Alton Tries to Silence its Citizens

[Rusty]

Another low turnout: why?

Opinion

SECTION A, PAGE 12 THE GRANITE STATE NEWS THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2015

As we were gathering the vote totals to do our election report last week, we saw the same pattern emerge that we saw in March 2014: the total votes cast was less than the year before. In some cases the winners this year won by total votes that would have made them losers last year.
Add to that the fact that there were very few contested positions, and it would be hard not to see a growing disconnection between town residents and their government.
As we have observed before, this is not a local phenomenon. Nationally the vote last November had the worst turnout in 72 years and on average, our national representatives were elected by just 20 percent of voters.
On the national level one can begin to understand why so many people have lost faith in the democratic process. Congress has approval levels in the single digits, political campaigns are driven by private money interests and cynically focus on demeaning the character of opponents and questioning their motives, and, in the end, we have a national government being weakened by thousands of small cuts and a Congress incapable of passing any legislation, let alone trying to solve any of the obvious problems the nation is facing.
We also have a national media, particularly cable news, that is driven to view every piece of news in a sordid light to make it more dramatic and entertaining. Politicians saying foolish things produce the best ratings.
So there are reasons for a national apathy, even if those reasons are not good ones (in the sense that voting all incumbents out and voting money out of political campaigns would solve the problem), but why do so few voters show up at the polls in local elections?
There is the benign view that local voters are, for the most part, satisfied with how their towns and schools are running and assume that things will continue to hum along without them bothering to vote. The rationale here is that people lead busy lives – many of them working multiple jobs to make ends meet – and free time is so limited that it can’t be spared to pay attention to politics or to vote.
Then there is the less charitable view that people are too self-absorbed to care what is going on in their world outside of their immediate circle of work and family.
We think that while these views are valid, they do not take into account the impact of state and national politics on how people view local government and those involved with it.
Last week we wrote about how in some towns (notably Tuftonboro) some people are actively promoting distrust of local government and disrespecting local elected officials. In the case of Tuftonboro we know that the person in the forefront of the distrust and disrespect movement has more than one personal grudge against the town in general and two of the three selectmen in particular. The puzzle is why others listen to this person and allow his anger and conspiracy theories to drive their actions.
Some of those others were opposed to spending money on building a new Tuftonboro library, and for them the third defeat of that proposal at Town Meeting last week should settle things. The two new members elected to the budget committee will hopefully improve the atmosphere on that board, which has had a particularly testy relationship with selectmen over the past year or so.
In any event, we all need to commit ourselves to positive choices, to persuading the best and brightest among us to run for office and help us govern ourselves fairly and openly. We also need to respect those we elect for their dedication and service.
The simple fact is that local politics is not national politics. No one makes a living running for local office: in most towns the few officials who are paid a stipend make less than the minimum wage. There are few favors to sell and the openness of government makes it very difficult to do so.
The rewards of being an elected official are the pleasures of making sure government is responsive to residents and efficient as possible and earning the respect, trust and gratitude of your fellow townspeople. We can’t let a few unhappy people put those rewards at risk: don’t tolerate disrespect and distrust by your silence. Speak up.

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by Rusty

Another low turnout: why?

Opinion

SECTION A, PAGE 12 THE GRANITE STATE NEWS THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2015

As we were gathering the vote totals to do our election report last week, we saw the same pattern emerge that we saw in March 2014: the total votes cast was less than the year before. In some cases the winners this year won by total votes that would have made them losers last year.
Add to that the fact that there were very few contested positions, and it would be hard not to see a growing disconnection between town residents and their government.
As we have observed before, this is not a local phenomenon. Nationally the vote last November had the worst turnout in 72 years and on average, our national representatives were elected by just 20 percent of voters.
On the national level one can begin to understand why so many people have lost faith in the democratic process. Congress has approval levels in the single digits, political campaigns are driven by private money interests and cynically focus on demeaning the character of opponents and questioning their motives, and, in the end, we have a national government being weakened by thousands of small cuts and a Congress incapable of passing any legislation, let alone trying to solve any of the obvious problems the nation is facing.
We also have a national media, particularly cable news, that is driven to view every piece of news in a sordid light to make it more dramatic and entertaining. Politicians saying foolish things produce the best ratings.
So there are reasons for a national apathy, even if those reasons are not good ones (in the sense that voting all incumbents out and voting money out of political campaigns would solve the problem), but why do so few voters show up at the polls in local elections?
There is the benign view that local voters are, for the most part, satisfied with how their towns and schools are running and assume that things will continue to hum along without them bothering to vote. The rationale here is that people lead busy lives – many of them working multiple jobs to make ends meet – and free time is so limited that it can’t be spared to pay attention to politics or to vote.
Then there is the less charitable view that people are too self-absorbed to care what is going on in their world outside of their immediate circle of work and family.
We think that while these views are valid, they do not take into account the impact of state and national politics on how people view local government and those involved with it.
Last week we wrote about how in some towns (notably Tuftonboro) some people are actively promoting distrust of local government and disrespecting local elected officials. In the case of Tuftonboro we know that the person in the forefront of the distrust and disrespect movement has more than one personal grudge against the town in general and two of the three selectmen in particular. The puzzle is why others listen to this person and allow his anger and conspiracy theories to drive their actions.
Some of those others were opposed to spending money on building a new Tuftonboro library, and for them the third defeat of that proposal at Town Meeting last week should settle things. The two new members elected to the budget committee will hopefully improve the atmosphere on that board, which has had a particularly testy relationship with selectmen over the past year or so.
In any event, we all need to commit ourselves to positive choices, to persuading the best and brightest among us to run for office and help us govern ourselves fairly and openly. We also need to respect those we elect for their dedication and service.
The simple fact is that local politics is not national politics. No one makes a living running for local office: in most towns the few officials who are paid a stipend make less than the minimum wage. There are few favors to sell and the openness of government makes it very difficult to do so.
The rewards of being an elected official are the pleasures of making sure government is responsive to residents and efficient as possible and earning the respect, trust and gratitude of your fellow townspeople. We can’t let a few unhappy people put those rewards at risk: don’t tolerate disrespect and distrust by your silence. Speak up.

Look at the last two words in this article: "Speak Up". In Alton, if one "speaks up", one gets "ARRESTED".

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

Look at the last two words in this article: "Speak Up". In Alton, if one "speaks up", one gets "ARRESTED".

He didn't get arrested for speaking up.

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by Rusty

He didn't get arrested for speaking up.

In my opinion, he most certainly did.

[Rusty]

Here is a comment made in todays "LETTERS" section of the LDS:

Alton Selectboard is now further restricting who can say what

After seeing what happened at the March 16 Alton selectmen’s meeting, I feel compelled to write this letter.
Loring Carr put a motion to restrict all public input to subjects that are on the agenda for that meeting. The vote was 4 to 1 to pass the motion, with Mr. Wittmann the only “no” vote. When I questioned this rule change I was told that public input was a privilege, not a right, and could be taken away at any time.
Starting immediately, we, the citizens of Alton, must write a letter to the town administrator to get permission to speak on subjects other than what is on the agenda.
“Public participation in the board’s regular meetings is a privilege that the board has adopted in order to assure that persons who wish to appear before the Board and bring matters to its attention may be heard.”
This statement is written in the rules governing selectmen’s meetings from the town website. I feel it is our right and duty to speak. It should not be a privilege given by the people we elect to represent us. If we do not have the right to free speech, what do we have left?
I feel it is time for the citizens of Alton to call for a public meeting of Selectboard to change this statement from privilege to speak, to right to speak on any subject.

Donald Kleeberg
Alton

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Rusty

Here is a comment made in todays "LETTERS" section of the LDS:

Alton Selectboard is now further restricting who can say what

After seeing what happened at the March 16 Alton selectmen’s meeting, I feel compelled to write this letter.
Loring Carr put a motion to restrict all public input to subjects that are on the agenda for that meeting. The vote was 4 to 1 to pass the motion, with Mr. Wittmann the only “no” vote. When I questioned this rule change I was told that public input was a privilege, not a right, and could be taken away at any time.
Starting immediately, we, the citizens of Alton, must write a letter to the town administrator to get permission to speak on subjects other than what is on the agenda.
“Public participation in the board’s regular meetings is a privilege that the board has adopted in order to assure that persons who wish to appear before the Board and bring matters to its attention may be heard.”
This statement is written in the rules governing selectmen’s meetings from the town website. I feel it is our right and duty to speak. It should not be a privilege given by the people we elect to represent us. If we do not have the right to free speech, what do we have left?
I feel it is time for the citizens of Alton to call for a public meeting of Selectboard to change this statement from privilege to speak, to right to speak on any subject.

Donald Kleeberg
Alton

It seems like four of the five Alton selectmen have not learned one of the preeminent rules of politics. When you find yourself in a hole.... Stop Digging!

We can argue all day about exactly what "Free Speech" is and how it applies to this situation. However what is clear to me is that the selectmens actions have opened up the town to expensive litigation. It will cost the taxpayers even if they win. And will cost a lot more if they lose.

All the selectmen had to do was sit there and let the citizen ramble on for his five minutes. If he had kept talking at the end of that time, and had then been arrested, nobody would be saying his arrest was improper.

[LakeSnake]

Based on the actions of the selectmen after this incident, it appears to me that Mr Clay may have had a point and the selectment are out to prove he was right.

[Tired of Waiting]

With that letter it sounds like the folks are starting to wake up and see the light. The BOS keeps digging and digging and sooner or latter they will hit the fires of H@## well you know of where I speak. And they are going to get burnt badly.

ToW

[Rusty]

This was a good move by the Alton BoS and IMO they got some advice from the Town attorney to do what they did.
The board needs time to get things organized and find out how they want to handle public input so that it will be fair to the public and the board.

In the end I believe that the 5 minute public input time will allow anyone to say what they want as long as there isn't any violation of the BoS policy. The policy needs to be revised also because it was done in a hurry to put out a fire that was getting out of control.

Good job Alton BoS.

[ITD]

Alton needs new selectmen, elections have consequences, I'm glad I don't live there.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Rusty

This was a good move by the Alton BoS and IMO they got some advice from the Town attorney to do what they did.
The board needs time to get things organized and find out how they want to handle public input so that it will be fair to the public and the board.

In the end I believe that the 5 minute public input time will allow anyone to say what they want as long as there isn't any violation of the BoS policy. The policy needs to be revised also because it was done in a hurry to put out a fire that was getting out of control.

Good job Alton BoS.

Rusty had me wondering just how badly this fire is out of control. So I went back and checked the Alton BOS Minutes. I went back to last June. There are two "Public Input" sessions per meeting. At no time did anyone speak at the second Public Input opportunity.

6/23/14 . 0 speakers
07/7/14 . 0 speakers
7/21/14 . 0 speakers
8/18/14 . 0 speakers
9/22/14 . 0 speakers
10/6/14 . 1 speaker
10/20/14 . 0 speakers
11/17/14 . 0 speakers
12/1/14 . 2 speakers
12/15/14 . 3 speakers
1/14/15 . 1 speaker

That is a total of 7 speakers in 8 months. Times are not listed but with a 5 minute limit that equates to a maximum of 35 minutes that the BOS have had to listen to "Public Input" over an 8 month period. Is the the FIRE that Rusty wants the BOS to put out?

[Tired of Waiting]

Looks like a real barn burner to me.

Some one actually spoke at one of their meetings. Oh the horror of it all.


ToW

[MDoug]

Wish George Orwell were around to comment.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Of course Lord Acton would be a welcome guest, also.

"Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Rusty had me wondering just how badly this fire is out of control. So I went back and checked the Alton BOS Minutes. I went back to last June. There are two "Public Input" sessions per meeting. At no time did anyone speak at the second Public Input opportunity.

6/23/14 . 0 speakers
07/7/14 . 0 speakers
7/21/14 . 0 speakers
8/18/14 . 0 speakers
9/22/14 . 0 speakers
10/6/14 . 1 speaker
10/20/14 . 0 speakers
11/17/14 . 0 speakers
12/1/14 . 2 speakers
12/15/14 . 3 speakers
1/14/15 . 1 speaker

That is a total of 7 speakers in 8 months. Times are not listed but with a 5 minute limit that equates to a maximum of 35 minutes that the BOS have had to listen to "Public Input" over an 8 month period. Is the the FIRE that Rusty wants the BOS to put out?

Nice job with the research.
At all of those meetings there wasn't a 5 minute limit for public speaking. That got added to the policy after Mr. Clay spoke for over twenty minutes and wouldn't stop because the policy didn't have a time limit. He had to be escorted out of a few meetings because he wouldn't stop talking.
Anyway, what I meant by "FIRE" is when the trouble started with Mr.CLay sometime in the beginning of this year. He kept testing the board about time so they had to set a 5 minute time limit after that and as we all know got arrested.
This is unfortunate and I dislike it as much as anyone here. However, something had to be done and the BoS chose a route to take, that route might not of been the best one and it will probably cost the tax payers money to get a resolution.
I hope that it can be resolved without litigation and the Alton BoS can get back to the business of getting things done for all the citizens.

BTW, there are two new members on the board and a new chair was selected at the first meeting after the Town elections. I say this because someone said there needs to be new members on the board.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Rusty

Nice job with the research.
At all of those meetings there wasn't a 5 minute limit for public speaking. That got added to the policy after Mr. Clay spoke for over twenty minutes and wouldn't stop because the policy didn't have a time limit. He had to be escorted out of a few meetings because he wouldn't stop talking.
Anyway, what I meant by "FIRE" is when the trouble started with Mr.CLay sometime in the beginning of this year. He kept testing the board about time so they had to set a 5 minute time limit after that and as we all know got arrested.
This is unfortunate and I dislike it as much as anyone here. However, something had to be done and the BoS chose a route to take, that route might not of been the best one and it will probably cost the tax payers money to get a resolution.
I hope that it can be resolved without litigation and the Alton BoS can get back to the business of getting things done for all the citizens.

BTW, there are two new members on the board and a new chair was selected at the first meeting after the Town elections. I say this because someone said there needs to be new members on the board.

I can understand that the BOS wanted to do something about Mr. Clay talking for 20 minutes. They came up with a good solution, limit the "Public Input" to 5 minutes per person. However instead of allowing Mr. Clay his 5 minutes the had him arrested. And, yes, I saw the video, in my opinion "they had him arrested" is the proper wording.

I understand there have been at least 2 BOS meetings since his arrest. Does anybody know why the minutes of those meetings have not been posted?

[Rusty]

"A charge of disorderly conduct lodged against Jeffrey T. Clay that alleges he purposely caused a breach of the peace by disrupting the meeting by
continuing to speak after being informed “repetitively” by the board that public input was closed was dropped on March 23.
A second charge against him for knowingly refusing to comply with a lawful order given by Police Chief Ryan Heath to move from the Alton Town Hall is still pending and is scheduled for trial on April 6."

[Tired of Waiting]

Back peddling going on here.

Also the article may be wrong but brings up the part of whether the police chief was present during the meeting or was called in. One of the last paragraphs states that the selectmen left the room and brought back the chief.

This is what I always thought happened but some here have said that was not the case.

No I'm not going to watch the film again cause I feel it's a moot point to the case.

ToW