O P I N I O N
To the Editor:
A recent Op-Ed in the Union Leader by Aldermen Tim Sennott, Tom Lopez and Melbourne Moran highlighted the need for the Board and City leaders to rein in spending. Board members should view spending as a nonpartisan issue, recognizing the financial limitations our citizens’ funding government faces.
While the authors’ collaborative letter raised important points, it lacked specificity in identifying which projects should be eliminated and how to prioritize them. The Mayor and CFO acknowledged the city’s high debt burden and, in February 2024, recommended the formation of a special ad hoc debt service committee, which held nine meetings, to prioritize spending.
The ad hoc committee developed a comprehensive plan approved by the Board of Aldermen and incorporated into the approved City Budget. However, just four months later, city leaders chose to ignore this endorsed plan. Under the Mayor’s emergency declaration and the alarmist “sky is falling” rhetoric about impending crises, the BOA approved an additional $45 million, overstepping the city’s chartered spending cap. On December 10, 2024, the Board will authorize nearly $26M in new spending and bonding drawn from the $45 million. This spending, which includes renovating downtown parking garages, upgrading police facilities, purchasing DPW trucks, rebuilding a fire truck, and allocating millions for “various projects,” was not part of the committee’s 2024 spending plan nor communicated transparently to the public. This lack of accountability is concerning and undermines the trust our community deserves.
The Mayor highlighted the urgent need for a larger budget, claiming the spending cap is overly restrictive. He is now advocating for a charter change to implement a tax cap. City leaders must remove their dunce caps when it comes to fiscal responsibility. One Aldermen pointed out that next year’s budget will increase by 12%. How can this be justified?
The Op-Ed authors highlighted the urgent need for effective policymaking, yet City leaders seem unwilling to engage in this critical process. Mr. Cummings mentioned at an Aldermen’s Ward meeting that the ad hoc debt service committee is tasked with developing policy. However, it’s important to note that the committee’s mission lacks the goal of creating enforceable policies; as of now, none have been established. Policymaking is more about appearances and optics than delivering real, impactful solutions.
Finally, while the Aldermen acknowledged the need to support Nashua’s hard-working families through targeted government spending, they overlooked the significant population of retired citizens who live in Nashua or raised their families here. Approximately 20% of Nashuans are 65 or older, and New Hampshire has the second oldest population in the country. Reports indicate that New Hampshire’s population will decline over the next 50 years; parents seek homes with yards to raise families over high-rise apartments. The Mayor must consider these facts when pushing for high-density living areas, funding a performing arts center, a City train service, constructing a riverwalk, and other costly projects.
While the collaborative insights of these three Aldermen are notable, it remains to be seen if they will translate into tangible actions that reduce the burden on taxpayers. This change will not happen without public vigilance—people must watch, listen, and participate.
Laurie Ortolano
Nashua, NH
Letters to the editor on topics of general interest are welcome. Click here to DIY your submisssion.