AG Requested to Re-open Election Violation Case

A local state representative has written to the requesting that it reopen the investigation into Concord School Board members and others who and during the November municipal election in 2011.

In a letter, state Rep. , D-Concord, requested Assistant Attorney General Matt Mavrogeorge, the head of the Civil Bureau, reopen the investigation after discovering that in a previous case, Mavrogeorge issued a cease-and-desist order against a person who violated the same state election laws that Concord School Board member Jack Dunn violated in November. In addition, it appeared that a thorough investigation was not offered in the Dunn case, since “information was not sought or not disclosed,” according to Watrous. Watrous requested the re-investigation because “without fear of any penalty, people may continue to break our laws.”

Incomplete investigation?

Watrous said that while Mavrogeorge cited an obscure Supreme Court decision from 1995 that called into question the state law, two years ago, Mavrogeorge enforced the law against a woman in Moultonborough for distributing fliers against a warrant article without proper identification. In that case, the woman, Karel Crawford, did not identify the source of the materials that she sent out to voters and did not sign some of the materials.

During the investigation, Crawford told the AG that she was a part of a group that got together to mail out the fliers. At the time, Crawford thought all the fliers were signed but they weren’t. She also said that members of the group chipped in money to pay for the mailings, according to Moavrogeorge’s investigation.

The actions were violations of state election laws and Mavrogeorge issued a cease and desist order against Crawford for not following the identification and signature requirements. If Crawford failed to comply in the future, she could be prosecuted by the state Superior Court.

In Watrous’ letter, he said the 2010 case was eerily similar to the situation that happened in Concord in November. However, the results were different. Mavrogeorge did not issue a cease and desist order against Dunn and seemed to skip over pertinent parts of the investigation, like the fact that the reported that there was a group involved in paying for the signs. That group included Dunn, School Board President , former school board members, and other Concord voters. The statements by officials in the newspaper contradicted those made during the investigation.

Watrous also noted that the investigation found that Dunn acted as a non-candidate when he actually was a candidate for re-election. He was also influencing an election that could have bearing on future elections he might participate in, since the charter commission question changed the process by which school board members were to be elected.

“The ballot question on which the signs were advocating were school charter questions that would directly affect the school district, school board, and how school board members such as Dunn and Ardinger are elected,” he wrote.

Watrous said that the involvement of one or more current school board members was troubling when looking other illegal activity by school officials. Watrous cited a case involving school district , of Upton & Hatfield LLP, who Mavrogeorge found had violated the lobbying law at the behest of Ardinger and others, to oppose a bill that would have returned control of the district’s charter to Concord citizens years before November’s vote.

“As with Mr. Dunn and RSA 664:17, you found a violation of law but failed to prosecute,” he said. “The laws exist for good reason and deserved to be enforced.”

Dunn did not return an email request for comment.

According to Business Administrator Michele Croteau, the incurred no legal costs assisting Dunn or Ardinger in the initial Attorney General investigation.