Board of Aldermen — 10/09/17 Page 4
City of Nashua, upon a vote referred to them by the Board of Aldermen of the City of Nashua.” Words to
that effect are mandated if you are going to have a binding resolution pursuant to those sections.
| particularly asked at that meeting if Alderman Clemons was thinking of a non-binding resolution. His
comment to me was yes, that was what he was envisioning. Those provisions, 98 through 108,
themselves, envision a measure that takes effect if there’s an affirmative vote of the qualified voters. The
very nature of a non-binding referendum is that it is advisory to the Board and the underlying action does
not take effect but merely provides information to the Board.
A combination of all of those things leads me to believe that we are not talking about something that’s
pursuant to 98 through 108, the Charter provisions. There’s also an ordinance provisions, Section 23-15,
which talks about information for voters in the form of pro and con statements. That being the case, |
interpret this to be just a method by which the Board of Aldermen is ordering the prudential affairs of the
city, which it has the right to do, pursuant to RSA 47:17. By prudential affairs, we’re talking about the
finances chiefly of the city. Other matters as well, but certainly finances are included. The underlying
measure here is to have a referendum to advise the Board of Aldermen on a matter that is pertaining to
the prudential affairs of the city. That’s where | see the authority for it.
Alderman Moriarty
A very good answer. Thank you, Attorney Bolton.
Attorney Bolton
You're welcome.
Alderman Moriarty
RSA 47:17 appears to be the statute which allows us to put a non-binding question on the ballot, and as
such doesn’t fall under NRO 23-15 and we are not required to provide pro and con information.
Attorney Bolton
That has been our analysis in the legal department.
Alderman Moriarty
I’m glad we had the discussion and think in advance of tonight’s Board of Aldermen meeting. With that, 1’ll
just leave it and say again | just want city staff to be mindful of RSA 659:44 which says don’t do anything
that might be construed as electioneering because it is a misdemeanor. Thank you.
President McCarthy
Attorney Bolton, is it your opinion that the question that’s being asked falls under the auspices of that
RSA?
Attorney Bolton
If we’re not going to provide it, | don’t have to worry about committing a misdemeanor. |’m fine with the
way we are leaving it.
President McCarthy
Do you believe it would be a misdemeanor if pros and cons were provided on a non-binding question?
