Aldermen, Board of

A special meeting of the Board of Aldermen was held Thursday, July 12, 2012, at 7:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. President Brian S. McCarthy presided; City Clerk Paul R. Bergeron recorded. Prayer was offered by City Clerk Paul R. Bergeron; Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess led in the Pledge to the Flag. The roll call was taken with 13 members of the Board of Aldermen present; Alderman Moriarty and Alderman Cookson were not in attendance; Alderman Vitale arrived after roll call at 7:12 p.m. Her Honor Mayor Donnalee Lozeau and Deputy Corporation Counsel Stephen M. Bennett were also in attendance. PERIOD FOR PUBLIC COMMENT RELATIVE TO ITEMS EXPECTED TO BE ACTED UPON THIS EVENING President McCarthy Period for public comment on items expected to be acted upon this evening, one person has signed up. Mr. Villiotti. Before you begin, Mr. Villiotti, this has been a heated issue and I would ask that you keep your comments to the substance of the discussion of the appropriation. David Villiotti Certainly. I last was in this Chamber on Monday evening. At that time we were seeking additional funding for the transitional living program of Nashua Children’s Home. Once again the transitional living program provides housing and staff support and guidance for young people who have aged out of our state’s child protective and juvenile justice system and face the challenges of adult living as 18 year olds absence of any financial support from their families of origin. The review and comment funding is the only public funding that supports that program. At the time aldermanic budget review committee did vote to provide an additional $5,000 to that program. The next night the full Board of Aldermen reversed that decision. In reversing that decision, I want to take a second just read the comments from the review and comment committee that oversaw the process. These comments were generated by Alderman Mark Cookson. I’ll skip the preliminaries and get right to the substance of the reason that the funding was reduced, and keep in mind that we experienced a reduction of 33 percent over last year’s allotment which was on top of 35 percent from the year before. The committee notes there some disparity between your fundraising and fundraising expense. $40,000 versus $35,853., respectively. The committee would recommend a review of the associated expenses which it hopefully resolved in a larger fundraising effort to benefit you. Lastly the committee had concerns about the structure provided to the children in the ILP and TLP. In particular the thought of a honor code where a roommate would inform the appropriate person of authority if their roommate illegally had drugs, alcohol, cigarettes or overnight visitors on the premises was of significant concern. The committee believed more structure and oversight is needed. Just to set the record straight, I know the Telegraph had reported that we had corrected misinformation about our honor code. The fact is we have no honor code. I think that’s something that Alderman Cookson did clear up the other night, that the word honor code was his language. It kind of begs the question of what would be the problem with a young 18-year-old if his roommate had illegal drugs letting staff know about it, but that’s kind of off topic. Then beyond that there was the issue of the structure of the program and the outcomes and type of thing. I really defer to Alderman Sheehan’s comments the other night in reviewing our application where she noted in her words “many, many measureable outcomes” in the application. As far as the structure of the program, I would invite any of you to look at the myriad of inspectable reports that come to Nashua Children’s Home by those state agencies responsible for the oversight and monitoring which leaves us with the question of the fundraising. Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 2 The issue was did we spend $36,000 to raise $40,000. That would be a concern if it were true. We’ve submitted it’s not true. We’ve submitted that we raised $317,000 in the year in question. On Monday night’s meeting Alderman Cookson stood by in his words the committee’s determination that we had only raised $40,000. On Tuesday night’s meeting he suggested that we somehow had filled out the form improperly, that we had not done a good job in conveying the information on the form. Now if you look at some of the other applications, and I’m going to focus on the application of the YMCA, that’s an organization on which Alderman Cookson sits on the board of directors. If you look at that application, the fundraising expense line for that year lists $371,000 in expense. The fundraising revenue lists $72,000. Now did the Y lose $300,000 in their fundraising efforts that year? The next time I’m at the Y and trying to fight my losing battle against everything going south on me, should I express my condolences to Mike LaChance on having such a tough year? Well according to Cooksonia economic theory you would think that they lost $300,000. However in the line directly above the fundraising revenue is contribution revenue. The Y raised $941,000 in contributions. I’m not here to criticize the Y. The Y did it right, as did Nashua Children’s Home as did most other agencies in the completion of their applications. I sent you an e-mail the other day and I noted on there that the Boys & Girls Club, Big Brothers, Big Sisters, Harbor Homes, all completed the application the same way. Here are copies of their application and once again the words of Willy Wonka: “It’s all here, black and white, clear as crystal.” Those are the applications so it should be clear to you that the reduction of funding for Nashua Children’s Home was based on inaccurate and false determinations of the committee chaired by Alderman Cookson. It just was. Quite frankly, I’m flabbergasted that someone can look at that application, someone on your budget review committee, and not get it. I’m not here tonight to ask you for additional funding. I don’t expect additional funding. I am here tonight to set the record state. I am here tonight to say that Nashua Children’s Home for the last century has provided clinical, social, educational and financial benefits, and those financial benefits as you know are to the tune of $500,000 a year in savings to the special education budget and now our funding is being reduced by $5,000. Not to worry though. Nashua Children’s Home will continue to prioritize service to Nashua youth. It’s our mission. It’s what we do and it’s something that we have a deeper commitment to than any determination that’s made by this body in the Chamber. Thank you. Alderman Donchess What Mr. Villiotti presented me or us with these documents. President McCarthy If you pass them up so Sue can put them with the record. UNFINISHED BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS R-12-41 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau RELATIVE TO THE ADOPTION OF FISCAL YEAR 2013 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF NASHUA GENERAL, ENTERPRISE, AND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Given its third reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO AMEND R-12-41 BY ADDING $20,000 ON PAGE 143, DEPT. 552, LINE 64226, NORTH COMMON PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT ON THE QUESTION Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 3 Alderman Chasse That falls under the park-rec. What about that money that we received from the Morin Foundation? Isn’t that for the park-rec to handle these kinds of items? May I ask that question to the mayor through you? Mayor Lozeau Alderman Chasse, the money from the Morin Foundation is for priorities that Park and Rec may have that they might present to them. The focus of that they are trying to focus on Roby Park and park and rec programs. While this may be something that could be used, I don’t think it’s something that would be designated to be used that way. President McCarthy My recollection was just jarred and I now remember that it was dedicated to parks and rec programs, not facilities. Mayor Lozeau The way it’s written is that it can be used for other things. Having talked to the family about what their priorities are, when they look at, they said they would consider anything. They are particularly interested in Roby Park. If we went to them and said would you mind if we did North Common, I don’t know if they would approve it or disapprove it. But I do know that there are some projects at Roby Park including maybe the lights for those ball fields that they are interested in doing. I think that would eat through a significant amount of that money. Alderman Chasse So in other words our hands our tied. With that money in a round-about way, our hands are tied. The family has to approve any expenditures from that trust fund. Mayor Lozeau The fund is set up through the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation and that’s generally the process. It’s what’s called a “donor advise fund.” The things that they have talked to us about when we met with them were Special Olympics, summer camps, a road race and Roby Park were some of the things they talked to us about. I think they would be open to a lot of different things. I talked to them about some of the needs and equipment at Greeley Park. I think they would be willing to do that, but I think if we focus on some of the things that they are foremost interested in, I think that money will be gone relatively quickly. Alderman Sheehan To the mayor, I guess, through you. Do we know where the equipment at North Common is on the list of priorities for parks and rec? Mayor Lozeau I didn’t bring a list in with me tonight, but I did look because when these came up I wanted to see where they were. I can tell you that they are not on the top five. The top priority right now is centennial pool. Beyond what we’ve already got scheduled for work, centennial pool has close to $100,000 worth of work that is their first priority. I looked to see if this made it into the top five, and it did not. Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 4 Alderman Sheehan We spend a lot of time there as well, and I know Greeley Park has some equipment issues as well. However, the centennial pool bathroom area does look to need quite a bit. Is it appropriate to amend the amendment to allow for rather than just the North Common equipment but anywhere within that park area? President McCarthy Yes because it’s an amendment to the main motion. A subsequent motion to amend the amendment is in order. Alderman Sheehan Then I would like to do that. President McCarthy And what was your amendment? Alderman Sheehan That the $20,000 be used within the North Common Park or Centennial Pool area. MOTION BY ALDERMAN SHEEHAN TO AMEND THE TITLE TO NORTH COMMON PARK AND CENTENNIAL POOL AREA ON THE QUESTION Alderman Caron If I understand, you’re adding that as part of Centennial Pool but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they would use it for the playground. Am I right if you add that as part? It’s like you’re putting it into, if you had $100,000 you’re adding it to that. I don’t think that’s helping what Alderman Deane is trying to establish here, to get money to upgrade that playground in particular. I don’t know. I could be wrong. Alderman Sheehan My point is there are things in that area that need work that have been higher prioritized. My experience with being at that pool as recently as a couple days ago, the bathrooms are in very, very much need of repairs and improvements. If the park and rec feels that the new equipment is more important, I know that my children use the park and are very happy with what they have to play with there. The bathrooms is another issue. So I would like to see the scope if they’re able to use Roby funding from the Jeff Morin or what have you but allow park and rec to have a little more flexibility. I know that $20,000 isn’t going to go very far, in particular with the playground equipment either way. Alderman Melizzi-Golja Through you to the Mayor. You said that Centennial Pool is on the priority list for this year. Mayor Lozeau The priority list. There’s two lists. There’s the list of work that’s being done currently. Things like Mass Ave, Bullova Park that just got completed. Things like that. This year’s list of action items are happening. Then there’s a priority list of if they had money, what would they do. Centennial Pool needs a new filter and a Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 5 liner similar to what we did at Rotary Common. It’s a very big expense. The bathrooms, I’ve not talked about the bathrooms. I just saw the dollar amount and knew the big ticket items for that. The $100,000 estimate may very well include the bathrooms. I don’t know for certain. I know that the next park on the list is St. Andrew’s Park. It’s one of the ones slated for priorities. Some of you know it as the Matt Dube Field. It’s behind that but the same area. So that priority list, there’s probably about 20 items on it. The reason why I bring that up, alderman, is because just because that’s on the priority list doesn’t mean that it is slated for this year’s work. Frankly, even if this money came right now, I don’t know that they’d be able to do that much more work this season. So we’d have to see how they can make everything work. It could be an opportunity where they look at it, contract out some of the work. I don’t know but that would be something they would have to … President McCarthy Let the record show that Alderman Vitale has joined us. I forgot to mention at the front that her Honor, Mayor Donnalee Lozeau and Deputy Corporation Counsel Stephen Bennett were in attendance. Alderman Vitale, just so you understand the situation, we’re discussing the budget and a motion has been made to amend by adding the North Common playground equipment, 552-64226, for $20,000 and there is a subsequent motion to amend the title of that to North Common Park and centennial Pool. Alderman Wilshire Based on what the mayor said that there may be $100,000 somewhere for the pool work, that you’re not sure that that covers the bathrooms over there? Mayor Lozeau There’s not $100,000 available for the pool. The amount that they think it will cost to do the work at the pool is $100,000. The funds have not been identified. I’m guessing based on the filter and the liner that that may be close to $100,000 all by itself but it could potentially include the bathrooms. I was not aware that there was a problem with the bathrooms. Alderman Wilshire Okay. Thank you. Alderman Deane I understand that the liner that we placed in one of our pools, the proximity of the pool and the type of unstable material that we find underneath the liner was a perfect match for that pool. The building over there at Centennial was rebuilt when we were using waste water user fees for everything. We used waste water user fees for all the benches, all the trees, all the paving. Everything that was done over there, we used waste water user fees on. That fancy bridge that sits behind the back where the two ponds are, to be retention and detention ponds behind the stadium. My quest was to do something for the children with that playground. My feeling is if somebody feels that we have inadequacies in the facility that houses the bathrooms and the showers and whatnot for Centennial Pool then maybe they should take a hard look at it and find out what that cost may be. We always talk about priorities. Well this is one of my priorities. That’s just how I look at it. You can either support it or not. It’s up to you but in my time around the city down in that neck of the woods, I see a lot of kids over there. There was a lot of kids over there tonight. I just wanted to refurbish that a little bit. I’ve looked at some equipment. I think we could bring somebody in to pop some equipment up and clean up what we have and make it a nicer place for the kids to play. That’s all. So I’m not going to support amending this to go in and start doing bathroom renovations. I think that’s as the mayor alluded to earlier that’s Centennial area. I think she’s correct in stating that the liner and the filtration replacement there is going to be $100,000 because that liner that we bought earlier or last year was rather expensive. It’s all fused rubber and everything was replaced. All the piping. I’ve always been of Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 6 the belief either we should fix the pools or fill them up with dirt. We’ve decided as a group to appropriate funds and fix them because there’s a lot of kids in the community whose summer is built around those swimming pools because they don’t go anywhere. I think they are a valuable asset to the community and I support maintaining them and taking care of them and staffing them and things of that nature. But my priority was for the little children’s playground equipment. That’s what would like to do. So I’m not going to support amending this. Thank you. Alderman Donchess I agree with what Alderman Deane just said. The budget committee did consider this. We adopted it, I believe, on an unanimous vote. By the end of the night tonight, we may have adopted a budget and may have considered one or two of the additional items that we haven’t already looked at that the budget committee adopted. But this was one that we looked at and I think voted for unanimously. In addition to that, living in that neighborhood and walking by the North Common little league field, in an effort to exercise, I so often see Alderman Deane working on the North Common little league field. I mentioned to President McCarthy in the last couple of days that I think Alderman Deane spends as much time working for those kids in the north end as he does on the budget committee and all the responsibilities for alderman. So I think he’s familiar with the recreational needs. I think that given the unanimous vote of the committee that this warrants being passed as originally proposed. Alderman Wilshire I appreciate the amendment because I agree that the work probably needs to get done but to dilute the original motion to fund the playground equipment, I don’t think I can support it. I’m hoping that it’s done when the pool liner and project is done, but I agree with Alderman Deane. I think that playground equipment is sorely lacking. Alderman Sheehan I’ll withdraw the amendment. AMENDMENT BY ALDERMAN SHEEHAN WITHDRAWN Alderman Craffey I think this is a good idea. I umpire a lot of baseball games throughout the city. I do a lot of games down there. We have people coming from different parts of both New Hampshire and northern Massachusetts come up here. They bring their families up here. They come down to the North Common field and this is an area where they come and they bring their families. They bring their children. This would be a nice area to spruce up a little bit to give them a good representation of the City of Nashua. I would support this amendment wholeheartedly and I agree with Alderman Deane. Twenty thousand dollars would be a great, great deal, great improvement to the area. Alderman Dowd I’m going to support the motion and the reason is that I’ve been out to Rochester, New York a lot lately. That’s a relatively large city, and they don’t have a lot of money. They’ve had a lot of economic issues, especially with Kodak and what have you. But their playgrounds are all brand new equipment and they’re full of kids. They are designed to safety. Everything looks brand new. Everything looks clean. That just impressed me a lot. I think that we owe it to the youth here to provide them with good facilities. I know we do, and we have a lot of examples of great parks all over the city. Nick certainly puts in a heck of a lot of hours trying to keep up with them. But I think if we could spend a little money to make some of the other parks up to the same quality, I think it’s money well spent. Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 7 MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO FURTHER AMEND BY ADDING $12,000 ON PAGE 143, DEPT. 552, LINE 64227, HOLMAN STADIUM BASKETBALL COURT RENOVATION ON THE QUESTION Alderman Wilshire Through you to the Mayor, did you tell us that some work was being done on those basketball courts already? Do you know to what extent the work is being done? Mayor Lozeau The superintendent agreed that there was work that needed to be done at that basketball court. He had it on his list of things to do. He was approached by a group of volunteers that were looking for a project. He met with them on the site. They went through it, and this group has agreed to take on that project. So, I can’t tell you a dollar amount associated with the work, but my understanding is the intention was to do some work on the pavement and to paint it and to replace some of the nets and things like that. That’s what I’m aware of and he thought that was squared away. Alderman Melizzi-Golja Through you to the Mayor, so the work that had been identified by parks and rec as needing to be done, all of that is going to be done by this volunteer group? Mayor Lozeau That’s my understanding. Alderman Deane Let me give my up close and personal opinion of the basketball court. I have been around that basketball court for the last seven years. Although I appreciate volunteer efforts by everyone in the community, I am of the belief that the basketball court, which is heavily used, needs a lot more than just what a volunteer group could do unless of course they own a paving company and they own a company that can professionally paint the court. The backdrop from where the backboards are where the pole is is an ankle turning trench on both ends. My vision is to bring the pavement out so that goes away and to take and resurface the court similar to Erion. Have people been down to see that basketball court on Robinson Road? Just like that. I don’t know if this group of volunteers could provide that type of paint or that type of expertise to it. Currently that basketball court at North Common ponds water in many places because the kids come over and see me and I lend them brooms and I have tennis court rollers to get the water off the court so they can play basketball there. That’s my vision of what needs to be done. That court is heavily used. What I would like to see done is beyond what a group of volunteers can do unless of course like I said earlier, if they own a paving company and could professionally paint it would be one thing. But it needs more than just a little touch up work. MOTION CARRIED Alderman Caron Tuesday night we passed some motions and one of the issues that I had and I went home and really pondered this was the three agencies that the budget review committee had recommended putting additional money into. Then there was a recommendation that, if I understand correctly, possibly taking Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 8 those agencies back to the Review & Comment Committee and looking at getting some money out of escrow to fund this to what the budget committee recommended. That being said, that wasn’t done. Two out of the three of these agencies were approved. One failed. And that bothered me gravely because if you had agreed in budget committee that all three deserved these increases then one not passing was unfair. So I would like, and I don’t know how to do this, but to bring a motion in for page 67, 505-81018, Nashua Children’s Home to put back that $5,000 change to bring it to $15,000 MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON TO INCREASE LINE ITEM 505-81018, NASHUA CHILDREN’S HOME, BY $5,000 ON THE QUESTION Alderman Wilshire I’m just going to tell you I’m abstaining from the vote. Alderman Deane I will be supporting Alderman Caron’s vote as well. I look forward to having this whole process reviewed and addressed. Thank you. Alderman Chasse I’m going to be brief. I did take a tour of the Nashua Children’s Home last year, and I went to this transitional housing and I was very impressed. There were four young men that were living there. They all had jobs. They learned how to do a checking account. They all took turns every night cooking the meal they had, cooking pizza, whatever. The next step after that they move to the next house where they are there, I believe, for a couple of years before they move out into the real world. To me those four young guys held jobs, went to school, cooked, and a had a clean place. They learned how to pay their bills by the way. They had their electric bill, whatever gas bill they had. They handled all of that. I think it’s a shame. I supported it last night, and I plan on supporting it again. I think that seeing we gave it to the other two, I kind of agree with Alderman Caron that we shouldn’t chastise them. Thank you. Alderman Tabacsko I just want to make sure I understand. There was already $10,000 in that line. The motion is to add $5,000 for a total of $15,000? Am I reading that correctly? President McCarthy That would be correct. Alderman Caron I would like a roll call please. Alderman Pressly I’d like to say that I voted the same for all three and voted to fund all three. I certainly agree that there should be some consistency and some fairness to all three so I will be voted as I did last night in favor. Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 9 Alderman Vitale Last night I voted no on all three because I really believed that it should go through the process that is in place and it’s just a review of that. It’s like going back and saying we disagree with your decision and please reconsider this. I would have liked to have seen it go back through the same process for all three. But since last night the other two passed and this one didn’t, I would support it tonight even though I still believe it should have gone back and we look at it as surplus and add it in that way. But you never know how the vote is going to go. I’ll support it this way even though I disagree with the way that we’re doing it. I would look this is not something that we do next year and we look at the whole process. I don’t think it is completely flawed. I think there’s a couple things to tweak and there’s some consistently with each of the groups that do the interviews and how it’s done. I’ll go ahead and support it tonight even though I didn’t on all three last night. I did it because of the way I believe it should go back through the process. Alderman Tabacsko I concur with Alderman Vitale. I just wanted to note for the record that I voted against all three the other night on the basis that I was trying to avoid making amendment to the budget in general and not any reflection whatsoever to any of the individual causes or organizations that are involved here. Now that we are where we are, I will be supporting this tonight. I just want to make sure that it’s clear that my vote the other night is not in any way reflective of my opinion of this organization or any of the others. Thank you. Alderman Craffey I just wanted concur the same as my previous two colleagues said. Thank you. A viva voce roll call vote was taken which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman Dowd, Alderman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman Donchess, Alderman Tabacsko, Alderman Sheehan, Alderman Deane, Alderman Vitale, Alderman Craffey, Alderman Pressly, Alderman McCarthy 12 Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSTENTION Alderman Wilshire abstained. Alderman Donchess I was going to make a motion to follow the budget committee and put $100,000 into contingency for police, but since Alderman Wilshire has been very involved with that, she may wish to make the motion. Alderman Wilshire Okay, I’ll make that motion. We had at the budget committee put money into page 196, department 591, 86008, contingency-police, at $100,000 and that would be my motion. MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO ADD LINE ITEM 591-86008, CONTINGENCY-POLICE, FOR $100,000 Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 10 Alderman Donchess I think was adopted also, I believe, unanimously by the committee based upon lengthy discussions with the police chief and the police commission about the needs of the department, about the fact that although they are authorized for 177, because of the length of the time that it takes to hire a police officer, testing, interviewing, investigation, police academy, field training when they get back, that they’re never at 177. We debated this. Some people felt that we should add money right away to put more police officers particularly into the tree streets, if we could do that immediately. I was among that camp. Others said we should take some more time to review the situation. The compromise that we reached was this one which I think helps us to have money available. It enables them to have a little more confidence that if they aggressively try to hire that there might be some money available to help them if they need a little more than in their current budget. It also enables us to satisfy the objection of taking a little more time to look at the situation and have them come back maybe at mid-year and discuss their situation there to decide whether this money is actually necessary. So I think these discussions went on from two different nights, many hours. Everyone was involved. I think this was a reasonable compromise, a reasonable solution, and one that I hope that the board will adopt. Alderman Vitale I will support putting the $100,000 into the contingency for police, but leading up to at any time because we have had many discussions on the board about police. I do follow because as backup liaison to Alderman Wilshire, there becomes many questions I hear people ask about the timing of when they do the hiring and how long it takes and everything. Maybe we can ask a presentation to be made in some format so we can get an idea before that time comes that we’re educated in advance as far as what takes place in the hiring process, what kind of responses they get, how long each phase of the training takes. At any given time, what they are looking at for upcoming retirements. Different issues that they see in this city. What the costs of those issues are so we are more familiar with the expenses of running that department as a whole board so we’re making a very informed decision when that comes before us and we’re not asked to make a decision without previous knowledge of different aspects of the police department. That would help us down the road when we make a decision on a contingency spending. Alderman Sheehan I would like to concur with Alderman Vitale but add that in the independent review I would like it to include information on why we had spikes potentially and what the independent review thinks we need as well as I would like to see what efforts have been made to fill the civilian positions because if we stop filling the civilian positions which the chief had said were 11 immediately, we have 11 people ready to be on the road. And that doesn’t require going to training or a 9-month lag time so that’s a real fast way to add almost ten percent to our workforce. So I want to see that addressed in the review as well. I think that needs to be their first priority because that will put 11 people. I understand that some people are going to be on light duty and there’s always going to be somebody in that position or somebody called in sick but to have 11 as a practice, and I’ve heard numbers as high as 17 at times. I think we may very well need more. I know that I would like to see more, but I would like to also see us getting what we are paying for so I would like to have that include in the review at the half-year mark. President McCarthy It’s my intention to work with the chief to have him come to us on probably a quarterly basis so that we can get an update on how we’re doing with the civilian positions. Alderman Sheehan Thank you. Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 11 A viva voce roll call vote was taken which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman Caron, Alderman Donchess, Alderman Tabacsko, Alderman Sheehan, Alderman Deane, Alderman Vitale, Alderman Craffey, Alderman Pressly, Alderman McCarthy 12 Nay: Alderman Chasse 1 MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-12-41 AS AMENDED BY ROLL CALL ON THE QUESTION Alderman Deane The tally sheet, where at what? $245,631,971? President McCarthy I believe the current numbers on the front page where it says “$230,547,530” that should be 684,530. The Number in the paragraph that begins with “Pursuant to NRO 5-145, the $628,000 should be $633,000 and then the line after that, the $613,984 is now $476,984. Alderman Deane There was what, $135,000 added? Wouldn’t that be $478,984 instead of $613,984? President McCarthy We added $137,000. Alderman Deane Okay. So it would be 476? President McCarthy The one that’s $245,496,971 in your copy should be $245,633,971 and the amount under the Cap which is in your copy $613,984 should be $476,984. Alderman Donchess On the list of changes that were originally recommended by the budget committee, one of them had to do with a contingency transfer for the downtown project. I don’t intend to make that motion because in discussing the situation with you, you had indicated that you thought there was a better way to accomplish the goals of learning about the project and potential input into the project that we had been seeking. I was hoping that you would at least give us a brief explanation of how you think we should proceed in that manner. President McCarthy Bd. of Aldermen – 07/12/12 Page 12 I can tell you that I have had concerns about that and recently the mayor and I had a rather spirited conversation on the topic. We are scheduling a presentation to the board. It will either be on the 30th or the 31st of July. I am reasonably confident that this board will have substantial input for that process. I believe we’ve re-arranged the ordering of some of the pieces so that can take place before we commit some of the changes to concrete and allow this board to have input. So I’m fairly confident that we will be able to work that out. A viva voce roll call vote was taken which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Donchess, Alderman Tabacsko, Alderman Sheehan, Alderman Deane, Alderman Vitale, Alderman Craffey, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Pressly, Alderman McCarthy 13 Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-12-41 declared duly adopted as amended. ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE THAT THE JULY 12, 2012 MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN BE ADJOURNED MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Attest: Paul R. Bergeron, City Clerk