#

Controversial Executive Councilor Karen Liot Hill’s 2024 campaign spending made headlines, and now it may be getting attention from the Attorney General’s Office as well. It confirms it is investigating the Lebanon Democrat’s campaign finances.

Questions about Liot Hill’s campaign finances began with NHJournal’s coverage of her lavish spending during the Democratic primary for Executive Council. Her allegedly campaign-related expenditures included charges for house cleaning, home heating oil, clothes, haircuts, groceries, gifts, payments to relatives, out-of-state trips, and more than $15,000 in gas and meal expenses.

Now, the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office confirms to NHJournal that its Election Law Unit is investigating a complaint filed against Executive Councilor Karen Liot Hill (D-Lebanon).

“The New Hampshire Department of Justice Election Law Unit can confirm that there is an open campaign finance matter involving Executive Counselor Liot Hill,” Election Law Unit Chief Assistant Attorney General Brendan O’Donnell told NHJournal.

Liot Hill, an Upper Valley Democrat who previously served on the Lebanon City Council, refused to answer when NHJournal asked her about the investigation. Liot Hill simply shook her head in response to NHJournal’s questions.

The New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office declined to give details about the investigation, and the original complaint is not being made public at this time. NHJournal’s review of Liot Hill’s campaign finance reports, and her subsequent moves to correct the reports, uncovered curious details.

For example, nestled among her campaign receipts were two mystery checks that corresponded to court dates in two separate legal matters facing Liot Hill.

After NHJournal reported on her spending, Liot Hill filed amended reports with the New Hampshire Secretary of State’s Office that removed some of the spending line items, and attempted to explain the two mystery checks.

Liot Hill’s original reports listed two unexplained checks from December 2023 and January 2024 totaling $1,350. The checks did not include any information on who received the money, or the purpose of the expenses.

NHJournal found the timing of the two checks corresponded with two court cases involving Liot Hill. One was a violation for driving with a suspended license, the other involved a debt collection. The amended reports list those checks as reimbursements to Liot Hill for various software subscriptions, as well as cell phone and internet services.

These aren’t Liot Hill’s first legal troubles. The Democrat has been arrested twice for DUI, once in 2010 and again in 2018.

One interesting element about Liot Hill’s campaign disclosures for investigators to review: the sudden change in the status of her campaign treasurer.

The original reports listed former state Rep. Corrine Morse as the campaign treasurer, and appear to bear her signature. But the amended reports, which are significantly different from the first ones, are signed by Liot Hill, who declared herself her campaign’s treasurer.

Filing campaign documents that make false representations, such as who signed them, is a serious violation of state campaign finance laws.

NHJournal contacted Morse in November about her role in the campaign and asked if she had in fact signed the original reports for Liot Hill.

“I can’t comment on that,” Morse told NHJournal at the time.

Morse has not responded since to NHJournal’s multiple calls or emails about the campaign or the investigation.

It’s past time for the public to get the truth about Liot Hill’s finances, says New Hampshire Republican Party Chairman Jim MacEachern, particularly given the financial duties of her position as an Executive Councilor.

“Councilor Hill, who has a history of breaking the law, is now accused of misusing campaign dollars and fraudulent filings,” MacEachern told NHJournal. “It’s alarming that someone like that is empowered to review state contracts and even pardons. I’m happy to hear this is being investigated and trust that justice will be served,” MacEachern said.

Liot Hill’s GOP colleague, Executive Councilor Joe Kenny (R-District 1), learned about the investigation from NHJournal. He declined to comment on Liot Hill’s campaign spending, but he added,  “I hope it’s cleared up very quickly. We have a lot of work to do.”

Executive Councilor John Stephen (R-District 4) echoed that view.

“At the end of the day, we’re going to serve the people of this state who elected us,” Stephen said.

Amid a flurry of proposed budget cuts coming out of the legislature, the council is also navigating the sudden loss of $80 million in federal funding from the Centers for Disease Control. Stephen would not say if he thought Liot Hill being investigated could tarnish the image of the council as the public watches their decisions.

“I’m going to continue my role representing the people of District 4 in the most accountable way possible, with transparency and integrity in everything I do,” Stephen said.

Republican Kim Strathdee, who unsuccessfully ran against Liot Hill for the Executive Council, filed the complaint now under investigation. Strathdee did not respond to a text message seeking comment, and the phone number listed for her is not in service. Strathdee filed her complaint Oct. 7, days after NHJournal broke the story about Liot Hill’s campaign spending habits.

As for Strathdee’s campaign finances, she has a perfect record. While Liot Hill spent close to $120,000 on the contested primary and general election, Strathdee raised no money and spent no money throughout her entire campaign, according to her reports.

After years of operating with little oversight and producing even fewer results, New Hampshire’s Human Rights Commission (NHHRC) is now set for a major overhaul. Critics say it’s long overdue.

A brutal report released in February found the agency has unresolved cases of alleged discrimination going back to the Reagan administration. Its performance is so poor that it takes on average more than two years to resolve a single case.

All the while, the agency, nominally led by Executive Director Ahni Malachi, shuffled key staff without any approval and provided annual reports that were years late.

Even with red flags about the commission’s operations, such as the years’ late reports, Executive Councilor Janet Stevens (R-District 3) told NHJournal she and the other councilors had no idea of the scope of the problem until the February performance audit released by the Office of the Legislative Budget Assistant.

For example, they were unaware that Malachi had simply stopped showing up for work, replacing herself with an “interim” director — all without oversight or scrutiny.

“The Council was not formally notified of the NHHRC Executive Director’s (Ahni Malachi) failure to fulfill the agency’s statutory responsibilities until the release of the Legislative Budget Assistant audit,” Stevens said.

The Human Rights Commission has rarely gone to the Executive Council in the time Stevens has been in her post. There was one software contract last year that needed Executive Council approval, and three appointments to the commission. The only other instances the Human Rights Commission interacted with the council is when it submitted its annual reports, sometimes a year or more late.

The LBA audit found pending cases that were years, and in some cases decades, old. The understaffed office included poorly trained investigators being mismanaged by leadership for years.

“We found the Commission did not perform necessary management control responsibilities such as developing a strategic plan; defining objectives; developing performance measures; identifying, analyzing, and responding to operational risks; and resolving prior audit findings. As a result, there was an increased risk the Commission would not achieve its objectives,” the audit stated.

Under the law that created the Human Rights Commission, the governor nominates the commissioners and the commission chair to oversee the agency, and those nominations are voted on by the Executive Council. It is the commission itself, made up of volunteers, that hires the executive director.

The Executive Council was never kept in the loop when Malachi left her post last summer due to a health problem and Investigator Katrina Taylor was made Interim Executive Director. Since Malachi and Taylor are both hired employees and not appointed, the Executive Council has no direct oversight of their jobs. That is left to the Human Rights Commission and its chair.

In January, weeks before the LBA audit was released, Human Rights Commission Chair Christian Kim resigned his post. The resignation occurred during the transition between outgoing Gov. Chris Sununu’s administration and incoming Gov. Kelly Ayotte’s. Both Ayotte and Sununu were informed of the resignation. Kim did not respond to NHJournal’s requests for comment. The commission currently does not have a permanent chair. 

Republican Ayotte announced her intention to fix the Human Rights Commission and get it serving the people of New Hampshire. 

“The long-term issues at the Human Rights Commission are unacceptable. My office is working with the attorney general to ensure the Commission is efficient and effective in investigating discrimination claims,” Ayotte said.

Ayotte wants to see more direct oversight of the Executive Director position by the Governor’s Office and Executive Council. Stevens said that is the right direction.

“Given the critical nature of these executive branch leadership positions, (Executive) Council oversight would ensure proper management and adherence to statutory obligations from the outset,” Stevens said.

The Human Rights Commission is administratively attached to the Department of Justice, and not an integrated part of the DOJ or Attorney General’s Office, under the law that created the commission. Attorney General John Formella said his office is working with commission staff to address the audit findings. 

“Right now, we are doing a lot of work to help them through this audit, the results of the audit, and to start developing plans to address the audit,” Formella told the Executive Council last week.

Stevens wants to see a remediation plan put into place that includes frequent and transparent reports about the commission’s progress in fixing the problems. 

“I remain committed to ensuring accountability and corrective action within the New Hampshire Human Rights Commission,” Stevens said.

Democrat Karen Liot Hill, whose unorthodox campaign spending in her Executive Council race has already raised ethical questions, failed to meet the filing deadline for both of her final two campaign reports. 

One of the Lebanon Democrat’s reports was due Oct. 30, the other on Nov. 13. But neither was filed with the Secretary of State’s Office until Thursday, Dec. 12 and they didn’t appear in the public campaign finance database until Dec. 13.

Liot Hill is set to be sworn in next month as the District 2 Executive Councilor, replacing Cinde Warmington, who chose to run for governor rather than another term on the council. Warmington lost to former Manchester Mayor Joyce Craig in the Democratic primary. Craig went on to lose to Republican Kelly Ayotte in the general election.

Liot Hill handily defeated Republican Kim Strathdee in the heavily-Democrat district.

In October, NHJournal broke the story of Liot Hill’s questionable campaign finance spending in her primary against Democrat Mike Liberty. According to her campaign disclosures, Liot Hill spent thousands in campaign cash on meals, clothes, and visits to salons. Her campaign expenditures included a $190 ferry ride to the Hamptons and $181 to register her car.

She also reported spending $7,004 on gas for her car, $755 for car maintenance, and another $8,330 on meals.

A major concern regarding her original reports were two checks, one for $700 and another for $650, that did not include details on who she paid or for what election-related purpose. Both the checks correspond chronologically to court costs charged against Liot Hill. 

On Dec. 12, 2023, a car financing company filed a motion for contempt against Liot Hill in Lebanon District Court for her failure to comply with a previous payment order. At the time, she had a balance of more than $1,000.

In January, Liot Hill pleaded no contest to a 2023 violation for driving with a suspended license and agreed to pay $620 in fines and court costs. However, court records show Liot Hill’s first check to cover the fine bounced.

In response to NHJournal’s reporting, Liot Hill filed amended reports. She listed the two checks for $1,350 as reimbursements to Liot Hill for campaign expenses. And while the first campaign finance documents were signed by Liot Hill’s campaign treasurer Corinne Morse, the amended filing was signed by Liot Hill herself, who took over the treasurer duties for her own campaign.

At the time, neither Morse nor Liot Hill would confirm that Morse had actually signed the original reports.

Liot Hill declined to respond to questions from NHJournal, including inquiries into whether she is currently under investigation for any of her campaign filings.

Liot Hill did not respond when contacted on Dec. 12 by NHJournal about the reports. Nor did the Secretary of State’s Office respond to NHJournal’s questions about the reports. The New Hampshire attorney general would not confirm or deny if an investigation is underway. Contacted Saturday, Morse said she has not been interviewed by anyone from the Attorney General’s Office.

The Executive Council’s job is to provide oversight of state spending on behalf of the taxpayers, which makes the issues surrounding Liot Hill particularly problematic, said New Hampshire GOP chair Chris Ager.

“For someone who must review state contracts, these reports are very disturbing.”

Days after a NHJournal article about her questionable campaign spending on personal items like home heating oil and paying her car registration, Democrat Karen Liot Hill (D-District 2) filed an amended financial disclosure.

In addition to changing some of the details of her spending, the amended documents are missing two key items from the originals: the name and signature of her campaign treasurer, Corinne Morse.

On the amended forms, Morse is replaced by Liot Hill, who has now declared herself the treasurer of her campaign — despite the fact that Morse had previously signed off on the spending in question. 

Now, Liot Hill is dodging NHJournal’s questions about Morse’s involvement in overseeing her campaign finances.

Liot Hill bested fellow Democrat Mike Liberty in the Executive Council District 2 primary in September and easily defeated a token GOP opponent in the heavily-Democratic district.

Morse, a Canaan, N.H. Democrat elected to the legislature in 2022, had served as treasurer for Liot Hill’s run to replace Cinde Warmington. Morse’s name and signature appear on all original reports. They included unexplained checks totaling $1,350 that appeared to correspond to two court cases against Liot Hill: a violation for driving with a suspended license, and another involving a debt collection.

Liot Hill also included house cleaning, home heating oil, and more than $15,000 in gas and meals expenses in her campaign spending reports, all with what is purportedly Morse’s signature.

By amending the filings, Liot Hill conceded there were problems with her initial paperwork. The question is whether, as treasurer, Morse asked about the details of the filings before she signed them.

And why didn’t she sign the amended documents — amending factual claims Morse has already endorsed — for the same spending period?

In fact, NHJournal asked Morse if she actually signed the original campaign reports in the first place.

Morse declined to answer.

“I can’t comment on that,” Morse told NHJournal on Monday.

Nor did Morse respond to an email from NHJournal that included one of the original reports to confirm that the signature appearing on it is hers. Morse’s own campaign finance reports, and her House financial disclosure forms, appear to have been filed electronically and did not require a physical signature that could be used for comparison.

Liot Hill did not want to take questions when reached by phone on Monday, instead offering to answer questions via email. However, when she responded on Tuesday, Liot Hill did not answer NHJournal’s questions about Morse’s signature or her decision to act as her own treasurer.

“I am proud that I ran my entire campaign on a minimal budget, doing almost everything myself from my car as I crisscrossed the district to meet as many voters as possible. As many candidates do, I have recently filed amended reports, making some clarifications and minor corrections. These items make up a very small percentage of my overall campaign budget. But it is important to correct even small mistakes, so I have done that.

“Corinne Morse stepped down as treasurer for my campaign after the primary, and the amended reports bear my signature. I look forward to serving on the Executive Council and finding common ground so that I can help tackle the challenges facing New Hampshire and deliver results for Granite Staters,” Liot Hill wrote to NHJournal.

Acting as her own treasurer, the mysterious checks that appeared to correspond with two court cases are now listed as reimbursements the campaign paid to Liot Hill for various software subscriptions as well as cell phone and internet services. 

On Dec. 12, a car financing company filed a motion for contempt against Liot Hill in Lebanon District Court for her failure to comply with a previous payment order. At the time, she had a balance of more than $1,000.

In January of this year, Liot Hill pleaded no contest to a 2023 violation for driving with a suspended license and agreed to pay $620 in fines and court costs. However, court records show Liot Hill’s first check to cover the fine bounced.

Forging or knowingly falsifying state campaign finance documents is a crime, as is misreporting campaign finance spending.

In 2005, former House Speaker Gene Chandler (R-Bartlett) pled guilty to a misdemeanor charge of failing to report $64,000 in contributions from lobbyists and special interests. The money was raised at Chandler’s annual “Old Fashioned Corn Roast.” Chandler paid a $2,000 fine and was sentenced to 100 hours of community service.

Karen Liot Hill may serve as the treasurer of Grafton County, but her use of campaign dollars for personal expenses in her Executive Council race is raising eyebrows.

According to her campaign disclosures, the Lebanon Democrat has spent thousands in campaign cash on meals, clothes, and visits to salons. Her campaign expenditures include a $190 ferry ride to the Hamptons and $181 to register her car.

Liot Hill also reports spending $7,004 on gas for her car, $755 for car maintenance, and another $8,330 on meals. 

Gubernatorial candidate Joyce Craig (D-Manchester) ran a bruising statewide primary campaign against Executive Councilor Cinde Warmington (D-District 2) and reports spending just $849 for meals.

“I’ve run a very grassroots campaign,” Liot Hill said.

The detailed reports on Liot Hill’s spending also include unexplained checks totaling $1,350 that appear to correspond to two court cases against her: a violation for driving with a suspended license and another involving a debt collection.

Liot Hill serves on the Lebanon City Council and is the elected Grafton County Treasurer. She’s also a former restaurant owner whose business went under during the COVID pandemic. That hardship is behind the financial difficulties she had earlier this year.

On Dec. 12, 2023, a car financing company filed a motion for contempt against Liot Hill in Lebanon District Court for her failure to comply with a previous payment order. At the time, Liot Hill had not made a payment since June 2023 and had an outstanding balance of $1,061, according to court records. The case was resolved this February after Liot Hill paid $945.

In January of this year, Liot Hill was again in trouble, but this time in a traffic case. She was charged in June 2023 for driving with a suspended license. The case was resolved with Liot Hill pleading no contest and agreeing to pay $620 in fines and court costs. However, court records show that Liot Hill’s first check to cover the fine bounced on Jan. 8.

Contacted Thursday, Liot Hill denied she used campaign funds to cover payments related to her court cases. However, she did not immediately recall why or to whom she paid $600 on Dec. 26, or $750 on Jan. 12. The campaign reports do not give any information about the recipient or purpose of those payments, unlike the thousands of other expense entries.

“They might be reimbursements to me,” Liot Hill said.

Liot Hill called back a short time later after checking her bank accounts to say the two checks were for reimbursements for different subscription services related to the campaign. 

Liot Hill told NHJournal she planned to amend her campaign reports to reflect the correct details on the two checks. But those checks represent a fraction of the $113,000 she has spent on the campaign. Liot Hill won her primary against Mike Liberty despite Liberty’s spending more than $400,000 on his campaign. Instead of television ads or digital ads, Liot Hill said, she put 40,000 miles on her car to meet voters.

“I’ve driven 1,000 miles a week. That’s how I won despite being outspent four to one. A lot of expenses are related to meeting the people and being out on the road,” she said. 

Having the campaign reimburse her for gas ultimately saved money, Liot Hill argued. She could have taken a mileage reimbursement at 75 cents per mile, but that would have driven the cost up to about $30,000 instead of $7,000.

Liot Hill noted that Executive Council District 2 is a large area, going from the Monadnock region and Keene, to north of the Upper Valley, and then out to Concord. But it’s not as large as District 1, where Democrat Emmett Soldati spent just $31,000 of the $106,000 he raised. Those expenditures include $1,500 for gas and $677 for meals.

Unlike Liot Hill, Soldati did not face a competitive primary opponent.

Liot Hill’s unusual campaign spending doesn’t end with dinner and a drive.

Also included is a $250 payment to a Vermont heating oil company. That payment was made in July to a company that performs $250 annual furnace tuneups. Liot Hill denied she used campaign money to service her heating system, but she did not have an immediate explanation for the charge.

Liot Hill also spent $711 on hair and nails, $1,600 on clothes, $330 on books, and $1,230 at grocery stores on “food and flowers.” Additionally, Liot Hill spent $736 on airfare, $453 on hotels, and $1,017 on transportation. Many of those expenses are not out of the ordinary for campaigns, including the out-of-state travel she charged.

Asked about her out-of-state stays, including a trip to Orient Point on the Hamptons in New York, Liot Hill said there were fundraising ventures to her old home turf.

“I grew up on Long Island,” she said.

However, a review of the donations reported by her campaign shows Liot Hill brought in a negligible amount of money from out-of-state donors. Her campaign reports nine donations from New York residents totaling $4,250. Her campaign has raised more than $122,000 as of the Sept. 19 report.

Vincent Liot, a retired Sag Harbor, N.Y. resident, accounts for four of those New York donations. Vincent Liot gave the campaign $3,550 in total, and Carolyn Liot from East Hampton, N.Y., gave another $300. The four New York donors not named Liot gave a total of $400.

At the other end of spectrum, Liot Hill’s opponent in the general election, Republican Kim Strathdee, is reporting zero money raised or spent. Candidates are not required to report any spending if the total is under $1,000.

State Rep. Ross Berry (R-Manchester), who has pushed for campaign finance reforms in the past, said the current law gives candidates a wide berth when it comes to how they spend money. Spending campaign money on personal expenses is prohibited, but defining what’s personal and what’s not gets tricky due to New Hampshire’s citizen legislature and Executive Council.

“That can open a Pandora’s Box, and we don’t want to curtail someone’s First Amendment rights,” Berry said.

Instead, New Hampshire law leaves it to voters and donors to oversee the candidates, he said. Candidates must be transparent in how they spend money, and who they get that money from.

“The point of campaign finance reporting is so the public can suss out if there’s an appearance of impropriety,” he said.

Former House Speaker Donna Sytek, who is a current member of the House Legislative Ethics Committee, said candidates need to make sure they can show donors they are spending donations in an appropriate manner. 

“You have to be able to tie it to the campaign,” Sytek said. “In a campaign, it’s best not to be on the receiving end of questions about possibly unusual expenses.”

Progressive activists who pushed for a state marker honoring a Granite State Stalinist are suing, claiming the Sununu administration did not follow procedure when it took down the historic plaque.

State officials changed the rules, then broke them, in the scramble to remove the sign honoring notorious Communist Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, according to the lawsuit filed this week.

The Historic Highways marker for Flynn, the former U.S. Communist Party Chair convicted of advocating the violent overthrow of the U.S. government, was removed from its Concord location on May 15, less than two weeks after it was unveiled. The marker is currently in the possession of the New Hampshire Department of Transportation.

Now, liberal activists Arnie Alpert and Mary Lee Sargent, represented by lawyer and former Executive Counselor Andru Volinsky, accuse Gov. Chris Sununu and others of breaking the law to get rid of the Flynn marker in the face of community backlash.

‘The State has the unequivocal legal duty to follow its own duly adopted laws and not to act by the fiat of the Governor and members of the Executive Council,” Volinsky wrote.

Alpert and Sarget want a judge to order the marker to be erected once again at its original Concord location.

The marker was unveiled on May 1, and the state’s Department of Natural and Cultural Resources promoted Flynn’s tribute. That did not sit well with Executive Councilor Joe Kenney, who lodged a complaint at the May 3 Executive Council meeting.

“Well, I’m going to say that this particular person has no historic value here in Concord. And this person, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, was a profound Communist who died a Soviet, who was anti-American,” Kenney said. “I am dead set against this. And I think it’s an embarrassment that we have a program that allows us to put Communists on historical markers and then say, ‘Oh, that’s part of our history.’ It’s not part of my history.”

In the days that followed, Flynn’s record as an unrepentant Stalinist who supported the Soviet Union during the height of the Cold War and received a Red Square burial came to light. As members of the public began to speak out,  Sununu vowed to get rid of the marker and blamed Concord City Council members for approving its placement.

Concord officials rejected that argument, pointing out that the marker is a state sign for a state program approved and funded by the state.

The marker was removed on May 15 and is currently in the possession of the New Hampshire Department of Transportation.

In a statement regarding the lawsuit, Sununu welcomed Alpert and Sargent’s court case, saying criticizing the government is an important part of the American Way.

“America is a free country, and we appreciate their ability to sue the government for a decision they might disagree with — a privilege not afforded to citizens in communist countries. An avowed Communist who benefited from a state funeral in Moscow’s Red Square should not be celebrated in New Hampshire. All policies were followed when removing this Anti-American sign, and it will not be coming back under my watch,” Sununu said.

The Department of Natural and Cultural Resources changed the rules for removing Historic Highway Markers after that May 3 meeting, allowing for removing markers that could be deemed inappropriate. However, according to the lawsuit, the new rules still required that the decision go to the Historical Resources Council.

According to the lawsuit, Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Commissioner Sarah Stewart ignored the rules and, on May 12, ordered that the sign be removed. 

“Commissioner Stewart did not consult the State Historical Resources Council as required by the newly amended policy,” Volinsky wrote. “Nor was the reason for retirement officially recorded in the minutes of the State Historical Resources Council also as required by the newly amended policy.”

Flynn was born in 1890 in Concord and became a socialist activist in her teens. She was a founding member of the American Civil Liberties Union and, in 1936, joined the Community Party, becoming the U.S. party chair in 1961.

She joined the Communist Party during Josef Stalin’s deadly purge and high-profile show trials, facts known to the public at the time. When Flynn joined in 1936, the Soviets had already murdered nearly 9 million people in Ukraine and other territories in what is now known as the Holodomor. Another 1.2 million were about to be killed in Stalin’s great purge. 

Her membership in the party got her expelled from the ACLU in 1940 when the civil rights groups formally denounced Communism. A decade later, she was found guilty under the Smith Act of advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government by force and violence. 

The Soviet government gave Flynn a state funeral in Red Square, with more than 25,000 people attending.

The historic marker in Concord commemorating unrepentant Communist Elizabeth Gurley Flynn got sent to the ash heap of history as the Sununu administration finally stepped up and removed it from state property.

Now the progressive activists who pushed for the marker are complaining about its removal.

The New Hampshire Historical Highway Marker was unveiled on May 1 (May Day). It celebrated Concord-born Gurley Flynn as an early labor activist, a civil rights pioneer, a supporter of women’s access to birth control, and the former head of the Communist Party in America (CPUSA).

Gov. Chris Sununu first promised to get the marker removed after learning about it from irate executive councilors Joe Kenney (R-District 1) and Dave Wheeler (R-District 5) during a Governor’s Council meeting two days later.

“This is a devout communist. We are the ‘Live Free or Die’ state,” Kenney said. “How can we possibly promote her propaganda, which still exists now through this sign in downtown Concord?”

Sununu, however, did not immediately take the marker down. Instead, he and his administration blamed Concord city officials for the marker’s placement.

“Why Concord would want to put this in the first place, God knows,” Sununu said on Good Morning NH with Jack Health. “Just tell us to take it down we’ll take it down. I’d love to take it down.”

However, Concord City Attorney James Kennedy responded, making it clear in a letter to Department of Cultural and Natural Resources Commissioner Sarah Stewart that the state could do whatever it wanted with the marker it installed.

“To the extent that the State seeks removal of (the Flynn marker) a marker that it approved (title and text) created and installed, bearing the State seal and located on State property, the City takes no position on this issue,” Kennedy wrote.

On Monday, the Gurley Flynn monument was gone.

“Through their public statements, the City of Concord made clear they were not advocating to keep the marker up,” Ben Vihstadt, Sununu’s spokesman, said Monday. “In their communications with the state, it was learned that the marker was located on state property, not city property as previously believed, and therefore the marker was removed this morning.”

Far-left supporters of the marker and Flynn’s legacy cried foul.

“The policies of the Division of Historical Resources specify the conditions under which markers can be retired,” said Arnie Alpert, who, with Mary Lee Sargent, initiated the proposal for the Flynn marker. “Even under the policy’s latest revision, there is no provision for markers to be retired because of objections to their content.”

The pair continue to defend the marker saying Flynn is a historically significant person born in New Hampshire and should be recognized. “We still say that under the department’s own guidelines, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn’s birthplace in Concord is a fitting location for a historical marker,” Sargent said.

Flynn was an outspoken member of the American left who helped found the American Civil Liberties Union, which she was later kicked out of because she chose to join the Communist Party. In fact, Flynn joined in 1936, during the infamous purges under Soviet leader Josef Stalin that drove many other Westerners out of the party.

Flynn made no apologies for her Communism. In a May 6, 1940 speech, Flynn praised the USSR.

“On May Day, we salute the Soviet Union, land of socialism, land of peace and plenty, the great ideal of labor since time immemorial, the cooperative commonwealth of all who toil,” Flynn said.

Flynn was convicted in 1951 for fomenting the overthrow of the United States, later became head of the Communist Party USA, and was given a state funeral in Moscow’s Red Square by a grateful Soviet Union when she died in 1964.

Alpert and Sargent continue to insist the marker should have remained and that Sununu lacked the authority to remove it as he did. They say that, under the state’s guidelines, markers are only removed if they are in disrepair or contain text with factual errors. The state also requires a public hearing before any marker is removed.

“None of the conditions for the marker’s removal have been met,” Alpert said. 

Vihstadt, however, said the state acted correctly in taking down the sign.

“All policies and guidelines were followed in removing this controversial marker,” Vihstadt said.

If Gov. Chris Sununu wants to do something about the Historical Highway Marker honoring notorious Communist Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, he is free to do it himself, according to the Concord City Council.

Concord Mayor James Bouley said Monday night he was confused by the letter he got last week from Sarah Stewart, commissioner for the New Hampshire Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, asking the city to request that the state remove the Flynn marker.

“We did not approve any marker, we don’t have that authority; we don’t approve the marker’s text, we don’t have that authority; and lastly, we can’t remove something that is not our responsibility from your property,” Bouley said.

The Flynn marker angered Republican members of the state’s Executive Council, prompting Sununu to blame Concord leadership and demand that it be removed. 

“Why Concord would want to put this in the first place, God knows,” Sununu said Friday on WGIR radio. “Just tell us to take it down, and we’ll take it down. I’d love to take it down.”

The problem for Sununu — or perhaps the solution — is that the marker is the state’s responsibility from beginning to end, according to Concord City Attorney James Kennedy. He said the marker was placed in the city by the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources and sits on state land. The marker features text about Flynn’s life and Communist affiliation that was approved by the state and additionally includes a seal of the State of New Hampshire. The fact that now Sununu and Stewart are asking the city to request its removal makes little sense, Kennedy said.

“That’s a curious concept to me,” Kennedy said.

According to Kennedy, if the state wants to remove the marker, it is free to follow the state law governing that process. 

Executive Councilor Janet Stevens (R-Rye) also places the responsibility at the feet of state government.

“The disgraceful placement of a historic highway marker in Concord, honoring Communist Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, a devout Stalinist and prominent organizer in the Communist Party, has elevated the need for an overhaul of the process for awarding historic markers in our state,” Stevens said in an editorial for NHJournal.

“There was a clear lack of common sense in allowing this new marker to be approved,” Steven added.

The state did seek Concord’s approval to install the sign, which went up on May 1. But Bouley and the councilors said that was a courtesy and had more to do with checking traffic visibility and general construction safety. That has not stopped Sununu from hammering Concord over the state marker.

“I don’t think it should ever have been put up; I don’t think Concord should have been advocating for it,” Sununu said.

According to available public records, the City of Concord never advocated for the Flynn marker. Liberal activists Arnie Alpert and Mary Lee Sargent petitioned the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources for the Flynn maker based on her historical significance. Flynn was an early labor activist, a civil rights pioneer, and a supporter of women’s access to birth control as well as the head of the Communist Party in America. 

Flynn was kicked out of the ACLU, which she helped found, because of her membership in the Community Party. She joined in 1936, three years after the USSR murdered close to 9 million people in a genocidal famine known as the Holodomor, and was about to start killing millions more. When she died in 1964, Flynn received a state funeral in Moscow’s Red Square with 25,000 people attending.

While Sununu has blamed Concord for the whole mess, and Stewart has claimed her department had no input in the text, records obtained Monday by NHJournal show otherwise. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources employee Amy Dixon worked on researching and editing the proposed text for the Flynn marker, even adding that Flynn was a supporter of women’s suffrage. Dixon then presented the marker proposal to Concord officials and explained all expenses would be the state’s responsibility. 

Kennedy said that under U.S. Supreme Court rulings protecting the First Amendment, cities are unable to regulate the content of signs put up in their jurisdictions. 

City Councilor Amanda Grady Sexton said if the state is upset about the sign, it can take it down anytime. “If the state wants to remove the sign, they can do so.”

City Councilor Zandra Rice Hawkins suggested Concord may still put up its own marker to commemorate Flynn, in which case the state would be actually powerless as opposed to engaging in the current game of blame-shifting.

“I’d be disappointed if the state removed the marker and tried to whitewash history,” Hawkins said.

Fallout from the state’s historic marker honoring a notorious Communist continues as the Sununu administration invites Concord to remove the monument, and the city insists it never requested the placard in the first place.

“If the City Council objected to the placement of the marker on city property, the application would have been denied,” New Hampshire Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Commissioner Sarah Stewart wrote to Concord’s mayor Thursday.

“It’s their sign, not ours,” Ward 3 Concord City Councilor Jennifer Kretovic told NHJournal. “And if they want to say differently, they can go pound sand.”

The controversy began in Wednesday’s Governor’s Council meeting when Executive Councilors Dave Wheeler and Joe Kenney raised questions about the marker, unveiled on May Day, honoring Concord native Elizabeth Gurley Flynn. Flynn was an unapologetic Stalinist who joined the Communist Party during the purges, led the CPUSA during the Cold War, and received a state funeral in Red Square from a grateful Soviet Union.

Flynn’s marker took members of the Executive Council by surprise this week, unhappy the state is seemingly celebrating an anti-American Communist. Gov. Chris Sununu promised to investigate how the sign got approved and the possibility of getting it removed. 

Stewart, who oversees the Division of Historical Resources (DHR), told NHJournal she “never reviewed this request. The process that is in place doesn’t include an approval from me. This is something I am discussing with the governor.”

On Wednesday, she told the executive councilors her office was not responsible for the marker, stating the application came from the City of Concord.

“Our agency is not in the business of approving or denying the markers,” Stewart said. “We check for factual accuracy, and we help make sure that the text fits on the space allocated on the marker.”

But Tony Schinella at The Patch reported Thursday morning that “the request for the marker was made to the Concord City Council by a state employee — Amy Dixon, a community preservation coordinator in Stewart’s department, on Sept. 12, 2022.”

“According to the timeline of records by the city, the council approved forwarding the request at its October 2022 meeting to the city’s Heritage Commission,” The Patch reported.

A few hours after the report was published, Stewart released a letter to the city of Concord urging them to request that the Flynn marker be taken down.

“I am reaching out to inform the City of the opportunity to reevaluate your approval of this marker,” Stewart wrote to Concord Mayor James Bouley. Her letter squarely places the blame for the Flynn marker on Concord officials.

“There was a public hearing conducted by the Concord Heritage Commission, and then (the marker) was approved at a Concord City Council meeting,” Stewart wrote. “If the City Council objected to the placement of the marker on city property, the application would have been denied.”

But city records show that application for the Flynn marker was brought into the city by DHR’s Amy Dixon, a community preservation specialist.

“The New Hampshire Historical Highway Marker Program is respectfully requesting City Council approval to install Marker #278, which honors former Concord resident Elizabeth Gurley Flynn for her accomplishments in leading America’s early 20th-century labor movement and for her support of civil liberties and women’s rights,” Dixon wrote in a September letter to the City Council.

Dixon assured the Council the state would pick up the costs of the marker. 

“The City would be under no financial obligation. We only seek City Council approval for its location, which is proposed near the southeast corner of Court and Montgomery streets near the county courthouse,” Dixon wrote to Concord officials.

Kretovic told NHJournal Stewart’s version of events is simply not true. While Concord did approve the marker, that process was merely a formality, she said. The state controls the whole process from start to finish, she said.

“It’s a courtesy that the state reaches out to the city and says, ‘Hey, we’re putting a sign in your city,’” Kretovic said. “We don’t bless that wording; we have nothing to do with that,” Kretovic said.

Arnie Alpert, a retired liberal activist, and Mary Lee Sargent, another left-learning activist, got the original ball rolling by sending DHR an application for Flynn’s marker. Alpert told NHJournal Flynn deserves to be recognized for her trailblazing work as a labor activist, civil rights leader, and feminist. 

“Elizabeth Gurley Flynn was a significant figure in American history,” Alpert said.

Alpert and Sargent’s application included signatures from 30 residents and proposed wording for the marker. Their text appears unchanged on the sign that went up on May 1. Dixon took that application and text to Concord and walked it through the process to get the city’s approval.

Kretovic said it is important that the marker recognizes Flynn’s membership in the Communist Party and her conviction in 1951 for fomenting the violent overthrow of the government. Kretovic would have preferred if the state included an option for people to learn more about Flynn and Communism, such as a QR code people could scan into their phones for relevant factual links.

Flynn was born in 1890 in Concord and became a socialist activist in her teens. She was a founding member of the American Civil Liberties Union and, in 1936, joined the Community Party, becoming the U.S. Party Chair in 1961.

Her decision to join the Communist Party during the period of Josef Stalin’s deadly purge and high-profile show trials is particularly disturbing. In fact, her membership in the party got her expelled from the ACLU in 1940. A decade later, she was found guilty under the Smith Act of advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government by force and violence. The Soviet government gave Flynn a state funeral in Red Square, with more than 25,000 people attending.

When Flynn joined the Communist Party in 1936, the Soviets had already murdered close to 9 million people in Ukraine and other territories in what is now known as the Holodomor. Another 1.2 million were about to be killed in Stalin’s great purge.

If the Sununu administration or the City of Concord does not act, the New Hampshire legislature is standing by.

“If the department does not remove this sign, I will sponsor legislation to do so,” said Rep. Ross Berry (R-Manchester). “We don’t honor Communists in New Hampshire.”

The Sununu administration approved a new Historical Highway Marker honoring a committed Communist from Concord who received a state funeral in Moscow’s Red Square. Now state officials are asking how it happened.

On Monday, May 1 — May Day for the international Socialist movement — the New Hampshire Department of Natural & Cultural Resources unveiled the marker honoring Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, who once led the Communist Party USA.

Flynn was born in 1890 in Concord and became a socialist activist in her teens. She was a founding member of the American Civil Liberties Union and, in 1936, joined the Community Party, becoming the U.S. Party Chair in 1961.

Her decision to join the Communist Party during the period of Josef Stalin’s deadly purge and high-profile show trials is particularly disturbing. In fact, her membership in the party got her expelled from the ACLU in 1940. A decade later, she was found guilty under the Smith Act of advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government by force and violence.

The Soviet government gave Flynn a state funeral in Red Square, with more than 25,000 people attending.

Executive Councilor Dave Wheeler (R-Milford) brought up the marker during Wednesday’s Executive Council meeting, expressing his outrage that the state would approve a memorial to an enemy of the United States.

Wheeler said Flynn’s maker in Concord is an insult to every Granite Stater who ever served in the military, including the veteran who led the council’s Pledge of Allegiance before the meeting. “I’m just totally offended by that. I think it’s a slap in the face to the veteran who did our Pledge of Allegiance this morning,” Wheeler said.

Fellow Republican Joe Kenney also voiced his opposition.

“This is a devout Communist. We are the ‘Live Free or Die’ state,” Kenney said. “How can we possibly promote her propaganda, which still exists now through this sign in downtown Concord?”

Executive Councilor Cinde Warmington, the lone Democrat on the five-member committee, represents the city of Concord, whose Heritage Commission requested the marker. Warmington didn’t comment during the discussion. She also declined to respond to requests for comment from NHJournal.

Gov. Chris Sununu learned of the marker Wednesday morning and was not happy with what he heard during the Governor’s Council meeting.

“I completely agree with the sentiment here,” Sununu said, and he pledged to “dig into” how it happened. He also grilled Sarah Stewart, commissioner for the New Hampshire Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, whose agency oversees the historic marker program.

Stewart claimed her office wasn’t responsible for Flynn’s marker, telling the governor the application came through the city of Concord. “Our agency is not in the business of approving or denying the markers,” Stewart said. “We check for factual accuracy, and we help make sure that the text fits on the space allocated on the marker.”

Sununu was not satisfied with his commissioner’s answer.

“Who at the state level says ‘yes or no,’ regardless of what a town wants?” Sununu asked. “Who at the state level says, ‘We are going to do this, or we’re not going to do that?’”

“There is a criterion that is evaluated by the Division of Historical Resources staff and the State Historical Resources Council,” Stewart acknowledged.

“I’ll tell you what: We’re going to review the whole process,” Sununu said. “The state obviously has authority here, and responsibility — it’s a state marker.”

The state’s rules for the Historical Highway Marker program clearly give Stewart and her agency the power to vet applications and approve or deny them as she sees fit. The rules have been in effect since 1958.

“The DHR shall have the function, including but not limited to, ‘Considering proposals to erect highway historical markers under RSA 236:41. No such marker shall be put in place without division approval,’” the rules state.

Michael Bruno literally wrote the book on the state’s Historical Highway Markers. The author of “Cruising New Hampshire History,” Bruno told NHJournal he was disturbed by the state’s decision to remember Flynn.

“I’m a veteran, and I served in the Cold War,” Bruno said. “I don’t see why we’re commemorating this person.”

Most disappointing for Bruno is the fact that each Historical Highway Marker includes the state seal of New Hampshire. “It looks like an endorsement from the state,” he said.

Arnie Alpert

Arnie Alpert, a New Hampshire activist who was a leader in the left-leaning American Friends Service Committee, defended the marker and Flynn, though he said he couldn’t defend all of her choices.

“She was a significant figure in American history,” Alpert said.

Alpert said Flynn was visiting the Soviet Union in 1964 to work on her memoirs when she died. The state funeral with honors in Red Square can’t be held against her.

“She was dead; she didn’t order up any state funeral,” Alper said.

Alpert said that her 1951 conviction had more to do with the McCarthy-era anti-Communist witch hunts than any threats of violent revolution. Flynn was convicted for believing in Communism, not trying to overthrow the country, he said.

“If she was guilty of anything, she was guilty of her beliefs,” Alpert said.

Still, the timing of her Communist allegiance raises questions. When Smith joined in 1936, the Soviets had already murdered close to 9 million people in Ukraine and other territories in what is now known as the Holodomor. Another 1.2 million were about to be killed in Stalin’s great purge. When she became the head of the American Communist Party, dissident writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn was just a few years removed from serving a decade in the Soviet gulags and internal exile.

“I’m not here to defend every step in the life of Elizabeth Gurley Flynn,” Alpert said.

Flynn had no problem speaking for herself. In a May 6, 1940 speech, she praised the USSR.

“On May Day, we salute the Soviet Union – land of socialism – land of peace and plenty, the great ideal of labor since time immemorial, the cooperative commonwealth of all who toil,” Flynn said.