Ruling Released for Vilchock v. Nottingham Board of Selectmen
Court rules in favor of the Board of Selectmen
In a 13-page decision, Rockingham Superior Court Judge Lisa M. English ruled that the Nottingham Board of Selectmen had acted rightly in its decision to fire Jaye Vilchock from his role as Nottingham’s Fire Chief. Vilchock brought the case to court, claiming that the board had decided wrongly and that the process the board used in making its decision was unfair. In New Hampshire, Fire Chiefs and Police Chiefs have a statutory right to have their firings reviewed and potentially overturned by a court.
The conclusion of the ruling was:
The Court finds that the plaintiff ‘lost the confidence … of those who served under him’ … and his ‘course of conduct in this entire matter rendered him unfit for the position’ of NFRD Chief…. This compels a finding of substantial cause for his dismissal.
I observed the three days of testimony. I also concluded, “I think the judge will decide in the town’s favor, on the grounds that Vilchock had lost the respect and confidence of his staff.”
Most of the document details the various grounds the board gave for its decision and why the judge found merit in them. About these, the judge commented:
While each of the above instances of conduct in isolation may not have amounted to sufficient cause, Court finds that, taken together, they support the Board’s decision. The Court acknowledges that many of these issues arose as the result of the advent of full-time NFRD staff, where the department had historically been composed of volunteer or on-call employees. Multiple witnesses testified that this transition was generally difficult.
Vilchock’s attorney had argued that the process the board used for firing the Chief was so poorly conducted and so biased against the Chief that the court should overturn the board’s decision on the basis of the injustice of the process. Nowhere in the judge’s ruling was this argument addressed.
The Town Attorney had argued that because the Board of Selectmen did not formally re-appoint the Chief in early 2023, the Chief’s legal status was that of a holdover appointee. As holdover appointees do not have the legal right to contest their terminations, the judge should dismiss Vilchock’s case. The judge rejected the Town Attorney’s argument, saying:
…it is undisputed that the Board dismissed the plaintiff from his position as Chief for cause. By all accounts, the Board followed the procedure listed under RSA 154:5 and cited to such in its termination letter. Multiple witnesses testified that the plaintiff’s holdover status did not factor into the board’s decision to terminate him, and that he was undisputedly terminated for cause.
The complete text of the judge’s decision may be downloaded. See below.
The situation was shamefully handled by the BOS and interim administrator. Regardless of the court decision, which I understand but find as lacking in deep consideration as I found the town-paid investigator's report biased and filled with innuendo, the Vilchock's deserve our respect and an apology from the town. Chief sued to defend his honor, he did not seek damages, just an apology and his legal fees. In my opinion, moving on him as the BOS and interim administrator did was uncalled for and should have begun with an open explanation of the charges and opportunity to respond to such charges. What happened, instead, as happens too often in this dystopian culture, is the cancellation of a long standing, respected, town servant.
I still think the way the town fired the chief is the reason he brought a law suit against the town. This is an opportunity for the town to review how the situation was handled and to improve on the way employees of the town are treated. Not a win for Nottingham.