Getting slapped around
Both the Steamer and the Citizen covered the latest meeting of the Meadows Advisory Committee (a sub-committee of the Gilford School Board). Once again, the Right To Know and the GSB School Board seemingly were close to butting heads, as two applicants were being considered for open slots on the MAC.
With all of the brouhaha swirling around the GSB - Moultonborough meeting, one would have thought that the GSB would have had the thought "let's not even come close to that line that marks controversy and non-controversal. Let's just play by the rules."
The Citizen reported:
Four members of the committee were set to meet with the only two applicants for the positions on Wednesday night. Prior to commencing the meeting in the Town Hall conference room, School Board Chair and Meadows committee member Sue Allen took committee chair Tim Drew aside and informed him that the group had the option of entering into nonpublic session for the interviews, though she informed him he might consider keeping the proceedings open
Excellent! Open and transparent. What local government needs to be optimally effective (doesn't hurt on the PR side either).
Oops, maybe not quite so fast:
Allen maintained that the Meadows committee had the right to enter into nonpublic session if it chose to do so, adding that the decision would require a roll-call vote.
When The Citizen pointed out to Allen that the committee would have to cite what provision under RSA 91-A would allow the group to enter into nonpublic session, she responded by saying, "I'll give you a letter."
Accountability. That all this is about. Doing things the right way, the proper way, the best way.
I'm not talking about making mistakes...everyone and every board will make one from time to time. But when considering contracts, inter-town meetings, and now this, one cannot just chalk this up to a simple mistake or misunderstanding. While Dr. DiMinico later defended the GSB's possible decision to go into non-public session, the Steamer article noted that the Selectmen routinely conducted their interviews in public session. So did the BudComm!
During the discussion, Allen and Derek Tomlinson, who was filling in for Paul Blandford on the committee, stated their support for remaining in open public session. Tomlinson went as far as to say that, if the candidates wanted to be on a public board, they should get used to the limelight.
The slogan at the 'Grok is to spank'em when they're wrong and thank'em when they're right. In this case, the THANK YOU (really! Really not meant sarcastically!).
When one wishes to serve, that is the atmosphere and the environment for all to expect. IMHO, non-public meetings should be kept to a minimum if at all possible.
That said, I do have to add the following:
Oh yeah, I almost forgot about a quote I found in both papers. Derek Tomlinson had this to say:
"I think people are tired of sticking their necks out and getting slapped around."
One does not get "slapped" around for behaving well. Take that out to the next logical step.
When not behaving well generally means that others notice and comment upon such behavior. No less so here at the 'Grok. One makes the deliberate decision to take a given action, for the right or for the wrong. Too often, the right goes thankless. But wrong? It can provide a bit of fun for observers.....
Take your pick
