Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Warner select board adopts, then moves to rescind, access restriction for Selectman Michael Smith after public outcry
Summary
The select board narrowly approved a motion to restrict Selectman Michael Smith’s access to town buildings, drawing extended public comment and legal discussion; the board later moved to rescind that motion and agreed to reconsider the issue at its April 14 meeting.
Get email alerts on the Local Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Warner select board on March 31 briefly approved a motion restricting select board member Michael Smith’s access to town buildings, then—after extended public comment and legal guidance—moved to rescind the restriction and agreed to reconsider the matter at its April 14 meeting.
Chair read the motion under RSA 41:11‑a specifying that Michael Smith “shall not be permitted to enter, access or use any town buildings except for attendance at select board meetings” and allowing five‑minute access immediately before and after such meetings. The chair made the motion and a second was recorded. In the roll call recorded in the meeting, the named votes were Ricky — yes; Michael — no; Hanson — yes; the motion was recorded as passing on that vote count as read into the record.
The motion prompted hours of public comment and legal examination. Several residents and town members said the restriction was overbroad and risked preventing an elected official from performing duties that require access to town documents and staff. James Gatling, who identified himself in the meeting, told the board the restriction “is not lawful” and warned the town could be exposed to litigation and additional legal bills if the board limited an elected official’s duties without clear legal footing.
Town attorney Michael Courtney addressed the board’s authority and said RSA 41:11‑a gives the select board authority over town buildings while noting the board could craft narrow carve‑outs. "The motion was specific to selectmen meeting access," Courtney said, and suggested amending or rescinding the motion to allow Smith to attend boards and committees on which he currently serves and to preserve necessary document access. Courtney recommended the board either amend the motion to clarify exceptions or rescind and reconsider the matter with clearer language.
Multiple public speakers urged that the board wait for the outcome of a pending hearing involving Michael Smith before taking long‑term action. One resident said Smith had been arrested and accused of tampering with documents; that claim was made by a speaker during public comment and not resolved in the meeting. The town attorney and other residents urged the board to treat the restriction as a temporary, narrowly drawn step if it felt necessary and to return the matter to the agenda for fuller review.
Following public comment, a motion to rescind the earlier restriction was made and seconded; the board recorded a roll‑call rescind vote and agreed to place the topic on the April 14 agenda for reconsideration so members could draft specific carve‑outs for committee attendance and procedures for document and file access.
What happens next: The select board will reconsider the restriction on April 14. The town attorney recommended the board define the scope of any restriction, including exceptions for committee service and access to public records, before adopting permanent language.
