Where is the accountability?
As recently reported, the city of Concord claims that the evaluation criteria used to assess the city manager’s performance is confidential. Both Councilor Brown and the Concord Monitor asked the city for a blank evaluation form, and the city denied the requests claiming confidentiality. Neither the criteria nor the blank form are confidential documents under the right to know law.
The purpose of the right to know law is “to ensure both the greatest possible public access to the actions, discussions and records of all public bodies, and their accountability to the people.” RSA 91-A:1. To accomplish this purpose the law should be interpreted as to favor transparency. Withholding the criteria used to evaluate the city manager’s performance erodes accountability. Without knowing the criteria, it is impossible to ascertain whether a favorable evaluation is based on objective criteria, or whether it reflects only personal or political opinion.
Last year, the city council gave the manager a 3% raise bringing his salary to just under $250,000. He receives seven weeks of paid time off annually, and an optional four-month sabbatical. This salary package makes him one of the top paid government employees in New Hampshire. He is paid more than the Governor, the Attorney General, or the Chief Justice. He is accountable to city residents and they are entitled to know how well he has performed required duties. The city’s evaluation process precludes any real accountability.