Eric Taussig: Intransigent moderator & town administrator put lives at risk

To The Daily Sun,

Many residents asked why I filed suit on behalf of a group of Moultonborough voters to cancel the Sandwich Fairgrounds Town Meeting on an 89+ degree day, when car air conditioners could only legally be used five minutes every hour and the meeting would last 5.75 hours? The answer, because of heat, humidity, danger of COVID-19, and the fact that older voters, and there are many in Moultonborough, could suffer from heat stroke, exhaustion or worse.

What many may not know is that before we filed suit, the Selectboard voted twice 4 to 1 asking the moderator to cancel for the same reasons the suit was filed. We asked the court to postpone the meeting until after the Legislature enacted an alternate safe meeting format that did not require 500+ individuals to congregate during a pandemic, at a venue where conditions and facilities were problematic. The Selectboard asked for the same accommodation from the moderator, who was tone deaf and refused to cancel.

The moderator, with the concurrence of the town administrator, declined, instead deliberately setting a date for the meeting one day before the Legislature and governor approved alternate safer Town Meeting options. The judge in her decision, while granting the temporary restraining order canceling the Sandwich meeting, suggested that the moderator postpone to a date until after alternate options were available. He refused.

Unfortunately the moderator’s refusal resulted in a chaotic meeting of some 490 voters, plus town staff, non-voters, and children of all ages congregating at the closed Moultonborough Academy for a contentious five hour and 45 minute meeting. Many, including myself, were very concerned about COVID-19, since at least three town employees had the virus recently, even though the town did not disclose this to the public. The meeting took place with attempts to social distance, which were less than successful, as many individuals did not remain six feet apart, refused to wear the masks required in the school building (including the moderator and some police officers), or failed to wear their masks over their noses, making the masks ineffective.

Voters should know that the lawsuit had nothing to do with the proposed community centers (Articles 5 and 6). I was not opposed to either article; my only personal objection, voiced at the meeting during discussion on Article 6, was that access to the proposed center not be from Route 25, but via Blake Road.

The Town Meeting was held as a result of the intransigence of the moderator. Many seniors did not attend, giving up their franchise, duty and responsibility to participate in town business due to fears of COVID-19 and the news of continuing record infections throughout the country.

Finally, we may not know for weeks whether the actions of the moderator and town administrator in insisting on the meeting may have been a mistake, due to potential COVID-19 spread.

For the interested public, all case pleadings can be viewed under Carroll County Superior Court, Case No. 212-2020-CV-00101.

Eric Taussig

Moultonborough