Pretrial Statement Issued by the Town Attorney
Town’s Fire Chief for 17 years claimed by Town Attorney to be in that role “temporarily” and thus not deserving of a court hearing.
In early June the case against Nottingham’s Board of Selectmen made by the town’s former Fire Chief, Jaye Vilchock, will be heard in Rockingham Superior Court. The Board of Selectmen terminated Vilchok for cause in June 2023 following an investigation performed by Charla Stevens. Vilchock had served as Nottingham’s Fire Chief for 17 years, earning an annual stipend of $11,400 for his service. He is seeking for the court to overturn the Board of Selectmen’s decision to terminate him, which the court is authorized to do so under RSA 154:5.
On May 16, Upton & Hatfield, attorneys for the Town of Nottingham, issued a pretrial statement. At the beginning of this statement, Upton & Hatfield argue that a hearing should be denied to the former Fire Chief.
The Town disputes the Petitioner’s ability to have his appeal heard pursuant to RSA 154:5. At the time of the Petitioner’s termination, he was not the appointed Fire Chief. The Petitioner was a “holdover” appointee…. While the Petitioner was appointed by the Town’s Board of Selectmen in 2022, he was not appointed by the Board in 2023. Thus, the Petitioner has no right to this hearing under RSA 154:5. At the time of his termination in June 2023, he was not the appointed fire chief, as holding over does not represent automatic reappointment.
It will be interesting to see if any of the Selectmen called up as witnesses will testify that:
They thought at the time they dismissed the former Fire Chief that the Chief was in a temporary role.
The reason the Chief had not been re-appointed for the 17th year was for the intention of putting the Chief into a temporary role, and not that the Board of Selectmen had simply failed in its duty to formally re-appoint him. (And, was the reason for this failure due to the failure of the Interim Town Administrator to put it on the board’s agenda? Was that failure related to the hostile remarks the Interim Town Administrator made about the Chief and the Chief’s complaints to the board about the behavior of the Interim Town Administrator?)
Even though they thought the Chief was in a temporary role, they did not think this was a relevant issue during the months-long process of investigating and terminating the Chief, or relevant to mention in the Chief’s termination letter, or in the minutes of their public meetings, or in any communications from the board to the public.
Conversely, if it turns out that none of the Selectmen are willing to testify to this, then why is the Board of Selectmen paying Upton & Hatfield to make this argument? Why are they allowing the argument to be made if they’re likely to be put into a situation of contradicting their own attorney’s argument? Or does Upton & Hatfield have no idea what their clients will say when called to testify?
It’s not likely the Selectmen can avoid testifying. The Town Attorney’s pretrial statement says they may call up as witnesses anyone who has served as Selectman between 2018 and 2023.
Other witnesses the Town Attorney says they reserve the right to call up include:
What appears to be a list of all of the members of the Fire Department in 2022 and early 2023.
The town’s current Town Administrator, Ellen White, and the former Interim Town Administrator, John Scruton. (But, oddly, not the prior Town Administrator, Chris Sterndale).
The investigator, Charla Stevens.
The pretrial statement includes a long list of exhibits the Town Attorney anticipates providing as evidence. Much of this list includes things one would expect, such as personnel files; however, some interesting items include:
Public meeting minutes for Board of Selectmen regarding appointment of Fire Chief for years 2023 and prior.
Any correspondence between the Petitioner or Sandra Vilchock and the Town; the investigator, Charla Stevens; any member of NFRD; and Upton & Hatfield.
Contents of Facebook pages titled “Support Nottingham Fire Chief Jaye Vilchock and Lieutenant Sandra Vilchock,” “Nottingham, NH SUPER Unfiltered Community Connection and Open Discussion,” “Nottingham NH News and Information,” and other similarly titled pages.
Fascinating information about the workings of Nottingham town government is likely to be revealed at the trial. Subscribe to the Nottingham Blog on either Newsbreak or Substack to follow what happens.
Charla Stevens' website indicates that her firm provides "remediation if requested". Some time back I contacted the town ("Contact Us" on the town's website) wondering if any member of the BOS might have suggested "remediation" in the Vilchock case. I received no response or acknowledgment.
Doug, thanks again for keeping up on this situation. I find the following curious:
1. The Town's attorney has indicated that the BOS had not appointed the Fire Chief for 2023.
2. A review of the BOS meeting minutes does not indicate any such vote to appoint the Fire Chief for 2023.
3. The BOS meeting minutes of 2023 indicates "Fire Chief" and "Chief Vilchock" several times. What person were they referring to?
4. According to the Nottingham Fire and Rescue Bylaws in effect at that time, the Fire Chief selection is subject to final approval by the BOS at their next regularly scheduled meeting (Article VI, Election of Chief and Secretary).
5. The appointment of the Fire Chief is incumbent upon a vote by the BOS, not the department.
6. Was the Interim TA delinquent in his duties to address the Fire Chief 2023 election?
7. Was the BOS delinquent in addressing the election during their meetings?
8. Was the writer of the BOS meeting minutes at fault for not documenting a vote?
9. How could a person that was NOT appointed to a position be placed on PAID administrative leave or -indeed- terminated from that position?
10. A review of the BOS meeting minutes over the last 18 years would indicate the this BOS Fire Chief appointment was not done consistently.
11. A review of the Town Reports from 2007 through 2023 indicates payroll payments were made to Mr. Vilchock as part of the fire department.
Thanks again!