I just can’t help noticing a glaring lack of knowledge of a most basic constitutional right – a real one, one not a made for political gain – made by a daily newspaper.
“The board violated the state Right-to-Know Law by conducting public business behind closed doors and engaged in more than a dozen telephone polls without ever formally ratifying those decisions at a later date.”
This is a complaint against the NH Medical Board made by the editorial team of the Nashua Telegraph. The Nashua telegraph editorialistas are “outraged” at the behavior of this mostly volunteer board, as it seems are the editorial boards of the other NH daily papers. The board engaged in nepotism, sloppy record keeping, and stored cash beyond what they should in a drawer and did not deposit it in their account nightly. I did not notice any crime committed by the Board or any members mentioned in any article to date. How about something to be outraged about?
But the Nashua Telegraph does point out the so-called violation of RSA 91-A by the med board as a problem.
Really, why not break it down.
The NT says: “The board violated the state Right to Know Law by conducting public business behind closed doors…”
This used to be a violation BEFORE we added new language to RSA 91-A to ALLOW “outside communications” as long as they do not violate the spirit of the law. Have you any PROOF the board did that Nashua Telegraph? Try winning that argument in court in NH. The NH Right to Know Commission is deathly afraid of putting this phrase: “outside communications shall be prohibited” in the 91-A revision but instead added a loophole.
Next the NT finishes by saying: “and engaged in more than a dozen telephone polls without ever formally ratifying those decisions at a later date.”
But please tell me, if it is still illegal to hold secret “outside communications” and votes by phone, how is the illegal activity made legal by “ratifying those decisions at a later date”? That was by the way, language the Right to Know Commission tried to pass several years ago but failed.
You can’t RATIFY a violation by holding it at a meeting later, at which lowly taxpayers are permitted to attend. You can only RECTIFY a violation by re-holding the outside meeting and secret phone vote by publishing, under RSA 91-A, a new date when a new meeting, discussion, and vote will be held – lawfully.
Of all the entities in this state to not comprehend what The Right to Know Law does, why does it not surprise me it’s a newspaper.