Concerns about transparency swirl around Nashua performing arts center
Thursday's decision arises from one of more than a dozen lawsuits resident Laurie A. Ortolano has filed against Nashua in the past five years under the RTK law. It clarifies that a 2008 change to the law didn't narrow the scope of entities bound by it. Legislators added language specifying that government-owned nonprofit corporations are public bodies subject to the RTK law, but that doesn't mean all for-profit corporations are exempt, the court ruled.
Get N.H. Morning Report
A weekday newsletter delivering the N.H. news you need to know right to your inbox.
Enter Email
Sign Up
To determine whether an entity constitutes a public body under the RTK law, judges still must conduct a 'government function' test, just as they were required to do before the 2008 change to the law. The lower court failed to do that in this case.
Advertisement
In response to Thursday's decision, Ortolano said it seems fairly clear that NPAC Corp. is using public money to perform a government function, especially considering how involved city officials have been in the entity's financing and administration.
Advertisement
Ortolano said officials had long reassured the public that the performing arts center would be operated transparently, but then they established the for-profit entity.
'All of the records went dark, and you could not really track accountability of the money any longer,' she said.
Ortolano's lawsuit alleges the city owns a nonprofit entity that owns the for-profit corporation, but city attorney Steven A. Bolton disputed that. Nashua doesn't own any of the entities in question, he said. (That said, the city's Board of Alderman approves mayoral appointees to lead the nonprofits.)
Bolton said he was pleased that the Supreme Court agreed with the trial court's decision to dismiss the city as a defendant in this case, and he expressed confidence that the money raised for this project was spent appropriately on construction, furnishings, and perhaps initial operating costs.
Attorneys for the remaining defendant, NPAC Corp., didn't respond Thursday to requests for comment. The corporation maintains it is a private entity exempt from the RTK law, even though its members are listed on
Gregory V. Sullivan, an attorney who practices in New Hampshire and Massachusetts and who serves as president of the New England First Amendment Coalition, said he suspects the superior court will conclude that NPAC Corp. is subject to the RTK law. He commended Ortolano as 'a right-to-know warrior' and criticized leaders who resist transparency.
'The city of Nashua has historically, in my opinion, not been cooperative with requests to disclose the public's records as opposed to other cities and towns in New Hampshire,' he said. 'We the people are the government, own the government, and they're our records.'
Advertisement
This article first appeared in Globe NH | Morning Report, our free newsletter focused on the news you need to know about New Hampshire, including great coverage from the Boston Globe and links to interesting articles from other places. If you'd like to receive it via e-mail Monday through Friday,
Steven Porter can be reached at
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
NH delegation slams 'reckless cuts' to AmeriCorps
Three-quarters of the state's congressional delegation attacked what they called the Trump administration's "reckless cuts" to the AmeriCorps program during a Manchester event Monday. Leaders of City Year estimated the impact to New Hampshire from lost grants was about $5 million. 'For decades, AmeriCorps members have put ideology aside to work for our communities and fill critical service gaps,' said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H. 'I heard from volunteers in the Granite State today, and Trump's shameful cuts to this bipartisan program would be devastating for the Granite Staters they serve.' Along with City Year, the event attracted leaders of conservation groups that have benefited from the program. "AmeriCorps members do critical work for our communities, but the Trump administration's funding cuts and firing of AmeriCorps staff are threatening this work,' said Sen. Maggie Hassan, also D-N.H. The Trump White House has said critical audits of AmeriCorps in recent years revealed millions of dollars in improper payments. Officials called AmeriCorps a 'target-rich environment for President Trump's agenda to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse." Rep. Maggie Goodlander, D-N.H., said she'll keep fighting to restore the program. 'The returns on investment are real: Every $1 that Congress invests in AmeriCorps generates more than $30 in returns to communities across New Hampshire,' Goodlander said. 'AmeriCorps changes lives for the better and its spirit of volunteerism is core to who we are as a state and as a nation." The Trump administration ended nearly $400 million in grants in AmeriCorps' roughly $1 billion budget and also fired most of its staff in April. About 32,000 lower-level workers were let go and an estimated 1,000 programs were eliminated. A Trump administration notice said the grants erased didn't fit AmeriCorps priorities. Two lawsuits have been filed over the changes, one by leaders in two dozen blue states and another by community organizations. Both alleged President Trump lacked the authority to gut the agency that was created and financed by Congress for decades. Monday's event was at the Manchester School District Welcome Center.
Boston Globe
20 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Trump and N.H. lawmakers want to ban gender-affirming health care for kids. These families say they may have to move.
Transgender issues have become a dominating topic in recent years in national and local politics, with Advertisement At least two New Hampshire families with transgender children told the Globe they have already moved to states they believe will preserve access to transgender health care, while a handful of others said they are preparing to uproot their lives. Get N.H. Morning Report A weekday newsletter delivering the N.H. news you need to know right to your inbox. Enter Email Sign Up Moving to another state, however, might not be a permanent solution. Tucked into the budget bill passed in May by GOP lawmakers in the US House were Remesch said her family would consider leaving the US if such proposals prevail. 'Do we go to Europe or Canada or Mexico? Honestly, those are all on the list,' she said. Other families have already left New Hampshire behind. Last year, out of concern for their transgender daughter, Abi and Jacob Maxwell Advertisement 'We knew what was coming,' Abi Maxwell said. 'It was taking years off our lives and we knew we had to get out.' Maxwell said she thought California would be the most protected place in the United States, but didn't rule out moving again if necessary for her daughter's safety. Since then, Republicans have increased their majority in New Hampshire's House and Senate and have worked to advance more restrictive bills concerning people who are transgender. If it passes, New Hampshire would be the first state in New England to enact such a ban, joining 25 other states that have banned such care for youth, according to the that provides research to promote equality. New Hampshire is also the only state in New England without laws to protect access to gender-affirming care and the doctors who provide this care, according to the project. Advertisement Senate lawmakers amended the bill in May, allowing children who are already receiving gender-affirming care to continue their treatments after the bill, if it is signed into law, goes into effect in early 2026. Rosie Emrich showed her support for the LGBTQ+ community with a sign at her house in Hooksett, N.H., on April 17. Brett Phelps for The Boston Globe Remesch said the proposal feels like a betrayal by the state where she grew up and where she returned to live near her family in 2019. She said her child has not yet gone through puberty, but they want the option of starting puberty blockers when the time comes. Even if they don't choose to undergo treatment, a scenario Remesch said she would welcome, she said they would still leave the state if the bill becomes law. 'Being non-binary, you still need to be recognized and respected,' she said, explaining that doctors must care for both the patient's body and mind. 'If we can't do that in New Hampshire, if their doctors can't care for them appropriately as someone who is non-binary. … We'd still leave.' Rosie Emrich and her family are also worried about the ban and have considered moving out of state to ensure their 8-year-old transgender child can continue accessing puberty blockers. She said the family has started preparing to sell their house in Hooksett and may move to Massachusetts. One of Rosie Emrich's children played at their home. Their family is considering moving from New Hampshire to Massachusetts because of a series of bills that have been presented in the state's Legislature. Brett Phelps for The Boston Globe 'I really don't want to leave New Hampshire. I just want New Hampshire to be a better place,' she said. Critics of the New Hampshire bill have pointed out that it specifically targets gender-affirming medical interventions when used by transgender individuals, but permits them in other cases, such as for people with Proponents of the ban said it is a matter of protecting children from treatments that they believe carry significant consequences. Advertisement A child played at home in Hooksett, N.H. The child's mother, Rosie Emrich, said her family is considering moving from New Hampshire. The bill Emrich is most worried about is House Bill 377, which aims to prohibit gender-affirming care for minors. Brett Phelps for The Boston Globe 'Children as young as 8 or 9 are being prescribed puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones and cannot fully comprehend the lifelong implications of altering their bodies with powerful medications,' Mazur, the prime sponsor of HB 377, did not respond to requests for an interview. The bill has drawn concern from some in the state's medical community. Cathy Stratton, CEO of the New Hampshire Medical Society, said gender-affirming hormone treatment has undergone tremendous scrutiny, clinical research, and peer review to become an approved medical treatment. She said medical care should be between a physician, a clinician, and their patient, and that this ban would undermine the physician's skill and expertise and compromise the care of some patients. 'When you legislate it, you really can't account for the complexity of what physicians are facing in the exam room and what patients are feeling,' she said. New Hampshire lawmakers have already curtailed access to gender-affirming genital surgeries, passing a A box of signs that Rosie Emrich and her children made for Transgender Awareness Week sit in the corner of their home in Hooksett, N.H. Brett Phelps for The Boston Globe New Hampshire's Governor Kelly A. Ayotte, a Republican, told reporters in May she needs to review the bill before deciding whether to support it. Some who have chosen gender-affirming care for themselves have called it life-saving. State Representative Alice Wade, 23, a Dover Democrat, said she started hormone replacement therapy at 17, after compiling research for years and persuading her father to agree. Advertisement When puberty exacerbated the feeling she didn't belong in her body, she said, she began thinking of suicide. She said hormone therapy was a way to feel whole again. 'It did save my life as a minor,' she said. Wade said HB 377 is wrong-minded. 'It sends a message to kids – not only to trans kids, that they aren't valid and that they should be shamed out of existence – but to cisgender kids that it's OK to shame trans kids and to label them as freaks,' she said. When it came to choosing gender-affirming care, the families interviewed described a slow, deliberate process in consultation with therapists and health providers before their children began medical treatment. 'It's not just that I looked up what side effects are behind the treatment, but I also looked at the benefit of the treatment and knew that it was what my daughter needed to actually live,' said Michelle Cilley Foisy. At 16, her daughter told her she was uncomfortable presenting the way people had come to know her. Cilley Foisy said her daughter's mental health deteriorated, and she attempted suicide. Afterwards, her daughter asked to start hormone replacement therapy, and Cilley Foisy spent a few months gathering letters of support from therapists and a doctor. Her daughter began treatment just before her 17th birthday, and her mother said she saw immediate improvements: For the first time in years, her daughter was able to look at herself in the mirror and smile, she said, because her appearance reflected who she was inside. Advertisement After living in New Hampshire for nearly 45 years, Cilley Foisy and her family moved in February. She watched online from her new home in Waterbury, Vt., as the New Hampshire House voted to approve HB 377 in March. 'I was devastated by the vote,' she said. She said she does not regret leaving. 'Definitely feel like our move was the right decision, 100 percent. It affirms that we left at the right time for the safety of my kid, but it's still heartbreaking.' Amanda Gokee can be reached at
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
‘A historic betrayal': Murkowski slams Trump administration revoking protections for Afghan immigrants
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) denounced the Trump administration's decision to axe temporary protected status for Afghan immigrants — the latest break by the centrist Republican from President Donald Trump's administration. In a joint letter with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the senator urged the administration to reconsider the cancellation of the temporary protection, which affords Afghans a work permit and legal status in the U.S. 'This decision endangers thousands of lives, including Afghans who stood by the United States,' Murkowski and Shaheen — the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee — wrote. 'This decision represents a historic betrayal of promises made and undermines the values we fought for far more than 20 years in Afghanistan.' The letter — which was sent May 23 and released Friday — comes amid reports that the State Department is shuttering the office that coordinated Afghan resettlement for those who helped with the war effort, part of an agency-wide reorganization aligning with the Trump administration's moves to reduce foreign aid and assistance and refocus on 'America First' priorities. Murkowski has not been shy about criticizing her own party, while encouraging her fellow GOP senators to do the same. The Republican has rebuked President Donald Trump for his close relationship to Russian President Vladimir Putin, accusing the U.S. of 'walking away from our allies.' But she also acknowledged a reticence within Republican circles of defying Trump — saying 'we are all afraid' of Trump's retaliation. She's also not the only Republican to raise red flags about the cancellation of TPS protections for some immigrants, with Miami's members of Congress also urging the Trump administration to continue the protections for Venezuelans and Haitians. The Alaska Republican first criticized the decision on TPS shortly after it was announced by the Department of Homeland Security, calling it 'concerning' in light of promises from Noem to address a backlog of asylum applications — which could dramatically increase as former TPS holders look for avenues to stay in the U.S. But eliminating TPS has been one of Trump's key campaign promises from the start, after calling the program corrupt and saying the legal status had been extended for too long. The battle over TPS has made its way to the courts. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court cleared the way for the Trump administration to revoke TPS protections for roughly 350,000 Venezuelans. Murkowski has previously called out the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan, which happened under the Biden administration, saying the 'botched' operation endangered many who then came to the U.S. — and that ending protections would only exacerbate the problem. 'This administration should not compound that misstep by forcing them to return to the Taliban's brutal regime,' Murkowski wrote on X earlier this month.
