We received the following article by Sandra Coleman and have posted the article without correction.
What was the process by which the Board of Selectmen, Chairman
Stewart and Dan Golden, appointed Glenn Dion to the position of Selectman
vacated by the resignation of Dennis Potter?
In her Memorandum, July 15, 2009, Attorney General Kelly Ayotte stated: in
hiring of any person as a public employee, RSA 91-A:3,II b, note: filling a
vacancy for an elected or appointed official is an 'appointment' and not the
hiring of a public employee. Interviews and deliberations on filling a vacancy
in an elected office must occur in public session.
Town Administrator, Paul Branscombe, brought this Memorandum to the attention of
the Water ant Sewer Commissioners at their meeting on August 3, 2011. It
compelled the Commissioners to hold a public meeting to deliberate the
qualifications of each candidate for the position of Commissioner.
It is apparent Mr. Branscombe is aware of Kelly Ayotte's Memorandum. Did Mr.
Branscombe bring this Memorandum to the attention of Chairman Stewart and Dan
Golden? If he did not, why? If he did, why did the Board of Selecten ignore
this Memorandum from the Attorney General? Did the Board of Selecten violate
the Right-to-Know law?
Kelly Ayotte, now US Senator from New Hampshire, strongly recommended "all
public officials learn their responsibilities under the Right-to-Know law".
As I have stated, and it has been stated before me by others, "the public's
right to know what its government is doing is a fundamental part of New
Hampshire's democracy".
At the heart of Sandra's article is the public's right to know. The AG's Memorandum makes it clear that the public has a right to know how and why a person is appointed to fill an elected position. Voters need to know the candidate's background and qualifications, and they need to know the basis on which the sitting board makes an appointment. The process is also important to the candidates. An appointed official does not have an electoral mandate from the voters; he or she only has the endorsement of the sitting board. As a matter of fairness, the candidates who were not selected need to know why.
ReplyDeleteSandra also raises the question about whether the town was aware of the AG's Memorandum at the time they made they appointed Glenn Dion. They should have known. But, after the memorandum was presented to the Water and Sewer Commissioners, they should have acknowledged the mistake and taken corrective action.
The Right to Know Law is clear on this topic. An appointment to an elected office cannot occur in non public session. Check out Lambert vs Belknap County in 2007 who took this very same issue to Superior Court when the county Sheriff appointment was made illegally.
ReplyDeleteThank you for responding to my Blog. Glen Dion was appointed as Selectman in public session. In Kelly Ayotte’s Memorandum of July 15, 2009, she stated ‘interviews and deliberations on filling a vacancy for an elected or appointed official must occur in public session’. The question is: What was the process? To my knowledge, no candidate was afforded the opportunity for an interview and therefore no deliberations took place in public session. We are talking about a violation of the Right-to-Know law.
ReplyDeleteSandra A Coleman
At the Select Board Meeting last night Jeanette Stewart explained the process they used to select Glenn Dion. Jeanette said that they wanted someone with experience who wouldn't need training and someone who would work well with the board. Jeanette said that they notified all the candidates that a decision would be made at the meeting when Glenn was Selected. At that meeting, there was no discussion of the candidates, their experience, ortheir qualifications qualifications. Dan Golden simply nominated Glenn Dion and Jeanette concurred.
ReplyDeleteFrom a voter's standpoint, this process was extremely unsatifactory. I did not feel that the Select Board was representing my interests by not discussing the candidates. I had no idea whether Glenn met Jeanette's qualifications or not. It is true that he was experienced, but he had not been attending board meetings, and I had no idea whether he was familiar with the current issues. There was at least one other candidate with recent experience. I would have liked to have heard the board discuss each of the candidates, and explain their reasons for selecting.
This is not a reflection on Glenn Dion. Glenn is very capable, and has a good understanding of the issues. It is clear that he works hard at the position.
However, at the next election, I will be looking for candidates who would do a more thorough job in selecting candidates to fill elected positions, candidates who will deliberate in public and make the reasons for their decisions known.