Delegation's legal invoices released: No smoking gun

LACONIA — If citizens supporting the Gunstock Area Commission in its struggle with the Belknap County Convention were hoping to find a smoking gun in the unredacted invoices for legal services racked up by the county’s executive committee, the newly released documents failed to provide one.

They do show that the legal bills had exceeded their appropriation by February 28. By the March 31 invoice, the county convention had amassed a total of $40,827.50 in legal fees in its defense against a lawsuit brought by the Gunstock commission. The delegation had allotted $20,000 for the job.

The full delegation learned of the cost overrun on March 30, when the bill stood at $36,186. County Commission Chair Peter Spanos told the representatives, “We do not have authorization to pay this bill in full,” but he said he reluctantly agreed that it should be paid.

“This whole lawsuit started because of an outrageous vendetta directed by certain members of the delegation against the Gunstock commission,” County Commissioner Hunter Taylor said in recommending against payment. “This litigation didn’t just involve a defense. It involved curtailing a majority of the Gunstock Commission.”

The delegation agreed to pay the bill, but complained that the invoice showed redacted explanations for some of the legal work. At its April 12 meeting, the delegation received an unredacted version of the invoices which members agreed to release to the public.

County Administrator Debra Shackett received a copy of the unredacted invoice over the weekend, and Rep. Norm Silber released it publicly on Monday morning.

Silber, along with Delegation Chair Michael Sylvia, had worked with attorneys at Cleveland, Waters & Bass to lead their defense, and the invoices show that some of the most expensive items involved evaluating and drafting responses to emails from Silber and Sylvia.

As an example, on November 15, 2021, the company billed the convention $930 to evaluate the petition and motion for preliminary injunction, hold two telephone conferences with Silber, draft a notice of cancellation, evaluate the court’s order on a request for a temporary restraining order, delineate the grounds for a motion to dismiss, evaluate emails from Silber and R. Quarles (Gunstock’s lawyer), and draft emails to Silber and Quarles.

On December 22, 2021, there was a charge of $1,085 for a conference call between the attorneys and Silber and Sylvia, along with reviewing affidavits from them and emailing the drafts back to them. The charges that day also included evaluating emails from Quarles, Silber, Sylvia, and Attorney Gould regarding a settlement; reviewing the hearing argument; and concluding the drafting of a reply to the Gunstock commission’s objection to a motion to dismiss.

Those all fit into Silber’s explanation that it is costly to defend against a lawsuit: “The normal strategy for plaintiffs is to make it as painful and expensive as possible for defendants to defend themselves,” he told the delegation on April 12.

He added at the time, “Whether or not we should have come back when we saw the bills going over, I don’t know the answer to that.”

One item that might raise concerns is the January 5 invoice entry for “voicemails from T. Quarles and N. Silber; evaluate emails from T. Quarles (2), M. Sylvia, and P. Ness; draft emails to T. Quarles (2, lengthy) and N. Silber (2).

Peter Ness is the Gunstock commissioner whose removal attempt set in motion the current controversy. It was the Gunstock Area Commission’s request that the Belknap delegation remove Ness that prompted the delegation to instead consider removing commissioners Brian Gallagher, Gary Kiedaisch, and Rusty McLear. The GAC responded by filing the lawsuit to prevent their removal.

The Gunstock commissioners had alleged that Ness had a conflict of interest, using his role as a commissioner to bully Gunstock employees, and to pressure the mountain into purchasing software he had an ownership in. Ness denied the charges, and the delegation chose to allow him to remain on the commission.

Why Ness would have emailed the attorneys defending against the GAC lawsuit, rather than leaving it to Quarles to do so, is unknown, but Silber said before releasing the document, “it would not be productive for me or anyone else involved to engage in any type of back and forth regarding questions about the bills.”

The over-expenditures did result in a tabled motion to remove Sylvia and Silber from leadership positions. Rep. Travis O’Hara introduced the motion on April 12, alleging financial malfeasance. “We have built up $40,000 [in costs] without the approval of the delegation,” O’Hara said.

Although both Sylvia and Silber were willing to respond to the charges, Rep. Paul Terry moved to table the motion, calling the allegations “very serious charges” and saying, “I don’t believe that the parties involved had an opportunity to know that the motion was being made prior to this meeting, and they’ve had no opportunity to prepare any kind of response.”