A RECENT op-ed published in the Union Leader by Nashua Aldermen Tim Sennott, Tom Lopez and Melbourne Moran highlighted the need for aldermen and city leaders to rein in spending. Board members should view spending as a nonpartisan issue, recognizing the financial limitations that our citizens funding government face.
While the op-ed raised important points, it lacked specificity in identifying which projects should be eliminated and how to prioritize them. The city’s mayor and CFO have acknowledged Nashua’s high debt burden and, in February 2024, recommended the formation of a special ad hoc debt service committee, which held nine meetings, to better prioritize spending.
This committee developed a comprehensive plan that was 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 Mayor Jim Donchess’s emergency declaration and the alarmist “sky is falling” rhetoric about an impending crisis, aldermen approved an additional $45 million, overstepping the city’s chartered spending cap.
On Dec. 10, 2024, the board will authorize nearly $26 million in new spending and bonding drawn from the $45 million. This spending — which includes renovating downtown parking garages, upgrading police facilities, purchasing public works trucks, rebuilding a fire truck, and allocating millions for “various projects” — was not part of the committee’s 2024 spending plan nor was it communicated transparently to the public. This lack of accountability is concerning and undermines the trust our community deserves.
Mayor Donchess highlighted the urgent need for a larger budget, claiming the spending cap is overly restrictive. Now he is advocating for a charter change to implement a tax cap. City leaders must remove their dunce caps when it comes to fiscal responsibility. One alderman 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 policy making, yet city leaders seem unwilling to engage in this critical process.
It was mentioned at an aldermen’s ward meeting that the ad hoc debt service committee is tasked with developing policy. However, the committee’s mission lacks the goal of creating enforceable policies; as of now, none have been established. This kind of policy making seems more about appearances and optics than delivering real, impactful solutions that last.
Finally, while aldermen acknowledge the need to support Nashua’s hard-working families through targeted government spending, they overlook 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 our state’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 commuter rail 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. Change will not happen without public vigilance — people must watch, listen, and participate.
