June 29, 2008
New Hampshire Sunday News

Two citizens whose New Hampshire Supreme Court argument resulted in Belknap County Sheriff Craig Wiggin being taken off the job during Laconia Motorcycle Week say the Belknap County Convention ignored the high-court ruling by returning Wiggin to work last week.

Tom Tardif of Laconia and Douglas Lambert of Gilford, both Republican activists, plan to ask the Superior Court tomorrow to stay Wiggin’s appointment and ultimately to vacate the position — again — at least until the County Convention repeats the entire application process and publicly votes on the appointee.

The Supreme Court earlier vacated the position because lawmakers had appointed Wiggin by secret ballot during a public session, in violation of the state’s right-to-know law.

The controversy comes as Gov. John Lynch is poised to sign a contentiously debated, updated version of the law after four years of debate.

“The convention is dealing with arrogance, not the law,” said Tardif, a retired telephone company employee known for filing right-to-know lawsuits.

“(The convention) snubbed the Supreme Court.”

Friends around town are asking when — not if — he’ll take the matter back to court, said Tardif, who also is running for Belknap County Commissioner.

Rep. Stephen R. Nedeau, R-Meredith, is chairman of the county convention. While he concedes that the convention, which comprises all House members in the county, violated the right-to-know law last year in appointing Wiggin, Nedeau disagrees with Lambert and Tardif regarding Wednesday’s vote to re-appoint Wiggin.

“It bothers me to the extent that it is a partisan issue, and the four Democrats on our delegation voted to abstain from voting,” Nedeau said. “The 11 Republicans voted to put him back in office.”

On June 13, the Supreme Court found in favor of Tardif and Lambert, who had argued the case without an attorney.

Tardif gave the oral argument before the court, which vacated Wiggin’s appointment after a year on the job.
‘An innocent victim’

A respected law enforcement veteran who retired from New Hampshire State Police as third in command, Wiggin was one of seven applicants seeking to fill the unexpired term left when former Sheriff Daniel Collis resigned the elected position before his term ended to work in the private sector.

“Wiggin is an innocent victim in this,” Tardif said.

Wiggin is the only candidate who has filed to run for sheriff in November.

Tardif and Lambert, a local manufacturer and conservative blogger, said even though they won the lawsuit, the case exposed deep problems with the right-to-know law.

The law lacks penalties that would make public officials think twice before conducting the people’s business in secret, Tardif said, and plaintiffs are seldom reimbursed for legal fees and costs.

(Tardif and Lambert were, however, granted out-of-pocket expenses, estimated at $1,000 for filing fees and copy costs).

And although courts can order violators to comply with the right-to-know law, Tardif said, he rarely sees judges do so.

Changes in the new law, which becomes effective Tuesday, mostly deal with making it clear that electronic messages, such as telephone voice-mails and e-mails, are covered under the law, with no changes relative to penalties for violators.
Didn’t read ruling

Tardif was particularly critical of Rep. John H. Thomas, R-Belmont, a member of the Belknap County Convention who also chairs the right-to-know oversight commission in the Legislature.

“(Thomas) doesn’t get it. He couldn’t have possibly read the Supreme Court’s order,” Tardif said.

Rep. Thomas said he hadn’t, in fact, read the Supreme Court’s order vacating the sheriff’s appointment when he voted with the majority to re-appoint Wiggin Wednesday.

Thomas, who said he disagreed with the Supreme Court’s ruling, said the convention relied on a legal opinion from Belknap County Attorney James Carroll saying the convention could proceed with the vote Wednesday night if it debated and voted in public.

“I do not think the right to know of the general public should override someone’s personal (privacy) protection,” Thomas said.
Whither Wiggin?

Sheriff Wiggin, meanwhile, said he is pleased to be back on the job.

“I just happen to be the person in the middle. It was not a pleasant experience, not one I care to repeat,” Wiggin said.

But Rep. Gail Morrison, D-Sanbornton, a member of the House Judiciary Committee and the county convention, wants the whole application process redone.

“It seemed to me that the only choice that would clearly keep us out of court and remedy the situation would be to, as expediently as possible, redo the process,” she said.

“We might get different candidates. We might get different results. My expectation, where everyone approves so highly of Craig Wiggin, is we would have likely ended up with one candidate — Craig Wiggin.”

As is, Morrison said, the way the vote was handled will likely mean further litigation
More changes proposed

Douglas Lambert, a member of the Gilford Budget Committee and Energy Committee, said he would like to see the right-to-know law changed.

“It would be really nice if there was another vehicle citizens could use short of going to court,” he said. “I am also very concerned that the process took a year to get through.”

Rep. Thomas said there is interest in working on changing penalties for violators of the right-to-know law.

“(The commission) may also be looking at some kind of oversight continuing on the right-to-know law to handle problems that may arise, like any other oversight committee,” Thomas said.

He doesn’t believe in harsh penalties for small towns with limited resources.

“As far as penalties go, let’s be realistic,” he said. “Most towns are small towns. If you say violations constitute too stiff a penalty, who will run for office? These people are volunteers.”
###

You can read more about this on the Granite Grok website:
Oops they did it again!