CONCORD, NH — A ward city councilor has been told she will not be allowed to participate in the review process of Concord’s city manager due to a conflict of interest since her husband works for the Concord Police Department.
On April 23, Concord Mayor Byron Champlin informed Ward 5 Concord City Councilor Stacey Brown by email she was being removed from City Manager Tom Aspell’s evaluation process. According to a copy of the email, anonymously sent to Patch and verified as authentic, Champlin told her he was asked to consider whether her participation in the process posed a conflict of interest because her husband is a police detective.
“I am writing to inform you that, in accordance with guidance from the city solicitor and applicable conflict of interest standards, you will not be participating in the city manager’s evaluation process this year due to your identified conflict of interest,” Champlin wrote. “The city manager serves as the chief administrative officer of the city. Pursuant to City Ordinance Chapter 35, he holds the power to appoint, demote, suspend, dismiss, or grant leave to city employees.”
While Aspell does not exercise day-to-day supervision of Brown’s husband or the police department, Champlin said, “he retains significant oversight and authority over his employment with the city.” Brown’s participation, “in determining the evaluation and compensation of the city manager constitutes a conflict of interest where the city manager’s decisions may have a direct impact on your husband’s employment and compensation,” Champlin said.
Champlin said all aspects of the evaluation process remain subject to the provisions of the state’s right-to-know law, 91-a.
City and elected officials have shielded the public and the press from Aspell’s evaluation and review process, much to the chagrin of the Concord Monitor, which has regularly covered the issue (though it appears the newspaper has not sued the city to obtain the information).
For four years, however, Brown has been participating in the review process and declined to recuse herself despite it being an obvious conflict of interest. Neither Champlin nor Jim Bouley, the city’s former mayor, removed her from the process, which is bewildering.
Not unlike the newspaper, Brown, too, is not being allowed access to the review documents.
On May 1, she requested the information from City Clerk Janice Bonenfant by email.
Bonenfant confirmed receipt of the request but said she had been advised the city manager evaluation guide was “a confidential draft document provided only to members of city council participating in the annual review of the city manager.” She added Brown was not participating in this year’s review and she was instructed not to share the information with her. Bonenfant CC’d Champlin, City Solicitor John Conforti and Danielle Sakowski, the deputy solicitor, who was covering for Conforti while he was on vacation.
Brown countered the information was “a public document” that was sent to city councilors and requested “legal documentation preventing disseminating a public document to a duly elected city councilor.”
Sakowski said, while she had not been involved with the issue, the documents Brown was requesting were “exempt from disclosure” since it constituted a record “pertaining to internal personnel practices.” She cited Seacoast Newspapers, Inc. v. City of Portsmouth (2020).
Brown replied to Sakowski’s email a couple of hours later and said the decision to remove her from the review process was “the unilateral determination by the mayor” and claimed it was a violation of city charter and councilor rules. Charter 27, she said, allows the solicitor to give recommendations to the entire council. Any conflict-of-interest decision should be put to a vote of the council, according to Rule 6B, Brown added,
“The mayor has violated both the charter and the rules by making this decision and denying me due process,” she wrote.
Brown said she was not removed from the city manager’s evaluation in April 2025, received nonpublic minutes before the vote, and suggested improvements to the process in July 2025.
“I fully expected to participate and was not given any indication that I wouldn't until the mayor's email last Thursday,” Brown said. “The email announcing his decision to exclude me (which he has no authority to do) came just before the city solicitor left for a family vacation only to return after the city manager's evaluation is due.”
Champlin said Rule 6B gave him the responsibility of making a preliminary determination of what constitutes a conflict of interest, and communicating with the solicitor on the matter was justified.
“My concern was that, given the city manager’s general supervisory authority over city employees and the potential conflicts that could arise from a councilor evaluating the person who supervises their spouse, a conflict of interest existed,” he said. “As the sole member of city council responsible for making a preliminary decision on the matter, I sought and received the advice of the city solicitor that my interpretation of the conflict was justified.”
Rule 6B also requires a councilor to declare a conflict of interest “as soon as the conflict of interest becomes known,” which would have been, for Brown, 1 minute after being sworn in for her first term. Participating in the review of the person who could fire or promote her husband, anyone would realize, was a clear conflict of interest and should not require the vote of their colleagues.
The rule also states that the mayor’s decision “may” be put to a vote, meaning it is not required.
Brown has previously recused herself from other votes involving the police department, including personnel, benefits, and other issues, although she has attempted to skirt the line in some discussions, including the police station construction project discussion in November 2025, where she refused to recuse herself and was forced to by nine votes of her colleagues, and the Coffee and Cars event, which requires police detail hiring. In that instance, she was brought up on ethics charges but escaped discipline because the ethics board members believed she did not have ill intent.
Brown did not respond to follow-up questions on the matter, including why she had not previously recused herself from city manager evaluations, if she believed it was not in conflict, if she forced votes before every meeting, like closed sessions involving police and other contracts, and whether she planned to file an ethics complaint against Champlin for her perceived loss of due process.
In the Seacoast Newspapers, Inc. v. City of Portsmouth case, the courts revised a 1993 decision involving the New Hampshire Union Leader and, while retaining some exemptions, narrowed others. The Portsmouth records were later released to the newspaper and the public. However, it was because the arbitration had been settled.
Do you have a news tip? Email it to tony.schinella@patch.com. View videos on Tony Schinella's YouTube or Rumble channels. Patch in New Hampshire is now in 217 communities — and expanding every day. Also, follow Patch on Google Discover.
Sign up for free local newsletters and alerts for the
Concord, NH Patch
Patch.com is the nationwide leader in hyperlocal news.
Visit Patch.com to find your town today.