Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Winnipesaukee Forums > General Discussion
Home Forums Gallery Webcams Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Register FAQ Members List Donate Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-30-2010, 09:14 PM   #1
breathe easy
Senior Member
 
breathe easy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 98
Thanks: 7
Thanked 23 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Argie's Wife View Post

I can guarantee that once they were convened in a meeting, most likely in a non-public session, they discussed in depth the issues before them that that night and the response of the town's assessor/assessing department.

My trust goes to those who admit they don't have all the answers, especially in a charged situation like the one you've described. I immediately distrust those who have an answer for everything and know-it-all.

Yes, waiting is painful but far better to wait for them to get it right the first time vs. re-try after re-try to get it right like a bunch of fools.

Well they better not be discussing this in non-public session as there is absolutely no justification for this under RSA 91-A , the Right to Know law. The Moultonborough Selectmen were unprepared plain and simple and even though they didn't have the "facts" the chair made the statement that he doubted they would reject the Vision Appraisal numbers.
breathe easy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2010, 09:23 PM   #2
Argie's Wife
Senior Member
 
Argie's Wife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Alton
Posts: 1,908
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 533
Thanked 579 Times in 260 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by breathe easy View Post
Well they better not be discussing this in non-public session as there is absolutely no justification for this under RSA 91-A , the Right to Know law. The Moultonborough Selectmen were unprepared plain and simple and even though they didn't have the "facts" the chair made the statement that he doubted they would reject the Vision Appraisal numbers.
Oh, yes there could be - and this is speculation - but if they decide to discuss say, the assessors' handling of the issue or the town manager/administrator, etc., then it would fall under reputation.

Also, if they're discussing legal matters - such as getting out of a contract with Vision or whathaveyou - then yes, they could go into non-public for that... again this is all speculation on my part about what might be going on - but I do know how RSA 91 can be used appropriately to go into non-public.



NH RSA 91-A:

91-A:3 Nonpublic Sessions.

I. (a) Bodies or agencies shall not meet in nonpublic session, except for one of the purposes set out in paragraph II. No session at which evidence, information or testimony in any form is received shall be closed to the public, except as provided in paragraph II. No body or agency may enter nonpublic session, except pursuant to a motion properly made and seconded.
(b) Any motion to enter nonpublic session shall state on its face the specific exemption under paragraph II which is relied upon as foundation for the nonpublic session. The vote on any such motion shall be by roll call, and shall require the affirmative vote of the majority of members present.
(c) All discussions held and decisions made during nonpublic session shall be confined to the matters set out in the motion.
II. Only the following matters shall be considered or acted upon in nonpublic session:
(a) The dismissal, promotion or compensation of any public employee or the disciplining of such employee, or the investigation of any charges against him, unless the employee affected (1) has a right to a meeting and (2) requests that the meeting be open, in which case the request shall be granted.
(b) The hiring of any person as a public employee.
(c) Matters which, if discussed in public, would likely affect adversely the reputation of any person, other than a member of the body or agency itself, unless such person requests an open meeting.
(d) Consideration of the acquisition, sale or lease of real or personal property which, if discussed in public, would likely benefit a party or parties whose interests are adverse to those of the general community.
(e) Consideration or negotiation of pending claims or litigation which has been threatened in writing or filed against the body or agency or any subdivision thereof, or against any member thereof because of his membership in such body or agency, until the claim or litigation has been fully adjudicated or otherwise settled.
(f) Consideration of applications by the adult parole board under RSA 651-A.
(g) Consideration of security-related issues bearing on the immediate safety of security personnel or inmates at the county correctional facilities by county correctional superintendents or their designees.
(h) Consideration of applications by the business finance authority under RSA 162-A:7-10 and 162-A:13, where consideration of an application in public session would cause harm to the applicant or would inhibit full discussion of the application.
(i) Consideration of matters relating to the preparation for and the carrying out of emergency functions, including training to carry out such functions, developed by local or state safety officials that are directly intended to thwart a deliberate act that is intended to result in widespread or severe damage to property or widespread injury or loss of life.
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, or render the proposed action ineffective, or pertain to terrorism, more specifically, to matters relating to the preparation for and the carrying out of all emergency functions, developed by local or state safety officials that are directly intended to thwart a deliberate act that is intended to result in widespread or severe damage to property or widespread injury or loss of life. This shall include training to carry out such functions. In the event of such circumstances, information may be withheld until, in the opinion of a majority of members, the aforesaid circumstances no longer apply.
Argie's Wife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2010, 09:38 PM   #3
breathe easy
Senior Member
 
breathe easy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 98
Thanks: 7
Thanked 23 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Baloney.
The contract with Vision Appraisal is paid for with pubic money and is not exempt from the RTK law. Deliberations about whether to accept the VA product must be held in public session and it will on Thursday at 4pm.
breathe easy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2010, 10:02 PM   #4
Argie's Wife
Senior Member
 
Argie's Wife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Alton
Posts: 1,908
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 533
Thanked 579 Times in 260 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by breathe easy View Post
Baloney.
The contract with Vision Appraisal is paid for with pubic money and is not exempt from the RTK law. Deliberations about whether to accept the VA product must be held in public session and it will on Thursday at 4pm.
Ah, but legal matters ARE covered and so is reputation. It would be more prudent for them to discuss legal matters in non-public to protect the town (legal fees are also paid for by the tax payer - why show their hand and make information discoverable to Vision or any other company or party if they plan on breaking or discontinuing a contract? Why invite trouble?) It most certainly would be covered under non-public. Ditto if a matter concerned an employee...

Remember: whatever decisions are made have to be disclosed in public and in the meeting minutes. That is also per RSA 91. Discussion and decisions are TWO totally different things.... check and see if your selectmen have a non-public session, workshop, or any other type of meeting before the meeting on Thursday. I'd wager they have a non-public session on the agenda at least for Thursday night, following the last public input of the meeting....

Just because something is paid for with public money (taxes) it doesn't automatically make it all public information. If you don't believe me, walk into your town hall tomorrow and ask for a list of what the employees have for health insurance, including who in their family is covered by their policy. Good luck with that one... seriously. It's not all public info like you may think.

BTW - on 7/29 the BOS went into non-public under RSA 91-A:3 II (d) and sealed the minutes. This same item has been on other meeting agendas since but the need to go into non public or even address this issue was put off for a future meeting (see BOS minutes from 7/29 if you don't believe me...)
Argie's Wife is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.10655 seconds