Ed Naile, CNHT

Hear Ed Naile every Wednesday morning on WLMW 90.7 FM on the Girard at Large radio show or listen to the archives at Voter Fraud Radio

RSA91-A for Vendetta

Rick Watrous was in Merrimack Superior Court yesterday trying to pry public documents from the City of Concord regarding their Concord Cable TV program under the Right to Know Law RSA 91-A.

And that was the argument before Judge Conboy yesterday - was Concord cable TV a city controlled entity.

Let’s see. It was formed when the cable company came to the City of Concord to sell cable access inside the city limits.

A committee was formed by Concord to investigate the plan, and a non-profit, Concord Cable TV, was formed by the city to run the operation. It has City Councilors on the Board of Directors.

Concord Cable TV is run out of Concord High School and the school picks a member of the CCTV Board.

The money to run CCTV comes from a franchise fee that the city collects from cable users. What does not get spent on CCTV goes into the City of Concord general fund.

The whole purpose of CCTV is to provide a public access TV station and studio to Concord residents.

Oh, and another purpose CCTV is for the City Council to skim hundreds of thousands of dollars from the CCTV budget to use for other purposes in Concord and to provide a good job now and then for sitting or former City Councilors.

And one other thing. The “right” people can use the CCTV studio on weekends when it is closed to the public to make their own programs. Because CCTV’s operational contract is not put out to bid it has become the personal plaything of the elite in town.

Back to pro se Rick Watrous before Judge Conboy.

Rick made his case methodically and logically, using about ten different exhibits, until it was the turn of the City of Concord attorney who sat through the whole morning and Rick’s case with a big cardboard box in his lap. It contained an overflowing three inch binder full of what looked like minutes of a non-profit cable TV organization - to the untrained eye.

It was Concord’s turn to show under RSA 91– A why they did not have to show records of meetings they have been having. Their attorney sprang from his seat. Here is what he used as an argument:

He told the court that Rick Watrous has a vendetta against the City and is constantly asking for documents.

That pretty much sums up what the City of Concord paid a lawyer to tell the judge in a Superior Court case. How’s that for the burden of proof required under RSA91-A for a public body to withold documents. Rick has a vendetta.

Judge Conboy is not what you call a consistent judge. But she should take into consideration a recent State Supreme Court decision regarding this same issue—Manchester Firefighters Assoc. v. The NH Municipal Association.

NHMA claimed it did not have to surrender documents to the MFA because it was a non-profit. But the State Supreme’s found that it had a board of directors made up of public employees and elected officials, its sole purpose was a public one, and its only customers were municipalities.

They lost. It was found they were quasi-public and had to comply with RSA 91-A.

We await Conboy’s ruling.

You won’t see this in the Concord paper I would guess.


Big Brother Meets Grandfathered

It looks like we have a small victory for property rights in Weare, NH.

July 3, I represented a homeowner in front of the Weare ZBA. He had a Cease and Desist Order placed on his property because the Code Enforcement Officer, Chip Meany (not kidding) claimed the property was “abandoned” during the time it was purchased and being remodeled. The owner has been sick to his stomach about this since 2004 when Mr. Meany did it the first time and then backed down before we had to appeal to the ZBA.

In Weare, the zoning ordinance exempts all USES existing on the date of adoption. We call this “grandfathering” for short. The property in question is on a small lot and is a residence—in a residential district. Mr. Meany claimed then in 2004 and again in 2007 that the residence was a pre-existing NONCONFORMING use that had been ABANDONED. This is not true and the Cease and Desist orders were clearly, clearly, wrong. But since the neighbor is a town employee it looks like the case got special treatment.

I printed out for each Weare ZBA member the NH Practice and Procedure description of ABANDONMENT.

I made a little book for each one and even highlighted the relevant portions such as: In NH there is a two part test for abandonment, one being was the abandonment physical, such as, are the taxes paid, lawn mowed place boarded up, etc. The second test is; was the abandonment intentional or willful? For example, was no one using the property because of illness, was it on the market, or was there a probate issue. Remember, Mr. Meany shut down the homeowner from fixing the property back in 2004, just after he bought it, then reversed himself days later (after I visited him) and said go ahead without us going to the ZBA for a variance to work on this residence in a residential district.

Now in the spring of 2007 we get a Cease and Desist sending us to the ZBA for a variance or special exception A DAY AFTER HE ISSUED THE OWNER A SEPTIC APPROVAL FOR THE SAME PROPERTY. The owner is a state certified septic designer.

Back in May we went to the ZBA thinking this would be cleared up. Meany did not attend. There were only four ZBA members on the panel.

We lost in a tie vote and appealed. This set up last week’s June 3 hearing. Meany was again a no show. The neighbor again had an attorney.

The hearing was on live cable access and we had a full ZBA Board as well as an alternate. I told them I would read aloud, and very slowly, from NH Practice, the way NH courts look at abandonment. Then I would read back to them the relevant part of the Weare Ordinance so we could all follow along and not drift into other issues. After I did this the lawyer for the town employee/abutter made some arguments I still do not fathom other than it may have made his client feel better. We then had a vote from the Board. One member mad sure everyone knew what a yes or no vote meant.

We got a unanimous vote to overrule the Cease and Desist from the five voting members, two of whom voted against us last time. Even the alternate who recused himself said he would have voted with us as well. Mr. Meany, after two hearings, never sent a letter or showed up to defend his Cease and Desist.

And I never even had to use my “ace in the hole” argument. During this debacle I went to Cilley Hill Road in Weare and measured the distance from the road to the front porch of the former home of US Supreme Court Justice David Souter, which for all intents and purposes is about as abandoned as you can get. His place is about ten feet from the right of way putting him in the same position as the homeowner we were helping.

Had the Weare ZBA not caved in to reality it would have made a nice Superior Court argument.


Takes A Lot Of Crystal Balls

Last year it was two black eyes. This year a bloody nose. Next year who knows what, but I know it will not die easily. The stakes are too high. No, HB 377, this year’s version of last year’s HB 676 just took a beating again but is not “dead” dead.

 It is so hard to subvert the New Hampshire Constitution when your not the State Supreme Court. It takes multiple attempts and a lot of smooth talking. Because… people don’t like it when you try to gut The Right To Know Law.

So its back to the drawing board for the Municipal Association’s Cordell “No I’m not a forced labor camp escapee” Johnson and the two members of the illustrious NH Bar, Peter Smith of Durham, and John Lassie of Deering. These three will just have to come up with some new scare tactic to get what they want—secret meetings by telephone and e-mail between public officials. Sorry boys!

And while you were busy trying to “fix” RSA 91-A, CNHT helped some taxpayers in Windsor (for the second time) win a right to know case that will force that town to reveal how much in taxes was abated, collected, and or lost, between 2000 and 2006. We won our costs as well. Thanks for nothing Right To know Commission. See you next year.


Does This Hammer And Sickle Make My Butt Look Fat?

I would say the communist symbols on trendy Hollywood fashions make Cameron Diaz look LIKE an ass. The liberal twit goes to Peru with some Chairman Mao gibberish on her handbag and, not unexpectedly, tweaks the sensibilities of some of the people who live in that country. It seems some 70,000 Peruvians were, lets say, were given an early sendoff to the end of their lives by a failed communist takeover by the gorilla comrades of the communist Shining Path.

When you try to understand it all and put it in actress perspective, Cameron does garner a bit of sympathy. She only runs into Hollywood communists, the wine and brie cheese types who live on trust funds or high paying entertainment careers.

The local Peruvians are more inclined to meet a machete or gun wielding comrade intent on slitting your throat if you don't damn well soon believe in a communist workers paradise - like they do in Hollywood. And again for Cameron's sake you need to understand how more “green” Peru is now that 70,000 less people are hogging up the scarce resources. Ms. Diaz is a big enviroyuppie.

Looking at it this way, communism has for almost 100 years been helping the planet heal by eliminating millions of humans all over the planet, many of whom just lay on the ground and return to nature without creating acres of unsightly cemeteries.

Maybe I’m the one who is all wrong about communists. We must have a college professor state rep here in New Hampshire who would know. I should ask him.



Joe Haas's Dog Almost Bit Me, Call The SWAT Team

Are we here in NH so desperate for a boogeyman that we have to arrest gadfly activist Joe Hass again? How damn sad is this getting.

I see Joe on the street. I pass him in the halls of the State House. Sometimes he shows up at political events he has an interest in.

Mainly though, I get handed a fistful of garbled, conspiracy laden, meandering patterns of random thoughts bundled into a declaration of some sort of request for redress of a wrong committed by the state or federal government.

Sound dangerous?

Apparently, state and city officials have a periodic spell of the vapors over the mega-sentence paragraphs Joe designs as a pamphleteer for freedom from what I would bet - is boredom.

The Manchester paper used up some serious ink in one inch type on its front page story about the secret e-mails between tax protester Ed Brown and Joe Haas. The Manchester paper had to use some roundabout fact accumulation and cherry picking to make enough of the story that it would be worth writing in the first place.

When the police and officials stoop so low as to scoop up Joe Haas AGAIN for sending "threatening letters" you know they have too much time on their hands. Joe should be a known entity by now for goodness sake.

Here is a small sample of what Joe writes.

(Can you find the obvious "threat" in the next to last paragraph about police officers in this piece? Its in capital letters.)

From: "Joseph S. Haas" josephshaas@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Brown's trial / RSA 123:1 Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:24:05 - 0500


Thanks for the information, as I did attend that seven (7) minute hearing on Friday morning at about 11:10-:17 a.m. and the case was continued to not 9:00 a.m., but 9:30 o'clock a.m. (in same courtroom #5 on the 3rd floor). The judge noted #__ motions that he was treating as "repetitive" UNLESS the U.S. Attorney gets back to him, such as whichever one was like this motion for a "fair trial".

The way the newspaper article read today/Saturday in the <http://www.concordmonitor.com it looks like there will be no action to bring Ed in if he doesn't show, but to continue the trial in absentia, whereupon if he does not take the stand to verbally say that he endorses all of the patriotic literature submitted as evidence, he ought to at least put an affidavit into the court in writing so that all of this informatyion gets to the jury from the I.D. classification to that of being marked as exhibits for them to consider in reaching a verdict, including the RSA Ch. 123:1 documentatuion of Jan. 11, 2007 from David M. Scanlan, the Deputy Secretary of State, who wrote that "This is to certify that we have checked our records and do not find a copy of the filing by RSA 123:1."

See <http://www.state.nh.us for the exact words including this "shall" word as a legislative mandate that the governor "may" enforce by Art. 41, Part the 2nd of the N.H. Constitution, but doesn't have to, as told to me by a Mr. _____ in Room 212 of the State House Annex yesterday afternoon, Fri., Jan. 12th @ about 4:29 p.m. right before closing, in his Office of Citizens Services. That decision of whether or not to do so enforce is up to the governor, and hopefully after his granting me my request for two minutes of his time, as he/the governor shook my hand yesterday at around noontime after his photo-op with the kids in his office, and directed me to make an appointment through his receptionist, NOT of a TRY to make an appointment, but the actual appointment, me having to call 271-2121 to get the extension of Amy Harrington for this, but when I paid her a personal visit in the early to mid afternoon after my cell phone call to her recording with no answer, now the run-around, spin- treatment is that instead of a letterhead paper with the day/time/place for such, that because it involves a legal issue, she said that she is seeking input from legal counsel BEFORE even making the appointment, BUT that's what I thought meetings where for: to bring along legal counsel, BUT not to use as an excuse as a delay tactic.

If I had had that letter, I would have most definately given it to Ed to copy and file with the federal court to back-off until this jurisdictional question is decided.

Furthermore from past experience last month in dealing with another legislative mandate question in writing to the governor on Dec. 13th involving the D.O.T. since the department did not know how to deal with it, I chose this way of doing business for Ed, presuming that the State Police, as Law Enforcement would give me a similar excuse as did the Department of Transportation in that other case, but in order to give them a chance I did send an e-mail to the State Police thru their isb@safety.state.nh.us <mailto:isb@safety.state.nh.us address at the <http://www.nh.gov/safety/division/ nhsp/ website requesting that they look into this RSA Ch. 638:14 "Unlawful Simulation of Legal Process" <http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rs a/html/lxii/638/638-14.htm in the past* tense as per the search +/or arrest warrant that was "calculated to induce a believe that it does have a judicial or other official sanction" when in fact, withOUT the filings as required by law**, and because such was of "Reckless conduct" from the law and that they used a "deadly weapon"s, that prosecution of such federal agents operating as out-laws, be for "a class B felony" under RSA Ch. 631:3 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa /html/lxii/631/631-3.htm

** The law being in Article I, Section 8, clause 17 of 18 in the U.S. Constitution that every state sets up their own entry procedures to allow the feds to operate within the state. Our state choosing this method as pre-scribed in RSA Ch. 123:1 and that ought to be amended by a footnote in an appropriate House or Senate Bill this Legislative Session 2007 to include an entry fee, so high an amount as to cover for damages already done outside the law, as in the Andy Tempelman case as just one example of many.

*The current and future tense being my request that the State Police person assign to this letter of mine meet with the governor @ 8:30 a.m this Tuesday morning so as to get to the fine details of just how such a state letter can be directed to the feds in asking that they comply with the law, so in effect the state working as a sword in such case, and any victims from them entitled to shield themselves from such federal tyranny until the sword of the state action is accomplished, as the pen is mightier than the sword! The pen of the governor needing its ink filled by the State Police at this early morning meeting!

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - -
Joe / Joseph S. Haas,
P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302,
Tel. 603: 848- 6059 (cell phone).

pc: The new Republican Merrimack County Sheriff, Scott Hilliard of Northfield. Hopefully he can make such meeting at 8:30 a.m. on Tue., Jan. 16th at the State House/ Governor's Office and assert his law-enforcement powers too against any beserk actions, if any, by the U.S. Marshall, Steven Monier, who I did meet with yesterday morning right before the hearing, him giving me a copy of his fill-in-the-blank oath of office form (withOUT his signature, as the original one is in Washington), and with both of us agreeing that the pen is mightier than the sword. But now afterwards, my next question should have been which pen? The one used by the Magistrate, or the ones used by the Legislators who put RSA Ch. 123:1 on the books.

Whatever further paper writing by the feds will no doubt, IF this case goes AWAY from the law, will call for back- up from state and/or local plus county law enforcement, and so it is my goal too, to see to it that the law as evidenced by this certificate be given to both the Sullivan County Sheriff, and the Plainfield Police to act as a check and balance against any more unlawful action by the feds to meet them in a paper stand-off if need be! Let's pray that the feds wise up to the law and not go down the wrong path to THEIR destruction!

See http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Politics /Views%20of%20Freedom/Tree% 20of%20Liberty for what Thomas Jefferson said of: "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion." See also: Article 10, N.H. Constitution, Part First & Bill of Rights to revolt against such federal tyranny in violation of the law! of both the United States and state of New Hampshire!!


So how sad is this state that we arrest, detain, and harrass people like Joe Haas and Peter MacDonald of Lee, over and over again for treading ever so slightly and clumsily through a world of conspiracy theories with little more than emails and letters.