If you catch this week’s Manch Talk, you’ll hear me discuss the latest developments regarding Right-to-Know in New Hampshire. Long story short, the NH AG’s office finally, FINALLY released the new RTK memo, nine years after the last one in 2015.
[PDF]
Since last week was Sunshine Week, when we typically celebrate or highlight national open government efforts, and as a RTKNH board member, I submitted an op-ed to the Union Leader, which got pulled last minute because the memo was released. I’ll take it! Stay tuned for an in-depth delve into the 158-page document, coming soon!
Here was the op-ed that was NOT published:
Dear Editor,
It is Sunshine Week, our annual reminder that if we don’t want more government corruption, we must demand transparency. What is hidden in government is what is rotten in government, and with distrust in government institutions at an all-time high, the need for open government has never been more critical.
I serve on the board of Right-to-Know NH, a statewide, nonpartisan group of open government advocates. We are from different walks in life, different political parties, religions, and backgrounds, but what unites us is the understanding that without open, transparent, accessible, and accountable government, local politics won’t work.
And, sadly, the trend in New Hampshire suddenly seems to be towards darkness, not light. For example: An insidious bill, HB 1002, would introduce a use fee for RTK requests, thereby introducing a new tax. Imagine the impact this would have on the press’ ability to investigate stories, or the chilling effect due to costs that this will have on open government activists.
Over the past few years, open government advocates have seen some successes. The RTK Ombudsman office finally opened last year, but already suffers from too complex rules, and a backlog. Several NH Supreme Court cases were found in favor of more open government. The Fenniman case was even overturned after almost three decades, significantly broadening our right to view government employees’ personnel files.
And yet, in the past decade, the government has also managed to seal the names of law enforcement officers who should have appeared on the Laurie’s List, they have arrested Right-to-Know activists, they have spent millions of your tax dollars fighting open government requests, and the NH Municipal Association has lobbied against common sense legislation to help broaden the press and Granite Staters’ Right-to-Know.
Last year during Sunshine Week, I implored the AG’s Office to update the 2015 Right-to-Know memorandum. We have now formally requested this update at least 5 times in writing, to no avail. The failure by the AG to act, especially when such failure shrouds in secrecy the incredible gains that have been made in favor of more open government, breeds suspicion.
In the words of Justice Louis Brandeis, “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” Let us, therefore, redouble our efforts to shine a light on the inner workings of our local government. It starts with that updated memo. To the NH Attorney General’s Office: Stop undermining public trust.
Sincerely,
Carla Gericke
Carla lives in West Manchester, and serves on the board of Right-to-Know NH. She is an outspoken critic of big government.
WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW ABOUT THE MOST INSIDIOUS NH HOUSE BILL BEING HEARD TOMORROW!!!
They’re creating a tax for open record requests. We HAVE TO KILL HB 1002!!!
Here’s the documents created by Right-to-Know NH regarding HB 1002. HUGE SHOUT OUT to Katherine Kokko of Right-to-Know NH for the incredible work she did on this issue, including the Q&A below. Right-to-Know NH is a nonpartisan group working together to keep NH government open, transparent, and ACCOUNTABLE to the people.
HB1002: Frequently Asked Questions
How does HB1002 impact the public’s Right to Know?
HB1002 imposes labor, retrieval, and redaction costs on requestors under RSA Chapter 91-A (NH’s “Right to Know” Law). HB1002 constrains a citizens’ right to know to what can be learned in 10 hours or less in a 30-day period, while charging for additional details within that time period.
A ten hour limit on requests sounds reasonable on paper. Why is this a problem?
The limit hampers the public’s ability to understand and scrutinize complex government operations thoroughly, setting conditions for opacity in government. HB1002 targets, and discourages members of the public from performing the public service of assuring transparency in government, jeopardizing public access and government transparency in New Hampshire. There are other ways to address the problem of “burdensome requests” as presented to the House (See inside).
What else is wrong with HB1002?
By defining the reasonableness of a request as a time limit, HB1002 contravenes the intent of the RTK Law repeatedly affirmed by the courts – to define reasonableness of a request in a manner that provides the greatest information, consistent with statutory and constitutional objectives.
Furthermore, high labor estimates for responding to a request are likely to be issued due to issues like poor record retention practices or the use of overzealous redactions. Those are the responsibility of the public body, not the fault of the requestor.
Why is it important for the public to have unfettered access to public information under NH’s Right to Know law?
NH’s law is entirely and uniquely reliant on private action by individuals for enforcement, giving the public a statutory role in ensuring transparency in NH. There is no oversight body to ensure that NH’s Right-to-Know law is enforced.
Any investigation, even by the RTK Ombudsman, must be instigated by private action. HB1002 erects financial barriers to the public and perversely incentivizes public bodies to increase their estimated labor in responding to RTK requests.
This bill appears to have lot of support from local communities, public bodies and their lobbyists. Who is opposing this bill?
Because this bill would severely harm government accountability and transparency in New Hampshire, it is opposed by a broad Coalition of stakeholders, including the Right-to-Know NH, the ACLU-NH, the New England First Amendment Coalition, the N.H. Press Association, the N.H. Union Leader, the N.H. Bulletin and Americans for Prosperity.
WHY VOTE NO
ON HB1002?
It sounds like “burdensome requests” are a big problem for public bodies/communities? Does RTKNH agree?
The bill’s sponsor Katelyn Kuttab (R-Windham), the NH Municipal Association and Right to Know NH have all confirmed that the large, problematic requests at issue are infrequent. In testimony, examples of “burdensome requests” were anecdotal and not placed in context. Most labor-intensive RTK requests come from commercial entities who are likely willing to pay.
By contrast, the average citizen will likely abandon their RTK request when faced with potential fees for a public interest inquiry, serving no public good. The impact on the average citizen request will be far more profound than the impact on burdensome commercial requests.
If this bill is NOT passed, how will public bodies/communities deal with these “burdensome requests”?
HB1002 addresses a perceived issue that is already addressed by the Right to Know law and existing State and Federal case law. HB1002 disincentivizes public bodies from understanding the existing parameters of the RTK law and the court’s definitions of “reasonableness”… at the public’s expense.
Finally, public bodies always have the option of communicating with the requestor to try and clarify the scope of the request. Many do not do this and choose a legalistic approach instead.
Are there other ways to address these “burdensome requests?”
Yes. Public bodies, including elected officials, should be trained on Right to Know. There is no training requirement. Relying on legal counsel or trying to base decisions on in-house interpretations – instead of training public employees on the front lines – exacerbates issues. When a community spends an inordinate amount of time on Right to Know requests, it is often due to this lack of training and/or reliance on overly legalistic responses.
• What else could be done to assist public bodies?
Multiple stakeholders have asked the AG’s Office to update its 2015 Memorandum on NH’s Right to Know Law so that public bodies can appropriately apply the many precedent-setting decisions made since 2015. The AG’s Office has not done so (claiming that it is in process) while failing to provide a timeline for completion. Meanwhile, it has endorsed HB1002 and specifically the proposed fee structure. This is an unacceptable abdication of its own role in assuring the integrity of the application of the Right-to-Know law.
• The House Judiciary Committee voted this bill OTPA. Why should I disagree with their recommendation?
With only 2 business days between the hearing and Executive Session, the House Judiciary Committee voted HB1002 OTPA 12-8 along evenly split party lines (6D/6R to 4D/4R), without:
(i) Investigating examples, or the origin and root causes of, burdensome requests that are being cited anecdotally to justify this bill
(ii) Considering more targeted proposals to limit excessive requests.
(iii) Investigating the role that RTK training and public guidance (including from the NH Attorney General’s office) could have in resolving this issue.
• How will this bill impact the “average” RTK request?
HB1002 reinforces the use of problematic practices like unnecessary redactions, use of outside contracted support staff and “data dumps” of large volumes of unnecessary documents by allowing billing for such labor. It will also have a “chilling effect” on anything but the most simple request, discouraging the public from researching and understanding issues of interest because they are “too complicated” to warrant paying for the public interest.
Developed and Funded by Committed NH Citizen-Advocates through Right-to-Know NH
Page 2
The Ombudsman Bill for RSA 91A Right-to-Know requests was signed into law. TBH, I was ambivalent about this one, HB481, because, on the one hand, it helps citizens with a cheaper, faster alternative to get access to information, but on the other, it grows government.
Read more about it HERE, from the former president of RTKNH and an activist instrumental in its passing, David Saad. Thanks to him for all the work he did!
We will need to be vigilant about who is appointed as the Ombudsman, otherwise this could easily become a way to quash transparency. That said, recourse in the courts–i.e. business as usual–always remains an option regardless of who is appointed as the Ombudsman.
Going forward, I am very interested in creating a repository of “open government requests,” meaning every time a RTK request is fulfilled, we add it to a searchable database, so that over time, we are simply creating open and transparent government by default, in keeping with Article 8, which expressly states that government officials ARE OUR AGENTS, and therefore cannot to things we are not allowed to do (booyah!).
My goal is to turn the Free State of NH into the most transparent and accountable government in the world.
ARTICLE 8 [Accountability of Magistrates and Officers; Public’s Right to Know.]:
“All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them. Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive. To that end, the public’s right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted.”
FROM PBS: “It’s Sunshine Week, the annual initiative spearheaded by the News Leaders Association to educate the public on open government and the dangers of excessive secrecy. This week on The State We’re In, we discuss New Hampshire’s Right-to-Know Law, how it’s applied, and how it can be improved. Guests include Right-to-Know New Hampshire’s Carla Gericke and Concord Monitor reporter Cassidy Jensen.”
Honored to have participated in this PBS interview to highlight how important open and transparent government is to keeping society in balance. Click the link below to learn more about my landmark #freespeech 1st Circuit win! #SunshineWeek #SunshineWeek2022 https://t.co/A92ypkzR65
— Carla Gericke, Live Free And Thrive! (@CarlaGericke) March 18, 2022
Lawsuits are pending regarding past abuses against children at the Youth Development in Manchester (notice the nifty re-branding to remove “Sununu” from the institution’s name).
The Dems bill HB 1677 wants to allocate $100 MILLION dollars, and wants settlements to be exempt from our Right-to-Know laws. This sounds suspiciously like a sludge fund to me…
If you are spending PUBLIC money, the PUBLIC has a Right-to-Know. Period.
Hearing is on Thursday, same day as several other RTK bills, as well as NH’s first independence bill, CACR 32.
Hope to see many Free Staters coming out to speak about these issues. We are fortunate to live in a state where the legislature listens. Victory often goes to those who show up… Be there. Thanks!
This week, Tammy and I cover a lot of ground! We discuss the elections, police body cams, Qualified Immunity, how much state funerals cost, and more (and more about you know what!). This one might get banned so get it while it’s hot!
Dear Honorable Committee Members:
My name is Carla Gericke, former Republican state Senate candidate in District 20. I live in Manchester, NH, am an author and attorney, and serve on several nonprofit boards, including Right-to-Know NH, a nonpartisan citizens’ coalition that works to improve government transparency, a crucial component to maintaining public trust in our institutions.
RTKNH supports this bill, and I believe another representative will be testifying on the organization’s behalf, so I am testifying today in my personal capacity as a voter, political candidate, and reformer. I will also submit this testimony in written form to the Committee via email afterwards, and ask that it form part of the permanent hearing record for the bill.
I ask you to SUPPORT HB480 in order to ensure the utmost transparency in the election process by allowing ballots to become part of the public record, subject to RSA 91-A, open to inspection by interested parties, and available to anyone who wishes to set their minds at ease.
Election integrity is a crucial part of any functioning government. More transparency leads to more accountability which in turn instills trust. Without transparency and accountability, Granite Staters will lose the last vestiges of trust in the system.
The NH Constitution says our government shall be “open, accessible, transparent, and responsive” to the people. In 1977, the legislature added a preamble:
“Openness in the conduct of public business is essential to a democratic society. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure both the greatest possible public access to the actions, discussions and records of all public bodies, and their accountability to the people.”
HB480 increases accountability by increasing checks and balances.
In 2018, I was the Republican candidate for state Senate in District 20. During the primary, the Libertarian Party launched a write-in campaign, meaning, if I got 30 write-ins, I would appear as a fusion candidate as both the Republican and Libertarian candidate on the general election ballot.
District 20 has 6 wards, and I picked up twenty-something write-ins in five of the wards, but only 1 write-in in Ward 11 (my home ward, where I know many voters, and where I could easily have expected at least 30 write-ins). It was clear when the Ward 11 results were read that something was amiss. I filed for a recount, and yes, something was amiss. The moderators failed to record the write-ins correctly, and I did in fact, receive enough votes to qualify as a fusion candidate.
Why were the write-in votes recorded incorrectly? I’m sure it was, as everyone claims, a mistake, an oversight, something “went wrong,” and that the checks and balances put in place “worked” to “fix it.” But the question also begs to be asked: Why did the system fail in the first place? Why was the original tally wrongly recorded? How often does this happen? Where?
Everyone here is aware of the current investigation of the Windham Incident, where 300+ votes were found for EACH 3 Republican candidates during a recount. Much like my case, this raises more questions than it answers.
HB480 will help address these sorts of troubling scenarios by allowing follow-up audits BY ORDINARY CONCERNED CITIZENS who are registered New Hampshire voters to ensure we have the most unimpeachable and solid election process.
This would also help identify, say, if there is an isolated polling station where there are identifiable problems and repeat “offenders.” Part of the goal of the bill is to ensure the accuracy of the vote count and *evaluate the performance of election officials.* In other words, it is the check and balance on the check and balance, and given the strange occurrences we are now seeing with increasing regularity, the time to pass this bill is NOW.
Increasing transparency serves to increase accountability and trust. Let’s empower Granite Staters to be able to exercise their own audits to ensure the trust remains. Please support HB480 to increase election transparency, accountability, and trust.
Thank you for your time!
Sincerely,
Carla Gericke
West Manchester
Secretary of State testifies IN OPPOSITION TO BILL!
I received this response from Heidi Hamer (D), Ward 10 Representative. I wonder why she thinks transparency is “dangerous”?
From the start of this lockup, I’ve been meaning to write a weekly column titled “Notes from Six Feet Away,” and, for years, I have wanted to do a weekly round up of my activism, and thoughts on the news and my related social media posts, so here we are. This column will become the Friday feature on The Art of Independence.
Police Brutality and Open Government
Back in 2014, I settled my wiretapping lawsuit against the Town of Weare, having prevailed in the First Circuit Court of Appeals (the one right under the Supreme Court). This landmark First Amendment case, Gericke vs. Begin et al, protects YOUR right to record every police encounter you see. And you should. Every damn time! Especially since I learned last week that even though police departments across NH are now spending tens of thousands of dollars buying body cams, these recordings are NOT generally subject to public disclosure under our Right to Know NH laws. Shocking! And as YOUR Senator, I will work ?% to increase government transparency and accountability for YOU.
Hell, if y’all want, I’ll wear a Go Pro to the Senate daily, and live-stream “How the Sausage is Made”! Love this idea? Donate to my District 20 Senate race today!
Right-to-Know Victories: Fenniman Overturned
The NH Supreme Court decided three vital Right-to-Know cases this week, and overturned Fenniman, a huge victory for open government proponents. Fenniman was a terrible case that shielded “internal personnel practices” from scrutiny and was much abused by the authorities to hide malfeasance and deflect from oversight or reform.
From Right-to-Know NH: “The NH Supreme Court issued 2 rulings today in the other 2 cases tried the same day as the Salcetti v. Keene case. In those rulings, they overturned the earlier Fenniman ruling, interpreting “internal personnel practices” more narrowly and eliminating the categorical denial of public access to records subject to the “internal personnel practices” exemption. Here are links to the rulings:
- 2019-0135, Seacoast Newspapers, Inc. v. City of Portsmouth
- 2019-0206, Union Leader Corporation & a. v. Town of Salem
This is a big step forward for RTK in NH. In particular, it means that personnel investigations are no longer categorically exempt from public disclosure and instead a balancing of the public interest with the privacy interests of the parties will be done by the courts.”
Says David Taylor, one of the lawyers from Right-to-Know NH about the third RTK case heard this week, 2019-0217, Marianne Salcetti & a. v. City of Keene: “This morning the NH Supreme Court released a less formal opinion in the Salcetti v. Keene case. While it is mixed – partly affirmed, partly reversed, partly vacated, partly remanded – there are some good wins in there. Mostly, the students requests were ruled to have been improperly read too narrowly as ‘lists’ when they should have not been. Perhaps the biggest win was a ruling that the $300 charge to access email records was improper and that those records should be free to inspect! The redacted police officers’ names ruling was remanded to the superior court. Lost on the need for a written and signed request formally, but they hinted a more proper case might win in the future. Similarly for the delays. In the end they reprimanded Keene, mostly, for wasting all the time and energy in this case. Overall, I’m happy with the ruling.
Questions for Mayor about Militarized Police Response to Peaceful Protests
Read more here, but these were the main questions that, of course, were flatly ignored by Mayor Joyce Craig, who pretends to care, but is unwilling to exercise the leadership necessary for reform.
1. Will the MPD un-encrypt their police scanners so we can hear what is happening real-time (like it used to be until 2016 when, without any public input, they hid this important citizen’s oversight tool from us)?
2. Will the BEARCAT be brought out?
3. What other agencies, other than MPD, are being used? You mention “federal.” Which ones? Under what authority/law?
4. Will the MPD’s body cameras be switched on? Will this footage be made available to the public upon request, as Chief Capano is on the record saying BWC footage would be?
5. Are any MPD officers working tonight also on the secret Laurie’s List (EES) of bad cops? If so, how many?
6. What use of force has been authorized? E.g. tear gas, rubber bullets, tazers, etc.
7. How much is this costing the taxpayers? Where is it accounted for (line item/budget)?
My point being, we need to end police militarization and policing in secret in order to restore public trust. You can start by answering my questions. I hope everyone is safe tonight. Thank you. #NHPolitics#NoPoliceStateNH
End Qualified Immunity as a Start to Ending Bad Apples Spoiling the Bunch
Want to understand more about solutions to the problems with policing in America? Start with eliminating Qualified Immunity, which is *literally* a “get out of jail free” card for cops. Yes, law enforcement is held to A LOWER STANDARD OF CARE than you or I. I have been advocating for the elimination of qualified immunity for more than a decade, and am very proud of the fact that in my First Amendment civil rights case, the First Circuit Court of Appeals found that police officers have NO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY if they arrest you for filming them or if they take your camera or phone. This means you can sue them in their personal capacity! (You’re welcome! :-))
Police Unions Protect Rotten Cops and This Must End
Here in NH, I have personally seen police union representatives testify against bills designed to help rein in bad cops.
I have even ended up in childish staring contests because they’ve tried to intimidate me when I testify in favor of more open, accessible, accountable and responsive government. One time in the chamber, I had to loudly reprimand a beefy dude looming over me with his arms folded who was trying to stare me down, with a “Really??? Are we doing this now!?!” Another time, I had two of my four car tires spiked with identical nails the same week as I testified. Coinkidink, right???
“This is what police unions do: defend the narrow interests of police at the expense of public safety. They exist to demand that taxpayers pay for dangerous, and even deadly, negligence. And although they are not the only pathology that affects American policing, they are a key internal influence on police culture, a locus of resistance to improvements designed to reduce police violence. To stop bad cops and police abuse, we must tackle police unions.” Read more…
Also, don’t miss this oldie but goodie from Radley Balko about the mentality of killer cops, and how they are trained.
Choose “dangerous” freedom
If you only read one thing today, let it be this brilliant article by John W. Whitehead, This Is Not a Revolution. It’s a Blueprint for Locking Down the Nation.
“Let’s not lose sight of what started all of this in the first place: the U.S. government. More than terrorism, more than domestic extremism, more than gun violence and organized crime, the systemic violence being perpetrated by agents of the government constitutes a greater menace to the life, liberty and property of its citizens than any of the so-called dangers from which the government claims to protect us.”
Nonessential For What Again, Manchester City Hall?
I was pissed at having received at parking ticket last Thursday after 6pm on a semi-deserted street in downtown Manchester. As I stated then: “Yes, I broke “the parking rule.” I just assumed they would cut us ‘nonessentials’ some slack while they collected their bonuses and destroyed our livelihoods, but no, they needed to go out and extort $10 from someone trying to support downtown businesses… you know, the ones that DID have to fire and furlough people, unlike the City of Manchester who gave themselves raises and didn’t furlough ONE PERSON, yet also closed the frigging dump for no explicable reason and built a disgusting Hooverville camp that has its own police escort while I had to put out literal fires. But sure, you’re right, my bad.” I appealed the ticket based on the following reasoning:
Explanation of Appeal:
As I was declared “nonessential” by order of His Excellency, the Governor of NH, I, being nonessential, am unable and unwilling to pay this parking ticket.
Thank you for your prompt voiding of this ticket.
Sincerely,
Carla Gericke
NH Governor’s Response Still (Even More So) Wrong
Chris Sununu continues to double, even triple, down on his bad decisions, which I have criticized from the start. Free people move freely, the government does not own you, and no matter what happens, the government is NOT authorized to lockup its citizens and still pretend that we live in a free society. (We don’t.)
This was my response to one of his recent posts, opening with a quote from “His Excellency’s God King Sununu”: “less than 5% of available hospital beds have been occupied by COVID-19 patients”… so there was no real “pandemic” in any sense of the actual definitional meaning of that word, but there is, and will continue to be a “government manufactured economic crisis,” including almost 20% of Granite Staters now being unemployed, a myriad of our businesses that are closing, and more hardship to come, correct?
Crickets on Double Standard Between ReOpen Rallies and Police Brutality Protests
This week, I wrote in to NHPR’s The Exchange (and called in too but alas, the phone just rang and rang, which seems sort of odd for a call-in show, but m’kay) to ask Laura Knoy to explain the difference in the media’s response between people they like (police brutality protestors) and people they don’t like (people concerned about the destruction of our liberties). Since I fall squarely into BOTH camps, I find it fascinating to see how the Karens and snitches and mask shamers and “YOU’RE A MURDERER FOR GOING OUTSIDE, CARLA” people have suddenly faded into oblivion now that it no longer serves their narrative.
Here’s what I said:
“I would like you to address the clear difference in how the media is reporting on concerns about the virus/social distancing and mask wearing depending on whom is doing the protesting… Liberty and police accountability are two of my core issues, so I’m familiar with both sets of protests, and I am shocked at how silent the social distancing- and mask shamers are suddenly, now that they “approve” of the protests… I would also point out that these are the same people, let’s call them “Karen,” who like to call the police on people, and I wonder whether they see the inherent problem with their way of thinking? They want MORE state to “fix” the state, instead of seeing that the state IS the problem… #HypocrisyMuch #NoPoliceStateNH“
And, if you want to be truly astounded, read this article, which cites more than 1,000 “health experts” who are now saying:
“But when it comes to the protests against police brutality, many medical experts think there should be an exemption to the COVID-19 lockdown logic.
More than a thousand public health experts signed an open letter specifically stating that “we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States.”
The letter conceded that mass protests carried the risk of spreading coronavirus, and offered some good—if naive—advice for people who are going out anyway: wear masks, stay home if sick, attempt to maintain six feet of distance from other protesters. Many protesters are wearing masks, but others are not. And while we can blame the police for forcefully corralling people into close quarters, it’s a bit rich for public health experts to endorse protesting under conditions that they know are impossible for protesters to meet.
Indeed, for the purposes of offering health care advice, the only thing that should matter to doctors is whether their harm-reduction recommendations are being followed: how big is the event, is it outdoors, are masks being worn, etc. However, the letter distinguishes police violence protesters from “white protesters resisting stay-home orders,” as if the virus could distinguish between the two types of events. While I am not a doctor, my understanding is that it cannot.”
Freedom is Contagious, Too
And Lastly… LFOD in the “Yankee Hong Kong”
Buy my book, The Ecstatic Pessimist now on Kindle with paperback coming soon. RSVP to my book launch at the illest event of the year (oh yes I did): PorcFest XVII taking place June 22-28, 2020 at Roger’s Campground in the beautiful White Mountains of the Free(ish) State. Learn more about this year’s event here. Buy your tickets or show your support by getting an In Spirit tix even if you can’t make it this year!
I sent the following Letter to the Editor to the Union Leader last week in honor of national Sunshine Week. Since they failed to publish it, I’m posting it below. If you are wondering what the legal ramifications of Governor Sununu’s “stay-at-home” “order,” you can read his own take HERE (this quote from Chris lightened my concerns significantly, “I want to be clear, though. We are not shutting down our state, sheltering in place, or closing our borders. No state has taken such actions nor does any Governor have the authority to do so.”), the Attorney General’s memo to law enforcement HERE (they have discretion, it’s a misdemeanor, and you will be arrested under “disorderly conduct”–if you get arrested, let me know!), an article about that discretion and law enforcement’s duty to inform HERE, and the Union Leader’s editor’s take, “Questioning authority: A healthy thing even in crisis.”
***
Dear Editor,
It’s Sunshine Week when we typically celebrate government transparency and openness. Given the government’s COVID-reaction, our rights are at risk. Before law enforcement knocks on your door, wouldn’t you like to know who to trust?
The Attorney General keeps a list of officers who have been identified by their own police chiefs as having “sustained findings of misconduct.” This list is kept secret from the public.
Yes, you read that right.
The AG keeps a list of suspect LEOs called the Exculpatory Evidence Schedule (formerly the “Laurie’s List”) with about 260 officers’ names on it, all blacked out, with only their departments and misdeeds viewable: falsification of records or evidence; lying in court; egregious dereliction of duty; and excessive use of force.
In April 2019, a judge ordered the list’s disclosure, stating it was “not confidential,” “not exempt from disclosure under RSA 91-A,” and that it is in the public interest to know who these officers are. Doh! Instead of releasing the list, the AG appealed at our expense to maintain its secrecy. Double doh!
Secrecy creates distrust and suspicion, undermining faith and confidence in government and law enforcement. As today’s paper stated: “Trust in public institutions relies on our ability to shine sunlight wherever we find shadows.”
Almost 1,000 Granite Staters signed an online petition started by Right-to-Know NH, a statewide nonpartisan coalition of open government advocates, asking Governor Sununu to end the appeal and release the uncensored list. Banish the shadows, Governor, and help us restore trust!
Yours sincerely,
Carla Gericke
Hooksett Road
- 1
- 2