Carroll County commissioners ask state integrity unit to review delegation chair and vote to unseal minutes

Carroll County commissioners on March 24 voted to ask the New Hampshire Attorney General's public integrity unit to review the conduct of the delegation chair and to unseal a set of previously sealed county minutes after hearing that Commissioner McCarthy had resigned.

The action followed public comment and internal discussion that commissioners said referenced the delegation chair in a county internal-investigation narrative. Commissioners approved a motion asking the attorney general's public integrity unit to review whether the delegation chair, identified in the meeting transcript as Lino Aveline, answered questions truthfully about how the investigation began. Commissioners also voted to unseal sealed minutes going back to the dates listed in the motion, with the caveat that employee personal information be redacted and reviewed by counsel before public release.

Why it matters: commissioners said the review is intended to ensure an impartial process and to avoid unnecessary county expenditures on internal work. Several public commenters urged transparency; one resident, Kevin, described the investigation as "a waste of tax dollars" and questioned whether expected costs were justified. Commissioners said they wanted to limit taxpayer exposure while making meeting records available.

The board approved three related motions during public comment and regular agenda time: (1) to request the Attorney General's public integrity unit examine the delegation chair's conduct; (2) to unseal sealed county minutes subject to legal redaction of employee-sensitive information; and (3) to send a letter to the delegation criticizing reported conduct toward county staff and to add the county executive coordinator's name to that letter and cc local media. Each motion passed on voice vote after a second.

Commissioners and staff said the motions grew from a packet of internal-investigation notes and from media and public concern about how the delegation and its chair had handled inquiries. In discussion, a speaker who identified himself as a member of the public told commissioners he believed the delegation chair should not participate in any investigation in which he might be called as a witness.

The motions did not name a specific civil remedy or change in delegation membership; commissioners indicated the delegation, not the county commission, controls delegation appointments. Commissioners instructed staff to coordinate with the county attorney's office on redaction and release procedures and to forward correspondence to the delegation and relevant state offices.

Ending: Commissioners said they intend to follow up on the letters and the redaction process; they also noted that sealed-minute review and release will proceed through counsel to avoid disclosing protected employee information.