Board approves statement of support for health department, sends decorum language to committee after heated public comments

The Manchester Board of Mayor and Aldermen on Thursday approved a resolution saying the board and city do not support “personal attacks, threats, or innuendos” against city employees and expressed “complete faith and trust in Director Thomas and the outstanding employees” of the Health Department, and directed staff to draft language that would add anti-harassment and workplace-violence provisions to the board’s rules of decorum.

The item prompted more than an hour of public comment and aldermanic debate that centered on complaints about how the Health Department enforced rules against a resident who distributed homemade pickles, whether department heads should be treated as employees protected from harassment, and whether adding workplace-policy language to rules for elected officials could expose the city to litigation.

Supporters of the measures said the board needed a clear statement that the city will not tolerate harassment of public employees. “This is just saying we’re supporting our department heads,” Alderman O’Neil said during debate. Several public commenters also criticized attacks on department staff and urged protections for employees.

Opponents said the proposals blurred lines between elected officials and city employees and risked censoring elected representatives and constituents who criticize city actions. “When you become a department head, you have to be prepared to take the criticism,” Alderman Sapienza said. Several aldermen warned that incorporating employee-handbook language into a decorum rule could create legal exposure and urged the solicitor’s office to analyze the liability and the enforceable penalties before drafting final language.

Residents who spoke during the public comment period sharply criticized the Health Department’s actions in a dispute over the enforcement of local food-sale rules. Austin Bouchard, a resident who identified himself during public comment, called the proposed decorum language “deference” that would shield department heads from scrutiny. Daniel Mowery, who identified himself as the person at the center of the pickling enforcement dispute, said the Health Department’s outreach to him consisted only of a letter and no investigator visit and called the enforcement “harassment.”

Board action and next steps The board passed a motion directing the city solicitor and city clerk to draft language to add to the rules of decorum that would incorporate the “spirit” of the city’s anti-harassment and workplace-violence policies and return that draft to the committee on administration for consideration. That procedural motion passed on a roll call vote recorded as 8 in favor and 6 opposed to send the item to committee for drafting and review.

Separately, the board voted to adopt a nonbinding statement in support of Health Department staff that included the phrase about “complete faith and trust in Director Thomas.” That resolution passed by roll call and voice votes during the meeting and will be entered into the record.

Why it matters Aldermen and residents framed the debate as a tension between protecting city employees from targeted attacks and preserving the ability of elected officials and residents to publicly criticize department actions. Opponents repeatedly warned that the board could be vulnerable to lawsuits if decorum rules were expanded without careful legal review; supporters said employees had been subjected to sustained personal attacks that warranted a public rebuke.

Several aldermen asked the solicitor’s office to prepare a written analysis of legal risk and suggested the committee review possible enforcement language and penalties before the board considers any final change to the rules of decorum.

Speakers quoted or referenced in this article include:

- Austin Bouchard, resident (public commenter): “That is deference. It is not the role of this board to canonize department heads.” - Daniel Mowery, resident (public commenter, identified himself as “Pickle Man”): “Director Thomas never called me, never sent an investigator over to my house, never did any investigation … This is harassment.” - Alderman Tony Sapienza: “When you become a department head, you have to be prepared to take the criticism.” - Alderman O’Neil: argued the board should support department heads while still providing oversight.

Sections Lede: The Manchester Board of Mayor and Aldermen voted to ask the city solicitor and clerk to draft proposed decorum language incorporating anti-harassment and workplace-violence language and adopted a statement expressing support for the Health Department after extended public comment.

Nut graf: The debate highlighted a split between aldermen and residents who said department staff have been personally attacked and those who said expanding decorum rules risks chilling criticism of public officials and could create legal exposure if elected officials are treated like employees.

Ending: The solicitor’s office and city clerk will draft proposed language to return to the administration committee; the board asked for a written legal analysis of potential liability before any final change.