Hopkinton selectmen voted to reiterate their policy on e-mail communications during a recent meeting after discussions on whether board members were following the state’s Right to Know Law.

Selectman George Langwasser brought up the subject during a Nov. 10 meeting, after Chairman Scott Flood e-mailed the four other board members and Town Administrator Leon Kenison with a memo with the subject, “Eyes Only.”

In the e-mail, Flood lists 12 subjects he feels the selectmen should begin to address in upcoming meetings, including potentially making the Slusser Senior Center a community center and moving the Town Clerk’s office to Town Hall.

“I welcome your thoughts and other ideas on the foregoing,” Flood closed the e-mail with. “Please send me your unvarnished thoughts.”

Langwasser said that by welcoming input from the other board members via e-mail, it was essentially holding a meeting without the public’s knowledge – a violation of the Right to Know Law.

“You can put forth an idea and let it go,” said Langwasser. “When you start to invite comments and suggestions back, you’re making a discussion out of the realm of the public, which is what the law is designed to counteract.”

Resident Janet Krzyzaniak went to Town Hall and requested recent documents pertaining to a variety of departments in town, and was surprised to find the email in the file.

“The big thing that is very upsetting to me is the memo and how it pertains to the Right to Know Law,” she said. “If I hadn’t had a gut feeling that something was going on, we wouldn’t have seen this memo.”

Flood said he did not intend to violate the RSA, and that the law did exactly what it was supposed to.

“It’s undisputed that the letter was sent to the selectmen and the Town Administrator,” Flood said. “She went into the office and asked for the documents, and obtained the letter. The process worked as it was intended to work.”

Town Clerk Sue Strickford was scheduled on the agenda for Monday, Nov. 17, to talk about the cost of potentially moving her office to Town Hall, but was informed that afternoon she was taken off the agenda. Strickford was told the Board had too many budget items to discuss and they would not have time for her concern during that meeting.

“I told them that I was certainly a budget item, and a big budget item,” Strickford said. “I respected his opinion, so I went in to talk as a citizen instead of my role with the town.”

Strickford was also upset that the potential move was discussed through the e-mail, and felt Flood’s correspondence had violated the law.

“I felt that we need to respect that Right to Know Law, and I was really disappointed that he, as a practicing attorney, would so blatantly disregard that by sending the e-mail,” Strickford said.

Flood said that the ideas in his e-mail are only that, potential ideas to save the town money during an upcoming time period when Hopkinton will likely struggle with revenue down and costs up.

“It’s consistent with the goal to economize and save money while providing the services to the town,” Flood said. “It’s an idea. Nothing that we have plans for.”

Turning the Slusser Senior Center into a community building could save the town money, according to Flood.

“There is over $250,000 that has been designated to assist or fund a community center. It’s just sitting there not doing any good in that account,” Flood said.

“Since we have this beautiful building that’s been built, it may be appropriate to use those funds to create an endowment or trust to help support that building.”

Krzyzaniak, chairman of the Senior Recreation Committee, said doing so may leave open the possibility that Gene Slusser could attempt to recapture his $1.5 million donation to the town since he donated the money with the understanding that Hopkinton would use it to build a senior center.

Langwasser said the possibility that the e-mail violated the Right to Know Law could be damaging to the board.

“It can be injurious to the reputation of the board because the general public has the right to believe the that the issues discussed in an open meeting are really what the board is talking about,” he said. “The public doesn’t have to agree, but the point remains it should take place in an open meeting.”