Story · Select Board
Right-to-Know law and board conduct
The chair responded to emails read at the last meeting. He said they repeated allegations he considers false. He said the real issue was the conduct of the former Conservation Commission chair, which he said showed bias. The second board member said it was time to decide next steps and move forward. The board's liaison to the Conservation Commission said he had asked that information go through him, but he did not say it was legally required. He said talks between the chair and a Conservation Commission member left him out, and he asked to be included in relevant communications. He said he agreed with the chair's concerns about that member's conduct. He also said a resident should not have emailed a neighbor's attorney without first asking the Town Attorney. He said the situation looked underhanded and could expose the Town to a lawsuit. He disagreed with the chair calling his remarks false. He added that audience members should not call out during meetings. Minutes for the rest of the discussion were not finished. The board adjourned at 8:23 pm.
How it happened
Aug 11 · MinutesFirst mention
A board member read from a March 14, 2024 state Department of Justice memo on the Right-to-Know law (RSA 91-A, the NH public meetings and records law). He said two of the three board members make a quorum. He said that if a quorum attends another board's meeting and joins the discussion without a public notice posted 24 hours ahead, that can count as an illegal unnoticed meeting. The chair then answered statements made at the July 28 meeting and read two prepared statements, which were attached to the minutes. A second board member said she was glad the matter was followed up on quickly. She asked the board to review which of its practices are real Town procedures and to write them down. She also said the board should avoid creating a quorum without public notice and should share information on time through the proper channels.
Aug 11 · Minutes
A resident suggested using the situation to teach rather than keep debating. She asked that all board chairs and elected officials read the law and Attorney General guidance. She also asked for formal training for boards and for newly elected officials, and for a clear written protocol. She said she saw the problem as the Town not explaining the rules ahead of time, more than an ethics breach by volunteers. The chair replied that the Town Attorney is paid for his legal expertise and that the board should rely on his advice. He also said officials swear an oath of office, and that being impartial and following the law is clear. A former Select Board chair said he had often urged members to use New Hampshire Municipal Association resources and to learn RSA 91-A. He said that when an official breaks the rules, the problem lies with that person's approach and not with the Town. He also said the Select Board alone has the power to appoint Conservation Commission members. He said the board filled a seat that had been empty for months and chose the new member unanimously after he applied.
Aug 11 · MinutesDecided
The chair responded to emails read at the last meeting. He said they repeated allegations he considers false. He said the real issue was the conduct of the former Conservation Commission chair, which he said showed bias. The second board member said it was time to decide next steps and move forward. The board's liaison to the Conservation Commission said he had asked that information go through him, but he did not say it was legally required. He said talks between the chair and a Conservation Commission member left him out, and he asked to be included in relevant communications. He said he agreed with the chair's concerns about that member's conduct. He also said a resident should not have emailed a neighbor's attorney without first asking the Town Attorney. He said the situation looked underhanded and could expose the Town to a lawsuit. He disagreed with the chair calling his remarks false. He added that audience members should not call out during meetings. Minutes for the rest of the discussion were not finished. The board adjourned at 8:23 pm.
Cat moved to adjourn at 8:23 pm and Mark seconded. All were in favor and the motion carried.