Search

Graham, Donna

mle LET aT EEE EP EEE
From: s.e.merrigan@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 1:27 AM
To: Board of Aldermen
Subject: Support becoming a mask city

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is unknown.
Dear BOA:

[am writing in support of becoming a mask city and hope you will vote to make this happen. Our proximity to
Massachusetts makes this vital to our safety. | have already noticed an increase in the number of cars from across the
border in just the last week. The fact that Dick’s Sporting Goods has opened all NH stores and no MA stores will only
cause this to increase. My boyfriend lives in Hampton and the number of cars from MA on any given day is unsettling
considering the virus statistics in that state. In addition, there are still plenty of people in the supermarkets who don’t
wear masks and don’t respect the traffic flow patterns that mandating mask wearing would make the experience that
much safer. There is still too much that is not known about this virus that we should be taking every precaution
available.

Sincerely,
Susan Merrigan

Graham, Donna

ERE SAE he EAR IT EEE rt EES
From: Willie Reed <williebreed@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 8:02 AM

To: Board of Aldermen

Subject: A letter against mandatory mask wearing

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is
unknown.

Dear members of the board,

I respectfully wish it to be known that ifa governing body attempts to dictate what I must wear in public I will
consider it a gross violation of my rights. I and my wife, along with every other adult of sound mind and body,
have every right to determine our own level of risk and what we are comfortable with as free adults. People who
are concerned for their health and place that concern above other considerations should absolutely 100% be free
to wear a mask and I support their right to do so. However, those of us who have deemed not wearing a mask an
acceptable risk should under no circumstances be required to take precautions we deem unnecessary for our
own safety.

I will draw the comparison to New Hampshire's lack of a seat belt law for adults. It is well known that wearing
a seat belt GREATLY increases your chances of surviving an accident. It is also known that not wearing a seat
belt poses a greater threat to others in the car with you. By choosing to not wear a seat belt, you are choosing to
increase the risk of injury or death of everyone in your vehicle. And yet, we in New Hampshire trust adults to
make the right decision for themselves, We understand that it is not the governments role to protect people from
themselves, Again, WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S ROLE TO PROTECT
PEOPLE FROM THEMSELVES.

It may be cliche, but in case anyone has forgotten, our state motto is "Live Free or Die". That motto means
something. The words were chosen carefully. Quite literally it says that it is better to die, than to be dictated
how to live by an overbearing government. In the case of Covid-19, this motto clearly says that there are worse
things than dying from this disease. If you vote to require people to wear masks, you are in gross violation of
our state motto and our state spirit. Respectfully, the very fact that you are considering this ordinance at all tells
me that you do not understand what it means to "Live Free or Die", you do not understand why people move to
this great state, you do not understand what this state means to people. This state means freedom. And freedom
has risks. Freedom has ALWAYS had risks. As Ben Franklin said (and I'm paraphrasing), "he who would give
up freedom for security will soon find he has neither".

Public safety is NOT the number one role ofa governing body. It is to ensuring people's rights are not being
violated. I can ensure my own safety and decide what precautions I would like to take better than you can.

On that note, I fully support a business's right to ask that I wear a mask when I enter their establishment. A
private business has every right to deny customers for any reason, and some businesses are already doing this.
As a governing body, if you feel it is right, you have every right to encourage this. But you have NO right to
force the hands of businesses that otherwise do not want to force people to take these precautions. Personally I
am unlikely to support a business that requires me to wear a mask. And I as a free citizen should be able to
voice my opinion in such a way. I would NEVER refuse the request and refuse to leave. That is immature and
wrong. Ifa business wishes to enforce mask wearing they have every right to ask me to leave and I must
comply. By the way, it is my understanding that it is ALREADY illegal to refuse to leave a store that is asking

1

you to do so. So businesses already have all the tools they need to enforce mask wearing themselves. There is
no need for government interference.

It is important for you to understand that every law and every regulation the government passes comes with a
gun pointed at its citizens. Ifa law is not backed by force it has no weight; it is unenforceable. If you intend to
pass an ordinance requiring mask wearing, you will need to exert force and violence to give it meaning. You
will need to arrest people when they don't pay the fine. You are effectively saying that people who don't want to
wear a mask should be jailed. You need to understand that is the end result of any regulation. In the end,
(capitalizing for emphasis because this is a long email) ANY LAW OR ORDINANCE IS NOT ABOUT
WHETHER THE BEHAVIOR (in this case mask wearing) IS DESIRABLE OR WHETHER WE WISH
PEOPLE WOULD DO IT. IT IS A STATEMENT THAT IF SAID BEHAVIORS SHOULD NOT BE
ADHERED TO, THE GOVERNMENT IS WILLING TO RESORT TO VIOLENCE.

There is an absolutely poetic example of this in the book Altas Shrugged where Henry Rearden refuses to sell
the government steel. There was a law passed called the Fair Share Law, which basically stated that if the
government required the use ofa "strategic material" for "the public good", the business was required to sell it
to the government at the government's set price. Rearden refused to sell. People kept saying "but you have to it's
the law". So he said "I will not sell my steel to the government. If they wish to come here and take my steel by
force, they are welcome to do so but I will not sell it", to which they replied "but that's theft!" Yes, it is. Exactly.
Later on, he's called before a tribunal and continuously, the judges try to make it clear that this is in the public
good, that their price is fair, they cannot understand why he won't comply. He won't comply for the very simple
reason that it is not a voluntary transaction. It is theft. He brings the logic to its final conclusion in such a
wondrous way, by basically saying "I will not sell my steel. If you choose to fine me for that, I will not pay it. If
you choose to arrest me for that, you had better send guns because I will not come willingly. I will make you
take me by force because that's what this law is: it states that I must give you my steel or you will send men to
my house with guns". When the tribunal says "no one is talking about sending men with guns", he says "then
why are we here"? (here is a link to the scene, it's only 4 minutes long https://youtu.be/_iHRJ4s9Ety, for
context Rearden owns the steel that is used to build the railroads which is basically the only way the economy
stays afloat. The blonde woman the camera keeps panning to is the owner of the railroad company, with whom
Rearden has been in business for a long time. I highly encourage watching the entire two part movie, but it is
really long and somewhat difficult to follow, not a light watch. So clips on YouTube may be the way to go!)

With that in mind, I want it to be known, that should an ordinance be passed requiring me to wear a mask in
public, I will not comply. Should a fine be instituted for not wearing a mask in public I will not pay it. You will
need to exert physical violence to enforce your ordinance (like any law). Is that something you are willing to
do? If so, you have become the textbook definition of tyrants.

Respectfully,
A concerned citizen

PS. In the spirit of constructive feedback and suggestions, it is well within the role and scope of government to
enable businesses to enforce these rules themselves if they so choose. You could pass an ordinance raising fines
or making it easier for businesses to remove people who refuse to comply with their own private rules. That
way if a business deems this requirement necessary for their safety, they will be able to enforce it themselves,
and businesses that do not want to impose such restrictions on their customers will not. This is a freedom-
friendly way to achieve your goals.

Graham, Donna

From: Kathryn Blair <kblair250@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 9:39 AM

To: Board of Aldermen

Subject: i support the mandatory use of face masks

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not elick lmks/open attachments if source is
unknown.

To the Board of Alderman,

lam an immunocompromised 61 year old citizen of Nashua. Whenever I go out (which is seldom), I wear a
face mask. Whenever my family members go out they wear face masks. I understand it is not comfortable to
many but I feel that the risks are too great not to. The news of children getting extremely ill is very concerning
and J don't think we've seen everything this virus has to show us yet.

Please vote yes for face masks in Nashua.

Thank you,

Kathryn Blair
2 Birchwood Dr, Nashua, NH 03064

Graham, Donna

From: kdaughan <kdaughan@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 9:50 AM

To: Board of Aldermen

Subject: Mandatory mask opinion.

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is
unknown.

| am wholly in favor of an ordinance for mandatory mask wearing particularly | in inside public buildings

including apartment buildings such as the Cotton Miil.
Kathleen Daughan, ward 3.

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy Tablet

Graham, Donna

From: gene porter <gporter77@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 9:58 AM

To: Board of Aldermen

Ce: Klee, Patricia; Donchess, James
Subject: Mandatory Masking

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is
unknown,

Please support the Mayor's efforts to require that all people in
confined public indoor spaces wear masks.

Some few will make the specious argument that such a mandate
would unduly infringe on their freedom. But so do many rules of
public behavior, including such disparate topics as speed limits,
building codes, traffic signals, seat belts for children and
prohibitions on hunting deer with bazookas.

The mask issue is not like the motorcycle helmet issue. Helmets
almost exclusively protect the riders, who in NH are free to
take the risks. Masks primarily protect others, and

their mandate is a very legitimate and important way for the
government to protect the public health.

The opponents of the Mayor's mask edict seem very confident that the
benefits of avoiding masks in terms of personal liberty and economic well
being outweigh its costs and drawbacks. But since they seem to
downplay or even ignore the drawbacks of mask avoidance it is
hard to avoid feeling that their argument is more an expression
of ideological imperatives than of reasoned and evidence-based

1

analysis. Masks are avoided in Sweden and the Covid 19 death
rate there is over five times higher than in neighboring
countries where masking is de rigueur.

Gene Porter

Graham, Donna

ee GEE ESE ET OR EE EE AP a ae EEE a re
From: Amanda Blair <akathrynblair@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 10:06 AM

To: Board of Aldermen

Subject: Support of Mask Ordinance

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is unknown.

Good morning,

lam a Nashua resident and would like to extend my support of the proposed ordinance to require the use of face masks.
| am young and healthy but | live with my mother who is immunocompromised. | feel we all have a responsibility to
protect everyone in our community. This needs to be a joint effort and | feel that the only way to get more people on
board is to make the use of masks mandatory.

| also work at gateways community services where | serve as a case manager for many elderly Nashua residents. In
‘speaking with my clients many are afraid to leave their homes or have caregivers come into their homes because the

general public is not taking the proper precautions to keep them safe.

| admit that when this all started | felt very silly wearing a mask. However, as | saw more and more people using them |
felt more comfortable. If everyone is wearing masks then no ane has to feel silly or self-conscious.

It is my hope that this ordinance is passed in order to safeguard our community. Many of us feel powerless in facing this
virus but wearing a mask is a simple act that we can all participate in.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Amanda Blair
2 Birchwood Dr, Nashua

Graham, Donna

ae CE ence aaa al
From: Paul & Rita Harrington <sunkingint@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 17:31 AM

To: Board of Aldermen

Subject: Masks

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is
unknown.

To the Board of Alderman

While I understand some citizens would like to have mandatory masks I am not in favor of this at all. I have
worn one for 3 weeks when I went into any stores and

I ended up getting very dizzy and did not feel well from it. Also it is a issue of freedom of choice and | am all
for that I don't want to be fined or jailed because I did not wear a mask. Let it be up to the store owners weather
they want masks and people can choose if they want to enter these businesses. Not the government telling me |
have to wear it. Also people can stay 6 feet from others or stay home if they feel that scared.

Sincerely,
Rita Costanzi
Ward 3

Graham, Donna

From: Jeff Carter Gilson <jeffgilson@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 11:55 AM

To: Board of Aldermen

Subject: Mask Ordinance

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is
unknown.

As a Nashua resident (and someone with co-morbidities for COVID-19) I urge you to please keep Nashua safer
and support the mandatory mask rule proposed by the Mayor. While masks aren't 100% effective, they are more
effective than not having masks, and in concert with social distancing can help greatly in reducing the spread.
Personal freedom ends when it comes to endangering others, so requiring masks in public spaces is not a
violation of people's rights.

Thanks

Jeff Gilson
Ward 3