CONCORD, NH — Two sitting Concord city councilors appear to have violated the city’s code of ethics and rules by not correctly following conflict of interest procedures despite warnings and opportunities to correct their actions — and no one seems to be willing to file complaints against them.
Ward 5 Concord City Councilor Stacey Brown, after pulling a consent agenda item about a closed street on Monday, voted for the item despite a possible benefit to her through her husband, who is a police sergeant. Closed streets often require detail pay and, in the case of the event in question, did have officers involved. Ward 8 Concord City Councilor Ali Sekou appeared to have violated the recusal provision on April 8 by failing to announce why he was not voting on a 79E tax exemption extension for the First Church Holdings project — a requirement under Article 1-6-4 of the Code of Ethics. He also failed to recuse himself from the entire question being discussed at the beginning of the process and only did so during the vote. Sekou is the president of the IQRA Islamic Society of Greater Concord, a mosque that abuts the property. The mosque is suing the city of Concord due to the zoning board of appeals approving the project, a 30-unit apartment proposal, due to limited parking spaces.
Brown Pulls Consent Agenda
Brown’s latest apparent conflict — one of a string of interactions outside the purview of councilors, including requesting private information about councilors having library cards or golf course membership as well as attempting to gain access to information about job applicants applying for work with the city, occurred Monday when she requested Item 24 be pulled from the Consent Agenda.
Find out what's happening in Concordwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
The Consent Agenda is a list of communications from staff and others to councilors with information in them. The items are sometimes pulled so councilors can make comments or question the items.
Item 24 on May 13 involved a report about street closures and the Cars & Coffee Events on North Main Street on Sundays, an event deemed a success. Anyone downtown Sunday saw how hopping Main Street was. The report included information from the owners of Revelstoke Coffee, the event organizer, and City Manager Tom Aspell. It also mentioned the need for police details at the event — something Brown cannot be involved with due to her husband being a police sergeant.
Find out what's happening in Concordwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
Brown commended the event but removed the item from consent to know what the process was for people who might have great ideas for events to be able to request streets be closed. Aspell said about 15 years ago, the full council approved each request for a street closure. But that bogged the process down, requiring petitioners to request the closure months in advance. So now, he approves them. A resident can submit a request, he will examine it, speak with city staff, and then approve or disapprove of the request, “if they make sense.” Aspell said there were about half a dozen requests a month.
“I’ve never had a complaint on every one I’ve considered,” he said.
In the case of the Coffee & Cars event, since it was a new event that led to the closure of Main Street and some side streets, he thought it was worth sharing the information about the event with councilors, hence the memo.
Brown said the concern was some residents did not like Main Street closed down. She asked if he had spoken to anyone downtown, and he said staffers spoke to businesses. Revelstoke, he added, also did a lot of outreach to businesses. Staff, too, thought it was something worth trying, he said.
At-Large City Councilor Fred Keach, who requested for Item 24 to be placed back on the Consent Agenda, something that is not allowed if a councilor requests to speak about, chastised Brown for getting involved in the minutiae of the city manager and staff.
Keach called it a conflict of interest since the memo clearly stated police were involved in the event and the closure and she was required to recuse herself from those discussion. That, though, was secondary to his main point, he added. As the city manager touched upon, Keach said, staff had already reviewed the process and it appeared the event was successful. The event organizers also spent hundreds of hours putting it together, he said.
“I’m not sure why we would substitute our judgment for the staff’s judgment,” Keach said. “This is just a no-brainer. It cost the city nothing. Zero dollars. It happens on a Sunday morning. I’ve been to previous events; I can testify as to as to Councilor (Karen) McNamara’s point at just how many hundreds of people were down there and what a huge benefit to the city.”
Keach said for those reasons, he objected to Brown’s action pulling a memo from the consent agenda.
“This is something we shouldn’t spend a lot of time with,” he added. “We have to move forward.”
Keach motioned to approve the item, but Sekou said he had questions. The motion was made and seconded, and then Sekou questioned whether a new item or event should be on the consent agenda. He noted there were new councilors and businesses who might like the information and not know about the process.
“I think it does make sense to have it here and to discuss it,” he said.
Aspell said when considering closing downtown, it was worth letting the councilors know about it because there were parking and other issues for residents on Main Street.
Sekou agreed and repeated that it was “always good to have those conversations” so that new people could learn and people watching the councilors knew the process.
At-Large City Councilor Nathan Fennessy commended the report and the event, although he said it was unnecessary. He said the downtown was packed for the event. Fennessy added too much time had been spent discussing the issue.
At-Large City Councilor Amanda Grady Sexton also thanked the owners of Revelstoke for putting on the event and said the entire purpose of revamping Main Street was to bring life into it, to attract New Englanders to the city, and for businesses to be more involved like they were doing.
Brown countered that while the event was great, it was important to allow anyone or everyone who might be impacted to be able to share their thoughts.
“I don’t think it’s fair to make a decision without getting their input,” she said.
Ward 3 City Councilor Jennifer Kretovic also commended the event as something Concord could offer.
McNamara confirmed Revelstoke reached out to businesses about the event.
Brown said she wanted to see the survey and information gathered from the businesses.
At-Large City Councilor Judith Kurtz said it was her understanding that Revelstoke gave Aspell the information. The city manager confirmed that the owners found full support for the event.
Keach added the consent item was not a “$50 million project” but was “a good idea to bring economic return to downtown.” He said the previous conversation was also an example of how councilors could “get in the way of things and be part of the problem not part of the solution.”
Brown said the survey from businesses should have been included in the initial report.
Mayor Byron Champlin agreed with Grady Sexton about changes to the downtown and commended Revelstoke for the event.
Before the vote, Champlin asked Brown if she was voting on it, which appeared to raise the issue of recusal while not challenging her ability to vote. She said she would be voting on it with the understanding that she could get the business survey information since it was not included in the report. After Fennessy moved the question, Champlin returned to Brown and said, “So councilor, you are not going to recuse yourself … you are going to vote?”
Brown confirmed she was going to vote on the item.
“Yes,” she said, “yes, I am voting.”
Champlin countered, “The chair would advise … if it were the chair, the chair would refuse … but … that’s your choice. OK.”
The item was then approved by voice vote, with Brown apparently voting for the item.
Along with the aforementioned issues, Brown has also reportedly identified herself as a city councilor at public meetings, a violation of council rules, and replied to all councilors in emails and sent emails to all city councilors and the mayor, violating state open meeting laws.
Jim Kennedy, the former city solicitor and now a judge, warned councilors in 2023 to refrain from emailing each other as it could be seen as a violation and, instead, filter all communication to other elected officials through the city clerk.
In past meetings late in her first term and through her second term, Brown has consistently recused herself from votes and discussion about issues surrounding the police department, union compensation, and the library due to conflicts of interest, making her action on Monday strange and unexplained.
Brown did not respond to an email seeking comment about the vote on Monday.
In the past, other city councilors have warned Brown about her continued violations of the rules, even during open meetings.
Also, at a zoning board meeting in February 2023, concerning a Lake Street parcel, Brown testified and announced she was the city councilor for Ward 5 and spoke about the issue in that capacity, a violation of council policy.
Councilors can speak at public meetings, but they cannot use their title in a way where it might influence public bodies.
In Code 1-6-3, a “conflict of interest” is defined as the following:
“A conflict of interest exists when an officer or elected official takes an action or makes a decision that would affect his or her financial interest, the financial interests of the officer or elected official’s family member or the interests of any organization in which the officer or elected official or the officer or elected official’s family member is an employee of the organization or a member of its governing body. For employment with the City of Concord and for other governmental entities, a conflict of interest shall exist when the matter before the Public Body involves the department for which the officer or elected official or officer or elected official’s family member is employed. A conflict of interest shall also exist for an officer or elected official whose family member is employed in the City of Concord when such family member is a member of a union in the City and the Public Body is discussing any collective bargaining matters in a non-meeting, under RSA 91-A:2, I (a), relative to strategy or negotiations with respect to collective bargaining.”
Brown was also accused more than two years ago of a conflict-of-interest violation when she voted on a donation to the library by her employer, but no one filed a complaint against her in that instance either.
Click Here: Cheap Vans Women Shoes
In the past, Brown has consistently recused herself from some items concerning police funding, union contracts, the city manager’s salary, and other issues due to her husband’s employment with the city, and has stated as such.
Mosque Lawsuit Still Active
Some city officials were surprised to learn the mosque’s lawsuit against the city was still active because they believed the matter had been settled.
After Patch broke the story that Sekou and the mosque were suing to stop a housing project from being built at a church that formerly housed a homeless shelter, some were surprised because few knew about the lawsuit, which was filed about a month before he was elected to the council in 2023 and certainly would or should have been a campaign issue.
Sekou has refused to respond to emails about the issue but told another media outlet in January that he and project developers Benjamin Kelley and Jonathan Chorlian were working toward a resolution.
Part of the supposed agreement was for the lawsuit to be dropped after Chorlian and Kelley received reapproval for the project after its units were cut by 10 percent.
Previously, the mosque had been able to use some of the church’s land for parking but now is unable to, even though providing parking for mosque attendees was not the responsibility of anyone but the mosque and worshippers, not the city or the developer.
The vote for the 79-E exemption extension on April 8, which was approved unanimously by the council, gave the developer an extra year to complete the project. The delay was primarily due to extra planning and zoning processes required and the lawsuit.
Sekou sat through the entire discussion of the 79-E extension and did not recuse himself as required before the discussion.
Sekou recused himself when it came up for a vote but failed to say why.
According to the code of ethics, the process is fairly clear, requiring recusal and reasoning, and disclosing it all before discussion on the matter:
“Whenever a matter comes before any City of Concord Public Body, no officer or elected official shall introduce, ask questions, speak on or vote on any motion, ordinance, resolution or issue in which he/she has a conflict of interest and shall disclose the reason for the conflict of interest prior to the Public Body’s discussion on the matter, or if discussion has occurred, then as soon as the conflict becomes known to the officer or official.”
Sekou was reminded about his incomplete recusal, and it was suggested he revisit the issue to correct the violation on Monday, but he refused.
The violation was pointed out to several other city councilors and the mayor, but they all refused to prompt Sekou or remind him to correct his incomplete recusal. They also did not respond to an email about the initial issues with Sekou failing to offer a complete recusal either on April 8 or Monday.
In an emailed joint statement, Kelley and Chorlian confirmed they had agreed “in principle” with the mosque several months ago to sell part of the church property to them for additional parking.
“As part of that agreement,” they said, “we were responsible for the design and permitting of that parking lot, subject to reimbursement from the Islamic Society.”
The zoning board approvals have been secured while planning board approval is expected later this month. The developers said they expected a written settlement agreement in the coming days, and after that, the mosque’s lawsuit against the city, challenging their earlier zoning variances, would be dropped.
“Needless to say, this whole process delayed the start of our construction, which was to being last fall,” they stated.
Kelley and Chorlian said they were excited demolition had started and construction would soon follow.
“And while we wish a resolution with the Islamic Society could have been reached sooner,” they said, “we are pleased that our project is moving forward with a resolution that helps our neighbor to meet the parking needs of a rapidly growing mosque.”
The civil suit, first filed in Merrimack County Superior Court, moved to Hillsborough County Superior Court North. A status conference hearing is slated for 2 p.m. on Thursday.
Av Harris, the communication manager and public information for the New Hampshire Judicial Branch, said the case was moved because it was a land use appeals case, and those now have a specialized docket with Judge Michael Klass of Hills North. The change was made in January, according to a court press release.
Where Are The Good Government Types?
These apparent violations, in the past, would have caught the eyes of good government types in the Concord community like former state Rep. Rick Watrous, a Democrat, and former Ward 2 City Council Allan Herschlag.
Both Herschlag and Watrous challenged others on the council and filed paperwork with the board of ethics mostly against former Mayor Jim Bouley. Herschlag called out Bouley back in 2021, during the Kenogarten situation, due to his lobbying work with Intralot, a vendor with the New Hampshire Lottery.
Both Herschlag and Watrous filed complaints against others, too. Herschlag filed a complaint against Ward 3 City Councilor Jennifer Kretovic concerning his perceived conflict involving a grant she voted on back in 2012 from a previous employer. Watrous filed complaints against Bouley and then-Councilor Dan St. Hilaire, who is also now a judge. The complaint against Bouley was based on him naming people who would be considering a complaint against him. Watrous also brought several complaints of ethics violations concerning the public access station and his former role as executive director of the facility.
All the efforts by Herschlag and Watrous were rejected by the board of ethics or were never forwarded or corrected.
Watrous moved out of the city several years ago and Herschlag has not offered any commentary about Brown or Sekou.
How To File A Complaint Against An Official
According to the city’s administrative code, filing a complaint against a councilor or any other city official is a fairly simple process.
Complaints should be filed with the city clerk in writing and sworn in before a justice of the peace or notary public. The complaint must be “specific and to the point.” The clerk then submits the complaint to the clerk of the board of ethics.
The board of ethics then reviews the complaint, determines merit, and schedules a hearing within 45 days of the matter being referred to the board.
During the hearing, the accused may have counsel, at their own expense, and may present evidence on their behalf. The board shall render a finding and recommend action to the city council.
Those actions can include a vote for innocence of any wrongdoing, a vote to place the matter on file with or without a finding, a letter of reprimand, a vote to publicly censure the offending member, a vote for suspension for a definite period, a vote for removal, and an acceptance of the accused’s resignation.
Do you have a news tip? Please email it to [email protected]. View videos on Tony Schinella’s YouTube.com channel or Rumble.com channel. Follow the NH politics Twitter account @NHPatchPolitics for all our campaign coverage.
Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.