Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee

PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 9 2015 A meeting of the Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee was held on Monday, November 9, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. Chairman Paul M. Chasse, Jr. presided. Members of the Committee present: Alderman June M. Caron Alderman Ken Siegel Alderman Michael Soucy Alderman Sean M. McGuinness Members not in Attendance: Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy PUBLIC COMMENT - None INTERVIEWS Auditorium Commission Paul LaFlamme (New Appointment) Term to Expire: December 31, 2018 Mayor Lozeau It’s my pleasure to be here to introduce to you two members of our community who are interested in volunteering their time and talent to committees. Sitting to my left is Mr. Paul LaFlamme who may be familiar to some of you but what you may not know is that Paul plays a role in the production manager for Symphony New Hampshire. We try to have a seat on the Keefe Auditorium Committee available to the Symphony because they use the auditorium a great deal and their last person had to resign as she moved. The Symphony asked me if I would be willing to consider Mr. LaFlamme and of course I am willing to do that. As you know, Paul is a volunteer in our community on a lot of different things and puts in a considerable amount of time and I think brings practical knowledge to the table. The Keefe Auditorium primarily concentrates on the use of that auditorium and how it’s scheduled. I think that Paul will bring something to the table that would help out there so I am pleased to offer him for your consideration. Mr. LaFlamme It’s a privilege to be here and to serve the community if I have the knowledge and skillset for such an endeavor. In my role as production manager at Symphony New Hampshire, which I have been doing for a little over a year, I have gained a lot of knowledge about the Keefe, I have made a lot of contacts with the other people that use the Keefe and we really work well together in making sure that schedules work and the facility is left appropriate for everybody involved. I think this would be a great role for me to continue serving and continue to make the Keefe the success that it is. Alderman Siegel I appreciate your willingness to volunteer and I think your qualifications speak for themselves excellently. Alderman McGuinness I know Paul very well and I think it’s a wonderful appointment, thank you, Mayor. Paul actually served in the State House for a couple of terms. He’s a wonderful guy. Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 2 Alderman Caron I’d like to second what Alderman McGuinness said. I too know Paul LaFlamme and have worked with him on a lot of projects over the years so I think this is a great addition to that. I see that you are still on the Board of Directors for Meals on Wheels. Mr. LaFlamme No not currently, my term expired. Alderman Caron But you were there for a long time so that shows your commitment to your volunteerism so I think that this is a great nomination, Mayor. Alderman Chasse We will take up your nomination in a few minutes. Mine Falls Park Advisory Committee Michael Watt (New Appointment) Term to Expire: October 31, 2018 Mayor Lozeau To my left is Mr. Michael Watt and he is very interested in the Mine Falls Park Advisory Committee. He has attended a few of the meetings and he’s served several times on their Trail Days. He reached out to me to say that he would like to be a formal member. The committee is very excited to think about him being involved. He’s very enthusiastic and he cares a great deal about Mine Falls. As you can tell he is a little bit strapping and can help out with some of the things that they would like to see done. Some of the more seasoned members have said “can you find us a young guy? I am happy to present him tonight for your consideration. Mr. Watt It’s a privilege to be here and to be considered for this role. I went to an agricultural technical high school and I have a certificate in Natural Resources. It’s been very exciting when I discovered Mines Falls. I moved here a couple of years ago and I knew I wanted to get involved. I’ve gone to all of the different meetings and went out to the Trail Day several times. Thank you so much for your consideration. Alderman Caron I think this is great because it’s nice to see young people and I know how important Mine Falls Park is and I think with your enthusiasm you will be a big asset to the committee, thank you. Alderman Siegel I would also like to thank you because I find that Mine Falls is one of my favorite places in the city. It’s when I want to show people how great Nashua is it’s one of the places I take them. Even my own company; we had our first big meeting and I took everyone to Mine Falls and we had the meeting while we walked through Mine Falls. Alderman Chasse How many people are on this committee? Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 3 Mayor Lozeau It’s pretty much staying the same. There are probably three to four positions that kind of come and go from time to time so right now we have twelve. The Nashua River Water Shed has an opportunity to put somebody on it. Alderman McGuinness I really appreciate your enthusiasm. Alderman Chasse We will take up your nomination in a few minutes. COMMUNICATIONS - None APPLICATION TO LICENSE HAWKER'S, PEDDLER'S, ITINERANT VENDOR'S LICENSE - None APPOINTMENTS BY THE MAYOR MOTION BY ALDERMAN SOUCY TO RECOMMEND THE CONFIRMATION OF PAUL LAFLAMME TO THE AUDITORIUM COMMISSION FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2018, AND MICHAEL WATT TO THE MINE FALLS PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE OCTOBER 31, 2018 MOTION CARRIED UNFINISHED BUSINESS – None NEW BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS - None NEW BUSINESS – ORDINANCES O-15-073 Endorsers: Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman June M. Caron Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown Alderman Ken Siegel Alderman-at-Large Daniel T. Moriarty Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess Alderman Michael Soucy Alderman-at-Large Mark S. Cookson Alderman Sean M. McGuinness Alderman David Schoneman Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane AMENDING THE EXEMPTION FOR ELDERLY PERSONS BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED INDIVIDUAL AND COMBINED NET INCOMES AND ASSETS MOTION BY ALDERMAN SOUCY TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 4 ON THE QUESTION Alderman McCarthy I had mentioned to Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja but in the past we had actually set the married and single income limits to be the same. The way the law now works is if a couple get the elderly exemption who is in the middle of those two income limits and then one of the spouses dies, in addition to losing your spouse the next time you get your tax bill you don’t have the exemption anymore either. About ten years ago we had set them to be the same and somehow they have become different again over the years. I think that’s actually a flaw in the enabling legislation that should say if you’ve had it you are entitled to it even if your spouse passes away. I would ask that we amend it to set those two numbers to the higher of the two that are in there now. Alderman Chasse Should this have gone to the Budget Review Committee too? Alderman McCarthy It has some effect on how much we have to put aside to cover the exemption but I think we’ve always handled it here. Alderman Chasse It’s not significant enough? Alderman McCarthy It’s not huge. We have often gotten an estimate from assessing as to how much it was going to cost us. Alderman Chasse Okay, so we have a motion on the floor to change the numbers to take the… Alderman McCarthy I can’t make a motion. Alderman Caron Since Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja isn’t here and she and I were the sponsors of that, may I ask a question through the chair to Alderman McCarthy? Alderman Chasse You sure may. Alderman Caron Alderman McCarthy, can you tell me what the numbers would be? Alderman McCarthy There are two numbers in there and I forget what they are in this version. There is one for single and one for married. My suggestion would be to amend the single one to be the same as the married one that’s in the draft. Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 5 Alderman Siegel If I may, Mr. Chair, let me read the specific sentence so that we are all on the page. It says “in addition, the taxpayer must have a net income of not more than $40,000 or if married a combined net income of not more than $50,000 and all net assets not in excess of $150,000, excluding the value of the person’s residence.” I would suggest that we change the $40,000 to read $50,000 and strike the clause that says “if married a combined net income of not more than $50,000” so that effectively it becomes $50,000 married or unmarried; there’s no difference. Does everybody understand? Alderman McCarthy, is that what you would do? Alderman McCarthy I think so. The only issue that might be in there is the way that the legislation is worded it mentions single and married so you might just set it to $50,000 single or married so that it’s clear. MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO AMEND THE LEGISLATION TO CHANGE $40,000 TO $50,000 IN THE SENTENCE “IN ADDITION, THE TAXPAYER MUST HAVE A NET INCOME OF NOT MORE THAN $40,000 OR IF MARRIED A COMBINED NET INCOME OF NOT MORE THAN $50,000 ON THE QUESTION Alderman Caron I don’t have a problem with that if that’s what Alderman McCarthy was alluding to. I think that Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja would be fine with that as well. Alderman Chasse There are fourteen sponsors on this and I wonder who the fifteenth one was? MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE OF O-15-073 AS AMENDED MOTION CARRIED TABLED IN COMMITTEE Appointments by the Mayor Zoning Board of Adjustment Kathryn Vitale (Moving from Alternate to Full Member) Term to Expire: September 11, 2018 8 Massasoit Road Nashua, NH 03063 • Tabled 6/29/15 MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE TO TAKE THE NOMINATION OF KATHRYN VITALE TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FROM THE TABLE MOTION CARRIED Alderman Chasse At this time I would like to invite Attorney Bennett to join us. Attorney Bennett, you sent us a letter explaining your stand on the saga of Ms. Vitale and I guess I was kind of confused because I believe it was...and I don’t have a copy of your letter so maybe Alderman Siegel can help me out. Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 6 Alderman Siegel What is it that you would specifically like? Would you like me to read the letter? Alderman Chasse Yes, the very last sentence in that letter said that she could…it relates to that she could not be prosecuted again, which I kind of don’t agree with. Alderman Siegel That’s not the case, Mr. Chairman. There are two separate documents that we received from Attorney Bennett. The first is an e-mail and the second was an attachment to that e-mail. You may be referring to the body of the e-mail which I do have also. Alderman Chasse That’s correct. Alderman Siegel I can share that with you if you would like me to read it. Alderman Chasse Yes, please. Alderman Soucy If we are going to be talking about somebody should we probably go into a non-public session? Alderman Chasse No, we are not talking about her, we are asking for clarification on the e-mail that Attorney Bennett sent me; that was my question. Alderman Siegel If I might Mr. Chair, perhaps it would be more instructive since we are having a public meeting here if I just read the entire e-mail so there is no question about context in fairness to Mr. Bennett and everyone else who might be listening. Alderman Chasse Please do. Alderman Siegel “Dear Alderwoman and Alderman, I had several requests for the memo attached hereto which was prepared at the request of the Mayor. I have also been asked to opine on the wait that should be afforded a grand jury indictment. The grand jury process is secretive and not open to the public. Defendants many times do not know that they an indictment is coming as they have not been arrested yet. Defendants are not invited to attend grand jury proceedings and there is no one at the proceeding representing the defendant cross examining the witnesses called by the Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 7 prosecutor presenting exculpatory evidence on behalf of the defendant. Evidence in testimony provided to the jury may or may not be admissible against the defendant at trial. It is the trial court and not the grand jury that decides whether physical evidence obtained from or statements made by defendants were obtained constitutionally or in violation of the Fourth and/or Fifth Amendments. Heresay evidence out of court statements made by others is admissible at grand jury proceedings but is often excluded at trial. The grand jury will hand down an indictment if it believes there is probable cause that based upon the information they received a reasonable person would believe that the person committed a crime. Finally, when a defendant is brought to trial, the trial court judge instructs the jury as follows: The fact that the defendant has been arrested and indicted is not evidence of guilt; the indictment is simply a way of giving the defendant notice of the charge. The indictment is a formal way of accusing the defendant of a crime in order to bring the defendant to trial. You must not consider this indictment as evidence of guilt. New Hampshire model jury instructions; when an indictment is nol pros dropped; well, not dropped but not prosecuted by the prosecution, there is no longer any pending charge. From a legal standpoint the individual is in the same position as before the indictment was returned by the grand jury. Steve Bennett.” That is the entire e-mail body that was sent to us. Alderman Chasse Can you read the last line again, please? Alderman Siegel Yes. The last two sentences read “From a legal standpoint the individual is in the same position as before the indictment was returned by the grand jury.” Alderman Chasse Okay, go ahead Alderman Siegel. Alderman Siegel While this may be a statement made by Attorney Bennett and I respect that this is given to us, I personally spoke to Assistant Prosecutor Leslie Gill and that was not what she said. She said the reason that this case was nol pros and I don’t really need to go into a guilt or innocence decision here, that’s not our job but the specific reason it was nol pros was that the available evidence did not allow for them to seek a conviction. They did want a nol pros it because they expected should there be additional evidence coming up they wanted to reserve the right to prosecute and, in fact, that was why she specifically denied my request for additional information which I submitted to the court. Rather than obviously providing me with information and possibly jeopardizing something going forward would be silly and I of course agreed with her; it wasn’t worth it. However, everything that I am going to discuss and all of the pieces of information that I have are in the public record so there is no reason to go into a non-public session because all of this in public information available at the superior court and anybody, any citizen can walk in and do exactly what I did which is just a request the court records that are public and this is public. Attorney Bennett I’m not quite sure why Alderman Siegel thinks that the information he got from the Assistant County Attorney is different than what was provided to him in that e-mail. It’s exactly the same. The fact is that anyone who has an indictment that is non pros is in exactly the same position as they were before they were indicted; there is nothing pending against them, there is no charge pending against them. When prosecutors drop the case or nol pros a case, there are not two options to do it with or without prejudice. They can always bring back a case that had been nol pros as long as they bring it back within the statute of limitations that applies to whatever the level of crime is. I know of no other reason…well, I guess there are several reasons why cases Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 8 get dropped; sometimes they are dropped because people are cooperating witnesses and part of the deal is that the charge will be dropped if they cooperative and testify against somebody else but otherwise the reason that prosecutors nol pros cases is because they don’t think that they can prove them. They don’t think that if they went forward to a jury that they would get a conviction and because there are a lot of cases out there the prosecutors have to look at their time and resources and that’s the decision that they make. So, as far as what you have just said in here, the charges were brought against Mrs. Vitale and what happened to them is when cases are dropped that’s what happens; it’s not unusual. Any suggestion that you just made that it was a special case; I don’t see that that’s the situation necessarily. Alderman Siegel If I might, I never said it was a special case, I said that’s what the prosecutor told me and in fact, the reasoning for why we went from having this indictment to a point where they decided to nol pros; you can see the various motions made by the defense to throw out specific pieces of evidence that were in play at the time. As you peel those away and they become ineligible to be submitted to the court I think it is as you said, they decided that under the burden of proof required in a criminal court they could not get a conviction. We are not in a criminal court. Attorney Bennett We are not in a court at all. Alderman Siegel We are not, we are in a hearing to determine whether or not a candidate is suitable for a position on the Zoning Board of Adjustment and using publicly available information which I believe is germane to this particular individual; I think that we have a different standard here. Our standard isn’t innocent until proven guilty, it’s is this in the public’s interest. In my opinion we have a very different standard I would think so it seems to me that those things that were tossed away; I don’t mean to bring every single element of the case but it was something which gave me pause. I originally voted for Kathy Vitale to be approved as an alternate because at the time, while I felt it was with very poor judgement to appear before a court of law and testify as a character witness in defense of somebody who was a multiple convicted felon, that was something that didn’t rise to the level of making them unsuitable for a Zoning Board candidate but what I discovered in researching what was in the documents available to the superior court I think is a very different animal. That is why I pursued this. Attorney Bennett I’m sure Chairman Chasse knows that at least I’ve had some experience in criminal law over my years and you’ve made several comments that I find somewhat troubling. First of all, I probably have done thousands of criminal cases over my career and a lot of that involved bringing in people to testify on behalf of my clients, typically at plea and sentencing hearings. When somebody comes in to present helpful information about a defendant regardless of what the crime is, it has nothing to do with the persons crime, it has to do with other good things the person may have done and just about the persons general life. Just because someone goes into a court of law and provides some character witness for someone, I don’t see where that in of itself rises to any level of bad taste as I think you said or bad judgement. It may not have anything to do with that. It doesn’t necessarily reflect bad judgement because someone comes into court and says that this person has done nice for me or things of that nature. Just to make it clear, people go into court not to support somebody for committing the crime but because of other things in people’s lives; they are not criminals all of their life. You also indicated that this is not a court and you have a different standard and that you looked at different evidence that was peeled away and discarded. There are many reasons for doing that but the general reason for why courts discard evidence is because it’s not reliable. The courts don’t like to introduce evidence which is not reliable and that can be hearsay or testimony by people that have a bias or interest. What you are left with and you have statements or police reports; I am assuming that based on probably not a lot of first hand police information that they got from people. Essentially what you would be discussing tonight is information Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 9 which is untried and nobody has cross examined these witnesses, they have just taken statements. You are looking at statements by people who have biases or don’t but you will never know that because all you are going to do is read things whether it be newspapers or statements by people who you don’t know their credibility. That’s one of the dangers. My memo wasn’t to tell you what you can do and can’t do. The memo states that I couldn’t find any clear cut rules for what questions you can ask and what you can’t. I think this body and committee over the years has developed a general rule that you are asking questions that have to do with the duties and obligations of the Board to see if these people have the ability both to either get to the meetings where they have the dedication to attend and whether they have a general understanding and whether they are coming to this position with some bias or some interest that won’t make them as fair as we would like them to be when they are making the decisions that they have to make. With the internet today there are all kinds of information that you can glean about people, true or not but it’s out there. I suppose we could look at people’s divorce records and find out whether they were nice to their spouses or whether they did terrible things to their spouses and whether or not that is germane; is that a bad person we don’t want sitting on the Board. The problem I see for the city is that if that’s going to be how you are going to approach people who are volunteering to come in here to do a hard job, volunteering, that they are going to be open to just any type of questions about their personal and private lives I think that you will find there will be very few people who want to step forward and help out. I am just trying to suggest in my memo that I think the main thing you want to know is whether people have the ability to do the job that you are going to appoint them to. When you have people who are being re-appointed you have a record that is important to look at to see whether they could do the job. Again, this is not a court of law and I think it’s difficult for people to sift through information they find in a court case in a file and determine what type of validity that may or may not have. It’s one-sided; it’s like the grand jury process, it’s pretty one-sided. Alderman Siegel Let me address a couple of things. One, I don’t believe that it was one-sided; it was a complete record of all of the motions made from both sides. It had quite a lot of information on the defense side and just so you know, none of the information that I have which makes me come to a decision on this in my own mind was because of unreliable witnesses. The charges were actually derived from tape recordings done in conversations that Ms. Vitale had while visiting Ernesto Rivera in jail. It’s fairly reliable information at least from that perspective. We are talking about 90 hours of conversation over several months with somebody who was just recently in the newspaper for being convicted again of a felony. The charges that he was in jail for he eventually was convicted of. That was what gave me pause and again, I do understand what you are saying about not pulling out everything and as I said in the very beginning, while I question Ms. Vitale’s judgement in going before the court, I agree with you; there are a number of reasons why people do that and I did not hold her to a standard which said look, this rises to the level that would disqualify a candidate nor did I make it an issue before the Board at the time. At the time I voted in favor of her approval as an alternate but this is a little bit of a different story, this is different information and it’s more powerful information and it’s public information about what happened and it gives me pause because as a member of the Zoning Board of Adjustment you are in a position of influence, it is a position that involves money and it’s fairly clear from the information that I had in the public record that there was quite a lot of interaction between Ms. Vitale and this individual which went well beyond casual interactions and so in mind and other people may think differently, that disqualifies her, under the standard that we as a government need to be above reproach. It’s a very, very different standard. Again, I don’t ask all of my colleagues to hold to that standard, this is my standard and you may view it differently and that’s why we will vote and eventually we will come to a decision one way or the other. I want to reiterate that all of the information I had was from as reliable of a source as you can have which is a tape recording of conversations in a jail. Attorney Bennett Everyone who has ever been arrested, indicted and found not guilty had the same evidence; tape recordings…I would just suggest that everything you find in a court record on paper is not necessarily reflective of whether somebody is guilty or innocent, that’s why they have trials; it’s not done based on a court file. Again, it’s difficult for us to sit here…all we have are the court files; we don’t have what came in behind that. I don’t know what these 90 hours of tapes contained but I think I am very comfortable in saying that they Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 10 didn’t contain enough information to convict her or even to bring her to trial. Alderman McCarthy Attorney Bennett, if the prosecutor were ever to decide to renew the action against Ms. Vitale, would that require another grand jury indictment that was done de novo? Attorney Bennett Yes. Alderman McCarthy So then she is exactly in the place as before she was indicted with respect to the law other than there is a file someplace with some stuff… Attorney Bennett I haven’t reviewed the file but I am sure that what the indictment says is it’s been nol pros by the prosecutor so they would have to re-indict at that point. Alderman McCarthy I guess I’m very concerned with us trying to be the interpreters of evidence rather than allowing the courts to do that and taking the result and let me explain some of the reasons why. In this particular case, because it was a criminal proceeding, a great deal of evidence is open and available to us. If what had happened were a civil proceeding wherein at the end the parties agreed to seal the records of the settlement we would have access to none of that. For example if someone comes in who was divorced one of the first questions would be what were the grounds for the divorce because what may be in there is evidence of spousal abuse, adultery, which was a crime until the beginning of this year in the State of New Hampshire or any number of other things where the evidence that was available met the civil standard but not the criminal standard so the spouse was never prosecuted but in fact the divorce was granted based on an agreement between the parties with evidence that we would never get to see. It may well be that we are appointing people to these Boards who have done much worse things than what is alleged in this case but not proven and we don’t see the evidence for it. To me the only reasonable standard, since we don’t have subpoena power to find out what the evidence is in all of these other cases, is to simply look at the public record of the outcome of trials from courts that have the jurisdiction to do that. I would contend that much as sometimes I might not like to do that, there are people that come in and I look at him and think this guy is shady but I’m not sure we can act on that until we’ve seen that there is a process that did that. That’s what the judicial branch of the government is for. If we start doing it other than that, for one thing you have to come back and ask the question of is there anybody around this horseshoe that wouldn’t pass that standard if we applied it to them because we are hypocritical if we allow someone to stay on the Board of Aldermen but apply a higher standard to the appointments to the Land/Use Board. To me it’s a very steep and very slippery slope and you step onto it as soon as you do something other than look at what is the record of this person’s interaction with the justice system. Alderman Chasse Well you stole my question but I got my answer. Alderman Soucy Okay so there is evidence out there; could it be reintroduced, yes but it’s got to meet that statute of limitations. A Class B felony would be three years and a Class A felony would be seven years so we are probably around four or five years at this point since the indictment so we are getting close to the statute of limitations now, is that correct? Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 11 Attorney Bennett It has been a few years since I looked at those statutes but… Alderman Siegel The 27th of November (inaudible) Alderman Soucy Seven years for at least a Class A felony would be the statute of limitations. Attorney Bennett I can’t recall off the top of my head. Alderman Soucy I know for misdemeanors it’s like a year and things could have changed because I am now working in another state but if my memory serves me correct on a Class B and I’m not sure if this is Class B or a Class A but I guess my comfort level would be to wait until the statute of limitations expires and I guess that’s all I am going to say on this case. Alderman Siegel It’s a Class B as I have the indictment in front of me and there’s plenty of time remaining on it but that’s not particularly germane to me. I understand what Alderman McCarthy is trying to say and I believe that, of course, there are people that were probably get in government in any number of positions that given complete knowledge of everything that they thought or have done in their lives we might reconsider but our job as a committee and as a Board of Aldermen is to do due diligence, to react to what is in front of us and what is reasonably in front of us and I believe that this is in front of us and it does reflect on the city and we can’t just ignore it because under that standard of well, as long as you are not convicted of something you are suitable, where does that leave us? If we are a private enterprise and somebody came before you and they had characteristics that seemed unsuitable you wouldn’t think twice about saying I don’t think this is appropriate for our organization and that would be entirely legitimate. Again, this is my particular interpretation of a standard that I’d like to see our government adhere to. To each their own, we are all sentient beings with our own beliefs but I think that the City of Nashua has to have an unimpeachable government. I mean people are cynical enough. When we have something in front of us I believe it’s our duty to act on it. Alderman McCarthy I would just say that in that standard having known Ms. Vitale for the best part of two decades since she was on the Conservation Commission many years ago and having known her on this Board and on the Land/Use Boards, I would contend that my personal recollection of her traits is she is amply suited to serve on those boards and has never done anything that wasn’t in the best interest of Nashua when she served. Alderman Caron Attorney Bennett, Ms. Vitale has been on this Board as an alternate. Was she taken off this Board while this was taking place? Attorney Bennett I think she voluntarily stepped down until the matter was resolved and once the indictment was nol pros she was back on the Board. Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 12 Alderman Caron Okay, so she never resigned, she just took time off to resolve this problem and she’s been back on the Board and there have been no issues with that because I do watch that Board all of the time. I understand what Alderman Siegel is saying but if we were that concerned, we are just looking to take her from an alternate to a full member I think we would have said maybe she shouldn’t be there period and pull her from the Board. She’s been on the Board for all of this time so what changes other than to make her a full member. I know she is very dedicated and she is very involved in that program. I’m trying to put a question to you, Alderman Siegel, what makes it so difficult for you to make her a full member when she’s been an alternate for all of this time? That’s what my concern is. Alderman Siegel That’s an excellent question and one that I would be happy to address because I don’t think she should have come back as an alternate either but I don’t make that decision. This is the extent that we can make a decision right now and frankly, we are almost at the end of term here also and we are having an incoming Mayor who may make a different decision. I have to believe in a city the size of Nashua that there are other people that wouldn’t have that cloud as it were. Now we were already able to select another member of the Zoning Board which is good and that went right through. I think most nominations this committee…there have been two nominations to this committee this entire time that have been a little rocky for different reasons entirely. This one and Ms. Adams and Ms. Adams is on and by all accounts she has done an admirable job but the issues were very different there. There was never a question of character it was just a matter of interpretation of that particular position. Again, in my opinion, this is different. I think we hold our government to a very high standard and it is a different standard than the burden of proof required in a criminal court. If my colleagues disagree then we shall vote so and I’ll be comfortable with whatever decision we make. Alderman Chasse Unfortunately she is a very dedicated employee, she came from this Board and she has done a lot of good things for the City of Nashua. I’m finishing up 9 ½ years on this Board at the end of this year. During that time there’s only been three and way back when there was one that was a definite no by the committee upheld by the Board and believe it or not it was the Historic District Commission. This individual would never work for us or anybody. The other two, you just mentioned the one from the airport and Ms. Vitale. Unfortunately she got herself in a little bit of trouble. A few years back we had one Alderman that spent some time in jail to get himself straightened out and we had some Aldermen on this Board that didn’t even want to sit in the same chamber as him when he came back. The guy had a problem and he took care of it. It wasn’t a major thing that he did somebody in, he basically did himself in. This is a tough one. She could come up for indictment again if they found some more evidence. You say it like it’s never happened well, okay, my DUI’s never happened; they happened, they are out there and they are public records until a certain number of years and then I believe they drop them off but they are there. If you say okay, I’m going for the Zoning Board when I leave here and I have six DUI’s in five years, are you going to put me on that Board? It’s not a major issue, it’s just a DUI. We have to look to a higher standard and unfortunately she is qualified and she’s done a good job with everything she has been involved with but I don’t know I’m truly beating myself up on this one. Alderman McCarthy I think what you have to ask is anything you have seen lead you to believe that she would be incapable of doing the job that the Zoning Board of Adjustment does. I will point out in the case that you brought up with a member of this Board, that member was failing to attend meetings of the Board of Aldermen because they were incarcerated and neglected to mention that. They eventually resigned from that office but we did appoint that person to the Conservation Commission afterwards. I said in testimony that I understand the problem this person has but I had never actually seen them come in impaired when they were dealing with a governmental function and why would that disqualify them then from being able to be a member of the Conservation Commission and do an adequate job of making those decisions. It’s the same thing here. We have a person who may have exhibited a spade of bad judgement let’s say and that happens often. I see no evidence that Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 13 that is an impairment to the function of the Zoning Board of Adjustment and frankly, if what we do is to exhibit a standard where we look for every little thing so that we stay above reproach and never pick a person with a cloud over their head, what we do is set out to create clouds that no one wants over their heads and the result will be people won’t volunteer to take the positions. We can’t get enough people now to fill these Boards. People ask me why I do it and I have a hard time answering that on occasion based on the things happening and for someone who is not even elected who is an appointed member of the government; it just gets to the point where no one wants to participate if we don’t treat them as if they are reasonable members of the community. Yes, there are cases where you want to make sure that you don’t have someone making decisions whose judgement is impaired but until you have that I believe it is incumbent on this Board to take people who are qualified and allow them to do those positions. Alderman Chasse Since Mayor Lozeau has come to office you wouldn’t believe the number of people that have come to join offices. Alderman Siegel I just want to address Alderman McCarthy’s concerns. First of all, I think this committee in general is reasonable. We don’t go out and search for clouds. I also don’t agree that every single thing that is obviously public that somebody might have done wrong is germane. Again, there was an issue before all of this other stuff that could have clouded us and it wasn’t germane. It is my judgement and remember, I did take the time to read the file and it’s not fair in a sense because I did and some of you may not have for whatever the reason but it is in my judgement that the things I read in there are germane to whether or not under the circumstances as a term progresses there would always be a situation where there wouldn’t be a possibility that something might go array. This has nothing to do with getting a DUI conviction, for example, I think that would be bad judgement but would not be particularly germane to this other than it might affect attendance and that’s not to dismiss the seriousness of that particular charge, it’s what I saw and I just want to make that clear. MOTION BY ALDERMAN SOUCY TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE OF THE CONFIRMATION OF KATHRYN VITALE TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 Alderman Siegel I’d like to request a roll call. A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Chasse 3 Nay: Alderman Siegel, Alderman Soucy 2 MOTION CARRIED Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 14 Resolutions R-15-136 Endorsers: Alderman Ken Siegel Alderman Michael Soucy Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess Alderman David Schoneman Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane Alderman Sean M. McGuinness ESTABLISHING THE PERMITTED LOCATION FOR THE OUTDOOR DINING PERMIT FOR THE CITY ROOM CAFÉ • Tabled – 6/2/15 Ordinances O-14-017 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO MERIT EMPLOYEE RULES AND REGULATIONS EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2014 • Amended & Tabled 4/21/14; Referred to Budget & Tabled – 6/29/15 O-15-038 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Daniel T. Moriarty Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown AMENDING THE COMPOSITION OF THE CABLE TELEVISION ADVISORY BOARD • Tabled – 3/16/15 DISCUSSION Alderman Chasse We don’t really have any guidelines in this committee to go by. I’ve been here this time around for eight years. I don’t allow you to ask anybody about marital status or age or certain other things that I won’t allow as the Chairman of this committee. When it comes to things like that, I don’t know if she does get passed by the full Board and the indictment comes down there is no way that this Board can rescind her… Alderman Soucy That’s not true. Alderman Siegel We are the appointing Board. Alderman Chasse It would have to be done by the full Board, correct? Alderman McCarthy Yes, the full Board can remove them from office if we see fit. Personnel/Administrative Affairs Cmte. 11-09-15 Page 15 Alderman Soucy I’m very familiar with indictments and the likelihood of this moving forward at this time is pretty much null. Alderman Chasse Even if we tabled and we said no I am sure that one of the Aldermen would have pulled it up to the full Board before the end of the year. Alderman McCarthy I don’t know that there is much help to offer for guidelines. We deal with a lot of Boards that are appointed in different ways for the most part people don’t volunteer for these Boards unless they intend to do a good job on them. You have to look and see if there is any evidence that they have done something wrong on the job. If someone is appointed for the first time you might want to look at their skills and it’s sort of like a hiring decision. In terms of reviewing people that have already been on Boards I think you can only look at how did they do on the decisions and is there any evidence that the decision they made whether you like it or not was not made genuinely in the best interest of the community. Alderman Chasse I’m a hot head and everyone knows it and let’s say the Mayor wants to put me on one of those community committee’s but you guys would say we can’t put him on one of those because he’d be yelling and screaming even though he’s done a lot of good for the city. Alderman McCarthy You have to look at it as a hiring decision. Alderman Soucy When you are looking to hire anyone you shouldn’t limit the disqualifiers. I’m a background investigator and sometimes what you see on the surface isn’t quite what it is and there’s a difference when you have a beagle or a hound dog going out looking for stuff and something that is splashed all over the front page of the newspaper. Character in my opinion is everything and I’m not saying that Ms. Vitale doesn’t have character but everything should be looked at. PUBLIC COMMENT - None REMARKS BY THE ALDERMEN - None POSSIBLE NON-PUBLIC SESSION ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON TO ADJOURN MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared closed at 8:01 p.m. Alderman Michael Soucy Committee Clerk