Search

At this time, the Board of Aldermen does not accept verbal public input. They accept emails that are put in the
agenda for the public to view and they are read into the record by name of the author only.

The Board of Assessors is not willing to do that and appears to accept the advice of Attorney Bolton, City legal.
The legal department has advised the board that there is no requirement within the law which requires
acknowledgement of an email.

So, the Board of Aldermen have decided to reject legal counsel's advice in that they acknowledge the emails,
put the emails on public record and record in the minutes under the name of the writer.

But, the Board of Assessor has no public input, email or otherwise. I really don't understand why I have been
batted around on this issue and you could not just directly inform me that no community comment, of any
form, would be allowed. So far, in Nashua, you are the only board I have found that will not allow the public
any form of public communication with the Board. For an Office that 1s under scrutiny with the State and the
BTLA, and transparency is a priority, it is amazing how you have chosen to barricade yourselves from the
public. It appears to me that the Board of Assessor is not operating like the Board of Aldermen.

Legal's advice appears to be a general blanket statement. In ordinary times this would be ok. Because in
ordinary times, any member of the public could attend a meeting and speak. Now with remote meetings, this is
no longer possible. So, asking the board to make concessions to allow the public to provide input, at least by

email, recorded as part of the public record and identified in a public meeting would be the very least you can
do.

The City of Manchester is allowing public input to be phoned in, stated in person at the chamber microphone or
submitted as an email read into the record. Our citizens have none of this.

It is almost unfathomable in 2020 that an Assessing Board, which creates the property values to capture the
majority of finances for the City's budget, will not accept any form of public input.

Laurie

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 2:32 PM Hansberry, Daniel <HansberryD@nashuanh.gov> wrote:
Dear Ms. Ortolano,

The legal department has advised the board that there is no requirement within the law which requires
acknowledgement of an email. [ will follow-up on your request for placement on the agenda regarding the
presentation of your abatement.

Regards,

Dan Hansberry

From: Laurie Ortolano [laurieortolano@email.com]

Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 9:55 AM
To: Hansberry, Daniel
Subject: Community Input

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

Obviously, | am disappointed with your discussion with my email communication for opening public
comment, You did not share the content of the letter and your discussion was a disservice to the public that
attempts to communicate. Disgusted.

I would like to know why you did not recognize me by name as all other boards do for public emails? Do you
have a policy for public input whereby you do not acknowledge the individual email. In a public meeting, the
public has the right to know who sent in a communication; it's a public document. This is the way the BTLA
listens to the input of the community. Are you trying to prevent outside organizations from knowing who is
connnenting?

T am filing a formal complaint with the BTLA regarding transparency. Enough is enough and you are not
helping the situation.

I would like to request placement on the agenda to address my 2019 abatement when it is presented to the
Board.

Thank you.

Laurie

Graham, Donna

From: Dave Villiotti <dvilliotti@nashuachildrenshome.org>

Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 8:53 AM
To: Graham, Donna
Subject: River Casino/School Street Lot

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

Dear Alderman Graham:

i have become aware that the City of Nashua is considering a plan that would involve the redevelopment of the School
Street Parking Lot, with a resulting large apartment building. The building, as | understand, would eliminate both the
school Street parking spots and a substantial amount of available parking in the High Street garage. The loss of parking
would certainly cause substantial harm to the River Casino & Sports Bar. Thirty-six local charities, including Nashua
Children’s Home, would be harmed as well.

Nashua Children’s Home has participated in charitable gaming with the operators of the River since their entry to New
Hampshire 11 years ago and has realized $100,522 in revenue during that time. | know that the owners have worked
diligently to locate their business in Nashua. We were scheduled to be on the River's gaming calendar for ten days this
June but will likely miss those days due to the current closure. As you can imagine, we will miss the charitable revenue
that the River raises for us ona yearly basis. We are anxious for the River to reopen so that we can reschedule gaming
days for this year and hopefully for many years to come.

Nashua Children’s Home, founded in 1903, has served as home to the City’s most vulnerable and at-risk youth for well
over a century. My purpose in writing is to ask you to reconsider locating this residential development in this location,
which ultimately will deprive Nashua Children’s Home, and 35 other local charities, of much needed financial support.

Regards,

Dave

David Villiotti, Executive Director
Nashua Children's Home

125 Amherst Street

Nashua, NH 03064

{603} 883-3851
dvilliotti@nashuachildrenshome.org

Graham, Donna

‘SEE NIE NERA ENEECEEREELIDP EEIEES
From: Laurie Ortolano <taurieortolano@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 9:11 AM

To: Board of Aldermen

Subject: Fwd: Charter Change

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

Kindly submit this for public comment.

Laurie Ortolano
41 Berkeley St.
Nashua, NH 03064

wo-------- Forwarded message ---------

From: Laurie Ortolano <laurieortolano/égmail.com>
Date: Sat, May 30, 2020 at 4:24 PM

Subject: Charter Change

To: Lori Wilshire <Lorifénashuachildrenshome.org>
Ce: Board of Aldermen <BOA@nashuanh. :ov>

May 28, 2020
To: Board of Aldermen
Re: Change to Charter for Board of Assessor Members

| am request the Board’s consideration for a change to the charter to require Board of Assessor members to
be residents of the City of Nashua. | am asking for the Board’s consideration to discuss this at an upcoming
meeting.

If 1 am reading the Charter correctly, Mayor appointed Board members can reside in another municipality.
Below is the language from the City Charter.

42. [City officers appointed; qualifications; compensation] The mayor with consent of the board of aldermen
shall appoint a city clerk, a welfare officer, three assessors, a treasurer and collector of taxes who shall be one
and the same person, and a city solicitor, each of whom shall serve an indefinite term at the pleasure of the
mayor; and such other officers as may be necessary to administer all departments which the board of aldermen
shall establish. Said city officers shall receive such compensation as may be set by ordinance. Each assessor
shall prior to his appointment have demonstrated knowledge of property appraisal or assessment and of the laws
governing the assessment and collection of property taxes. It shall be the duty of the board of assessors to assess
all taxable property in the city in accordance with general law and such administrative regulations as may be
promulgated pursuant thereto, to maintain a standard system of assessment records, and to perform such other
duties as the board of aldermen may prescribe by ordinance. The powers and duties of officers 20 Editor’s

1

note—The board of inspectors of checklist has been replaced by the board of registrars. See § 29 of this charter.
1975, ch 415:13, effective Nov. 4, 1975; Res. R-83-223, effective Jan. 1, 1984. CHARTER AND RELATED
LAWS xv November 1, 2018 and heads of departments appointed by the mayor shall be those prescribed by
state law, by this charter or by ordinance.

As | read the section of the charter above, it appears that Nashua may, at one point in time, had a full time
assessing board. This may be why these position were not required to be city residents.

| believe the city is large enough to support finding Nashua candidates for the 3 member board.

| contacted other municipalities to determine if those with Boards of Assessor permit non-residents. There
were no other Boards | could find with the exception of Manchester. Manchester is in a unique situation, in
that they have a full time Board. So, the City will hire employees that are non-residents,

Many of New Hampshire’s assessing boards are actually the Selectmen and these folks must be registered
voters and residents. Other municipalities | checked with were Portsmouth, which does not have a board,
Brookline with an elected three member board, and Keene has a part-time 3 member board that are all
residents of the City.

Thank you for your consideration.

Laurie Ortolano

Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility
and Voluntary Exclusion

- Lower Tier Covered Transaction

(1) The prospective lower tier participant certifies, by submission of this bid or proposal, that neither it nor its
“principals” [as defined at 49 CFR § 29.105(p)] is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment,
declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any Federal department or
agency.

(2) When the prospective lower tier participant is unable to certify to the statements in this certification, such
prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal.

The bidder respondent and all subcontractors hereby certifies that he/she has not been debarred or suspended from

participation in Federal contracts. Please note - separate certification may be photocopied and submitted by each
subcontractor. (Pursuant to 49 CFR, Part 29)

Certified (Contractor)

Company

Signed By

Name

Title

Date

Certified (Sub-Contractor(s))

Company

Signed By

Name

Title

Date

Graham, Donna

AAAS cS mea SS EE REE ES
From; Laurie Ortolano <laurieortolano@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 9:13 AM
To: Board of Aldermen
Subject: Fwd: Disciplinary Action Jan Schmidt

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

Please submit this to Public Comment

Laurie Ortolano
41 Berkeley St
Nashua, NH 03064

wennnan==- Forwarded message ---------

From: Laurie Ortolano <laurieortolano@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:22 PM

Subject: Disciplinary Action Jan Schmidt

To: Board of Aldermen <BOA@nashuanh.gov>

Ce: <steve.shurtleff@leg.state.nh.us>

May 26, 2020
To: Board of Aldermen

lam requesting that this be accepted as public input and when meeting are open again for the public to speak
at the microphone, | will be reading this into the record.

|am writing to this Board to ask for disciplinary action to be taken against Alderwoman Jan Schmidt. Lori
Wilshire sent a fink to the Aldermen Code of Conduct. ! have provided a link to the code below as well as the
language for section F.

lam concerned that there is no disciplinary policy for member who fail to abide by the code of conduct. What
are the ramifications?

Jan Schmidt has been using social media to post information that | believe that is not available to the general
public and appears to be information she might be receiving in non-public sessions. She is clearly choosing to
engage in these communications rather than withholding comment. It is her choice to play in the social
media arena.

https://ecode360.com/8728382
F. Each member is responsible for the behavior of his or her fellow members, since inappropriate
behavior which goes unchallenged reflects badly on the entire Board.

ina post on Nashua Scoop last week, May 21, 2020 regarding the PA-71 filed by Cheryl Walley against Greg
Turgiss, Aiderwoman Schmidt posted a comment about the police warning given to me in September.

She wrote: “Would you like to explain why employees were accosted outside the building? Why some
were in tears, feeling frightened? Why you had to be told to leave them alone? You had business inside
their offices not outside being aggressive toward them.”

| did offer an explanation. | am only aware of a single conversation with Lynn Cameron outside City Hall that
took place on September 11, 2019. She was not in tears nor did she look frighten. As a matter of fact, she did
not walk or run away from me; she stayed and spoke and answered my question.

It was 11 days later, on September 22, 2019 that the police showed up to issue a verbal warning to have no
contact with assessing employees outside of city hall or a restraining order would be issued. | was also warned
that if my conduct in City Hall was viewed inappropriate, | could be removed from the building and denied
entry for an extended period of time.

If had been so menacing and emotionally abusive, why did the police wait 11 days to issue the warning? The
use of the word “accosted” is interesting and disputable.

| explained on social media, that | had watched Lynn Cameron deal with some pretty difficult people (they
were men} who came into the assessing office upset about exemptions. They were verbally and aggressively
confronting her. She was accosted by them. She stood up to questioning beautifully and was no shrinking
violet.

The information from the police investigation has not been made public yet. | am still waiting for my RTK
request to be filled. It has been 8 months since the warning was issued and | have no idea what was said by
every employee to warrant the warning given to me.

Have the Aldermen and Jan Schmidt been made privy to the information in that investigation and should she
be posting the results on social media when the person accused does not have access to the information and
no real means to defend themselves?

So, when Jan Schmidt writes employees were accosted, in tears and frightened. Who is she referring to?

This is not the first time that Alderwoman Schmidt has used social media to address the police warning.

| was sent a post this weekend by a Nashua resident who was on Jan’s personal Facebook page. Here is what
was written,

“Lam trying to have a conversation with a woman who has inflated her self-importance by attacking a
city department.

You know that person who has an argument by increasing the load of horseshite by bringing up every
single slight she has ever encountered?

Even if each has been resolved, years ago?

And then her friends jump in to tell you that you are shite and have to be removed from office?
2

Yes, Have a problem with letting people get away with manipulating the facts and manipulating people
~/ don’t know why | bother.”

She the writes on her page, “I have to say that 99% of my own constituency is incredible. Thoughtful,
caring, part of a community- but there’s those few — one called me a Schmidthead today...sigh.”

itis not clear, if Aldermen Schmidt is referring to me in this post. But what is clear is that it is incredibly
inappropriate to write this way about any citizen who chose to reach out to Jan.

If this post is, in fact, about me, then Jan is doing quite a bit of information manipulation herself. She writes
that each of the issues has been resolved years ago. My issues have not been resolved. My appeal and
abatement will continue for the next several years, my Right-To-Know lawsuit is scheduled for a 2 day trial in
November, and my police investigation data has not been released. We still do not have a Chief of Assessing
and no policies have yet to be written to guide the office. The by-laws for the Board of Assessor were started
last September and are not publicly available. Public input has been eliminated. Moving forward to replace
paper data with digital data has not even been looked at.

Finally, and most disappointing, there is not community involvement in the policy creation or digital data
initiative.

If 99% of Jan’s constituency is wonderful, | think she should be able to handle the 1% that are difficult. Once
again, she doesn’t have to use social media to draw attention to this individual. Wouldn’t it be best to just
ignore this individual?

lam very concerned about Jan Schmidt’s conduct and her ability to serve the people of Nashua as an
Alderwoman and Representative to the state.

Regard,
Laurie Ortolano
BTW, in the process of drafting this letter, | have been in an email exchange with Ms. Schmidt. | sent the email

to her City account and she responded using a private account. | do not think this is appropriate as lam
addressing City business. | will forward all the emails.

Graham, Donna

REN ean ae mh eR
From: Laurie Ortolano <Jaurieortolano@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 9:14 AM
To: Board of Aldermen
Subject: Fwe: Disciplinary Action Jan Schmidt
Attachments: 20200529 - Lynn Cameron Oriolano warning.pdf; 20200529 - Assessing

OfficeOrtolano warning.pdf

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

Please submit these emails to public input

Laurie Ortolano
41 Berkeley St
Nashua, NH 03064

ween Forwarded message ---------

From: Laurie Ortolano <lauricortolano@gmail.com>

Date: Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 2:52 PM

Subject: Re: Disciplinary Action Jan Schmidt

To: Board of Aldermen <BOA@nashuanh. gov>, <steve.shurtleff@leg.state.nh.us>

Cc: Mayor Jim Donchess <nashuamayor(@nashuanh.sov>, Bolton, Steve <boltons@nashuanh. gov>

I am following up on my request for disciplinary action against Jan Schmidt. 1 received the police investigation
information on Friday and there we 2 minimal pieces of information regarding the warning. Please see
attached.

Aldermen Schmidt's remarks about me accosting employees outside City Hall was not accurate. As

I suspected, the only individual I spoke with was Lynn Cameron. As far as Aldermen Schmidt's remarks about
bring them to tears and frighten them, again that did not happen. The “tears” for Ms. Cameron only came in the
police interview with her boss, Louise Brown present. The police did not speak with anyone else who interfaced
with me outside of City Hall nor did the document anyone was in tears.

I am disgusted that she uses social media to post these accusations and calls me out on social media to speak to
the accusation. | do speak to the accusations with the information 1 have and as it turns out, 1 was accurate.
Aidermen Schmidt is an elected official and I believe she is deliberating spreading misinformation on social
media and in public. Her actions do not represent the harmonious nature of the chamber.

I believe the police warning I received was a complete manipulation and blow out of proportion which has
been City Hall's and the Mayor's reaction - an over-reaction. | waited 8 months to get these 2 pieces of paper.

The negative actions of Aldermen Schmidt reflects on the entire chamber. Turning a blind eye to unacceptable
behavior and allowing the "bad apples" to go unchecked is unacceptable. We all see what is happening to our
police departments nationally as a result of the "few bad apples" who get to keep their jobs and abuse their
power. The emotional outcry has been devestating and is brought on by systems protecting those that should
have been pushed out years ago.