91-A "Public Officers" and "Employees" makes a distinction between the two.   Section II (b) doesn't included Public Officers because they are either elected, or appointed to an elective position when a vacancy occurs.  BELKNAP COUNTY SHERIFFS ARE NOT HIRED. 
 
 
David Gammon
Laconia, NH

Posted by Doug at 07:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

.

[This is also posted at GraniteGrok]

.

Friday was the hearing for the Right-to-Know suit filed by me and former Laconia Mayor Tom Tardif under NH's Right-to-Know law (RSA91-A). (Click here to read a prior posting with the details and here for the Citizen newspaper's reporting on the matter) As expected, our elected representatives vigorously defended their actions instead of simply dropping back and doing the right thing in compliance with the law. You know-- default in the direction of openness. Instead, it's time to circle the wagons...

.

One of the things we asked the court for was to deny the assumption of the Sheriff's position scheduled for Monday, July 9th based on our contention that the secret ballot used in an open meeting by the Belknap County Convention was illegal. Unfortunately, the judge decided that no harm would come from this happening, no matter what he ultimately rules on our overall case. While he's right that the matter is one of process versus whether the person is suited for the job, which nobody questions, it validates the egregious action. Furthermore, I still believe this leaves the county wide open to future messy litigation as defense attorneys seek exoneration of clients using all available means, at undoubtedly great cost to the taxpayers.

. 

I believe we successfully made our overall point and will be found correct by the judge. What was interesting was that the county's attorney framed the convention's action as being an exception to the Right-to-Know law because they held an ELECTION, which is exempted from the statute. The problem for the county is, if that were true, then the election would have to be under the auspices of one of the three types as defined by NH's election laws. If that's the case, then the county violated ELECTION law instead of the RIGHT-TO-KNOW law. Either way, a body comprised of those we elect to MAKE the laws has broken some law, thus causing our honorable

lawmakers to become lawbreakers!

Here is the testimony I gave to the Belknap Superior Court today at 9:00AM:

Your honor,

If the use of a secret paper ballot by a public body in a public meeting, in this case, the Belknap County Convention, is allowed to stand, I fear the citizens of the county, and even the whole state, will be negatively impacted.

.

The law is quite simple. The Right to Know law- RSA 91A clearly includes a meeting of the Belknap County Convention as a “public proceeding”, therefore making the body subject to all of the rules governing such events. (91-A:1-a, I, d.) To make an exception in this case, one would need a new law, as none presently exists.

.

RSA91-A:2, II states that

“All public proceedings shall be open to the public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meetings of those bodies or agencies. Except for town meetings, school district meetings and elections, no vote while in open session may be taken by secret ballot.”

I’m not sure what part of this the County Convention didn’t understand. It plainly says “NO Vote while in open session may be taken by secret ballot.” Given that we’re not talking about a town or school district meeting, the only other exception allowed for a secret ballot vote is for an election.

“If a vacancy occurs in the office of county sheriff, county attorney, register of deeds, or county treasurer, the members of the county convention shall fill the vacancy for the unexpired term by majority vote.”

""Election'' shall mean the choosing of a public officer or of a delegate to a party convention or the nominating of a candidate for public office by voters by means of a direct vote conducted under the election laws. The term does not include caucuses or conventions.”

“"Regular election'' shall mean an election required to be held periodically under the election laws, a city charter, or a local by-law, and which is held in accordance with the same. Any other election shall be a ""special election.'' As used in the election laws, ""election'' shall mean a regular election.”

The people’s right-to-know is embedded in our Constitution. When the current Constitution was adopted on June 2, 1784, the accountability to the people of the people’s elected representatives and appointed public officials was established in Part 1, article 8, which read:

All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them.

In 1976, the people of New Hampshire amended Part 1, article 8 of our Constitution, reinforcing the existence of a right of access to public meetings and records, by adding the following two sentences:

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.

“The public’s right-to-know what their government is doing is a fundamental part of New Hampshire’s democracy. For our government to remain of the people, by the people, and for the people, while protecting individuals’ privacy, it is essential that the people have reasonable and open access to the information that will inform the people what their government is up to and how it is performing.

.

With the exception of the public business conducted at traditional annual town and school meetings, New Hampshire uses a representative form of democracy. The people’s elected representatives set and carry out most public policy. New Hampshire’s Constitution and the Right-to-Know Law ensure that the public has reasonable access to public meetings and public records that show what those elected representatives and the appointed public officials that carry out our laws are doing.”

The problem, your Honor, is that our lawmakers have now become lawbreakers.

Doug Lambert & Thomas A. Tardif
v.
Belknap County Convention, et. all

 

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

 

 

 

 

            NOW COMES Doug Lambert, ProSe who’s and Thomas A. Tardif, ProSe, in the above entitled matter says as follows:
Fact
1.              Belknap County Sheriff Dan Collis resigned.

 

2.              On 29 May 2007 the Belknap County Convention held a meeting. The 14 member quorum, by role call vote, entered non-Public session per RSA 91-A-2.  It was announce that the applications for seven candidates have been sent to each Delegation members.
3.              On 11 June 2007, the County Convention held a meeting.  A list of question created by a sub-committee was presented and the “interviewing Process: Rep. Millam suggested:
a.       Develop in public session the process for filling the position of Sheriff.
                                                               i.      Interview applying candidates in non-public session for the purpose of screening the candidates for appropriateness and eligibility.
b.      Identify two (preferably) candidates for final interview in public session.
c.       Conduct the final interview in public without public comment.
d.      Appoint a person to fill the unexpired term of Sheriff. (Emphasis added)

 

4.    On 11 June 2007, absent and RSA 91-A exception the commission entered non-public session by role call vote.  Interview commence at 6:35.  At 9:15 p.m. by motion they reduce field to two: Nielson and Wiggin.  Unanimous, 9 -5, Motion passed.  At 9:45 p.m. they came out of non-public.  The minutes do not reflect the required announcement that they had made a decision in non-public session.

 

5.    On Monday 25 June 2007, the Belknap County Convention, comprised of 15 of the 18 member representatives, met to discuss the “appointment”, from the two finalists for Belknap County Sheriff, to fill the unexpired term of Sheriff Dan Collis.

 

6.    On Monday 25 June 2007, 14 representatives present by a 13 –1 vote that the voting would be “by secret ballot.
7.    On Monday 25 June 2007, the convention took a second vote by secret paper ballot;
8.    Results of voting:
Nielsen – 4
Wiggin – 10
Rep. Arsenault Abstained.
 
9.    On 25 June 2007 Wiggin by10 to 4 majority vote was appointed Belknap County Sheriff to succeed Dan Collis as Sheriff and will assume his duties on 9 July 2007. .
Law

 

RSA 652:1 Election. – ""Election'' shall mean the choosing of a public officer or of a delegate to a party convention or the nominating of a candidate for public office by voters by means of a direct vote conducted under the election laws. The term does not include caucuses or conventions. The types of elections are further defined in this chapter. (Emphasis added)

 

652:3 State Election. – ""State election'' shall mean an election to choose a federal, state, or county officer or a delegate to a party convention or to nominate a candidate for federal, state or county office. The 3 types of state elections are defined in RSA 652:4, 652:5 and 652:6
            Accordingly, the Secretary of State is and would have been involved had the Belknap County in Convention were electing the interim Sheriff to fill the unexpired term of Sheriff Dan Collis.

 

            In addition it is universally accepted that State election Laws which embrace County election are determined by Plurality, not a simple majority.

 

RSA 661:9 County Officers. –
    I. If a vacancy occurs in the office of county sheriff, county attorney, register of deeds, or county treasurer, the members of the county convention shall fill the vacancy for the unexpired term by majority vote. (Emphasis added)
<