09 March 2009

Hey KingCast what do your old high school friends have to say to you?

Great to hear from you! I checked out your website--you are the man! Loved your documentary shorts. It amazes me, that so much bs still goes on--I see it--I hear about it--and there you are fighting for change. Right On!

Matt is hanging in there. He still lives in North Collinwood near my photo studio. I'll tell him you said hello.

Keep doing what you do. If I ever run into you--first beer's on me. Take care.

********

Goes like that. It's KingCastic, and just wait until this summer. Also just conducted an interview in which I got to discuss the windshield bullet. More on this soon.

My friends start things that leave indelible imprints on the American landscape, like the Grog Shop. The MySpace, with 8,600 friends, showing the bar the way it looked back in the Day, when you could walk up to the Goo Goo Dolls on stage and hand them a beer, back when they were still really cool and stuff.

Related post: What Franconia Recovery and Reconciliation Committee member Gary Harwood said.
Unrelated post: The Rookie, comment #2.

1 comment:

Christopher King said...

Matt, Mike and Steve, Kathy, Sean:

I will keep on doin' what I do, in between time on the jobby-job!

Wait for the audio transcript from this State Senator Robert Letourneau being a schmuck to me a couple of weeks ago. I totally faced that dude. I'll have it posted within a few days, they just offered it to me after initially telling me no-can-do, shoo-fly-shoo.

Read Casey Sherman's book "Bad Blood: Freedom and Death in the White Mountains" this summer, which will be matched with Supreme Court filings and a Petition to Washington, DC for a real investigation in the Franconia shooting tragedy.

Sometimes you've just gotta' sue 'em:

Telegraph editorial 4 Feb. 2007:

"Has the United States reached such a point of political correctness and potential lawsuit aversion that we are willing to give up essential liberties for the sake of avoiding uncomfortable debate?

Apparently so in Nashua, a least until the threat of a real lawsuit looms.

Nashua Board of Education members unanimously voted last Monday to eliminate a year-old restriction on public comments at their meetings. The limits, both vague and potentially unconstitutional, prohibited citizens from discussing “administrative and personnel-related problems.”

In any public or private enterprise “administrative and personnel-related” issues cover a great deal of territory. Interpreted broadly, the policy could have been used to shut out public comment on almost any issue brought before the school board.

The rule went largely unnoticed until October 2006 when Paula Johnson, a former alderman, was told she could not speak about Superintendent Julia Earl, who was, and still is, on paid leave.

Two more months passed before Nashua resident Chris King again attempted to speak about Earl during a December meeting. When he was told to stop, King’s response was a pledge to get the policy revoked.

The school board began an internal review of the rule, but received vastly differing opinions from city and outside attorneys, and appeared themselves to be split on the issue.

To justify the policy, several board members cited the potential for defamatory speech by members of the public targeted at school employees.

While anything is possible, it is a thin excuse and a legal leap of faith to assume the school board could be held liable for such behavior. Nonetheless, several of the board’s lawyers backed up this contention.

So King, who has practiced as a lawyer in Ohio, threatened his own lawsuit against the board and came within hours of filing the paperwork. The suit was avoided when the board called a policy committee meeting, leading to the vote last week to change the rule.

The about-face on the part of the school board is to be praised as a common sense decision. However, more praise would be due if the change had not been due largely to outside pressure and the threat of a lawsuit.

The school board, and its attorneys, would be well served to remember who the public in “public comment” is: their employers, the taxpayers.

The school board has done the right thing, but the impression we are left with is that many members did it grudgingly. The board needs to change its thinking and reframe its approach when dealing with the public.

Yes, there should be rules enforced to maintain a civil and productive public debate during governmental meetings.

However, there is no excuse for imposing rules out of fear at the expense of an open and public discussion of the issues."


********

BACKGROUND: The Nashua Board of Education, under threat of a lawsuit, has reversed its previous policy of not allowing members of the public to comment on school personnel during the public comment section of its meetings.

CONCLUSION: The school board has done the right thing and this should be a first step in reframing how the board deals with the public.

1:24 PM