by Tom Sutliffe
Dear Ms. Munsey:
Two weeks have elapsed since I presented your office with our letter of February 12th requesting a date by which to provide you with our opposing content to be included in the 2006 School District Annual Report. We requested to have our viewpoint included, only if the school board has planned to open a forum by only presenting selectively biased information concerning the school warrant articles. As publication of this report is rapidly approaching, if you chose to open such a forum, our viewpoint must be taken into consideration. As you know this publication is paid for with taxpayers’ dollars and as such, should include all consequences good and bad of the article coming before the electorate, not only the “benefits” of the school warrant articles.
We do recognize your right to inform the public with a fair presentation of the facts to aid them in reaching an informed decision on the school warrant articles, but there are constitutional constraints connected to your right to inform the public when using taxpayers’ monies and resources. P resently, in our federal c ase (06-CV-00474-SM) which illustrates very similar concerns, we are relying on our present Constitutional protections.
We presume, as you have chosen not to respond to our request that you have also chosen not to open a forum in the 2006 School District Annual Report, but might prefer to exercise your right to inform the public fairly, without advocating, when using taxpayers’ monies and resources, thus not necessitating our participation.
Please be forewarned however, if you choose to go forward and open a forum utilizing the 2006 School District Annual Report to advocate by promulgating selectively biased information, without our opposing view represented in the same forum, we shall earnestly pursue legal remedies.Sincerely,
Thomas A. Sutliffe, Chairman
On behalf of the Epping Residents for Principled Government, Inc.