Post by Shuftin on Dec 7, 2006 2:36:32 GMT -5
Deerfield and Alton New Hampshire Police Chief's Suspended, But Facts Hidden From Citizens - Just Like Jaffrey Chief Martin Dunn's Suspension, Reinstatement, Leave, And Firing. Littleton Ends KGB Style Secret Arrests
2006-12-03
NEW HAMPSHIRE – Citizens in at least two New Hampshire towns are without the services of their police chiefs, who have been placed on leave -- with pay -- by selectmen. The citizens are not being told what is going on and it is entirely conceivable that they may never be told. This is the rather sad state of New Hampshire citizens' "right to know" these days.
The Deerfield board of selectmen put that town's chief on paid administrative leave last week and wouldn't say word one as to why, other than it was a "personnel issue" and it didn't have anything to do with a murder committed in Deerfield a year ago. The board wouldn't even tell the townspeople how long the leave would continue.
At least the Alton selectmen told the town how long their police chief, police captain and police lieutenant would be gone -- sort of. The selectmen announced there was an "investigation" taking place and the police brass would be gone at least until that had concluded. But they wouldn't say how long that might be, either.
No hint, of course, as to what the police were being investigated for; but the selectmen did say the process had been going on since September. One wonders if the police chief's own threat, in October, to sue the chairman of the selectmen over some alleged right-to-know infraction plays into this at all.
Meanwhile, in Littleton, smarter heads have prevailed and the police are no longer being advised -- by town counsel -- to withhold from press and public the names and addresses of people they arrest. This is comforting, since the last groups we knew who took citizens off the street in such a clandestine fashion were the Gestapo, the KGB and the thugs running various authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, Latin America and Asia.[/i]
The New Hampshire Union Leader had to seek (and win) a court ruling last week in order to find out for Dover residents what they pay public employees in severance and unused leave time.
Public officials all too often try to slide through the "personnel" exception in our Right-To-Know law in refusing to conduct the public's business in public. As a reporter for the Citizen of Laconia told us recently, there may be legitimate reasons for the exception when it comes to the disciplining of a rank-and-file town or state worker.
But when it comes to top executives, such as police chiefs or school superintendents, serious actions such as paid leave or arranged "resignations" need to be dealt with in the open and above board. Otherwise, the citizens are clueless as to whether their elected or appointed officials are acting correctly on their behalf.
Citizens need to demand such openness. The attorney general and Legislature need to address the new information technologies that are actually helping to further mask actions taken in the public's name. The public's right to know is too often becoming officials' right to keep the public in the dark. That has to change or ignorance and misinformation will prevail.
2006-12-03
NEW HAMPSHIRE – Citizens in at least two New Hampshire towns are without the services of their police chiefs, who have been placed on leave -- with pay -- by selectmen. The citizens are not being told what is going on and it is entirely conceivable that they may never be told. This is the rather sad state of New Hampshire citizens' "right to know" these days.
The Deerfield board of selectmen put that town's chief on paid administrative leave last week and wouldn't say word one as to why, other than it was a "personnel issue" and it didn't have anything to do with a murder committed in Deerfield a year ago. The board wouldn't even tell the townspeople how long the leave would continue.
At least the Alton selectmen told the town how long their police chief, police captain and police lieutenant would be gone -- sort of. The selectmen announced there was an "investigation" taking place and the police brass would be gone at least until that had concluded. But they wouldn't say how long that might be, either.
No hint, of course, as to what the police were being investigated for; but the selectmen did say the process had been going on since September. One wonders if the police chief's own threat, in October, to sue the chairman of the selectmen over some alleged right-to-know infraction plays into this at all.
Meanwhile, in Littleton, smarter heads have prevailed and the police are no longer being advised -- by town counsel -- to withhold from press and public the names and addresses of people they arrest. This is comforting, since the last groups we knew who took citizens off the street in such a clandestine fashion were the Gestapo, the KGB and the thugs running various authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, Latin America and Asia.[/i]
The New Hampshire Union Leader had to seek (and win) a court ruling last week in order to find out for Dover residents what they pay public employees in severance and unused leave time.
Public officials all too often try to slide through the "personnel" exception in our Right-To-Know law in refusing to conduct the public's business in public. As a reporter for the Citizen of Laconia told us recently, there may be legitimate reasons for the exception when it comes to the disciplining of a rank-and-file town or state worker.
But when it comes to top executives, such as police chiefs or school superintendents, serious actions such as paid leave or arranged "resignations" need to be dealt with in the open and above board. Otherwise, the citizens are clueless as to whether their elected or appointed officials are acting correctly on their behalf.
Citizens need to demand such openness. The attorney general and Legislature need to address the new information technologies that are actually helping to further mask actions taken in the public's name. The public's right to know is too often becoming officials' right to keep the public in the dark. That has to change or ignorance and misinformation will prevail.