Jim Donchess

NASHUA – Last week, the Nashua Board of Aldermen voted 8-6 against a ballot measure that could have changed the city’s charter in reference to the way members are appointed to the Nashua Police Commission.

The proposed resolution – R-21-143 – would have placed a question on the municipal ballot in November.

The legislation would have provided for appointment of Board of Police Commissioners by the mayor and the president of the board of aldermen upon approval of the BOA. In addition, the board would have shifted from having three members – its current makeup – to five.

Commissioners currently are appoint by the governor and vetted by the Executive Council.

The city of Nashua is the last municipality in the Granite State to make appointments in that manner.

Addressing the police commission resolution during his comment period at the meeting’s outset, Mayor Jim Donchess told the board that “things have changed since 1891,” and in all that time, “only one woman has been appointed to the commission.”

Later in the week, Donchess voiced additional concerns during an exclusive interview with The Telegraph, especially about the formation of a committee to review and study the matter.

“The committee is totally stacked,” Donchess said. “It’s unfair, it’s imbalanced. It’s totally stacked against anyone (wanting) local control. There are four people who have testified in very vociferous fashion against local control – a police commissioner, an employee of the police department, Alder Rick Down – whose opinion I respect, but its definitely opposed with no qualification – and a citizen who has testified repeatedly against any form of local control. Yet, there is no one on there who has indicated they support local control. In fact, Alderwoman Trish Klee, the alderperson who is the principle sponsor of the resolution before the board of aldermen, asked to be on the committee and was denied.”

“To be a balanced committee, you need at least four people on there who are openly advocating for local control (too),” Donchess added. “It’s just seems to be designed to confuse people, to scare people with all of the things that the police commission is saying.”

The mayor said he’s unsure of what the die-hard motivation is behind the opposition.

“Many people are asking, and they don’t understand why the extreme overreaction by the police department,” Donchess said. “This is a modest reform, one that’s been made in all of the other cities in New Hampshire. In fact, there are some cities who have more direct city government control over the police department. For example, the city of Manchester. The police chief reports to the mayor. Period. Now, there is a police commission, but it is advisory, and they have no authority.”

“What’s being proposed here is a modest reform,” the mayor noted. “We still will have the police commission as an institution that stands between the actual city government and the police department. The significant change would be that those people are locally appointed.”

Donchess also noted the approach taken by those who oppose the measure.

“The police commission has used the word ‘dangerous’ in terms of what we have proposed,” Donchess said. “Like, there would just be these disastrous consequences. Well, why do we see nothing like that in Manchester. They have pointed out no facts, nothing to support any of these theories. It seems that it is all designed to scare people into opposing the idea of local control. The exaggerations are just growing.”

“At the hearing before the aldermen, someone representing the police commission said that the petition drive was the equivalent to a knock on the door in the middle of the night,” Donchess said. “This is democracy. These are citizens talking to their neighbors and other community members, not at night, but in like 95-degree weather. They believe strongly in local control. Characterizing that as a knock on the door late at night, this is democracy. This is the American system. Here in the United States, we have the freedom to petition the government, and that’s what people are doing. They are exercising their rights under state law to pursue a charter change. It’s nothing evil or devious. It’s not like a knock on the door late in the night.”

The mayor also said one “story” going around is getting way out of control.

“Another story that just gets bigger and bigger and bigger, it’s like the guy who said he caught a fish that was a foot long, then it’s two, then its three,” Donchess said. “They started out as an exaggeration of three aldermen. They have portrayed that as a city of Nashua prosecution that could have been influenced by these aldermen. It was not a city of Nashua prosecution. It was a federal prosecution, run by the U.S. attorney. The idea that an alderman, the mayor could somehow pressure the U.S. attorney to back away from an investigation is ridiculous. It was a federal investigation. This was in federal court.”

“In fact, local departments don’t investigate any type of alleged wrongdoing by local officials or within their own department,” Donchess added. “It goes to an outside agency – the AG, the U.S. attorney. So, this idea that these three aldermen, that this could have been derailed is completely fallacious. Now, they are saying – now the story has grown – now the story is the aldermen tried to stop the investigation. Well, there is no facts supporting that at all. If that had happened, they would have been charged. That is a crime. That’s obstruction of justice, and the U.S. attorney would have charged them with it. But, that didn’t happen, so they weren’t charged with that. So, why this extreme overreaction to a very modest reform? People are having a hard time understanding what’s really behind this.”

The bottom line, the mayor said, it let democracy run its due course and let the people decide.

“It’s troubling that the police commission doesn’t understand that this is democracy in action, and characterizes this as something evil,” Donchess said.

—

FROM THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING

Ward 8 alderman Skip Cleaver agreed, telling his fellow board members that “a change needs to be made … it’s archaic, going back to the 1890s,” referring to the charter provision.

Ward 4 alderman Tom Lopez said he initially felt the matter should be put to voters, but after discussing the issue with several people he rethought his stance, but still feels it should be put to voters.

Ward 5 alderman Ernest Jette said he’s “struggling with this … I see both sides.” He added that because he feels “voters should have the opportunity to express their opinion,” he would vote to put the matter on the Nov. 2 ballot.

Ward 2 alderman Rick Dowd suggested the resolution to be tabled “and a committee be formed” to study it.

“Changes to a city charter should reflect a glaring problem … nobody has put forth any immediate concerns that requires an immediate change.”

Various procedural matters were tossed back and forth during the discussion stage, but were eventually ironed out, setting the stage for an extended period of discussion.

Alderman at large Ben Clemons said he believes taking the time to form a study committee and discuss “what the best option is” would boost transparency on the matter.

While Ward 3 alderwoman Patricia Klee said she sees no problems with the police commission process, “I do see horrible things coming down the road from Concord.”

She referred to her previously-aired concerns that state government is gradually gaining more control over the way Nashua does business.

Newsletter