Paid leave for those charged with crimes not fair to taxpayers: Letters

Paid leave for those charged with crimes not fair to taxpayers

Aug. 30 − To the Editor:

Several recent news stories relating to alleged misconduct by municipal employees and/or elected officials refer to an unfortunate practice that really needs to be given a second look. This not only relates to Strafford County, but is an issue that arises all too often in numerous contexts. It is the concept of the granting of "administrative leave" to individuals who may have been charged with some kind of improper conduct.

In reality, what this amounts to is an extended paid vacation. In too many cases this can last for weeks or months while an investigation is underway or criminal charges work their way through the court system. The end result is that taxpayer money is being paid to the individual in question for doing nothing and providing no service. If there is an ultimate finding of wrongdoing there is no way of recouping the money paid, which may well end up being in the thousands of dollars.

A reasonable suggestion for dealing with the problem is the following: set whatever wages and benefits the individual would normally receive aside until the final resolution of the charges. If the person is exonerated he or she will receive the accumulated money in full; if the finding is adverse the fund will be forfeited and returned to the employer. This will not only protect the person's presumption of innocence pending final resolution, but also protect the taxpayer's interest in knowing that a person who is ultimately determined to be at fault will not be unfairly rewarded for his or her wrongdoing. This might even act as an incentive to both sides to deal with the charges promptly − the employee as well as the public is entitled to have these matters resolved without unnecessary delay.

A second issue that often appears when this situation arises is the potential for an agreement that the employee will voluntarily withdraw from his or her position, often in response to some kind of monetary settlement, but with no admission of wrongdoing. That might be the easy way out, but it is a disservice to everyone involved: those who might have been the victims of the improper conduct, the employer who may have suffered lost revenue or damaged property, or the taxpayer who, in effect, is paying someone off for bad behavior. This is true particularly if the person in question is a public employee or an elected official. The rule should be that, if guilty, they will be held accountable. No pay-offs or buyouts, and no part of what was involved in the charges to be withheld from the public, i.e. no non-disclosure agreements.

The overall integrity of government, and the public's expectation that those who have been elected to uphold the law will do the right thing, demands nothing less.

Anthony McManus

Dover

Working together we can make affordable housing a reality

Aug. 25 − To the Editor:

Housing and zoning are vital aspects of community development, and in Portsmouth, these issues have become increasingly significant. While the city has made progress in addressing some zoning complexities, this process has been slow and methodical. It's a journey that demands patience and, most importantly, collaboration from all stakeholders in the community.

Recent setbacks underscore the urgency and challenge of this issue. Multiple recent private-sector projects in Portsmouth, which would have provided workforce or more affordable housing, were either canceled or converted to office space. Others were reduced in scope, resulting in fewer, more expensive luxury homes or condos. These changes not only impact potential residents but alter the landscape of the community, shifting the balance towards wealthier inhabitants.

One of the factors that adds complexity to the situation is New Hampshire's adherence to Dillon's Rule, rather than home rule. Unlike home rule, which grants local governments some autonomy, Dillon's Rule emphasizes state control over local decisions. In Portsmouth, this has created hurdles in tailoring solutions to fit the unique needs and wants of the community. As a city councilor or local stakeholder, battling against this broader governance structure can be challenging and limiting.

Despite the complexities, the community must persevere. There are no pain-free or compromise-free solutions to Portsmouth's housing and zoning issues. However, inaction is even less desirable. Local government, private sector, and community members must continue to work together, openly discussing the challenges and creatively exploring solutions that align with Portsmouth's unique character and needs.

The journey towards resolving housing and zoning issues in Portsmouth is long and filled with challenges. But the alternative—stagnation and imbalance—is far less appealing. By embracing the slow process, recognizing the constraints of Dillon's Rule, and fostering an environment of collaboration and compromise, Portsmouth can move towards a future where more affordable housing is not merely an aspiration but a reality. It's a process that demands continued attention, commitment, and action. The path is complex, but the destination is worth every step and will take the entire community's efforts to complete.

Andrew Bagley

Portsmouth

Thanks to Peter Rice for his leadership at Portsmouth DPW

Aug. 27 − To the Editor:

I’d like to publicly thank someone most of us have been touched by in one way or another. The Director of Portsmouth Department of Public Works, Peter Rice. I’ve known Peter Rice for years. We’ve certainly had our ups and downs over the Peirce Island WWTF, Mechanic Street Pumping station & South Mill Pond. You could say some of our professional encounters have bordered on never dull looking back. So here I am thanking the director of Portsmouth DPW. For that matter, all of DPW. As Mr. Rice said to me once in response to a question, “Portsmouth is my life…..” To understand that is to understand Peter Rice.

When you realize how complicated Portsmouth has become, it’s time. Think of all the different projects we see DPW employees working on. These dedicated men and women spend their lives making ours better. How many different projects are there in Portsmouth on any given day? Line painting; parking; street sweeping; snow plowing; pothole paving; street calming; garbage collection all week every week; storm water flooding; Bertha the vector-truck; random sewer line emergencies; water line emergencies; major sewer projects; water safety, electrical problems; our entire drinking water system for that mater. Don’t forget Pease….another Wastewater Facility. Countless vehicles and employees. More pumping stations than imaginable. I could continue. Every night he’s needed by the City Manager or Council to explain at some meeting what they don’t understand, he’s there politely explaining. There is precious little about the workings of this city that Peter Rice and the divisions of employees working for him don’t understand.

Yes, we may pay our employees well, but as The Director of the Department of Public Works said, “ This is my life. Of course I’m here.”

So what’s prompted my note of thanks? I wrote to Mr. Rice about The Dreaded Geese in Prescott Park this morning – on a Sunday. As they call them in the Midwest, Sky Carp. I’d read the Herald article (also the many reader comments). Common sense says herding dogs might be the humane solution to the poop problem in the park, so I wrote to Mr. Rice. He certainly didn’t need to respond on a Sunday, but he did. What he said was polite and caring and certainly funny and empathetic. He said, “We’re certainly working on it. I had my cattle dog down at Prescott Park and it works! So we’re in talks with professionals. The only problem I had is that my dog kept eating the Geese Poop…”.

I’m still laughing at the thought, Peter Rice, and everything else that goes along with it, but thank you for personally trying to make our lives better. This entire city works better because of your caring and that of the Department of Public Works.

Thank you Peter Rice to you, your dog, and DPW

Paige Trace

Portsmouth

Do those who think Pence could overturn election think Harris can too?

Aug. 27 −To the Editor:

We learned from the first GOP debate that with the exception of Chris Christie and Asa Hutchinson, all the other candidates have chosen  political party over our Constitution and our Nation. To publicly indicate that a conviction of treason is insufficient to stop them from supporting a candidate for President of the United States is not comforting.

Many supporters, beyond the GOP candidates, believe that Pence had the power to replace the electoral college results with the votes of fake electors. The certification of 50 independent states and the decisions of 60+ courts should be an indication of a job well done. After all, there were many down ballot results favoring the GOP candidates. The Federal Election Commission has certified that Hillary Clinton beat the GOP candidate by 3 million popular votes in 2016, and the same man was beaten by 8 million popular votes in 2020.

All this leaves me to consider what the response of those nonbelievers would be if Kamala Harris decided on a different result than the states offered in 2024.

Sheila Nudd

Hampton

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Paid leave for those charged with crimes unfair to taxpayers: Letters