New Hampshire Town and City Magazine, January-February, 2017

January/February 2017

TownandCity N E W

H A M P S H I R E

In This Issue:

A PUBLICATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION

Balancing Free Speech and the Right To Vote in New Hampshire........................................................8 A Primer on 2017 Election Reform Possibilities for the Granite State...................................................11 From Referee to Official Ballot Referendum.............15

Contents Table of

Volume LX • Number 1

January/February 2017

3 A Message from the

NHMA Executive Director

5 Happenings 7 Upcoming Events 26 Up Close and Personal in the Field: Blaine Cox 27 Up Close and Personal in the Field: Sheridan Brown 28 Tech Insights: Considerations for Data Storage Management 30 The HR Report: Looking Ahead to 2017 32 Legal Q and A: Guide to NHMA Legal Services – An FAQ

8

Balancing Free Speech and the Right To Vote in New Hampshire

11

A Primer on 2017 Election Reform Possibilities for the Granite State: From Early Voting to E-POLL (and Everything In-between)

15

From Referee to Official Ballot Referendum: My Time Behind the Podium

17

Supervisors of the Checklist: Understanding the Amendments to RSA 654:27 & 654:28

22

New Hampshire Municipal Association’s 75th Annual Conference Highlights

Cover Photo: Unity Town Hall by Tracy Decker, Secretary to the Board, Town of Unity.

New Hampshire Town and City Magazine Staff

Executive Director Editor in Chief

Judy A. Silva Timothy W. Fortier

Contributing Editors Margaret M.L. Byrnes

Barbara T. Reid Art Director

Scott H. Gagne

Production/Design

Scott H. Gagne

Official Publication of the New Hampshire Municipal Association 25 Triangle Park Drive • Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Phone: 603.224.7447 • Email: nhmainfo@nhmunicipal.org • Website: www.nhmunicipal.org New Hampshire Municipal Association Phone: 800.852.3358 (members only) NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY (USPS 379-620) (ISSN 0545-171X) is published 6 times a year for $25/member, $50/non-member per year, by the New Hampshire Municipal Association, 25 Triangle Park Drive, Concord, New Hampshire 03301. Individual copies are $10.00 each. All rights reserved. Advertising rates will be furnished upon application. Periodical postage paid at Concord, NH 03302. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY, 25 Triangle Park Drive, Concord, NH 03301.

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY serves as a medium for exchanging ideas and information on municipal affairs for officials of New Hampshire municipalities and county governments. Subscriptions are included as part of the annual dues for New Hampshire Municipal Association membership and are based on NHMA’s subscription policy. Nothing included herein is to be construed as having the endorsement of the NHMA unless so specifically stated. Any reproduction or use of contents requires permission from the publisher. POSTMASTER: Address correction requested. © Copyright 2017 New Hampshire Municipal Association

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

1

New Hampshire Municipal Association

Board of Directors The Board of Directors oversees NHMA’s league services. The board is comprised of 25 local officials elected by NHMA member municipalities.

Seated, left to right: Chris Dwyer (Councilor, Portsmouth), Stephen Fournier (Town Administrator, Newmarket; Immediate Past President), Donna Nashawaty (Town Manager, Sunapee; Treasurer); Scott Myers (City Manager, Laconia; Chairman), Shelagh Connelly (Selectman, Holderness; Vice Chairman), Elizabeth Dragon (City Manager, Franklin), Elizabeth Fox (Assistant City Manager/Human Resource Director, Keene), and Elaine Lauterborn (Councilor, Rochester).

Standing, left to right: Eric Stohl (Selectman, Columbia), Ben Bynum (Clerk/Tax Collector, Canterbury), Bill Herman (Town Administrator, Auburn), Hal Lynde (Selectman, Pelham); Phil D’Avanza (Planning Board, Goffstown), John Scruton (Town Administrator, Barrington), Brent Lemire (Selectman, Litchfield), Teresa Williams (Town Administrator, Wakefield), Patrick Long (Alderman, Manchester), David Caron (Town Administrator, Jaffrey), Shaun Mulholland (Town Administrator, Allenstown) and Jim Maggiore (Selectman, North Hampton).

Missing: Candace Bouchard (Councilor, Concord), Butch Burbank (Town Manager, Lincoln), Priscilla Hodgkins (Clerk/Tax Collector, New Castle), Nancy Rollins (Selectman, New London) and David Stack (Town Manager, Bow).

2

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

Thank You to 2016 Town and City Advertisers

A Message from the

NHMA

Executive Director Judy Silva

Avitar Associates Boutin & Altieri, PLLC Coppola + Company Davis & Towle Insurance Group Drummond Woodsum DTC Lawyers DuBois & King, Inc. Gardner, Fulton & Waugh HealthTrust, Inc. HEB Engineers Melanson Heath Mitchell Municipal Group, PA Municipal Resources, Inc. NH Correctional Industries NH Municipal Bond Bank Peoples United Bank PFM Asset Management, LLC Preti Flaherty Primex3 RMON Networks Roberts & Greene, PLLC Soule, Leslie, Kidder

H

appy New Year! As we turn the calendar to 2017, we wish to thank our members who have shown us such strong support over the past year.

We are pleased that many of you have expressed how much you value NHMA by renewing your membership this year. We are so thankful for your continuing support.

We had a very successful conference in November, with over 55 educational programs, 105 exhibitors, and 539 attendees. In conjunction with our conference this year, NHMA also recognized its 75th anniversary, having been founded in 1941. The 75th celebration was a blast with over 180 members, past presidents, past board members, and past executive directors joining staff and friends. It was a great way to recognize and wind up our year-long celebration of our 75th anniversary. We hope you enjoyed the trip down memory lane.

We are delighted to welcome a new member to the Board of Directors, Caroline McCarley, mayor of the City of Rochester. Mayor McCarley replaces long-serving board member Elaine Lauterborn, a city councilor who also hails from Rochester.

In addition, seven incumbent board members were re-elected. We are grateful for our board members who oversee all NHMA programs and services, and we look forward to working with them in 2017 to further NHMA’s commitment to serving New Hampshire municipal governments.

We have another exciting year of programming to support you in 2017. We kick off the new year with the Moderators Workshops scheduled for Saturday, January 7 (SB 2 meeting) and Saturday, February 11 (traditional town meeting). We encourage all new and veteran moderators to attend this workshop, which reviews the moderator’s duties at town, village district and school district meeting, along with issues related to warrant articles. Look for our Training and Workshops Schedule found on page 21 which provides a current line-up our 2017 workshops.

Again, thank you for all your support of NHMA in 2016 and please let us know how we can serve you in 2017.

TD Bank Tighe & Bond, Inc.

Warmest regards,

Underwood Engineers Upton & Hatfield, LLP Vachon Clukay & Company, PC

www.nhmunicipal.org

Judy Silva NHMA Executive Director

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

3

4

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

HAPPENINGS Check Out Our Webinars!

Have you taken advantage of the Association’s 2016 Webinar Series yet? Our most recent webinar Exploring Infrastructure Funding Strategies will be available shortly, and the next webinar 2017 State Legislative Preview: Now What? will be available on January 11th with NHMA’s Cordell Johnston and Barbara Reid giving members a look at the latest legislative developments in Concord.

Interested in a topic but the date doesn’t work for you? Register anyhow and you will receive a link to the recording.

You will love the convenience. Online registration and webinar descriptions available at www.nhmunicipal.org. We hope you will join us for our 2017 Webinar Series.

For members to access these archived webinars, simply go to the Member Toolbox on NHMA’s homepage and hit Webinar Archive. Members will need an email account and password to access these webinars. If you don’t have a member account, please contact your local Account Administrator (typically the designated chief administrative officer, such as town manager or administrator), or contact NHMA at nhmainfo@nhmunicipal.org.

If you have a suggestion for a webinar topic, send your ideas to Tim Fortier at tfortier@nhmunicipal.org. Thank you.

USDA Seeks Business Development Grant Applications – Letter of Intent Due by December 16th The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is now seeking applications for its Rural Business Development Grant (RBDG) program that supports non-profits and municipalities aiming to create jobs and bolster business in rural New Hampshire. The RBDG program allows USDA to directly invest in community development efforts. The program offers grants that average $30,000 to eligible applicants, including cities and towns.

The Agency is currently accepting applications with a letter of intent due by Friday, December 16, 2016 and a full application due by Wednesday, February 15, 2017. www.nhmunicipal.org

Application materials and a full list of last year’s funded projects can be found on the USDA Rural Development website (www.rd.usda.gov/nh) or by contacting Heather Gronlund, Business Program Specialist, at (603) 223-6041 or by email at heather.gronlund@nh.usda.gov.

2016 Municipal Law Lecture Series Draws Over 200 Members Each year NHMA hosts a series of three law lectures held around the state addressing planning and zoning issues.

This year, over 200 municipal members attended these law lectures which are intended for officials with an interest in, or responsibility for, any aspect of municipal land use regulation, including members of planning boards, zoning boards, conservation commissions, and select boards, as well as councilors,

Attorneys Justin L. Payson and Eric Maher of DTC Lawyers, present to members at the Newington Town Offices on code enforcement.

planners, building inspectors and code enforcement officers.

NHMA’s Hard Road to Travel Workshop Never Grows Old On October 6, NHMA’s Legal Services attorneys, Stephen C. Buckley and Margaret Byrnes (pictured next page), addressed a group of 30 attendees in a Hard Road to Travel workshop. The JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

5

HAPPENINGS from page 5

event was co-sponsored by UNH’s Technology Transfer (T2) Center and NHMA. With the 2015 revision of A Hard Road to Travel as a backdrop, this workshop provided an in-depth review of the laws related to liability, regulation, and maintenance of municipal roads. Even today, this workshop remains among NHMA’s most popular workshop offered to members.

N E W

On November 10, NHMA’s Government Finance Advisor, Barbara Reid (pictured above), joined by Staff Attorney Margaret Byrnes (not shown), addressed 35 members of the New Hampshire Recreation and Parks Association on “Municipal Financing for Recreation Departments.” This professional development workshop explained the statutory budget provisions that affect recreational operations, including municipal immunity and liability. Reid and Byrnes also discussed legal issues related to recreation revolving funds and background checks. Attendees received a copy of NHMA’s publication, The Basic Law of Budgeting.

H A M P S H I R E

M U N I C I P A L

• Bond issue approved by governmental entity • Completed application approved by Bond Bank Board

Bond Sale Date:

Application Deadline:

June 6, 2017

April 10, 2017

Do you have a capital project that needs financing?

• Audit by CPA Firm

We can assist you with your planning by providing various scenarios based on level debt or level principal payments for different terms.

Contact us now for your estimated debt schedules.

NEW HAMPSHIRE MUNICIPAL BOND BANK

6

B A N K

The Bond Bank’s Next Bond Sale Schedule

Basic Loan Requirements:

• Local bond counsel opinion

B O N D

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

To schedule a meeting, obtain debt service schedules, or for details about our schedule, fees, Bond Anticipation Note programs, and current interest rates, please contact Sheila M. St. Germain, Executive Director, at info@nhmbb.com or call (603) 271-2595 or toll-free in NH at (800) 393-6422. For more information, visit our website at www.nhmbb.org.

www.nhmunicipal.org

Upcoming

Events

For more information or to register for an event, visit our online Calendar of Events at www.nhmunicipal.org. If you have any questions, please contact us at nhmaregistrations@nhmunicipal.org or 800.852.3358, ext. 3350.

JANUARY

FEBRUARY

New Year’s Day (NHMA Offices Closed) Monday, January 2

Webinar: Right-to-Know Law: Open to the Public – A Primer of Public Meetings Wednesday, February 8 12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m.

Moderators Workshop for SB 2 Meeting NHMA Offices, Concord Saturday, January 7 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

Snow Date: Saturday, January 14 Webinar: 2017 State Legislative Preview: Now What?

Wednesday, January 11 12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m.

Martin Luther King/Civil Rights Day (NHMA Offices Closed) Monday, January 16

www.nhmunicipal.org

Moderators Workshop for Traditional Town Meeting NHMA Offices, Concord Saturday, February 11 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

Snow Date: Saturday, February 25 President’s Day (NHMA Offices Closed) Monday, February 20

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

7

Balancing Free Speech and the Right to Vote in New Hampshire

By Gilles Bissonnette

8

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

g h e o n e

T

he right to free speech and the right to vote. They are both sacred rights that are essential to a functioning democracy. Yet these rights clash every election, as states and municipalities struggle with how to respect freedom of speech in polling places while simultaneously ensuring that citizens can vote in an environment free from harassment and intimidation. Both New Hampshire and courts throughout the country have struggled with how to balance these competing rights.

The seminal decision addressing this conflict is the 1992 case Burson v. Freeman. There, a city council candidate’s campaign treasurer challenged on free speech grounds a Tennessee law prohibiting the solicitation of votes and the display or distribution of campaign literature within 100 feet of the entrance to a polling place. “This case,” the United States Supreme Court noted, “presents us with a particularly difficult reconciliation: the accommodation of the right to engage in political discourse with the right to vote—a right at the heart of our democracy.”

The Court ultimately concluded that the statute did not violate the First Amendment. The Court stated that, though the law only banned political speech, it was necessary in order to serve the compelling state interest in preventing voter intimidation and election fraud. As the Court explained: “While we readily acknowledge that a law [discriminating on the basis of political content] rarely survives such scrutiny, an examination of the evolution of election reform, both in this country and abroad, demonstrates the necessity of restricted areas in or around polling places.”

The Court relied heavily on how such speech bans around polling places have been common for over a century in an effort to combat voter intimidation and election fraud: “After an unsuccessful experiment with an unofficial ballot system, all 50 States, together with numerous other Western democracies, settled on the same solution: a secret ballot secured in part by a restricted zone around the voting compartments. We find that this widespread and time-tested consensus demonstrates that some restricted zone is necessary in order to serve the States’ compelling interests in preventing voter intimidation and election fraud.”

Consistent with the Supreme Court’s findings, New Hampshire imposes restrictions on political speech near polling places, though these restrictions are not as severe as the Tennessee law upheld in Burson. For example, under RSA 659:43, II, “[n]o person who is a candidate for office or who is representing or working for a candidate shall distribute any campaign materials or perform any electioneering activities … within a corridor 10 feet wide” along the entrance www.nhmunicipal.org

of a polling place. How long this corridor extends beyond the polling place entrance is to be “determined by the moderator where the election is being held.”

New Hampshire also places restrictions on political speech within the polling place. RSA 659:44 states that “[n]o election officer shall electioneer while in the performance of his official duties.” This is an understandably prudent measure designed to ensure that election officials perform their duties neutrally. Similarly, New Hampshire law bans voter intimidation and coercion, including within a polling place.

Under RSA 659:40, II, “[n]o person shall use or threaten force, violence, or any tactic of coercion or intimidation to knowingly induce or compel any other person to vote or refrain from voting, vote or refrain from voting for any particular candidate or ballot measure, or refrain from registering to vote.”

Following the Burson decision, there is little doubt that these polling place speech restrictions in New Hampshire are not only constitutional, but prudent measures designed to preserve the sanctity of one’s right to vote. But Burson does not provide a blank check for the government to restrict political speech related to the act of voting.

For example, on September 1, 2014, New Hampshire banned a person from displaying a photograph of his or her marked ballot reflecting “how he or she has voted,” including on the Internet through social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. In response to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire, the First Circuit Court of Appeals struck down this law banning “ballot selfies,” ruling that “the restrictions on speech imposed by this [law] are antithetical to democratic values.” As the Court explained: “The restriction affects voters who are engaged in core political speech, an area highly protected by the First Amendment.

Ballot selfies have taken on a special communicative value: they both express support for a candidate and communicate that the voter has in fact given his or her vote to that candidate.”

The idea behind New Hampshire’s ballot selfie ban was to address vote buying and voter coercion. But the Court explained that the law was simply too broad: “New Hampshire may not impose such a broad restriction on speech banning ballot selfies in order to combat an unsubstantiated and hypothetical danger. We repeat the old adage: ‘a picture is worth a thousand words.’” The Court also highlighted that New Hampshire’s ballot selfie ban was broader than the speech restriction in Burson because it “does not secure the immediate physical site of elections, but instead controls the JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

9

BALANCING from page 9 use of imagery of marked ballots, regardless of where, when, and how that imagery is publicized.”

Similarly, multiple courts since Burson have rejected laws implicating elections that ban innocent, political, and non-disruptive speech. For example, in State v. Brookins, the Maryland Supreme Court struck down a state law that prohibited candidates and others from paying persons for performing “walk around services” (such as distributing sample ballots) on election days.

The law was enacted to prevent election corruption. But the Court concluded that the law needlessly banned protected political speech. Voter fraud and corruption do not, the Court explained, “give the State the right to abridge speech because it paternalistically seeks to establish a completely fraud-free atmosphere within which the electorate is exposed only to the absolute untainted truth about political candidates or their platforms.”

In light of these decisions, can a state prevent voters from passively wearing campaign buttons and clothing while they are waiting in line in a polling place? It is unclear.

During the last legislative session, New Hampshire enacted a new provision in RSA 659:43, I, banning people within polling places—including voters standing in line—from wearing any campaign material in the form of a pin, sticker, or article of clothing.

According to the Secretary of State’s Office, those who refuse to cover up a campaign shirt or remove a sticker should not be turned away on Election Day, but the Moderator can report them to the Attorney General’s office.

Immediately prior to the 2016 general election, some complained that this ban violated the First Amendment.

10

This view may have some merit. Such a ban, for instance, prohibits a voter who is simply standing in line from passively wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat or an “I’m with Hillary” button. While the law in Burson dealt with political speech that attempted to influence others, New Hampshire’s ban on clothing and pins, as interpreted by the Secretary of State’s Office, arguably goes further by restricting passive speech that has no intent to influence others in the polling place.

Some courts, however, have allowed similar restrictions banning political clothing and pins in the polling place.

For example, in Minnesota Majority v.

Mansky, individuals wearing local Tea Party shirts that said “Don’t Tread On Me” and buttons that said “I.D. Me Please” where told to remove the items if they wanted to vote. This instruction was given under a Minnesota law stating that “[a] political badge, political button, or other political insignia may not be worn at or about the polling place on primary or election day.” The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that this speech restriction was reasonable in light of Minnesota’s legitimate interest in maintaining peace, order, and decorum in the polling place. Similarly, in AFSCME, Council 25 v. Land, the Michigan Department of State issued a directive telling election inspectors that they had the right to ask voters entering the polls to remove campaign buttons or cover up clothing bearing a campaign slogan or a candidate’s name. A Michigan federal court ruled that this directive was permissible because it was viewpoint neutral and reasonable in light of the purpose of the polling place.

the sanctity of the polling place is not always clear. What we do know is that the government has significant latitude in restricting speech in and around a polling place. But this latitude is not unlimited. The speech restriction must address an actual problem in need of solving, not a speculative concern. And once the government starts attempting to regulate political speech beyond the polling place—as New Hampshire did with its ban on ballot selfies—courts will be far less willing to conclude that the speech restriction is necessary to preserve the sanctity of the voting process.

Gilles Bissonnette is Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire. He may be reach at 603.224.5591, ext. 103, or at gilles@ aclu-nh.org.

Simply put, how to balance the right to free speech and the right to vote in an environment free from intimidation are difficult questions. The line between free speech and protecting

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

A Primer on 2017 Election Reform Possibilities for the Granite State: From Early Voting to E-POLL (and Everything In-between)

By Todd Selig

T

hirty-seven states and Washington, D.C. offer some form of early voting where the rules make it convenient for voters to cast their ballots before Election Day without the requirement for an excuse to vote early.

Early voting generally means that voters are either able to vote at polling stations open for early voting, or they’re able to pick up a ballot and cast it in one place before the election.

Maine and Vermont have had a 45-day window in which voters can request a ballot for any reason and cast it early.

In New Hampshire, only those who qualify under a rigid definition to get an absentee ballot can vote early.

However, Gardner is convinced the easier you make voting, the less likely it is people will participate.

“New Hampshire does have a unique culture of civic engagement, but we are at risk of becoming last in the nation in voter convenience and using technology to save our taxpayers time and money spent waiting in line,” said Paula Hodges, state director of America Votes, the pre-eminent national group pushing for election reforms, according to a Union Leader article by Kevin Landrigan on October 30, 2016.

To date, the data suggests Gardner is right. A study from the University of Wisconsin -Madison published in the January 2014 American Journal of Political Science, Election Laws, Mobilization, and Turnout: The Unanticipated Consequences of Election Reform, indicates that while state governments have experimented with a variety of election laws to make voting more convenient and increase turnout, the impacts of these reforms vary in surprising ways, providing insight into the mechanisms by which states can encourage or reduce turnout.

Yet the state’s top election official and the longest-serving secretary of state in the nation would not have it any other way.

“Early voting has the opposite effect; it cheapens the value of the day itself,” said Secretary of State Bill Gardner in that same article. “With early voting for weeks if not months, by the time the real day comes, nobody pays much attention to it. Here the whole campaign builds to that crescendo on Election Day.” In Massachusetts, there is an 11-day window at city and town halls prior to Election Day.

New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Connecticut are the New England holdouts. In those three states, voters with a specific conflict that prevents them from getting to the polls on Nov. 8 can request an absentee ballot.

The researchers conducted both aggregate and individuallevel statistical analyses of voter turnout in the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections. The results showed that sameday Election Day registration policies, such as those utilized in New Hampshire whereby residents may both register to vote at the polling place on the day of the election and cast their ballot, has a consistently positive effect on turnout, whereas the most popular reform, early voting, is actually associated with lower turnout.

The researchers concluded that early voting has created

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

11

While early voting does not have merit for us, there are other reforms that might be considered for New Hampshire with potentially positive outcomes.

port towns and cities to ensure they have the supplies, voting equipment for voters with physical impairments, absentee ballot envelopes, and technical support to implement streamlined polling place and registration processes. Such a grant program would be of immeasurable benefit to smaller NH communities who struggle mightily with the resources needed to orchestrate a smooth experience for voters on Election Day.

America Votes has advanced a plan to “strengthen integrity and build transparency into the voting process and improve access to the ballot box,” for New Hampshire. The campaign’s platform includes three state initiatives that were introduced as part of the 2016 legislative session, and will almost certainly be discussed further in the coming year.

The third initiative is to implement a statewide online voter check-in system. Of all the reforms being discussed these days, the most promising is this, which was deliberated by the New Hampshire Legislature in pilot form as part of House Bill (HB) 1534 in 2016. Most people refer to this initiative as either “Electronic Poll Books,” “Poll Books,” or “E-POLL.”

The first proposes standardizing Election Day polling hours from 6:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. across New Hampshire (Editor’s Note: NHMA has opposed this proposal in testimony before the State Legislature), which would add both convenience and predictability for voters. The challenge with this initiative is that, as election officials in cities and towns know too well, we rely on citizen volunteers to staff our polling places, and it has already become increasingly difficult to find sufficient persons to staff existing polling hours. Don’t forget, before the polls open, and after the polls close, election officials and volunteers devote considerable time setting up, tabulating totals, and breaking down polling places. Extending hours makes the job much more difficult for already fatigued moderators, town clerks, supervisors, and selectpersons.

There are many benefits of an electronic check-in system such as E-POLL: it is anticipated to dramatically reduce waiting lines, reduce the possibility of voter fraud, shorten the process for same-day registration, and eliminate weeks of post-election data entry. That is why the project has received support from the City and Town Clerks Association, the League of Women Voters, and America Votes, as well as from the New Hampshire Municipal Association — and why the chairs of both the Republican and Democratic state parties sent letters strongly supporting it.

The second initiative from America Votes is to create an innovation grant system administered by the New Hampshire Secretary of State to sup-

Opponents of HB 1534 indicated they did not oppose the idea, but that there was not enough time to test the E-POLL system before the Septem-

PRIMER from page 11 negative unanticipated consequences by reducing the civic significance of elections for individuals and altering the incentives for political campaigns to invest in mobilization.

12

The 2016 discussion centered around running a pilot project in three municipalities — Durham, Hooksett, and Manchester — to see how the E-POLL system works in practice and identify any potential problems, in advance of legislation to allow usage statewide.

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

ber 2016 primary, and the pilot project should wait instead until 2017 to demo at smaller elections.

The fact that we have a significant period of time now before the next state primary gives New Hampshire a perfect opportunity to roll out some form of electronic voter registration system. It should be emphasized that E-POLL is a voter “check-in” system, not a voting system. The present paper ballots utilized in New Hampshire for voting work well and guarantee an accurate recount can be completed and verified.

College student voting is likely the final area that will receive significant scrutiny in 2017. Typically, Republican-leaning legislatures have expressed concern about the same-day registration of college students, primarily because it is perceived that most college students tend to favor more liberal perspectives and candidates, while Democraticleaning legislatures have advocated for maintaining the existing New Hampshire definition of domicile.

In June 2012, the New Hampshire Legislature, overriding Gov. John Lynch’s veto, passed Senate Bill 318, which required people registering to vote to sign an affidavit agreeing they were subject to the state’s residency laws, “including laws requiring a driver to register a motor vehicle and apply for a New Hampshire driver’s license within 60 days of becoming a resident.”

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argued imposing a “residency” condition on the right to vote would disenfranchise college students living in New Hampshire, a Manchester executive intending to retire in Florida, a medical resident living here while completing her hospital training, or a member of the U.S. Navy who lives in Portsmouth but knows he will be transferred somewhere else in two years. www.nhmunicipal.org

Being domiciled, according to the ACLU, did not mean anyone could vote in the state simply because they want to or are in the state on Election Day. Instead, it argued, a person is domiciled in New Hampshire for voting purposes if that person has a continuous physical presence here and treats this state as “home.”

In 2015, the New Hampshire Supreme Court concurred with the ACLU and unanimously struck down the 2012 state law that required voters be state residents, not just domiciled here, in order to vote.

Trying to fine-tune the definition of what constitutes domicile, especially with the goal of excluding college students, has many unintended consequences that invariably impact non-college students, the elderly, or the poor. The existing system works.

Leave it be; instead, focus state legislative energies on E-POLL; it’s an innovation whose time has come.

Originally from Laconia, Todd Selig has been the Administrator for the Town of Durham since 2001. He lives with his wife and two daughters (who cannot wait to be old enough to cast their own ballots) in Durham, NH.

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

13

Trust. Excellence. Service.

Since 1979, Primex³ has provided comprehensive risk management, training, consulting, and coverages for New Hampshire municipalities, schools, counties and other governmental entities. Our philosophy is all about partnership and aligning our service with our core values.

TRUST. Members experience the assurance of stable and predictable contributions through a continual focus on best practices in risk pooling, long-term stability, and sustainable risk financing.

EXCELLENCE. We hold ourselves to a high standard, where good is not good enough to respond to the complex world of risk in which our members must operate.

SERVICE. In-house claims staff, educators and consultants, and trainings that focus on loss trends to provide the risk management, human resource consulting, and public safety support that exceed our Members’ expectations.

OFFERING Property & Liability, Workers’ Compensation, and Unemployment Compensation Programs to New Hampshire municipalities, schools, counties and special districts.

46 Donovan Street Concord, NH 03301-2624 800-698-2364 (toll free) 603-225-2841 n www.nhprimex.org

14

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

3

www.nhmunicipal.org

From Referee to Official Ballot Referendum: My Time Behind the Podium

By Lynn Christensen

I

have been a moderator for over 25 years. I have also been a soccer referee and a softball umpire. They are not so different: There are generally two opposing sides hoping to win the day; I still need my stopwatch; and, sometimes, I even need to step in and “break it up.” And, in each case, there is a set of rules that govern, and fair play and good sportsmanship are important.

Like the athletes during a game, voters at town meeting want to think you’re on their side—or at least not favoring the opponents. Maintaining an unbiased appearance and reputation is critical to moderating the meeting. Of course you have an opinion, but it should not influence how you manage people or the process. Each side must be treated equally, and allowed to “play” within the rules of the game, even when some individuals become outrageous or silly.

This is part of the rule of good sportsmanship, more than a statute. And, if someone becomes offensive or threatening, that is when you pull out the yellow or, in rare cases, the red card.

Understanding the issues and the players makes you more aware of potential problems and allows you to anticipate how to handle them. Things will always go more smoothly if I take the time to talk with the players in advance to help them understand the process and suggest ways to accomplish their goals. Otherwise, players may end up stumbling along, not understanding what is and is not allowed. For example, many times someone will attempt to introduce a surprise amendment—spur of the moment—on the night of the meeting. These proposals may be vague, poorly worded, or may even change as the individual is proposing it. Therefore, I require all amendments to be in writing. www.nhmunicipal.org

Taking amendments in writing means the voter has taken some time to put his thoughts into words, rather than rambling at the microphone. And, just as importantly, everyone else knows what is being proposed, without having to guess at what the proponent meant.

Over the years, as with anything else, the game has changed.

As the number of voters increases, the number of people who want to speak at town meeting also increases. Meetings started extending past midnight and into a second night.

There are rules that can help: establishing the length of time someone can speak; giving everyone an opportunity before recognizing someone for a second time. Also, the town can decide at the beginning of the meeting that, if all the articles have not been addressed by a specific time, the meeting will recess and reconvene on a second night. This assures that people will be fresher, and also gives them the opportunity to recruit additional people on their side to attend.

Even the basic town meeting has changed. While the original traditional town meeting still exists in rare pockets in the state—where warrant and elections are held at the same meeting—most towns have gone to the official ballot town meeting. Final decisions on the articles presented in the warrant are still made at town meeting, but elections to vote on those articles are held at a different time. This has made things easier for most people, adjusting as the needs of the voters have shifted. For example, town meetings are generally held in the evening and, as the population grew and changed to multi-income families, many found it hard to make the time to attend. Some towns have tried holding town meetings on Saturday, but found that people did not want to give up the only day they had time to do errands JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

15

REFEREE from page 15 and dump runs. Additionally, some voters consider it a waste of time to sit through the entire meeting when they had already made up their minds and just wanted to get to be able to vote on the issue at hand. Others felt that the only people coming to the meetings were special interest groups to support their particular issue or to vote down one they felt passionate about. And even those who attend sometimes feel hesitant to raise their hand, realizing that everyone would see how they voted and be concerned about retaliation.

Hence “SB2” town meetings were born. Now a voter no longer has to sit and listen to that one guy who always stands up and speaks forever and says nothing, or the local activist who spouts the same arguments repeated over and over. Now he or she can show up to vote on each of the articles on election day, in the privacy of the booth, and at a time during the day most convenient for his or her schedule. And the special interests could no longer negate your vote by packing a deliberative session.

Alas, SB2 meetings do have some disadvantages. We discovered after a few of these meetings that, since fewer and fewer people show up to debate the articles, a smaller number of people

16

could influence the wording of the article that appears on the ballot on election day. Then, on election day, voters look at their ballots for the article to buy band uniforms, only to discover it was watered down at the town meeting, and now only proposes “looking into” the variety of uniform options.

Therefore, attendance at the meeting is still important.

Regardless of the rules or the type of meeting, there will always be difficult situations and difficult people. You need to be patient, listen well, and take your time with the voters.

Case in point: At the last presidential primary—early in the morning before the traffic flow became an issue—we had an upset voter. As happens not all that infrequently, the woman went to check in and vote in one party’s primary, only to discover that she could not, because she was registered as a member of the other party. She became very indignant. She explained emphatically that she is an independent and “neverever” stays in a party even if she votes in the primary. I suggested that maybe she forgot: “No way!” She always signs the book to go back to undeclared.

Always! She hung around the polls for over an hour and complained to anyone she could find, including the Attorney General’s representative and the lawyers representing the two parties. She cried, she yelled, she stamped

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

her feet. Everyone directed her back to me. And I politely explained each time that I could not give her the ballot she wanted. I finally sent a Supervisor of the Checklist back to town hall to collect the checkout book from the vault and brought it back to the polling site. I opened it to the page with her name on it; she had not signed it. She eventually calmed down and took the ballot offered.

The point to the story is that people often “blame the ref.” But don’t let them drag you down to their level: don’t raise your voice; don’t cry; don’t stamp your feet. Be politely persistent, but be sure in what you are saying and doing. And don’t forget that having a sense of humor goes a long way.

Lynn Christensen has served as town moderator in the Town of Merrimack since being first elected in 1990.

www.nhmunicipal.org

Supervisors of the Checklist:

Understanding the Amendments to RSA 654:27 & 654:28

By Margaret M.L. Byrnes

I

n 2016, two house bills significantly altered the requirements for holding sessions to correct the checklist: House Bills 1468 and 1144 were passed, which amended RSA 654:27, RSA 654:28, RSA 654:38, and RSA 654:39. These statutes govern procedure for checklist sessions prior to state elections, but also apply to local elections through RSA 669:5. The biggest changes were to RSA 654:27 and :28, which involved the timing for holding the sessions prior to the election day, the notice requirements, and the “21-day exception.”

First, although the supervisors still must hold the session for correction of the checklist 6 to 13 days prior to the election, the session can now be held on any of the days that fall 6 to 13 days before the election—in other words, that day no longer must be a Saturday, but it could be. Furthermore, the duration of each session must be at minimum 30 minutes, but can be longer at the discretion of the supervisors of the checklist.

Second, notice of the sessions must still be posted in “2 appropriate places”; however, now one of those places “shall be the city or town’s Internet website, if such exists.” In the alternative to posting in two places, the municipality can opt to give the previously-required form of notice: notice in a “newspaper of general circulation in the city or town.”

Third is what I have dubbed the “21-day exception.” As stated above, the statutes require a session for correction of the checklist to be held 6 to 13 days prior to the election.

However, House Bill 1468, amending RSA 654:27, now provides the following exception:

www.nhmunicipal.org

[W]henever more than one meeting is required within a 21-day period, the first required meeting may serve to fulfill the requirements of the remaining meetings.

This new provision removes the requirement for more than one checklist session during a 21-day period. This would be particularly appealing to supervisors in SB 2 municipalities, where three checklist sessions are required throughout town meeting season: one prior to the opening of the candidate filing period, one prior to the deliberative session, and one prior to the ballot voting. The new “21-day exception,” if applicable, would allow the supervisors in SB 2 municipalities to dispense with one of the three sessions.

However, it appears that neither the 21-day exception nor the deletion of the Saturday session requirement, applies to town meeting and town elections.

To reach this conclusion, we must start with RSA 669:5, which, as stated above, applies to local elections the procedures for checklist sessions described in RSA Chapter 654.

RSA 669:5 states, in part: The supervisors shall prepare, post, and revise the checklist for a town meeting or election in the same manner as for a state election as provided in RSA 654:25-654:31, provided, however, that the session for correction shall be held on Saturday 6 to 13 days prior to the election. (emphasis added) Therefore, at first glance, it may have appeared that all the new amendments to RSA 654:27 and :28 applied to local JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

17

CHECKLIST from page 17 elections too—since RSA 654:25 :31 are incorporated into RSA 669:5.

However, RSA 669:5 was not also amended—leaving intact the requirement that a session “be held on Saturday 6 to 13 days prior to the election.”

Therefore, it appears that, in local elections, supervisors must still hold their sessions on the Saturday 6 to 13

18

days prior to the election, with no exception where more than one session is required during a 21-day period.

In other words, the language in RSA 669:5 about the timing of the sessions likely still governs local elections.

However, because RSA 669:5 otherwise requires the supervisors to follow RSA 654:25-654:31 for local elections, the other amendments to the

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

statutes, including notice and duration of the sessions, should apply to local elections. For more information on the deadlines for holding and providing notice of checklist sessions, please refer to NHMA’s Important Dates Calendars, available on our website at https://www.nhmunicipal.org/resources# ImportantDateCalendars.

www.nhmunicipal.org

National League of Cities Release New Report Offering Practical Strategies for a Stronger Local Democracy

T

he National League of Cities (NLC) recently released a new report, Planning for Stronger Local Democracy: A Field Guide for Local Officials, responding to the challenges of governing democratically. This tool kit, made possible with support from the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation, is designed to assist officials in strengthening local democracy by cultivating transparency and inclusivity with citizens and key allies with shared responsibilities and mutual accountability for addressing and solving problems.

According to the Report’s introduction, local officials seem to have reached a critical threshold in their work to strengthen local democracy. Reacting to a combination of factors, local governments are exploring ways to move from temporary public engagement efforts to more stable, durable foundations for democratic governance. NLC defines democratic governance as “the art of governing a community in participatory, inclusive, deliberative, and collaborative ways.”

The Report lays out some of the key questions you might ask about democratic governance in your city or town – questions that will help you decide how to create a much stronger, more productive long-term relationship between citizens, local government and other organizations in your city or town. For some time, local officials have been faced with a kind of ‘Catch22’ dilemma: public trust in government has declined steadily, while the active support and engagement of citizens has become increasingly critical for solving public problems. Today’s citizens are simply more vocal, knowledgeable, diverse, skilled and skeptical than the citizens of a generation ago. There are a number of macro-level trends at work here – rising levels of education, different attitudes toward authority, the emergence of the Internet – but it all adds to up to a basic shift in what citizens expect, and what they can contribute.

officials interact with the public. The recent recession has plunged many municipalities into fiscal crisis, and prompted local officials to engage citizens in thorny questions about how to balance revenues and services.

At the same time, municipalities are sharing more local government data with citizens, who are better able to use and assess the information. Finally, the explosion of social media has meant that citizens have new venues to connect around their concerns and articulate their views about local governance and politics. These pressures present new challenges, but also new opportunities. Local officials are starting to think more seriously about how to combine hard-earned engagement lessons with innovations.

Members are encouraged to download this hands-on guide that lays out key questions for local governments to use to assess their city or town’s engagement capacities. Also included are practical suggestions to finding out when and how to develop and enhance public participation processes. The full toolkit can be downloaded from NLC’s website at www.nlc.org.

In just the last few years, cities and towns have been buffeted by a number of shifts that affect how local

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

19

— This Moment in NHMA History — 64 years ago….Starting in 1945, the New Hampshire State Planning and Devel-

opment Commission published the Directory of New Hampshire Municipal and County Officials. When the State no longer had resources for such a publication, the Directory eventually moved to NHMA for printing and distribution. Since 1952, this comprehensive listing of municipal officials has been maintained by NHMA for each of the 13 cities and 221 towns throughout the state.

46 years ago….NHMA was the only state municipal league in the country that held four statewide or regional meeting annually, typically an afternoon-evening event. Other municipal leagues had offered only a 2-3 day conference each year. NHMA discontinued regional dinners in 2010 due to declining member interest and attendance.

?

?

Things You Should Know

?

20

? ?

Name the town in which this town office building is located?

This town building celebrated its one hundred birthday in 2013. Originally built as a school housing first- and second-graders, the building also housed the town library. Funds to construct the school building were a bequest of Judge Thomas Dodge, in memory of his wife, Eliza Daniels Dodge, (1822-1908) with the stipulation that it be named for her.

The upper floor was a social hall with a stage. In addition to town meetings, various groups put on plays. There was traveling entertainment, such as minstrel shows, during the 1930s and 1940s. The lowest level contained a dining room and kitchen where town meetings dinners were served, as well as supper put on by the Grange and other organizations. Story is told that the town couldn’t have town meeting and school district meeting on the same day in the same place. So town folks turned all the chairs 90 degrees so to create a different space for a different meeting. That’s Yankee ingenuity for you!

When you have figured out the answer, email it to tfortier@nhmunicipal.org. The answer will appear in the March/April issue.

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

2017 Training and Workshops Schedule 7

January 2017 Moderators Workshop, SB 2 Town Meeting - NHMA Offices

14 Moderators Workshop SB2 Town Meeting (Snow Date) - NHMA Offices February 2017 11 Moderators Workshop, Traditional Town Meeting—NHMA Offices 25 Moderators Workshop, Traditional Town Meeting (Snow Date) - NHMA Offices March 2017 31 A Hard Road to Travel—NHMA Offices April 2017 12 Local Officials Workshop—Peterborough 19 Local Officials Workshop—Grantham May 2017 4 Local Officials Workshop—Littleton 10 Local Officials Workshop—Jackson 24 Local Official Workshop—Stratham June 2017 3 Local Officials Workshop—NHMA Offices 9

Right-to-Know Workshop—NHMA Offices

15 The Art of Welfare Workshop—NHMA Offices September 2017 12 Budget & Finance Workshop—Puritan Conference & Event Center, Manchester 23 Municipal Law Lecture Series — NHMA Offices 26 Budget & Finance Workshop—Attitash Grand Summit Hotel, Bartlett October 2017 14

Municipal Law Lecture—NHMA Offices

27 A Hard Road to Travel—NHMA Offices November 2017 15/16 76th Annual Conference and Exhibition, Radisson Hotel, Manchester All events, dates and locations subject to change. Visit www.nhmunicipal.org for current information.

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

21

NEW HAMPSHIRE MUNICIPAL ASSOC

November 16 – 17, 2016 _________________

The Radisson Hotel Manchester, New Hampshire

T

he 75th Annual Conference theme was “75 Years of Service to Your Hometown” and attracted 539 municipal elected and appointed officials, municipal employees, federal and state agency representatives, and exhibitors. In addition, there were 55 educational sessions including the perennial favorites such as Right-to-Know, Legislative and Court Updates. Topics included state law updates, infrastructure planning, human resources and

From left to right: Lisa Goodell of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, Past Executive Director Maura Carroll and her husband and past NHMA board of director, Allen Bennett; Past Executive Director John Andrews and his wife, Sharon; and Past President Patrick McQueen.

leadership skills, local welfare, municipal liability, municipal financing, recycling, federal labor laws, and much more.

Our Exhibit Hall this year showcased 105 businesses, state agencies, and other organizations that do business with municipal governments in New Hampshire. These exhibitors make our conference possible and we thank them for their continuing support.

The conference opened with a hilarious keynote address from Loretta LaRoche, an internally-acclaimed stress management expert, motivational speaker, author and humorist.

NHMA Chairman, Scott Myers, and NHMA’s Executive Director, Judy Silva, make some brief remarks at the 75th Gala dinner.

22

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

CIATION’S 75TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE

NHMA’s Legal Services team, Stephen Buckley and Margaret Byrnes, address a packed room in the 2016 Court Update session.

Boy, was she funny! Loretta used her incredible wit and irreverent humor to get people laughing and thinking about how we handle stress. Everyone left Loretta’s performance with a big smile which set the tone for the rest of our conference and 75th celebration.

In conjunction with the conference this year, NHMA marked its 75th anniversary with a Gala Dinner celebration on Wednesday evening. Nearly 180 members, exhibitors, past presidents and executive directors joined NHMA

staff, board of directors and others for an evening of great food and entertainment with the interactive fun of “Dueling Pianos.” This Gala was a wonderful way to cap off the Association’s year-long celebration of our founding. It was outstanding to see NHMA’s past Executive Directors Maura Carroll (2013-2009), John Andrews (2009-1975), and David Mann (1975-1962) in attendance. Other notable attendees included Past Presidents Patrick McQueen (1986) and Bonnie Ham (1987). We can’t thank these individuals enough for their years of professional service to this organization.

Next year’s conference will again be held at The Radisson Hotel on Wednesday, November 15, 2017 and Thursday, November 16, 2017. We thank you for joining us this year and we hope to see you again in 2017.

NHMA board members, including David Caron, Steve Fournier and Scott Myers, and joined by Dennis Pavilek and Sheridan Brown (directly behind Dennis), were coaxed to the stage for a little dancing and fun.

www.nhmunicipal.org

With 105 businesses showcased in the Exhibit Hall this year, there were plenty of networking opportunities for members to build relationships with leaders in the business and service industries essential to municipal government operations.

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

23

Thank you to our 2016 Exhibitors and Conference Sponsors Acuity Brands Lighting - Holophane/AEL Aggregate Advisors Angell & Co., LLC Avitar Associates of N.E., Inc. Badger Meter Bearing Point Wealth Partners, Inc. BlumShapiro BMSI Brandon Archibald (Author) CAI Technologies Citizens Bank CLD Consulting Engineers, Inc. ClearGov CMA Engineers, Inc. Commerford Nieder Perkins Community Development Finance Authority Concrete Systems, Inc. Conway Office Solutions, Inc. Coppola + Company - Municipal Financial Consulting Cyberlock/Tec Solutions, Inc. Donahue, Tucker & Ciandella, PLLC Drummond Woodsum DuBois & King East Coast Containers eCitySystems Eversource FairPoint Communications FirstLight Fiber FlashVote FuelMaster/Syntech Systems, Inc. GDS Associates, Inc. Governor's Commission on Disability Granite State Rural Water Association Harriman HDR HealthTrust, Inc. Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. ICMA-RC Inception Technologies Inc. Interware Development Company, Inc. JPI Pyrotechnics LLC Lavallee Bresinger Architects Liberty Mutual LighTec, Inc. Mailways, Inc. Mascoma Bank McIntire Business Products Melanson Heath Milton CAT Mitchell Municipal Group, P.A. Municipal Resources, Inc. municodeWEB/aHa! Consulting MuniComp Plus+ (Brought to you by The Lawson Group and Davis & Towle

24

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

New England Document Systems New Hampshire Correctional Industries New Hampshire Government Finance Officers Association New Hampshire Homeland Security and Emergency Management New Hampshire Housing New Hampshire Library Association New Hampshire Library Trustees Association New Hampshire Municipal Bond Bank New Hampshire Public Deposit Investment Pool New Hampshire Retirement System NH Association of Regional Planning Commissions NH Department of Environmental Services NH Division of Historical Resources/ NH Preservation Alliance NH Public Works Association NHSaves/Eversource Northeast Delta Dental Northeast Resource Recovery Association Onsite Drug Testing of NE OTT Communications Oxford Networks Patriot Properties, Inc. Pavers by Ideal Pennichuck Water Services, Co. (PWSC) People's United Bank Plodzik + Sanderson, PA R.W. Gillespie & Associates, Inc. Resource Management, Inc. Ricoh RMON Networks Roberts & Greene, PLLC RPF Environmental S. W. Cole Engineering, Inc. Stantec State of NH 457 Deferred Compensation Plan Stone Hill Municipal Solutions StreetScan TD Bank TFMoran, Inc. The Garland Co., Inc. The H.L. Turner Group, Inc. The Lawson Group Tri State Fire Protection / Tri State Hood & Duct Tufts University Underwood Engineers, Inc. USDA Rural Development VHB Virtual Towns & Schools Vision Government Solutions Weston & Sampson Wright-Pierce WSP/Parsons Brinckerhoff

www.nhmunicipal.org

Porstmouth City Council Recognized for Outstanding Legislative Advocacy First “Governing Body” to Receive 2016 Russ Marcoux Municipal Advocate of the Year Award Each year, the Municipal Advocate of the Year award is given

by NHMA staff based on our interactions with municipal officials during the legislative session. We established this award in 2011 to recognize an elected or appointed local official(s) for his or her non-partisan contributions toward the advancement of NHMA’s legislative policy goals and for the advocacy of municipal interests generally.

In 2011, NHMA staff selected Russ Marcoux, town manLeft to right: NHMA’s Judy Silva; Portsmouth City Councilor and NHMA Board of Director, Chris Dwyer; Mayor Jack Blalock; ager in Bedford, as the first-ever recipient of the Municipal Deputy City Manager, Nancy Colbert-Puff; Assistant City AttorAdvocate of the Year award because Russ did all the things ney, Jane M. Ferrini; and NHMA’s Cordell Johnston we want members to do in support of our legislative policy and to enhance the success of our legislative agenda. Russ passed away just days before the 2011 Annual Conference and he never knew we had created such an award or that he had been selected the first recipient. So in his honor, the NHMA board of directors renamed this recognition as the Russ Marcoux Municipal Advocate of the Year award.

At its recent annual conference in November, NHMA recognized the Portsmouth City Council with its 2016 Russ Marcoux Municipal Advocate of the Year award.

In his presentation remarks, NHMA’s Government Affairs Counsel, Cordell Johnston, stated: “Our five previous Advocate of the Year award winners have all been individuals, and that is how we always envisioned the award. The award has gone to three town administrators or managers, one selectman, and one assessor. This year, for the first time, the award goes to the entire governing body of one of our member municipalities."

That’s because this group has become a model of how to engage in legislative advocacy at the municipal level: • They have a legislative subcommittee that meets regularly to review legislation and make recommendations.

• The subcommittee also meets regularly with their senator and representatives to discuss legislation and inform them of their positions.

• They encourage municipal staff to provide necessary information to the legislative delegation.

• They regularly send staff to the state house to follow what is going on and testify when necessary.

• And they usually keep us informed about their legislative efforts, so that we can coordinate with them.

And we know that their legislators listen to them, because we hear it from the legislators when we are at the state house.

Their efforts also have the secondary effect of improving our own standing. Our relationships with legislators are enhanced when they know that we are working closely with the same people they are.

You may have guessed by now that this is one of the state’s larger municipalities, and not every city or town has the capacity to do all of this. But it is something to aspire to, and if each municipality did 20 or 50 or 70 percent of what this city council does, it would be a major boost to NHMA’s legislative efforts. We are pleased to present the Russ Marcoux Municipal Advocate of the Year Award to the Portsmouth City Council.

Past recipients of this recognition include: 2011 Russell R. Marcoux, town manager, Town of Bedford 2012 James Michaud, assessor, Town of Hudson 2013 Don MacIsaac, selectman, Town of Jaffrey 2014 Julia N. Griffin, town manager, Town of Hanover 2015 Shaun Mulholland, town administrator, Town of Allenstown

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

25

UP CLOSE & In the Field

PERSONAL W

elcome to Up Close and Personal – In the Field, a regular column in New Hampshire Town and City dedicated to giving readers a closer look at staff from New Hampshire municipalities. In this issue, we hope you enjoy meeting Blaine Cox, Deputy City Manager/Director of Finance & Administration with the City of Rochester.

T&C: What are your duties and responsibilities as Deputy City Manager/Director of Finance & Administration?

BC: I serve as both the chief financial officer as well as chief operations officer for the City of Rochester. I provide direct support to the city manager to assist in the development and implementation of goals, objectives, policy recommendations, long and short-range planning, and priorities. I directly supervise the finance & business offices, the city clerk and tax collector, the human resources department, the information technology department, the assessing department, and the welfare department.

I also oversee budget development, administration, and overall fiscal management of the City; I am at the bargaining table for all eight employee unions.

Blaine Cox

Do you know someone who deserves to be profiled in a future edition of New Hampshire Town and City magazine?

If so, please contact the New Hampshire Municipal Association at 800.852.3358 ext. 3408 or townandcity@nhmunicipal.org.

26

T&C: What is your biggest challenge in performing your duties?

BC: It is simply time. There are so many demands upon my time and so many areas to which I must devote time and effort.

T&C: How has NHMA helped you to do your job?

BC: In my early years in this profession, the publications were invaluable – such as The Basic Law of Budgeting, Basic Financial Policies, Knowing the Territory, Town Meeting & School Meeting Handbook and A Hard Road to Travel. The myriad of training sessions as well as the bi-weekly e-newsletter Newslink have also been incredibly helpful in staying current on relevant issues. Finally, the legal counsel provided through NHMA membership by the attorneys at NHMA Legal Services has been a beneficial resource many times.

T&C: What is the public perception about your job and how does it differ from the reality of your job?

BC: The public perception is that most of my job consists of working with budgets, sending tax bills, and managing city staff. However, a large and rewarding part of my role is working with the governing body every day to provide the support they need as well as working with city residents to serve their needs and assist the general public with their interactions with the city.

T&C: What lessons about human nature have you learned in your role?

BC: People most often just want to know that they are being truly heard, and it is not so much your specific response to them, but how you respond, that matters. If you listen sincerely and with empathy, people will usually be accepting of your response or what you can and cannot do for them. If your response is respectful and thoughtful, people will in turn be respectful and accepting

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

UP CLOSE & In the Field

PERSONAL W

elcome to Up Close and Personal – In the Field, a regular column in New Hampshire Town and City dedicated to giving readers a closer look at staff from New Hampshire municipalities. In this issue, we hope you enjoy meeting Sheridan Brown, Selectman in the Town of Grantham.

T&C: What are your duties and responsibilities as Selectman?

SB: As selectman, I am part of the three-person governing body that manages the Town of Grantham. Our key responsibilities acting as a board are to prepare a budget for approval by the voters, oversee employees and expenditures, and implement policies and procedures to protect the town from waste, fraud, and legal liability. I also contribute time individually to researching issues, developing policy proposals for board consideration, and helping staff with projects. The selectmen are assisted by a town administrator who operates under our direction.

Sheridan Brown

T&C: What is your biggest challenge in performing your duties?

SB: Patience. The town fulfills a wide range of duties and requests with very limited staff. Implementation of new policies and procedures must be balanced against dayto-day demands. It is essential to set realistic deadlines and prioritize tasks that are objectively urgent or of greatest benefit to the town. One must not “kill the goose to get the golden egg” by overextending employees.

T&C: How has NHMA helped you to do your job?

SB: Our selectmen use NHMA’s legal guidance, model best practices, and professional development opportunities to be more effective in our day-to-day work. We also benefit from NHMA’s legislative tracking and advocacy efforts, which inform us how to best influence state-level policy and protect the town’s long-term interests.

NHMA’s services are irreplaceable because our town could never devote the resources required to be effective in these areas independently.

Do you know someone who deserves to be profiled in a future edition of New Hampshire Town and City magazine?

If so, please contact the New Hampshire Municipal Association at 800.852.3358 ext. 3408 or townandcity@nhmunicipal.org.

www.nhmunicipal.org

T&C: What lessons about human nature have you learned in your role?

SB: Fully understand your audience before explaining the need for a new policy or procedure. Remember that individuals in municipal roles take pride in their work and are usually operating with best intentions. If a recommendation sounds like criticism of past work, rather than a way to make that work even better moving forward, it is more likely to be met with a passionate defense of the status quo.

T&C: What was your motivation for becoming a selectman?

SB: I enjoy volunteering, and working with municipalities as an aide to U.S. Senator John. E. Sununu made me aware of their many challenges and service opportunities.

Being an avid birdwatcher, I joined the conservation commission to contribute my experience in law, grant funding development, and public relations in support of its mission. Several years later, the job of selectman found me when I was asked to fill a seven-month vacancy. I had a rare opportunity to “test drive” the job, and that persuaded me to run for my first term.

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

27

Tech

Insights

By Tim Howard

Considerations for Data Storage Management

D

id you know that more data has been created in the past two years than in the entire history of the human race? According to the Gartner Group, one of IT’s biggest challenges today is massive data growth. Additionally, RMON Networks conducted a poll in 2016 and we learned that New Hampshire municipalities are also significantly challenged by data storage growth. Information like emails, office documents, spreadsheets, presentations, database files, images/graphics, and audio/video files make your office function as it should. These applications that run and protect your city or town require a lot of disk space as well.

What’s Causing this Data Growth?

• Body Cameras for police officers • Archiving e-mail messages • Spyware requires more backups, which requires even more storage.

• New versions of software applications or operating systems can demand more space. Sharing large media files, such as videos Storing all this information and managing storage is critical to an organization’s behind-the-scenes success. Fortunately, there are many solutions available to help!

Proper planning is the starting point. Once you know how much data you’re dealing with you’ll have a better idea about your storage needs.

On Premise. If you are going with an on-premise solution, you will need to carefully plan for your hardware purchase.

If you purchase too much hardware, you will have wasted your money. However, if you do not purchase hardware with enough power or space, then you will be left with sluggish systems, and ultimately need to spend more to buy more hardware.

5 basic questions to ask when exploring storage solutions.

1. How fast do you need to access your data?

2. How soon do you need to be back up running if data is lost?

28

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

3. How long must you retain your data?

4. What are the regulatory requirements you need to comply with?

5. What level of security are you looking for?

The Cloud. Don’t want to keep investing in hardware?

Then the Cloud is a great option for your storage needs.

With the Cloud you are able to pay and scale as your data grows. Findings from the latest 2016 State Chief Information Officers (CIO) survey clearly show the Cloud is the solution of the future. In fact, 76% of State CIOs have or are planning on moving their digital archives to the Cloud, and another 88% have or are planning to utilize the Cloud for data storage.

Think the Cloud model sounds great? We do, too! Just remember, not all “Clouds” are created equal. Some are designed to handle data archiving, while others have increased performance and stability. Refer to the same 5 basic questions above, and measure your Cloud vendors against those as well.

So our advice? Planning! Planning will be the key to your success! Put in the effort ahead of time to ensure success in the future, and don’t be afraid to reach out to an expert if you need assistance.

Tim Howard is President and CEO of RMON Networks, an IT Support Company specializing in services for municipalities since 2002. He can be reached at 603-869-7323, or thoward@ rmonnetworks.com. www.nhmunicipal.org

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

29

The

HR

REPORT

Looking Ahead to 2017

By Mark Broth, Esq.

“May you live in interesting times.”

(Purported Chinese curse; true origin unknown).

I

t appears that we have a few minutes between the end of the 2016 presidential campaign and the launch of the 2020 campaign to take stock of the election results and look ahead to 2017. It appears that 2017 will be the “interesting times” that will disrupt the status quo. During the Obama administration, a divided Congress deadlocked on most proposed legislation that would have made any major changes to employee rights and employer responsibilities.

The big exception was the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) (“Obamacare”), which mandated that covered employers provide eligible employees with affordable health insurance benefits or pay a fine. Unable to push legislation through Congress, the Obama Administration shifted its focus to changing federal regulations, which do not require legislative approval. The best example of this shift is the changes to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) salary test, which would have made most employees earning less than $47,476 per year eligible for overtime pay.

Whenever there is a change in the political party controlling the White House, there are resulting shifts in administrative approach and philosophy. Through Cabinet and other appointments, a new President can alter the way existing laws are administered. For example, under the Obama administration the US Department of Labor significantly increased its emphasis on enforcement by adding investigators, refusing to negotiate liquidated damages assessments, and in some cases, seeking criminal sanctions. In contrast, the Bush administration’s focus was less enforcement oriented and more focused on educating employers. Presidential appointments to the National Labor Relations Board, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Occupational Safety and Health Administration, as well as the Supreme Court, can all effect how existing laws are interpreted and enforced. For example, following the death of Justice Scalia, a 4-4 tie Supreme Court split in the Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association case has allowed public sector unions to continue to collect “agency fees” from bargaining unit 30

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

members who decline to join a labor union. Should a similar case come back before the Court, as it likely will, a new conservative Justice could tip the balance, resulting in a decision that could seriously impact labor organization finances.

It seems likely that the incoming Trump administration will follow that same pattern. While no candidate has been announced, it can be assumed that Secretary of Labor Perez’ replacement will have a more pro-employer outlook. It seems likely that the next Labor Secretary will considering withdrawing the new FLSA salary test regulations, which were scheduled to go into effect on December 1, but which were enjoined by a federal court in late November. It is also likely that the Trump administration will seek to dismantle the most objectionable elements of the ACA, including the “Cadillac Tax” and mandatory coverage requirements. The fate of other ACA provisions that are intended to transform the health system from fee for service to a value-based model remains uncertain.

During the campaign, President-Elect Trump gave mixed signals with regard to increasing the minimum wage and socalled “family friendly” legislation, such as paid sick leave.

It would be surprising if either gained traction in the new Congress. It is clear that the new Administration will support some form of enhanced immigration law enforcement. This is unlikely to have a significant impact in New Hampshire, which is estimated to have a small illegal immigrant population. With a State unemployment rate of 2.3% and an aging population, a lack of available workers, particularly in law enforcement, corrections, emergency services, and critical skills education, will present employers with a greater challenge.

With Republicans in the majority in the State Legislature and holding the Governor’s office, it is also unlikely that there will be an increase in minimum wage or expansion of employee protective legislation at the State level. However, shifts in Administration priorities for State agencies will take longer to implement, as Commissioners and agency directors serve set terms and can only be replaced when their terms expire or if they resign. www.nhmunicipal.org

While these anticipated developments suggest less aggressive government enforcement of existing laws, it is important that employers continue to recognize the importance of remaining in compliance. Most federal and state employee protective legislation provides for both governmental enforcement and a private right of action, which allows individual employees to pursue claims through the court system. A change in administration at

either the federal or state level has no immediate impact on trial courts. As a result, there is an increased likelihood that the volume of private action court claims will increase over the next few years. We live in interesting times.

Mark Broth is a member of the DrummondWoodsum’s Labor and Employment Group and his practice focuses on the representation of private and public employers in all aspects of the employer-

Court

Update

employee relationship. This is not a legal document nor is it intended to serve as legal advice or a legal opinion. Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon, P.A. makes no representations that this is a complete or final description or procedure that would ensure legal compliance and does not intend that the reader should rely on it as such. “Copyright 2017 Drummond Woodsum. These materials may not be reproduced without prior written permission.”

By Stephen C. Buckley, Legal Services Counsel and Margaret M.L. Byrnes, Staff Attorney

Court Update, previously a regular column in New Hampshire Town and City magazine, has moved to the New Hampshire Municipal Association web site to provide more timely information to NHMA members. Opinions will be posted after they are released, and a reminder will be included here and sent in Newslink. To read previous Court Update columns, please visit www.nhmunicipal.org.

Now available online: Superior Court Says Email Production Not Required Taylor v. SAU#55, Rockingham Superior Court No. 218-2016-CV-00900, 10/24/2016 New Evidence Submitted With a Motion for Rehearing May be Disregarded; ZBA Conditions Reasonable When Tied to Future Uses Exeter Farms Homeowners Assoc. v. Town of Exeter, New Hampshire Supreme Court No. 2016-0036, 9/30/2016 Second Site Plan Must Only Address Reasons for Initial Site Plan Disapproval Kulick’s Inc. v. Town of Winchester, New Hampshire Supreme Court No. 2016-0054, 9/16/2016

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

31

Legal

Q and A

By Stephen C. Buckley, Legal Services Counsel with the New Hampshire Municipal Association

Guide to NHMA Legal Services – An FAQ

T

he New Hampshire Municipal Association’s Legal Services Department employs two (2) lawyers: Legal Services Counsel Stephen C. Buckley and Staff Attorney II Margaret M. L. Byrnes. The main job of the Legal Services Department is giving general legal assistance to NHMA’s member towns, cities, and village districts. We prepare articles, handbooks, seminars, and other educational programs and publications. We will also answer your specific legal inquiries. But there are limits. After all, we aren’t your regular lawyers, and our services are always more in demand than supply (same as municipal services are!).

The purpose of this “Guide” is to make clear what we can do for you, versus what we can’t.

Q: When can I call and speak to an NHMA lawyer and get legal advice?

A: Our goal is to have a lawyer on telephone duty at 1-800852-3358 each business day between 8:30 and 4:30. But there are unavoidable exceptions, such as when we are both presenting workshops or other speaking engagements. And often you won’t be put through immediately to a lawyer, because s/he is already on the phone, or researching earlier inquiries. We will make every effort to return calls the same or following day, but you must leave a return telephone number. We recommend that you do not call just before a deadline, such as a meeting or hearing.

Q: Will I always be able to immediately speak to someone about my legal question?

A: If we aren’t immediately available, our receptionist (a real, live, caring human being) will give you the option of leaving a voice mail message for us, briefly describing your inquiry.

Hearing your question directly helps us give a better answer when we return the call. Be sure to tell us your municipality and what position you hold there, and be sure to leave your telephone number.

32

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

Q: Can I submit my legal inquiry via email or regular mail?

A: We are also glad to answer your written inquiries in writing, whether by regular mail or by email, and we try to do so in a timely fashion. Email inquiries should be sent to legalinquiries@nhmunicipal.org. Written inquiries can be mailed to NHMA-Legal Services at 25 Triangle Park Drive, Concord, NH, 03301. We answer these in the order received, and response time depends on our volume of work.

However, with 232 communities to work for, and with publication deadlines to meet, we can’t promise any firm response time. We do our best, but if you have a quick deadline for a written response, it’s probably better to contact your municipality’s regular legal counsel.

Q: Are there any limitations on the subject matters we make ask about?

A: We play our best role as NHMA lawyers when we’re answering questions of general municipal law—issues of interest to more than just a few communities—especially questions which can be answered by reference to state statutes or court opinions. If an answer hinges on complex local facts, documents, or the peculiarities of local ordinances or charters, we may well recommend that you contact your regular legal counsel. NHMA’s legal services do not include such matters as comprehensive legal review of contracts or other documents, drafting individualized ordinances or charters, or complete review of specific applications before local boards. We can, of course, answer specific generic questions you may have about any of these matters. But we do not directly represent municipalities in court, or negotiate on your behalf with third parties.

Q: Will NHMA provide its opinion about the meaning of language in our local ordinances?

A: We are often asked: “What does word X mean, as it appears in our ordinance?” Although we can offer suggestions, we can’t give definitive interpretations of terms in an ordinance because that meaning often hinges on the context and hiswww.nhmunicipal.org

tory of the ordinance as a whole. Also, courts give some deference to local administrative interpretations. A lawyer’s interpretation gets no such deference.

Q: Can NHMA provide technical assistance with zoning and planning questions?

A: For technical assistance with developing zoning ordinances, subdivision, site plan, and other land use regulations, the first place to go is your regional planning commission or the State Office of Energy and Planning. But there’s no hard line between “technical” and “legal” assistance. A substantial number of our inquiries come from the land use field, so don’t hesitate to call.

Q: Does NHMA assist with appeals to the NH Supreme Court?

A: Although we don’t file lawsuits, we do assist members with appeals to the New Hampshire Supreme Court by submitting an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief on a municipality’s behalf. If you have a case involving an issue of municipal law which has statewide significance, and you think the Court ought to have our input, please let us know.

Q: Are there ethical limitations and rules that govern the legal advice provided

by NHMA? A: This is a question addressed constantly by us and our colleagues in other states, other New Hampshire municipal lawyers, and local officials themselves. In 1995, we asked the Ethics Committee of the New Hampshire Bar Association for a formal opinion. The rest of this Guide is grounded in that opinion, most of which reaffirmed our prior practice.

Q: When NHMA provides legal advice, who is the client?

A: First and foremost, when one of us in the Legal Services Department is answering an inquiry from a local official, our client is the municipality as www.nhmunicipal.org

a corporate entity. The client isn’t you personally, or even you in your official capacity. Nor is it NHMA itself, as an organization. This fact has some crucial ethical consequences, explained further below.

Q: Who from our municipality can utilize NHMAs’ Legal Services?

A: It would be a clearly unethical conflict of interest for us to give opinions on municipal law to private citizens (including newspaper reporters). Likewise, even if you are a public official, we can only advise you on matters on which you represent your town or city, and not on your own private concerns, or on the duties of other officials. Unless otherwise instructed by the local governing body, we will answer inquiries from all local officials, including board or committee members, who call about issues within their own official responsibilities. For instance, we would decline to answer an inquiry from a Budget Committee member who was asking about a subdivision approval granted by the Planning Board. Please don’t give our toll-free number to private citizens, since we must refuse to answer them.

It’s awkward, and ties up time otherwise available to municipal officials.

Q: Is the advice I am provided confidential?

A: Since our lawyer/client relationship is with your municipality, not the caller personally, the right to keep legal advice confidential also belongs to the town or city, and not the caller. This means that, while we don’t share that advice with the public, we will share it with other affected officials. In fact, since telephone advice is, by its very nature, subject to misunderstanding, we are always glad to explain to one member of a board or body the advice we gave another member. We will also provide copies of any written opinions to the governing body, manager, administrator, or legal counsel, if requested.

Q: I am embroiled in a dispute with other local officials, will NHMA assist me?

A: If it comes out in the course of a call that we’re being asked to resolve a “local dispute” between differing officials, we cannot ethically take sides, and we may ask that the inquiry be put in writing so that we’re responding to all sides jointly. Lastly, we can’t advise one NHMA­member community on a matter involving a dispute with another community, since that would also be a clear conflict of interest.

Q: What is municipal legal advice?

A: Please don’t think we’re being evasive if we can’t give you “a simple yesor-no answer.” Legal advice demands give-and-take on the facts. Our job is only to try to predict what a court might say in a specific case. Judges are never 100% predictable, and the law’s often unclear. But even beyond that, governmental actions have moral and political dimensions that transcend any legal fallout, and those are issues you must weigh. We’ll help evaluate legal risks. But it’s you, not we, who were chosen by your community to make the final decision.

This Guide isn’t meant to discourage you. On the contrary, we hope understanding the scope of our legal services will help you make better use of them.

When in doubt, don’t hesitate to call.

You are also welcome to come see us at our offices at 25 Triangle Park Drive in Concord. Please call in advance and make an appointment so that a lawyer will be prepared to meet with you. We are also happy to come to your city or town to speak with boards on general legal matters, if we have enough advanced notice, and can pick a good time.

Stephen C. Buckley is Legal Services Counsel with the New Hampshire Municipal Association. He may be reached at 800.852.3358 ext. 3408 or at legalinquiries@nhmunicipal.org.

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

33

Required Information for Annual Town Reports The following information is required by statute to be included in the Annual Town Report. This is not necessarily an exhaustive list, since there is no one repository of statutory requirements for the Annual Town Report:

❑ Copy of Municipal Budget; RSA 32:5, VII ❑

Final budget and ballot questions in official ballot communities; RSA 40:13, II

❑ Balance Sheet as of December 31 of the previous year (June 30 in fiscal year municipalities); RSA 41:9, IV and RSA 41:13

❑ Selectmen’s Report; RSA 41:13 and RSA 41:14 ❑ Tax

Collector’s Report (including summaries of tax warrants and tax lien accounts); RSA 41:35

❑ Treasurer’s Report; RSA 41:29, III ❑ Report of the highway agent; RSA 231:68 ❑

Summary of report of trustees of trust funds; RSA 31:33

❑ Report of municipal auditors; RSA 41:31-d ❑ Report of independent auditor’s findings and recommendations; RSA 21-J: 21 ❑ Report of Library Trustees; RSA 202-A: 12 ❑ Report of Conservation Commission; RSA 36-A: 2 ❑ Report of Public Works Commissioners; RSA 38-C: 5

`

❑ Report Utility Systems; RSA 38:21 ❑ Expenditures from contingency fund; RSA 31:98-a

34

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

Optional Information for Annual Town Reports The following information is not required by statute to be part of the Annual Town Report.

However, most communities choose to include these items in order to present a more comprehensive picture of municipal operations for the previous year:

❑ List of Municipal Officers ❑ Copy of town warrant ❑ Comparative statement of estimated and actual revenues for the previous year ❑ Comparative statement of appropriations and expenditures for the previous year (budget versus actual expenditures)

❑ Detailed statement of receipts (by revenue source) and expenses ❑ Summary of inventory valuation, taxes assessed, and tax rate computation ❑ Statement of outstanding debt ❑ Schedule of town owned property (land, buildings, major equipment) ❑ Report of independent auditor (auditor’s opinion letter, management discussion and analysis, financial statements and notes)

❑ Summary minutes of previous year’s annual town meeting, and any special meeting(s) ❑ Report of the Town Clerk ❑ Reports of town departments ❑ Vital statistics ❑ Report of school district or village district/precinct to their voters (may be a separate report or combined with the town report); RSA 32:5, VII

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

35

36

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

37

38

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

www.nhmunicipal.org

2017 State Legislative Preview: Now W hat?

Wednesday, January 11 12:00 pm—1:00 pm

Upcoming

Webinars NHMA will be hosting two webinars in January and February for members of the New Hampshire Municipal Association.





2017 State Legislative Preview: Now What?

Right-to-Know Law: Open to the Public—A Primer on Public Meetings

As the New Hampshire General Court begins to wrestle with hundreds of bills, legislators need to hear from both appointed and elected government officials regarding the concerns of municipalities. To help you connect better with legislators, this webinar will: 

Include a preview of legislation filed;



Outline the messages legislators need to hear from you;



Recommend grassroots action to get the municipal voice heard.

Join Government Affairs Counsel Cordell Johnston and Government Finance Advisor Barbara Reid for a look at the latest legislative developments in Concord.

Right-to-Know Law: Open to the Public—A Primer on Public Meetings Wednesday, February 8 12:00 pm—1:00 pm As a basic rule, under RSA Chapter 91-A, New Hampshire’s Right-to-Know law, all meetings of public bodies must have proper notice and be open to the public.

Spend an hour with Stephen C. Buckley, Legal Services Council and Margaret Byrnes, Staff Attorney II, who will discuss issues related to public meetings under the Rightto-Know law. Learn what is a meeting and what is not a meeting and acquire helpful tips regarding proper notices, telephone participation, minutes and non-public sessions.

This webinar is of interest to planning boards, zoning boards, select bard members, budget committee members, town administrators and managers, and legal counsel.

For details and registration information, visit www.nhmunicipal.org under Calendar of Events .

Questions? Call 800.852.3358, ext. 3350, or email NHMAregistrations@nhmunicipal.org.

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

39

2017 Town & School Moderators Workshops Beginner & Advance Training Available SB 2 Meeting

Traditional Meeting

Saturday, January 7

Saturday, February 11

Snow date: Saturday, January 14

Snow date: Saturday, February 25

9 a.m.—2:00 p.m. 25 Triangle Park Drive, Concord, NH Cost: $60 Registration and continental breakfast begin at 8:30 a.m. Lunch will be provided.

Attendees will receive a copy of NHMA’s 2016-2017 edition of Town Meeting and School Meeting Handbook with Supplement.

Topics include: The Basic Law of Town, Village District and School District Meeting Statutes governing the moderator’s duties at town, village district and school district meetings will be discussed along with issues related to warrant articles, the operating budget, secret ballot voting and other town meeting issues. These topics will be addressed in two concurrent sessions tailored for new and experienced moderators. Ample time will be devoted to questions and answers.

Strategies for Running a Smooth Meeting Moderators are faced with a challenging task: keeping meetings focused and fair to all participants, while effectively facilitating the flow of debate. This session will highlight suggested strategies for running respectful and efficient meetings.

Sample Scenarios A series of sample scenarios will help attendees prepare for a wide range of meeting challenges.

Customized Training for Beginner & Advanced Officials This year the workshop will be divided into beginner and advanced sections catering to the needs of newly-elected officials as well as seasoned veterans.

40

NEW HAMPSHIRE TOWN AND CITY

Register online at www.nhmunicipal.org under CALENDAR OF EVENTS. Online pre-registration required one week prior to each date. Space is limited.

Questions? Call 800.852.3358, ext. 3350 or email NHMAregistrations@nhmunicipal.org

www.nhmunicipal.org

www.nhmunicipal.org

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

41

25 Triangle Park Drive Concord, NH 03301

Periodical Postage Paid at Concord, NH

$2.5 Million Saved in 2016!

T

hank you HealthTrust Members for helping us win the 2016 Best Practice Award from the New England Employee Benefits Council (NEEBC) by doubling our savings goal with SmartShopper in 2016. By using SmartShopper to find cost-effective medical services, HealthTrust enrollees earn rewards and help reduce claims costs.

Here’s to even more savings in 2017!

Scan this QR code with your mobile device to learn more about SmartShopper.

800.527.5001 www.healthtrustnh.org HealthTrust Members + SmartShopper = Lower Costs for Everyone