Home Tags Posts tagged with "right to know"
Tag:

right to know

Blog

NH is Getting a Right-To-Know Ombudsman

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

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.”

0 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
The Carla Gericke ShowVideo

Ep. 17 The Carla Gericke Show Sits Down with PBS’s “The State We’re In” to Discuss Open Government for Sunshine Week

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

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.”

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Public Funds? Then the Public Has a Right-to-Know

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

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!

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Testimony in Support of HB480, Relative to Verification of Ballots Cast in an Election

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

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”?

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

Notes from Six Feet Away #1

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

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:

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

Watch as thousands in Hong Kong defy a ban to stage a mass vigil in honor of those who died at Tiananmen Square in 1989.

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!

0 comment
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

“Stay-At-Home” and the Secret List of Untrustworthy NH Cops

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

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

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Video

Manch Talk (11/26/19)

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

This week, we fill you in on egregious violations of your Right-to-Know by discussing three current cases in front of the NH Supreme Court (read more here), how use of force compares between law enforcement on the streets of America and soldiers in combat zones (the rules of engagement in war zones are stricter! Wut!?!), the City’s police surveillance cameras are coming, and more!

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Blog

“Egregious Continual Violations of Right-to-Know” Heard at NH Supreme Court

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

Art.] 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.  The public also has a right to an orderly, lawful, and accountable government.  Therefore, any individual taxpayer eligible to vote in the State, shall have standing to petition the Superior Court to declare whether the State or political subdivision in which the taxpayer resides has spent, or has approved spending, public funds in violation of a law, ordinance, or constitutional provision.  In such a case, the taxpayer shall not have to demonstrate that his or her personal rights were impaired or prejudiced beyond his or her status as a taxpayer.  However, this right shall not apply when the challenged governmental action is the subject of a judicial or administrative decision from which there is a right of appeal by statute or otherwise by the parties to that proceeding.
June 2, 1784
Amended 1976 by providing right of access to governmental proceedings and records
Amended 2018 by providing that taxpayers have standing to bring actions against the government

Three important Right-to-Know cases were heard yesterday at the NH Supreme Court. You can read Mark Hayward of the Union Leader’s take here, Justices Review Law that Keeps Records of Official Misconduct Secret, the Monitor here, and In-Depth NH here, but basically, in all three cases, the government argues they have the right to hide personnel misconduct from the public.

They base their arguments on the 1993 case, Union Leader vs. Fenniman, which all open government proponents believe was wrongly decided, and which is now being used to shield legitimate information pertaining to government employees from the public eye. To put that in context, yesterday, the government lawyers went so far as to argue there is no public interest in knowing *who individuals* accused of misconduct are…

This is particularly galling when you consider that one of the profound challenges we face in holding public officials accountable is when, by some miracle, shady public employees are removed from one jurisdiction, they often resurface to continue their malfeasance elsewhere. How do we protect our cities, towns, and villages from these repeat offenders? How do you hold someone accountable if you don’t know who they are?

Just ask Laurie Ortolano of Nashua, who spent more than $1,000 to determine the Nashua tax assessor wasn’t doing his job. She built such a strong case that this assessor was forced to leave his position in Nashua, only to… dundundun… resurface in… Hooksett (sorry to inform you, Hooksett taxpayers). This is just one example of why knowing who the individual is, not simply hiding behind an anonymous monolithic facade called “the state,” is so important.

The world is, after all, made up of INDIVIDUALS doing good and bad things. If you work for the state, and you do bad things, you don’t get to hide behind the cloak of the state: we have a right-to-know who and what YOU are, what YOU are doing. Because, in the end, what do you think creates better incentives for better behavior over time: A system that says, “We’ll cover (and cover, and cover) for you when you do something wrong,” or a system that says, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant”?

In response to Ortolano’s experience, Democrat Representative Jan Schmidt from Nashua is proposing several amendments to the current RSA 91-A law. Schmidt and Ortolano both attended a meeting on Saturday with Right-to-Know NH, a nonpartisan coalition of open government advocates.

At this meeting, Schmidt claimed her proposed amendments will help citizens like Ortolano. Schmidt is either woefully misinformed, or lying, because it is simply impossible to interpret her proposed amendments as favorable to open and transparent government. In fact, one proposed amendment strikes a roll call requirement (our only way to know who voted for what), and another adds thousands of dollars in taxpayer fees to the RTK process.

“We are totally opposed to it,” David Saad, president of RTKNH, said on Wednesday. “Part of our mission is to have more open and transparent government. What we have been fighting for since 2013 is to make minor changes to the law so that everyone has a right to inspect records at no cost. “Once you create a financial barrier to an individual to view public records and charge them in any way to view those records, you are creating a financial barrier which is going to be used maliciously by some public officials to thwart the public’s right to know,” said Saad. Schmidt did not return phone calls and emails seeking comment on the bill.

Union Leader

The main thrust of questioning by the Justices yesterday had to do with Fenniman, with most of the judges asking what would happen if this decision was overruled. As a lawyer, I empathize when judges have to overrule a previous decision, but just as you need sunlight for disinfectant, you need to be open to the fact that sometimes, you get it wrong, suck it up, and do the right thing. And with Fenniman, it is crystal clear that the unintended and damaging consequences to government accountability and transparency far outweigh sticking to stare decisis.

“We believe that this position is deeply harmful to government accountability and is inconsistent with Chapter 91-A’s presumption in favor of disclosure,” Bissonnette said. “It’s crystallized to me when I think about the examples of documents that would be categorically excluded under Fenniman. Number one, an internal report documenting a school district’s potential failures in investigating sexual misconduct against students by a teacher.”

From Concord Monitor

The Court’s best bet for a good outcome for the people of New Hampshire is to overturn Fenniman and apply a balancing act when considering what information, if any, should be redacted from public record requests. As Greg Sullivan, attorney for the Union Leader, who also argued Fenniman in 1993, said yesterday to laughs all round: “I’m here to blame the court… Fenniman… was wrong then. It’s wrong now.”

The Justices have an opportunity to right a serious wrong. I hope they have the courage to do what’s right for our Right-to-Know, and stand with the people for open, accessible, accountable and responsive government.

0 comment
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Video

Manch Talk (11/19/19)

by Carla Gericke
written by Carla Gericke

Today’s episode is a feisty one! I call out the Union Leader for their lack of leadership on government- and police accountability issues, we recap the situation one Nashua taxpayer finds herself in after filing Right-to-Know requests and then being issued a “verbal restraining order” by police for her efforts, why “free staters” are just like everyone else (but better :P), why a “ski tax” is a terrible idea, and more!

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
  • 1
  • 2
Close