Laconia Mayor purchases home on Governors Island

[WinnisquamZ]

Tuesday headline in the LDC tells us Laconia’s Mayor has been living on GI the past few months with his wife and children. It also notes he has purchased a residence in the city for himself and his wife and children will be residents of GI. The city charter reads he must be registered voter in the city to hold office. No other details are know, but I find this arrangement very odd. Should he resign?


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Descant]

It is possible, however unlikely, that you can temporarily move to a nearby locale, and retain residence and voting rights in the original town. E.g. with a pending separation, you find temporary digs with the intention of returning to your original voting locale. When you're an elected official, it would seem to be the honorable thing to maintain an original residence and forego the vacation home as a permanent residence. At least, this should be an embarrassment for the mayor if not cause for recall.

[Irish mist]

Hilarious...something that I would fully expect from this guy. At the least, inform the city of your new living conditions. Don't wait to get caught.

[joey2665]

Here is the article. I am wondering where his children go to school and the move of his wife and children was to have them go to school in Gilford instead of Laconia which would be extremely ironic.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...ign=user-share


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Kamper]

Let's hope he is simply planning for a future that does not include re-election.

This happened a few years back with a Manchester Alderman. She moved outside of her ward and resigned when the Union Leader brought it up. I think a Nashua Alderman's wife and children moved to Mass. but he had rented an apartment in Nashua and I think he didn't resign. There are probably more instances like these and as a short-term situation it doesn't bother me.

[fatlazyless]

Governor's Island with 504-acres and 1.8 miles of shoreline used to belong to Laconia.Take a look at the local map and Governor's Island definitely looks like it should belong to Laconia and not to Gilford. The Governor's Island bridge is attached to Laconia, yet somehow or other it crosses into Gilford at somewhere on the bridge.

This is actually the first step of Mayor Hosmer's super secret plan for Governor's Island to secede from the Town of Gilford and join the City of Laconia. Right on Mayor ...... go Andy go ..... buddy .... restore Governor's Island back to where it belongs ..... and where it used to be ...... back in 1880 or so, sometime back there, then ....... it left Laconia and became part of Gilford ...... is now time to correct this wrong and returneth ye island back to Governor's Island, an island belonging to Laconia, NH! ...... Hear Ye Hear Ye!

[MotorHead]

how can you afford to buy a house on GI with a 72K salary?

[fatlazyless]

Originally Posted by MotorHead

how can you afford to buy a house on GI with a 72K salary?

As they say ....... the salary stinks, but the pay is great! ..... just ask your local building inspector.

[WinnisquamZ]

Did the city council know about this move? Knowing the Mayor and the LDS have been on the outs these past few months. It’s no surprise the story ran. The people of Laconia deserve a Mayor who is “all in”. Purchasing a home outside of the city you represent says a lot. We deserve better.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by MotorHead

how can you afford to buy a house on GI with a 72K salary?

I think it's fairly well known that Hosmer's mayor salary is not his only source of income.

[MotorHead]

Good for him.
Zillow shows, 3 properties available on the island.

9.5 Million
3.9 Million
and
1.16 Million

[FlyingScot]

OK, this was all in good fun until I actually read the article. It says his wife and kids are moving to GI, but he is staying in Laconia. If this is true, that is very sad for them, and maybe we should give them some privacy for a while

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by MotorHead

Good for him.
Zillow shows, 3 properties available on the island.

9.5 Million
3.9 Million
and
1.16 Million

I'm not sure I get the point you are trying to make. It appears that the mayor's wife is also gainfully employed. Perhaps family members helped with the purchase. Why does it make any difference how much the property may have cost and how the purchase may have been funded? Unless there is suspected criminal activity, why is this anyone else's business?

[joey2665]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

I'm not sure I get the point you are trying to make. It appears that the mayor's wife is also gainfully employed. Perhaps family members helped with the purchase. Why does it make any difference how much the property may have cost and how the purchase may have been funded? Unless there is suspected criminal activity, why is this anyone else's business?

It isn’t as long as there was no criminal or unethical behavior but it’s a situation that certainly raises eyebrows and as a public servant he should have expected scrutiny on this issue. Sorry that’s what happens when your a public figure


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by joey2665

It isn’t as long as there was no criminal or unethical behavior but it’s a situation that certainly raises eyebrows and as a public servant he should have expected scrutiny on this issue. Sorry that’s what happens when your a public figure


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Sure, I can understand there being legitimate public scrutiny if it looks like the Laconia mayor is actually residing in Gilford. That's a legal issue, apparently on both the state and municipal level. But where the money came from to buy the Gilford property shouldn't be a matter of speculation on an open internet forum. People should have a little bit of decency and respect private matters. The fact that a person is a public servant doesn't give every citizen the right to delve into all personal matters involving the public servant. We should act to encourage our fellow citizens to pursue active roles in our governments, rather than give another reason to say "no thanks."

[MotorHead]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

I'm not sure I get the point you are trying to make. It appears that the mayor's wife is also gainfully employed. Perhaps family members helped with the purchase. Why does it make any difference how much the property may have cost and how the purchase may have been funded? Unless there is suspected criminal activity, why is this anyone else's business?

If your 18 year old came home driving a brand new sports car and a wad of cash, wouldn't you question it?

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by MotorHead

If your 18 year old came home driving a brand new sports car and a wad of cash, wouldn't you question it?

Probably, but I would address the issue directly with my kid instead of speculating on a public internet forum about what may or may not have actually taken place. And if my legally adult 18 year old told me it was none of my business, he/she would be 100% correct. At that point I would be questioning my parenting skills.

[WinnisquamZ]

Agree with most that the issue is not how or why he purchased a home on GI. The problem is he and his family have been a residents of Gilford over the past four months. While representing and making decisions for the city of Laconia and their residents. He should resign his position immediately or be removed by the city council. That brings up my other concern. Did the city council members know and kept it from the public? Hopefully, the LDS follows up on this story


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by WinnisquamZ

Agree with most that the issue is not how or why he purchased a home on GI. The problem is he and his family have been a residents of Gilford over the past four months. While representing and making decisions for the city of Laconia and their residents. He should resign his position immediately or be removed by the city council. That brings up my other concern. Did the city council members know and kept it from the public? Hopefully, the LDS follows up on this story


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Generally, a person can maintain legal residency in one place if the person is temporarily absent. If Hosmer has been temporarily residing in Gilford while his property in Laconia is being prepared for sale and before buying a new property in Laconia and getting it ready for occupation, that would certainly qualify as a temporary absence from Laconia. How about giving him the benefit of the doubt and seeing how things play out, instead of making a demand that he immediately resign. If he doesn't end up moving back to Laconia in a new residence within a reasonable amount of time, then sure, take him to task.

[WinnisquamZ]

I prefer my Mayor to be invested in the community they manage. To make such a large investment outside the community that you were elected by the people to manage and keep it a secret for four months is a red flag in my opinion. He ran on his long standing love for the city and its bright future. By choosing to purchase a home in Gilford tells me his love for the city has wand His opponent also a long standing resistant of the city did the same as his family built a lake home in Tilton. He would live in a laconia rental during the week and live with his family in Tilton on weekends. The residents of Laconia deserve better


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Descant]

If I go to a BBQ and pay $25 for an ear of corn, sponsored by Friends of the Library, no problem. If I go to a BBQ run by "Friends of x politician" the laws surrounding that money are considerably different, especially if the $$ is diverted for personal use. If I, as a politician, buy a house at a deep discount, the public may have an interest in who the seller was and what he got in return.
I seriously doubt skulduggery in Laconia, but I think it is appropriate for interested citizens to ask questions.
Being a public servant makes your entire life, and that of your family, more public.

[fatlazyless]

Heard it through that inter-island grapevine that Andy Hosmer will be running to become Mayor of Governor's Island! His first move as their new mayor is to relocate The Dive to Governor's Island, and permanently go spuds down at that beautiful sandy beach in front of their two tennis courts.

Happy Hour with Andy, is every day starting at 4-pm, and that includes Mondays, too!

Spuds down, and bottoms up ...... Vote for Andy! .....

[MAXUM]

LOL congratulations Laconia voters.... nicely done!

Why voters are incapable of seeing that somebody like this clown is doing nothing other than paying them lip service to get elected. Who actually bought the line this guy cares about Laconia or it's future? I mean really?

Cut him some slack will ya I mean it's rough living amongst the GI peasant community.

[joey2665]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

Sure, I can understand there being legitimate public scrutiny if it looks like the Laconia mayor is actually residing in Gilford. That's a legal issue, apparently on both the state and municipal level. But where the money came from to buy the Gilford property shouldn't be a matter of speculation on an open internet forum. People should have a little bit of decency and respect private matters. The fact that a person is a public servant doesn't give every citizen the right to delve into all personal matters involving the public servant. We should act to encourage our fellow citizens to pursue active roles in our governments, rather than give another reason to say "no thanks."

I’m sorry I disagree. There is nothing wrong with asking the question, in fact a major responsibility of citizens is to question their leaders. The people did not leave this open to question the mayor did. Maybe if he was a little more up front and transparent and disclosed this himself instead of it being reported by the paper first it would be different.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[gus62]

I believe his wife is part of the Gaudet family who owned Auto Serv in Tilton which recently sold. My guess money was not an issue to purchase on Governors Island

[gravy boat]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Heard it through that inter-island grapevine that Andy Hosmer will be running to become Mayor of Governor's Island! His first move as their new mayor is to relocate The Dive to Governor's Island, and permanently go spuds down at that beautiful sandy beach in front of their two tennis courts.

Happy Hour with Andy, is every day starting at 4-pm, and that includes Mondays, too!

Spuds down, and bottoms up ...... Vote for Andy! .....

Now THAT would create quite a stir and create HOURS of reading entertainment on local forums and FB pages.
GB

[jetskier]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

Generally, a person can maintain legal residency in one place if the person is temporarily absent. If Hosmer has been temporarily residing in Gilford while his property in Laconia is being prepared for sale and before buying a new property in Laconia and getting it ready for occupation, that would certainly qualify as a temporary absence from Laconia. How about giving him the benefit of the doubt and seeing how things play out, instead of making a demand that he immediately resign. If he doesn't end up moving back to Laconia in a new residence within a reasonable amount of time, then sure, take him to task.

Beyond the bad optics of this, one has to question the following:

1. Should this have been disclosed a prior in detail to avoid speculation and legal concerns?
2. What does it say that his wife and child are going to live on Governor's Island while he maintains a residence in Laconia?
3. Would this have been a consideration in electing him to this position?

Jetskier

[Descant]

Governor's Island can't elect a mayor. Too many of the property owners are legal residents of Florida. You'd never get a quorum at March Town Meeting. LOL.

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by jetskier

Beyond the bad optics of this, one has to question the following:

1. Should this have been disclosed a prior in detail to avoid speculation and legal concerns?
2. What does it say that his wife and child are going to live on Governor's Island while he maintains a residence in Laconia?
3. Would this have been a consideration in electing him to this position?

Jetskier

1. Perhaps. Maybe Hosmer didn't consider or he underestimated how some people might try to turn this into something, with so far zero evidence, that it's not. From the LaDaSun article, he's between houses in Laconia, preparing one for sale while he has purchased another and is getting it ready for his occupancy, and he needed a place to stay in the interval. In that time he's living with his wife and children in a house in a different town. As I said earlier, there should only be concern if he doesn't go back to Laconia when the newly purchased house there is ready. Why he doesn't live with his wife and kids at that point is between him and his family members. I don't get why people who aren't acquainted with the Hosmer family think they have a right to know the intimate details of this family's interpersonal relationships.

2. As long as the mayor is actually residing in Laconia, it shouldn't matter to anyone outside the mayor's family why his wife and children are going to live on Governor's Island while he maintains a residence in Laconia.

3. If when he was running for mayor last year voters knew that in a year's time Hosmer would be living outside of the city for several months while he was between houses in Laconia, then sure, that may have given some voters second thoughts about their choice for mayor. But, is there any credible evidence that Hosmer knew or should have known that this might happen, and therefore he possibly had a duty to let the voters (or at least those who might care) know?

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

2. As long as the mayor is actually residing in Laconia, it shouldn't matter to anyone outside the mayor's family why his wife and children are going to live on Governor's Island while he maintains a residence in Laconia.

Just curious: If the Mayor is actually living on Governor's Island full time with his family and keeping a Laconia address so he could claim he was a Laconia resident for political purposes would that change your opinion?

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

Just curious: If the Mayor is actually living on Governor's Island full time with his family and keeping a Laconia address so he could claim he was a Laconia resident for political purposes would that change your opinion?

It would change my opinion from "there's nothing right now to get your undies in a twist about" to "there's a legal issue involving the mayor that needs to addressed right now." The article from yesterday's LaDaSun, linked above, reports that Hosmer's new Laconia residence "would be ready for occupancy by the end of the week." And I stated the following in a previous post: "If he doesn't end up moving back to Laconia in a new residence within a reasonable amount of time, then sure, take him to task." If he's not living in Laconia after his newly acquired house is ready for occupancy, that's a legitimate concern. Any reasons that he would choose not to live in Gilford with his wife and kids is a matter for his family.

[jetskier]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

It would change my opinion from "there's nothing right now to get your undies in a twist about" to "there's a legal issue involving the mayor that needs to addressed right now." The article from yesterday's LaDaSun, linked above, reports that Hosmer's new Laconia residence "would be ready for occupancy by the end of the week." And I stated the following in a previous post: "If he doesn't end up moving back to Laconia in a new residence within a reasonable amount of time, then sure, take him to task." If he's not living in Laconia after his newly acquired house is ready for occupancy, that's a legitimate concern. Any reasons that he would choose not to live in Gilford with his wife and kids is a matter for his family.

Actually there is (NH State Law):

669:6 Qualification of Officers. – Unless otherwise provided by law, no person shall hold an elective town office who does not have his domicile within the town.
Source. 1979, 410:1, eff. July 1, 1979

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by jetskier

Actually there is (NH State Law):

669:6 Qualification of Officers. – Unless otherwise provided by law, no person shall hold an elective town office who does not have his domicile within the town.
Source. 1979, 410:1, eff. July 1, 1979

I'm not sure what you're getting at. As you can see from my post #15 above, I acknowledge that permanently residing in Gilford while being mayor of Laconia would be a problem under both state law and municipal ordinance.

[TiltonBB]

So his wifes family already had a "substantial" home on Governor's Island and he and his wife bought a house on Governors Island but their plans are to live in Laconia? Hmmmmmmm.......

I don't know. Given a choice between a Governors Island home and a Laconia residence................Well................Let me think about that.

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

So his wifes family already had a "substantial" home on Governor's Island and he and his wife bought a house on Governors Island but their plans are to live in Laconia? Hmmmmmmm.......

I don't know. Given a choice between a Governors Island home and a Laconia residence................Well................Let me think about that.

What we know from the newspaper article is that Hosmer plans to live in Laconia once his new residence there is ready, while his wife and kids live in Gilford. What neither you nor I know is the current dynamic within the Hosmer family. Making guesses or assumptions is useless and counterproductive.

[Mr. V]

The statute makes no exception for a "temporary" absence, therefore it would seem that he is currently disqualified from holding the office of mayor.

I suggest that you "lawyer up" however if you want to take him to the mat.

[8gv]

If nominated, I will not run.

If elected, I will not serve.

But...

I there is a dog catcher position that opens up...

I like dogs.

[Kamper]

Originally Posted by 8gv

...
I there is a dog catcher position that opens up... ...

See if your town still has the office of "Hog Reeve" in its charter.

It may be vacant. All offices are supposed to be on the ballot but
you may have missed it if no one was running.

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by Mr. V

The statute makes no exception for a "temporary" absence, therefore it would seem that he is currently disqualified from holding the office of mayor.

I suggest that you "lawyer up" however if you want to take him to the mat.

So elected officials in New Hampshire must continuously remain within the jurisdiction they represent or they will be automatically disqualified? No vacations in another state? No trips to see a kid gradate from college? No holidays with family members two states away? If an elected official's house burns down and he moves in with his brother in the next town over while his house is being rebuilt, he's disqualified from serving? You get the idea, and the logic makes no sense. The standard appears to be based on domicile, which means permanent residence. A temporary absence with an intent to return to the domicile does not change domicile.

[WinnisquamZ]

The issue I see is that it was hidden from the public’s eye. It was a school rep that identified the issue to the LDS. If I understand correctly a past school board member had to resign her post due to a similar incident. But, the mayor was given a pass


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[jetskier]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

I'm not sure what you're getting at. As you can see from my post #15 above, I acknowledge that permanently residing in Gilford while being mayor of Laconia would be a problem under both state law and municipal ordinance.

What I am getting at is that there was a 3 month period where the mayor was conducting business and not a resident of Laconia. The law does not provide dispensation for a temporary change of address. The use of the term permanent is a misnomer relative to how the law is stated.

I understand that the mayor will be moving back to Laconia, however, that does not mean that during the last 3 months he was compliant with state law. There is no provision for intent or special circumstances.

Just my 2 cents.

Jetskier

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by jetskier

What I am getting at is that there was a 3 month period where the mayor was conducting business and not a resident of Laconia. The law does not provide dispensation for a temporary change of address. The use of the term permanent is a misnomer relative to how the law is stated.

I understand that the mayor will be moving back to Laconia, however, that does not mean that during the last 3 months he was compliant with state law. There is no provision for intent or special circumstances.

Just my 2 cents.

Jetskier

If the mayor was temporarily absent, his legal residence did not change. Did he register to vote in Gilford? Change his car registration or drivers license to a Gilford address? Ever abandon an intent to return to a Laconia residence? The statute you specifically cited refers to domicile. Find the definition of that word in a New Hampshire statute, as it applies to this situation.

To recycle an example I just used: If an elected official's house burns down and he moves in with his brother in the next town over while his house is being rebuilt, he's disqualified from serving? The interpretation of the statute that you promote defies common sense.

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by WinnisquamZ

The issue I see is that it was hidden from the public’s eye. It was a school rep that identified the issue to the LDS. If I understand correctly a past school board member had to resign her post due to a similar incident. But, the mayor was given a pass


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

If before the fact Hosmer had publicly announced that he would be temporarily living in Gilford while he was preparing one house in Laconia for sale and buying and getting ready for occupancy another house in Laconia, there wouldn't have been a problem? That's the only issue that you have? If that's the case, chalk it up to poor thinking on Hosmer's part, and not anything illegal, unethical or otherwise nefarious.

Was the school board member's move out of her jurisdiction permanent or temporary? That's a possible distinction that would make a big difference.

[thinkxingu]

He's moving from one permanent house to another and, in between, is living in another house they might decide to keep or sell "as part of his wife's real estate business."

Much ado about nothing.

Dude said it best in the article, “I think there are various points in people’s lives where we should be respecting privacy in people’s lives. Unfortunately,” he continued, “there are people who choose to weaponize situations like this, but that’s the nature of politics in the 21st century.”

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Cobalt 25]

I agree with thinkx.

Yes, an elected official should expect scrutiny. But this thread seems to be an opportunity for some in the court of public opinion to assume wrongdoing .

I believe there are some individuals who run for office that actually care about the common good. Looking at forums such as this might make them wonder if it were worth it.

[jetskier]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

If before the fact Hosmer had publicly announced that he would be temporarily living in Gilford while he was preparing one house in Laconia for sale and buying and getting ready for occupancy another house in Laconia, there wouldn't have been a problem? That's the only issue that you have? If that's the case, chalk it up to poor thinking on Hosmer's part, and not anything illegal, unethical or otherwise nefarious.

Was the school board member's move out of her jurisdiction permanent or temporary? That's a possible distinction that would make a big difference.

Domicile - a person's residence or home.

The fact remains that for 3 months the domicile was Gilford...dance around the point all you want, that is what it was. I have simply been stating the facts.

Jetskier

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by jetskier

Domicile - a person's residence or home.

The fact remains that for 3 months the domicile was Gilford...dance around the point all you want, that is what it was. I have simply been stating the facts.

Jetskier

The facts as we both understand them do not support your conclusion regarding Hosmer's domicile.

The brief statute you have cited doesn't address permanent versus temporary living situations because the word domicile does that all by itself. That word has a specific legal meaning, especially here where it is used in statutory language. It seems that you are making the same mistake as Dawn Johnson, the Laconia School Board member who is quoted in the newspaper article: "If that’s where he rests his head, that’s his domicile..." By this logic, if I go to Disney World with my family for a week long vacation, our domicile shifts to Orlando while we are there. That's not how it works, and that's why I suggested that you look in New Hampshire statutes for a definition of the word domicile as it applies to Hosmer's situation.

From Black's Law Dictionary:
Domicile
1. The place at which a person is physically present and that person regards as home; a person's true, fixed, principal, and permanent home, to which that person intends to return and remain even though currently residing elsewhere. 2. The residence of a person or corporation for legal purposes.

Wikipedia:
Domicile (law)
In law, domicile is the status or attribution of being a lawful permanent resident in a particular jurisdiction. A person can remain domiciled in a jurisdiction even after they have left it, if they have maintained sufficient links with that jurisdiction or have not displayed an intention to leave permanently (i.e. if that person has moved to a different state but has not yet formed an intention to remain there indefinitely).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domicile_(law)

So no, Gilford was/is not Hosmer's domicile, as long as he has an intent to return to Laconia and maintain the city as the location of his permanent residence. Intent can be discerned by looking at and evaluating a number of different things in combination, including a person's oral and written statements, where a person is registered to vote, the address being used on legal documents such as a vehicle registration and a drivers license, and where a person owns real property and pays taxes. Living in Gilford for a few months while he is between houses in Laconia does not make Gilford Hosmer's domicile.

[jetskier]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

The facts as we both understand them do not support your conclusion regarding Hosmer's domicile.

The brief statute you have cited doesn't address permanent versus temporary living situations because the word domicile does that all by itself. That word has a specific legal meaning, especially here where it is used in statutory language. It seems that you are making the same mistake as Dawn Johnson, the Laconia School Board member who is quoted in the newspaper article: "If that’s where he rests his head, that’s his domicile..." By this logic, if I go to Disney World with my family for a week long vacation, our domicile shifts to Orlando while we are there. That's not how it works, and that's why I suggested that you look in New Hampshire statutes for a definition of the word domicile as it applies to Hosmer's situation.

From Black's Law Dictionary:
Domicile
1. The place at which a person is physically present and that person regards as home; a person's true, fixed, principal, and permanent home, to which that person intends to return and remain even though currently residing elsewhere. 2. The residence of a person or corporation for legal purposes.

Wikipedia:
Domicile (law)
In law, domicile is the status or attribution of being a lawful permanent resident in a particular jurisdiction. A person can remain domiciled in a jurisdiction even after they have left it, if they have maintained sufficient links with that jurisdiction or have not displayed an intention to leave permanently (i.e. if that person has moved to a different state but has not yet formed an intention to remain there indefinitely).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domicile_(law)

So no, Gilford was/is not Hosmer's domicile, as long as he has an intent to return to Laconia and maintain the city as the location of his permanent residence. Intent can be discerned by looking at and evaluating a number of different things in combination, including a person's oral and written statements, where a person is registered to vote, the address being used on legal documents such as a vehicle registration and a drivers license, and where a person owns real property and pays taxes. Living in Gilford for a few months while he is between houses in Laconia does not make Gilford Hosmer's domicile.

OK...looked at the legal definition too and domicile is defined differently than residence. What Hosmer should have done is publicly state that it was his intent to keep his domicile in Laconia and he would be taking temporary residence outside of the city. That would have avoided the dust up.

So, I agree that there is no legal issue, just bad form and bad optics.

Jetskier

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by jetskier

So, I agree that there is no legal issue, just bad form and bad optics.

Jetskier

Yup. It's unfortunate that 20/20 hindsight comes too late to cure bad optics.