RSA 42 Oaths of Town Officers
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
42:1-a Manner of Dismissal; Breach of Confidentiality.
I. The manner of dismissing a town officer who violates the oath as set forth in RSA 42:1 shall be by petition to the superior court for the county in which the town is located. II. Without limiting other causes for such a dismissal, it shall be considered a violation of a town officer's oath for the officer to divulge to the public any information which that officer learned by virtue of his official position, or in the course of his official duties, if: (a) A public body properly voted to withhold that information from the public by a vote of 2/3, as required by RSA 91-A:3, III, and if divulgence of such information would constitute an invasion of privacy, or would adversely affect the reputation of some person other than a member of the public body or would render proposed municipal action ineffective; or (b) The officer knew or reasonably should have known that the information was exempt from disclosure pursuant to RSA 91-A:5, and that its divulgence would constitute an invasion of privacy, or would adversely affect the reputation of some person other than a member of the public body or agency, or would render proposed municipal action ineffective. III. No town officer who is required by an order of a court to divulge information outlined in paragraph II in a legal proceeding under oath shall be guilty of a violation under this section. Source. 1994, 249:1. 2008, 303:7, eff. July 1, 2008.
42:1-a Manner of Dismissal; Breach of Confidentiality.
I. The manner of dismissing a town officer who violates the oath as set forth in RSA 42:1 shall be by petition to the superior court for the county in which the town is located. II. Without limiting other causes for such a dismissal, it shall be considered a violation of a town officer's oath for the officer to divulge to the public any information which that officer learned by virtue of his official position, or in the course of his official duties, if: (a) A public body properly voted to withhold that information from the public by a vote of 2/3, as required by RSA 91-A:3, III, and if divulgence of such information would constitute an invasion of privacy, or would adversely affect the reputation of some person other than a member of the public body or would render proposed municipal action ineffective; or (b) The officer knew or reasonably should have known that the information was exempt from disclosure pursuant to RSA 91-A:5, and that its divulgence would constitute an invasion of privacy, or would adversely affect the reputation of some person other than a member of the public body or agency, or would render proposed municipal action ineffective. III. No town officer who is required by an order of a court to divulge information outlined in paragraph II in a legal proceeding under oath shall be guilty of a violation under this section. Source. 1994, 249:1. 2008, 303:7, eff. July 1, 2008.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.