Aldermen, Board of

A regular meeting of the Board of Aldermen was held Tuesday, December 10, 2013, at 7:30 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. President Brian S. McCarthy presided; Deputy City Clerk Patricia Piecuch recorded. Prayer was offered by Deputy City Clerk Patricia Piecuch; Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess led in the Pledge to the Flag. The roll call was taken with 12 members of the Board of Aldermen present; Alderman Tabacsko, Alderman Sheehan and Alderman Cookson were recorded absent; Alderman Moriarty arrived after roll call at 7:36 p.m. Her Honor Mayor Donnalee Lozeau and Corporation Counsel Stephen M. Bennett were also in attendance. REMARKS BY THE MAYOR Thank you, Mr. President, I do. I would begin this evening by thanking the volunteers that we have on tonight’s agenda again, some of them are reappointments, so for their willingness to continue to serve, some of whom are here this evening, and for new appointments that are willing to take a shot at serving in our community. The second item I wanted to talk about was, I have provided in the packet, Mr. President, the information relative to the tax breakdown and percentages. I just would ask that somebody might move to make that accepted as a communication tonight so it becomes part of our record. I was a little concerned, I guess I didn’t put it in the right way so that it was understood to be a communication. It was in your packet on Friday. I also wanted to take a moment to say that I support the contracts that are before you for consideration tonight. I would like to thank the Police UAW union for finding a creative way to cover the costs of their share of health care in providing the contract in the manner in which they did. In addition, I would mention that like many of you, I do support finding a way to help the Soup Kitchen meet their challenge grant. I still remain concerned, however, about the source of funds to do that with. I’m just concerned about using general contingency funds in that manner but I support the effort and the funds necessary to help. I would end tonight by just letting you know that we stand ready for the overnight parking program to go into effect. The intention was to go live with it this week, actually, I think tomorrow the City Clerk was prepared. I think the Deputy Clerk was in training today with the staff. It would be helpful and, unless I’m told otherwise, I think that we should probably wait until the pending legislation has action taken on it, that final piece that made adjustments to, I think, three things, if I’m correct. One is including residents from Buck Street, the second is taking some residents out in an area, no taking a piece of Kinsley Street out, and the last piece, which is really the one that’s holding things up, would be what side of the window the sticker goes on. So, before people come in and buy their sticker, I think it would be helpful. So, we stand ready to implement that as soon as that decision is made. And, with that, I would also say that the Holiday Stroll was a wonderful event. I want to thank everybody for their participation and the turn out, as many of you know, was quite remarkable for our twentieth anniversary. I think people had nothing but good things to say. So I thank everybody for their efforts in that endeavor. Mr. President, as always, I would say thank you for your kind attention. RESPONSE TO REMARKS OF THE MAYOR Alderman Donchess I would like to thank Mayor Lozeau for working to bring the downtown parking program to the stage where it’s ready for implementation. I would agree that the amendments that we took up in the Infrastructure Committee a few days ago still need to be passed, and I would expect that they would come to the full Board of the 23rd. You should have a full ordinance by that time. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 2 Alderman Chasse There is a Santa Claus. I did get my marshmallows at the stroll that night. RECOGNITION PERIOD – None READING MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE THAT THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF NOVEMBER 26, 2013 AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED BY THE PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE OF NOVEMBER 25, 2013, BE ACCEPTED, PLACED ON FILE AND THE READINGS SUSPENDED MOTION CARRIED COMMUNICATIONS From: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Re: Millyard Chimney  Tabled 8/13/13 MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE THAT THE RULES BE SO FAR SUSPENDED AS TO ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE A COMMUNICATION FROM MAYOR LOZEAU REGARDING THE TAX RATE MOTION CARRIED PERIOD FOR PUBLIC COMMENT RELATIVE TO ITEMS EXPECTED TO BE ACTED UPON THIS EVENING Bob Sherman, 7C Taggart Drive One of your alderman, I won’t name names, asked me who was on the budget committee, and I placed on each of your desks the projection costs related to salary. The print may look small but I actually did take the costing sheets for the three contracts and pasted them in here. The important information is that given the projection in 2007 to 2011, given the final figure for the end of that contract, the projected cost was $2.1 million less than the projection. In the 2011 to 2013, the projected cost was $1.9 million less than the projection. When you take a look at this teacher’s contract that’s coming before, I think the projections are high. I can give you the reason why: simply not all people that retire are eligible for severance. When those people that retire or resign that are at the top of the pay scale, they are replaced by less people, generally lower on the pay scale. Further, people take leaves for maternities all year that might be up on the pay scale and you hire people that are lower. Therefore, your projections are less. I want to thank the Budget Committee who voted for this unanimously, those people who were co-signers and the Mayor for endorsing this contract. We’ve been at odds sometimes, but we’re in agreement with this so I thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Joerel Nieves, 9 Forge Drive. I’m still in middle school. I’m interested about the skate park. I’m saying because most kids really like the skate park when it was over there. It will be more fun to get the kids out of the house because I think most parents don’t like it when we’re in there. We need a location fast please. Thank you. Ken Siegel, 3 Lamb Road. My remarks are about the Soup Kitchen funding, and only that, but before I do that I just want to make a point of thanking the aldermen that aren’t going to be with us in the next term because I’m learning very quickly it’s a very difficult job. I don’t think the public can necessarily appreciate that. So from one Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 3 alderman-elect to the others, thank you very much for your service. I appreciate it. Now as far as the Soup Kitchen funding, I’m glad to hear that the Mayor is on board with this. It seems like there’s a lot of support. The only real controversy seems to be the means by which it’s going to be financed, whether it’s the contingency fund or it’s the block grant. I think at first blush, the block grant funds seem like the right place to take it from because it really does seem like something which it’s ear-marked for. The only problem is unfortunately despite the fact that the Soup Kitchen personnel are goodhearted and said it wouldn’t be a problem, I spent some time investigating what the requirements would be for federal grant money and what happens when you take it. It’s unfortunate because it should be easier but it’s not. Let’s assume that they are taking this money and it’s on the order of $80,000. It really only has to be more than $2,000 to trigger the requirements. Mention was made at the committee meeting that it triggers the Davis Bacon Act which would be bad enough except it also triggers the Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act and also the McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act and they overlap. The problem with that is you have crazy regulations like if you paint more than 200 square feet, you’re straddling the DBA and SCA and you have to actually account for each separately. In the best case scenario that I could envision, and I’m not an expert on this so others can correct me, they would take whatever that grant money is and try not to put anything towards labor. The DBA is about labor. Service Contract is mostly about labor and prevailing wage issues. The problem is the second you take the money, at the very least you have to escrow it into a separate account and you have to fill out the reports associated with that. Best case is you spend it on equipment. It’s a soup kitchen. Hopefully they’re going to outfit it with new equipment. Maybe they don’t need new equipment. In any case, they really would have to make a concerted effort to avoid any labor costs associated with that and clearly escrow that money and get receipts to prove that. Okay. Now here’s the other problem. It sounds good except the specific trigger listed on the government website for an audit for DBA money is not reporting sufficient wage payments. The problem is they don’t even audit the recipient. It’s the employer’s of the contractors. Here you’re in a situation where there’s a lot of people that are doing work probably below what they would normally charge because this is a charity and they’re doing good stuff. Now they’re subjecting themselves to the risk of undergoing a government audit. I don’t know if any of you have dealt with dealing with some of the government people that you have to deal with that are in some far away bureaucracy, have no idea what your business is or anything, it can be uncomfortable at best and expensive at the very minimum. It’s a pain. Not to belabor it, I think we all have a sense of right and wrong here. I think most people want to do this. I think the Mayor’s suggestion was a reasonable one and not knowing any better, I certainly would have agreed with it. But having investigating it, I think it’s more complicated than at first blush appears to be. I might also add that the money that the city takes I believe, and correct me if I’m wrong Mayor because I don’t know this as well as other people, there’s a de-rating factor in it for administrative overhead associated with these contracts. The Soup Kitchen would probably have to incur that same sort of administrative overhead and potentially worse because they’re not even experienced with this. It could be kind of bad. That’s all I have to say. I hope it’s been helpful, and once aging thank you very much for your time. PETITIONS – None NOMINATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS Appointments by the Mayor The following Appointment by the Mayor was read into the record: Board of Assessors Daniel Gagnon (New Appointment) Indefinite Term at the Pleasure of the Mayor 46 Indian Rock Road Nashua, NH 03064 Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 4 MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE TO ACCEPT THE APPOINTMENT BY THE MAYOR AS READ AND REFER IT TO THE PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MOTION CARRIED REPORTS OF COMMITTEE Budget Review Committee ................................................................. 12/03/13 There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the December 3, 2013 Budget Review Committee accepted and placed on file. Finance Committee............................................................................. 12/04/13 There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the December 4, 2013 Finance Committee accepted and placed on file. Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee ....................................... 11/25/13 There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the November 25, 2013 Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee accepted and placed on file. WRITTEN REPORTS FROM LIAISONS – None CONFIRMATION OF MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS Business and Industrial Development Authority MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE TO CONFIRM BY VOICE VOTE THE APPOINTMENT OF CARL ANDRADE, 10 CLYDESDALE CIRCLE, NASHUA, TO THE BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 MOTION CARRIED President McCarthy declared Carl Andrade duly appointed to the Business and Industrial Development Authority for a term to expire September 13, 2016. Oath of Office administered by Corporation Counsel. Downtown Improvement Committee MOTION BY ALDERMAN DONCHESS TO CONFIRM BY VOICE VOTE THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS TO THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE FOR TERMS TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 13, 2016: BENJAMIN CLEMONS, 177 KINSLEY STREET, NASHUA, RON LAFLEUR, 93 WEST PEARL STREET, NASHUA, AND SY MAHFUZ, 227 MAIN STREET, NASHUA ON THE QUESTION Alderman Pressly I certainly support these three candidates. However I have been attending this committee for two years now. I think we’re lacking some representation. There’s no one on this downtown improvement committee that speaks for the restaurants on Main Street. I feel that our restaurants are one of our major features. We’ve had difficulties. We’ve lost two really important restaurants that we all have loved and enjoyed recently. I think many of the restaurants have had to close for lunch period for lack of business. I think we need to expand this representation to make sure that the restaurants are represented and also Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 5 small businesses. A lot of businesses in downtown are your small service people. Your barber shops, your service people. I would encourage that we expand the representation to include those that I think are not having a voice. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED President McCarthy declared Benjamin Clemons, Ron Lafleur and Sy Mahfuz duly appointed to the Downtown Improvement Committee for terms to expire December 13, 2016. Ethnic Awareness Committee MOTION BY ALDERMAN MELIZZI-GOLJA TO CONFIRM BY VOICE VOTE THE APPOINTMENT OF JANETH OROZCO SANCHEZ, 9 FORGE DRIVE, NASHUA, TO THE ETHNIC AWARENESS COMMITTEE FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 MOTION CARRIED President McCarthy declared Janeth Orozco Sanchez duly appointed to the Ethnic Awareness Committee for a term to expire September 1, 2016. Oath of Office administered by Corporation Counsel. Mine Falls Park Advisory Committee MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO CONFIRM BY VOICE VOTE THE APPOINTMENT OF BRIAN EDWARDS, 22B AUBURN STREET, NASHUA, TO THE MINE FALLS PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 MOTION CARRIED President McCarthy declared Brian Edwards duly appointed to the Mine Falls Park Advisory Committee for a term to expire September 1, 2016. Nashua Housing Authority MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO CONFIRM BY VOICE VOTE THE APPOINTMENT OF PAUL DESCHENES, 57 TYLER STREET, NASHUA, TO THE NASHUA HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE OCTOBER 13, 2018 MOTION CARRIED President McCarthy declared Paul Deschenes duly appointed to the Nashua Housing Authority for a term to expire October 13, 2018. Oath of Office administered by Corporation Counsel. Review and Comment Commission MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON TO CONFIRM BY VOICE VOTE THE APPOINTMENT OF KATHLEEN NELSON, 138 SPIT BROOK ROAD, NASHUA, TO THE REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMISSION FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 1, 2016 MOTION CARRIED President McCarthy declared Kathleen Nelson duly appointed to the Review and Comment Commission for a term to expire December 1, 2016. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 6 Tax Increment Financing Advisory Board MOTION BY ALDERMAN VITALE TO CONFIRM BY VOICE VOTE THE APPOINTMENT OF ECONOMIC DIRECTOR TOM GALLIGANI, 229 MAIN STREET, NASHUA, TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ADVISORY BOARD FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE NOVEMBER 1, 2014 MOTION CARRIED President McCarthy declared Tom Galligani duly appointed to the Tax Increment Financing Advisory Board for a term to expire November 1, 2014. UNFINISHED BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS R-13-129 Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane Alderman Arthur T. Craffey, Jr. Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman June M. Caron Alderman-at-Large Barbara Pressly Alderman Kathy Vitale Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess Alderman Daniel T. Moriarty APPROVING A NEW LOCATION FOR THE DAVID W. DEANE SKATE PARK  Amended & Tabled – 9/10/13 R-13-149 Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman Daniel T. Moriarty APPROVING THE COST ITEMS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE NASHUA BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS AND UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA (UAW), PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES OF THE NASHUA POLICE DEPARTMENT, LOCAL #2232, FROM JULY 1, 2011 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2015 AND AUTHORIZING RELATED TRANSFERS Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-13-149 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-13-149 declared duly adopted. R-13-151 Endorsers: Alderman Michael J. Tabacsko Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman Diane Sheehan Alderman Kathy Vitale Alderman Daniel T. Moriarty Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy Alderman-at-Large Barbara Pressly Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess APPROVING THE COST ITEMS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE NASHUA BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS AND LOCAL #789, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS FROM JULY 1, 2013 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2015 AND AUTHORIZING RELATED TRANSFERS Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 7 MOTION BY ALDERMAN MELIZZI-GOLJA FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-13-151 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-13-151 declared duly adopted. R-13-152 Endorsers: Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman Michael J. Tabacsko Alderman Diane Sheehan Alderman Kathy Vitale Alderman-at-Large Barbara Pressly Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy APPROVING THE COST ITEMS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE NASHUA BOARD OF EDUCATION AND THE NASHUA TEACHERS’ UNION, LOCAL 1044, AFT, AFL-CIO FROM SEPTEMBER 1, 2013 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 2016 AND AUTHORIZING RELATED TRANSFERS Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD TO AMEND R-13-152 IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REPLACING IT WITH THE GOLDEN ROD COPY PROVIDED WITH THE AGENDA Alderman Dowd There were some minor changes made that should have been made the night of the Budget Committee meeting but weren’t. They are pretty much clerical in nature. The first column of salary was straightened out. The other was the dental change was clarified. Alderman Deane We can’t amend contracts. We can accept and reject cost items, correct? President McCarthy Yes. Alderman Deane The amendments were made by whom? Attorney Bennett I spoke to Superintendent Conrad sometime after we introduced the resolution. There had been changes made which were agreed to both the union and the school district by the Board. As Alderman Dowd said the change in the dental, they weren’t really changes in what the agreements of the dental program were. It was just moved from the body of the contract to an appendix. It was expanded a little more in detail. I believe the change to the salary grid, as I call it, was just to specify that the first column was for new teachers as opposed to experienced teachers. I think there were a few grammatical changes made but that was the extent. They were both approved by both the union and the Board of Education but subsequent to the introduction of the contract for approval. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 8 Alderman Deane So the changes were approved by both negotiating parties and never quite amended within the body of the contract, itself, when it was sent over here? President McCarthy I think we just heard they were made after the introduction of the resolution to approve the contract. Alderman Deane Had the contract had its first reading? Attorney Bennett I’m not exactly sure on the timing. It may have. President McCarthy In response to your first question, we get to vote up or down on what’s agreed to by the employer board and the bargaining unit. The amendments simply brings us up to doing that by amending what’s in front of us to be what was agreed upon by the two boards. Alderman Deane I understand that, but once a resolution is put into place and it’s had its first reading, it’s now in our possession to either accept or reject and amendments can’t be made by the two bodies, correct? President McCarthy They can propose an amendment which we can accept. I don’t think it makes much sense to approve the contract without accepting that amendment because you’re voting on something that’s not the agreed upon contract. Attorney Bennett None of the changes affected the cost of the contract. They were for clarification sake or cleaning up the contract. There were no change in the cost items that were presented initially when the resolution was brought forth. Alderman Deane I just don’t want to get into a position where we set a precedent where employer boards and unions are amending contract after we’ve got a first reading and it come back to us for final approval in an amended version that has things changed in it after the fact. That’s my only concern. Thank you. Alderman Dowd They meant to bring those up the night of the budget hearing so they could be amended there but it went so quickly, they forgot to do that. Like Attorney Bennett said, there’s nothing that affects any of the cost items. It’s just for clarification of the wording. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 9 Alderman Deane So the motion is for this body to move to make all these amendments this evening prior to the final passage. President McCarthy Yes. Alderman Pressly I would just like to also express my concern. Those of us that have some memories of things that have happened in the past, this is not the type of area that we want to do sloppy work like this. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-13-152 AS AMENDED Alderman Dowd This contract does a number of things that the Board of Education has been trying to do for quite a long time and were able to negotiate. One of the more important ones is limiting the severance pay to 40 percent of the final year’s salary. That’s a first step in taking the severance numbers down that had plagued us in all of our unions. They’ve eliminated longevity for all new teachers coming in so there will be no more longevity payments. I know that’s another thing that this board has always been concerned about. The dental plan has been taken over into the purview of the Board of Education now rather than the union. They’ve also allowed for an extra teachers’ training day which is very important to the district. Also many of the sidebars that have taken place over the years have now been incorporated into the body of the contract which is something that I have personally been trying to do for quite awhile. The contract is probably one of the better ones that we’ve had come before us from the teachers’ union and I recommend that we approve it. Alderman Donchess I would like to thank both sides, the Board of Education and the union for hard work on this. I believe they started a long way apart. They came to an agreement that seems to be satisfactory and to the advantage of both sides. This is an important contract for the city and a very important group of employees who are subject to the contract. Therefore, I hope that everyone will join in voting to ratify it. Alderman Moriarty I’m going to vote no. I’ll try to make this quick since we have nine endorsers for it. After speaking to quite a lot of people in the past few months, there are two things. The most common statement that I heard was keep our taxes under contract, and the most common question I heard was: What do you think about the Nashua school system? Very rarely are those questions and statements come from the same individual. But nevertheless that’s what we have before us. I took it upon myself to think probably more than any other topic across my desk about what would I do to address improving our school system. A few things that come to mind are an increased emphasis on summer school, increased building maintenance so the students can breathe fresh air. The number one predictor of student achievement relates to the teacher and how they did well in school. In order to attract those teachers, I would suggest increasing the starting salaries of teachers. Although the student-teacher ratios are generally pretty good in Nashua, there’s been a lot of discussion about that. I would not be against limited hiring of teachers in order to target one or two classes. All of those items cost money. We have to be extremely careful about how much we spend on salaries which is 80 percent of $140 million budget. When you get down Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 10 to something like what can the people pay, the taxpayers and the middle class, the people in Wards 4, 6 and 7 who are having a hard time getting by in particular, they’ve all said they are having a hard time paying their bills and cost of living, the inflation rate is a pretty good predictor of the people’s ability to pay so I like the idea that the firemen’s pay increases came in at 2 ½ , 2 ½, 2 1/2 which is a nice, steady predicable cost of living increase. What I’d like to draw your attention to is the 3.1 percent in FY16 on the teacher’s pay increase. That extra .6 percent is $600,000 which could go towards summer school or hiring a couple of teachers or building maintenance or increasing the salary of the starting teachers. It’s been offset by the reduction in severance but bear in mind in 2008, severance was increased from an average of $25,000 to $33,000 for teachers. What has happened by reducing the severance, it’s still not as low as it used to be. It’s hard to claim a victory for that severance reduction when it should never have been in there in the first place. All that aside, I went through the step table and I noticed something very interesting about it. If you look at the base salary increases of line item 3 on the summary where it says “there’s zero percent for all three years” what’s that is saying is that the number of the step table don’t increase over those three years. But as each teacher goes up a step, the individuals will see pay raises on the order of 2.9, 4.4, 3.9, 3.6, 4.4, 4.2. Really, really, really, really high pay increases given today’s economy. The way it works out is the reason the average based on this analysis is only 3.1 percent instead of 4.1 percent which is sort of like an average the step table would predict is for instance if you have someone who’s a bachelor’s with zero years experience and they hire now, essentially what the step table does is for everybody who’s a current employee they get these large salary increases going forward but any subsequent employees that are hired in are hired in at very low compared to the current employees. For instances, a Masters with 10 years experience today may be a Step 9 but next year it drops to like a Step 7. If you hire someone in a Masters 10 this year, they are hired in at a higher salary than if you hire next year somebody with a Master 10. They are hired at a lower salary. If you have Bachelors with 0 experience, that entry level salary does not go up. What happens is in the future years it will make it more difficult for us to attract teachers because the salary that they will get doesn’t keep up with inflation. What the step table should do is each year all the numbers should go up by cost of living so when you are trying to attract new teachers they see that cost of living. Then the individual steps should go up one percent. I don’t like the way the step table came out. The 3.1 percent aggregate is still too high. It’s knocked down by the severance which should never have been in there in the first place and we have to be really careful about what we spend the money on because we need to really, really put some attention on our school system. Thank you. Alderman Dowd One other thing I forgot to mention there was a very large step in the steps of the teachers that this Board has also had problems with over the years. That’s been broken up into five individual steps so it takes longer to get there. Also, they’ve added two steps at the top. It takes the teacher a lot longer to get to the top salary now than it did before. That’s also important and a cost savings to the city. MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-13-152 declared duly adopted as amended. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 11 R-13-153 Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman-at-Large Barbara Pressly Alderman Arthur T. Craffey, Jr. Alderman June M. Caron Alderman Kathy Vitale Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja RELATIVE TO THE TRANSFER OF $100,000 FROM DEPARTMENT 194, ACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION 70 – CONTINGENCY INTO DEPARTMENT 109 – CIVIC & COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES, ACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION 56 – OUTSIDE AGENCIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF DONATING TO THE NASHUA SOUP KITCHEN’S CAPITAL CAMPAIGN Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-13-153 ON THE QUESTION President McCarthy Alderman Deane, at the budget committee you had mentioned amending this down to the amount that was necessary for the match. Alderman Deane I’ll defer to Alderman Wilshire. She has the numbers. Alderman Wilshire Since 1981, the Nashua Soup Kitchen and Shelter has been providing a vital service in our city. I believe they save the city thousands of dollars each year just by being here in the city. The city welfare department uses the Nashua Soup Kitchen and Shelter as a primary resource to feed and shelter those in need. Those are our residents. This resolution gets them to the goal that gets them the $100,000 match but it doesn’t get them to the $2 million goal that they need to achieve to successfully meet their capital campaign. That said this organization is a real asset to the city and I urge us to support the full amount in this resolution to meet the needs of our citizens. They do a fabulous job at meeting those needs. Alderman Pressly I totally agree with your comments. I thought the question was did they need the $100,000? It was a matter of how much have they raised? You say they do need the $100,000 to get the match? Alderman Wilshire They’ve raised $90,000. They need another $60,000 to meet the goal of the $100,000 match. What I’m suggesting is that we fund them at $100,000 because they still need to reach the goal of $2 million to have a successful campaign. Alderman Deane It’s the will of the board so I’m just going to let my motion stand. If somebody cares to amend it then that’s fine. If not, we’ll take it from there. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 12 Alderman Vitale What I’m hearing is it’s only $60,000 needed to bring it up to what they need to get the match. Is that correct? Alderman Deane That’s correct. Alderman Donchess I think the facts that were established at the budget committee are that in terms of the overall campaign that counting the match the Soup Kitchen has raised $1.7 million towards a $2 million goal. If we pass the resolution as proposed that would bring them to 1.8 and they would still need to raise another $200,000. I think given that set of facts, given what Alderman Wilshire has suggested regarding the importance of the Soup Kitchen, the service that they have done for the city over the last 30 some years, and given the dedication and importance of the service they do provide and that this is a once in a 30 year capital campaign, I believe we should pas the resolution as proposed and help them get within $200,000 of their final goal. Alderman Moriarty After being so critical of over $600,000 for the teachers contract it would be hypercritical of me to just start spending money that I think should be prioritized towards summer school so as much as I like the idea of what the Soup Kitchen does, I’m going to vote no. Alderman Dowd If they don’t get the $2 million what does that do? If they end up short of the $2 million what does that do to what they are trying to do? Alderman Wilshire They need to meet the $2 million to get this building up and running and everything they need to operate. There’s no fluff. This is one of the best run organizations I’ve ever come across in my life. They do the best job at fundraising. I believe 75 percent of their budget is fundraising. They provide a vital service to the people in this community. If they’re not providing it, those folks are going to go to the welfare department and we’re going to be paying it through the welfare department. Alderman Dowd I don’t think that answered the question. If they only end up with $1.8 million, are they going to start the project and spend $1. 8 million and do something else later or are they just not going to do it? Alderman Wilshire I don’t have that answer. Alderman Deane I don’t think for a minute that they would collect $1.8 million in donations and not do anything. If that’s the case then there’s a problem. I think the point that Alderman Wilshire is trying to make is this $100,000 puts them that much closer to the $2 million; that’s her point. Yes, they’re going to have to Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 13 probably generate another $200,000 in fundraising efforts in some manner to hit the $2 million that they say they are looking at to complete the project. That’s how I understand it anyways. Alderman Chasse Is this $100,000 going to get them to $1.8 million. Then they have a match out there that’s going to get them to $1.9 million or is that 1.8 include that match? President McCarthy As I understood it the other night, there is currently a program to collect $150,000 of which they have collected $90,000. If they collect $150,000 then they get an additional $100,000 from two other donors who will give that as a match to the $150,000. Sixty of the 100 that we’re providing would get them up to the $150,000 which will get them $250,000. I believe that $250,000 is what gets them to $1.7. What’s on the table right now would give an additional $40,000 which I think gets them to $1.74 if I understood the numbers correctly. Mr. Fisher is indicating that I do. Alderman Chasse The $60,000 is getting them to where they want to be for the match so we’re giving them 40. President McCarthy Yup. Alderman Chasse It’s Christmastime, folks. Give it to them. I’m in the giving mood. Alderman Dowd That question I asked Alderman Deane was just for clarification for the people that are watching tonight. I was pretty certain that they were going to spend the 1.8 but I wanted to make sure that people knew that if they did fall short of the $2 million they were still going to put that into their effort. MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-13-153 declared duly adopted. Alderman Deane Could I have a show of hands of those in support so we can get a headcount. Instead of a roll call, could people who supported the legislation raise their hands? President McCarthy I’ll do that but in general you should have asked for a roll call before the vote was taken. Alderman Deane I apologize. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 14 President McCarthy I believe there was only one vote in opposition. Alderman Deane Thank you very much, Mr. President. MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO WITHDRAW FROM COMMITTEE RESOLUTION R-13-146, ACCEPTING 7 NEW PORTABLE RADIOS FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE MOTION CARRIED R-13-146 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman Diane Sheehan Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman June M. Caron Alderman Michael J. Tabacsko Alderman Kathy Vitale Alderman Arthur T. Craffey, Jr. Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy ACCEPTING 7 NEW PORTABLE RADIOS FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-13-146 ON THE QUESTION Alderman Wilshire Back in September the Police Department received notification of this award. Mr. Mansfield, we had told him we were going to have a meeting prior to tonight’s meeting. But we got another piece of legislation that came in so we moved the meeting out another week. It’s a little more time sensitive than that so we asked that we take it from the committee and move for final passage this evening. I would urge your support. Alderman Moriarty Maybe this is getting ahead, does that mean the Human Affairs won’t be held next week? Alderman Wilshire That’s not true. No, it will be. Nice try. MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-13-146 declared duly adopted. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 15 UNFINISHED BUSINESS – ORDINANCES O-13-39 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau AMENDING SEWER USE FEES RATES AND CHARGES Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN CRAFFEY FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-13-39 ON THE QUESTION Alderman Donchess I’m not requesting a roll call but I’d like to be recorded in opposition to this particular ordinance. Alderman Craffey Roll call please. Alderman Moriarty I was at a meeting when this was first brought up and then it was postponed because it was originally in Personnel/Administrative Affairs. It was sent to Budget Review. I never did catch up. I’m just wondering if someone that was there might want to give a quick summary of happened. President McCarthy There have been some slight amendments down to the rate increases and some change of direct funding into financed projects, bonds and revolving loan fund loans so that the effect on the rate is somewhat smaller. However, the general conclusion after analyzing the account is that the capital in the enterprise fund had been spent down far enough that we could not fund a lot of the capital projects. What’s left seems to be the rate that will support the work that needs to be done over the outlying years. Alderman Donchess I don’t think we amended this in the budget committee at all. Is the rate proposed rate increase still the 15 percent? President McCarthy Yes. The reason for that is when we had proposed it, we proposed raising it in June. What would have been in the FY14 budget was a 7 ½ percent increase effectively. Moving it to December, we’re way further down the line so that the actual increase that the user will see is smaller in this year. But the need for the increase is just as high. If I remember the discussion correctly we said we’ll look at what it looks like in the middle of next year and if we can amend the out years down somewhat we will do that. Alderman Deane I think I brought that up during the budget discussion that when we approved the operating budget, the operating budget included a rate increase in order to cover the cost of operations. To put it in layman’s terms, they spent all the cash that was on hand that was funding the capital improvement. That’s what they did. They left the cash alone and went out and bonded the improvements to not just the treatment plant but the other CSO projects that were going on. It would have pushed the cost to the out years of future users to pay for it. I believe we were sitting on somewhere around $29 million and they spent that Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 16 down to next to nothing. Then you start having these problems. It’s a 24/7 operation with moving caustic affluent, everyone knows what the plant does and everything down there takes a beating. The equipment isn’t cheap. When you go into the capital area to get the cash to pay for it, it was gone. It had already been spent. Alderman Pressly I think we all have known that this would be one of the more sensitive areas during this term. It’s been delayed and delayed. I would like to know how it’s going to actually affect the rates. I think the citizens have a right to know. What Alderman Donchess My view of it differs slightly from yours. The numbers are complicated and there are a lot of important projects, some of which are court mandated by the Consent Decree entered by the city with the EPA. As I recall the analysis, the current rates could cover the court ordered improvements, many of which are significant. On top of those court ordered or mandated improvements via the Consent Decree there are undesignated sewer improvements which the city wishes to undertake as time goes on. Just like the city paves streets, there is a portion in this budget for the replacement of sewers. I was the only one to take this view in the committee so I don’t really want to go on with this too long, but I think that given the size of the increase, given other 15 percent increases we’ve had, were we to moderate the speed with which we undertake the undesignated repair and improvement projects, we could keep this increase to a smaller amount. Clearly it has to go up to some degree, but I think it could be smaller. A viva voce roll call was taken on final passage which resulted as follows: Yea: Ald. Wilshire, Ald. Dowd, Ald. Melizzi-Golja Ald. Chasse, Ald. Caron, Ald. Deane Ald. Vitale, Ald. McCarthy 8 Nay: Ald. Moriarty, Ald. Donchess, Ald. Craffey Ald. Pressly 4 MOTION CARRIED Ordinance O-13-39 declared duly adopted. NEW BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS R-13-155 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman June M. Caron CHANGING THE NAME OF POISSON AVENUE TO ADVENTURE WAY Given its first reading; assigned to the COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE by President McCarthy NEW BUSINESS – ORDINANCES O-13-67 Endorsers: Alderman June M. Caron Alderman Diane Sheehan Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess AUTHORIZING STOP SIGNS ON DUDLEY STREET AT ITS INTERSECTION WITH LINTON STREET Given its first reading; assigned to the COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE by President McCarthy Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 17 PERIOD FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT – None REMARKS BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN Alderman Pressly As we’re nearing the end of this term, I just wanted to announce that I have felt when I have served that I have been the most senior member of this Board. Therefore I have proudly represented the interest of the senior citizens. Since I will no longer be on the Board, I would like to pass the torch to the next person of seniority that turns out to be Alderman Dowd. Here is the torch and I will give it to you after the meeting. President McCarthy Just to clarify that is electric and not an actual lighted candle. Alderman Pressly Absolutely. Alderman Craffey I just want to say thank you to the members of the Board. It’s been a fine time that I’ve served with the members. I want to congratulate Alderman Deane and Alderman McCarthy for your elected positions. I wish you the best of luck in the upcoming years. Thank you. Alderman Deane How about them Patriots, Mr. President? President McCarthy They put something in the weaves. Alderman Deane I want to thank people for the support last night. I’m currently working with Sue on getting some documents out to everyone. I’ve been working with the city clerk looking at abolishing some committees. Nothing too outrageous but some of them haven’t met in years. Some of them have morphed into something else and some of them have completed their task and no longer meet. Paul Bergeron is going through that now. It needs something similar to what was done with CERF when there was funding for equipment that we never had any intentions on ever buying. The old pieces were down there rotting but there were still money in the funds. That was all purged out, money was moved around and funding in different areas. Hopefully when I meet with Sue, we’ll get that back to everyone. I’m going to send people an e-mail about having a picture taken here on the floor with the new Board. My biggest fear is having it turn into an e-mail circus and having 200 e-mails about a date. I’m thinking I’m just going to propose one date at a time and see what happens. I have to make sure that the Charter members, the Mayor and Corporation Counsel and the Treasurer are available too that night. I’m going to start that and send a date out and see what happens, and we’ll take it from there. Hopefully the first chance will be the romance so we can just get it over with. Then the singular pictures, Mr. Andruskevich, if you have an interest in the new aldermen need to have their pictures taken and hung downstairs. That’s something you can work out with Jodie separately. He’s aware of that. I’m going to line that up with Sue and get some contact information with Jodie to be able to speak with the Aldermen-Elect as well. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 18 Alderman Moriarty Alderman Cookson is not here to comment on this. It’s procedural. We have one remaining Infrastructure Committee meeting in the term, and I believe its tomorrow, the 11th. We have two new business that have been referred to it and they are not on the agenda. Is there something we need to do to make sure that they don’t expire at the end of the year or are we just going to let them expire. President McCarthy They do expire at the end of the year if they’re not… Alderman Moriarty I remember the last time there was a bit of a bickering going on about the fact that there was something that didn’t get referred the next day. President McCarthy Our assistant tells me they are on the agenda for tomorrow’s meeting as anticipated referrals. Alderman Moriarty Okay, well done. Alderman Melizzi-Golja I’d just like to remind people that tomorrow night and Thursday night from 5:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m., you’ll be able to view the trees at the Hunt Building. Admission is $5.00, $3.00 for children and seniors. The money raised from the Festival of Trees will go towards restoring the doors at the Hunt Building. Thank you. Alderman Dowd I just want to pose this to our President-Elect. Since we’re all there and all dressed up at the Inauguration, why couldn’t the picture be taken there since we’re all there. Could we all meet a few minutes early and have our picture taken? Alderman Deane A genius. As long as the photographer can make it. I guess we can do it after the Inauguration because people will be late for it. I’ll have Sue contact Jodie and see if he can do it. He’d probably love that because last time it seemed like it took forever. Good idea. Thank you. Alderman Wilshire I’d like to thank the Board for their support for the Nashua Soup Kitchen and Shelter. I’d also like to share my thank you that I got from Ms. Chelsey’s pre-schoolers are New Searles School. They gave me the best Christmas card and thank you card that I’ve ever gotten. I thought it was pretty sweet. That’s all. Thank you. Bd. of Aldermen – 12/10/13 Page 19 Committee announcements: Alderman Wilshire Human Affairs, Monday, December 16, 7 PM. Alderman Chasse Personnel next Wednesday night at 6:30 p.m. prior to the Finance meeting. Alderman Dowd Infrastructure tomorrow night. ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE THAT THE DECEMBER 10, 2013 MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN BE ADJOURNED MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Attest: Patricia Piecuch, Deputy City Clerk  &onnaIee l£ozeau MAYOR Board of Aldermen Dontytstlefefcfteau Date: Decgptoer6,2013 Re: Tax Rate As you know, the city has recently issued its November 2013 property tax bills to residents and businesses. These bills were calculated using the property values resulting from the total revaluation of all properties within the city and the tax rate of $23.50 per thousand dollars of valuation. Comparing the new tax bills to last year's tax bills, we are pleased to report that approximately 66% of the residential taxpayers will pay the same amount or less this year. This percentage compares favorably to the conservative projection of 53% provided in September 2013. When the actual property bills were calculated and issued, many taxpayers migrated from paying slightly more to paying slightly less in property taxes than last year, thereby increasing the percentage from 53% to 66%. The chart below shows the updated percentages for Residential Properties. Residential Properties • 1 to 99 • 100 to 199 • 200 to 299 • BOO to 399 4.09% • 400 to 499 • 6Tor EQ 500 * Zero or Less 229 Main Street • PO Box 2019 • Nashua, NH 03061-2019 603.589.3260 • fax 603.594.3450 • NashuaMayori^NashuaNHgov  Salary cost projections on the past/present teacher contracts: 2007 to 2011 teacher contract was- Base year (2006) $46.2 million which was projected to be $58.8 million (2011); Actual $56.7 million (2011) difference of $2.1 million less than projection 2011 to 2013 teacher contract was- Base year (2011) $56.7 million which was projected to be $57.4 million (2013); Actual $55.5 million (2013) which was $1.9 million less than projection 2013 to 2016 teacher contract is- Base year (2013) $55.5 million which is projected to be $59.9 million (2016) Given past projections, this projection has been overstated. Robert Sherman, NTU President MTU Cost Analysis FY07 • FY11 Contract Items YMrFYM Y»arFY07 Year FY08 Vnr FY09 YearPMO Year FY11 17NMM)5-U30n>6) (7rauo6-snora7) (7raiM>7-imvo8) (7/01/OB-6/30/09) (7/1/0 9-6/3 0/10|(7/1/10-6/30/111 Wages' Article 4:2 • Basic Salary Schedule $ 4<.I86.ÏW S 4S.1Ì6.232 S 49,017.653 » 52.011,39« I 55,663 32»S SS 7Î1 »'.3 PertM SMf hK*u* z.ao% OS* 2.41% Partort npmliuifl C0t>(00**« im i.m fm J0<* Bate Wags » J iOI,«l ? J.0JJ.74Î J 3.531.53» t 3.DSS.ZI4 % Base Wag« Inctea» e.13% «.MX 6.98% 5 nr. «90011 City of Nashua, School Department Teacher NTU Contract Analysis Generai Fund Basa Description FY11 FY12 FY13 063 983 " 555"" Number of Employees in Analysts Base Pay catenations 56,635,433 53,095,433 ? 56,941,183 Base Pay Calculations 245,750 Projected Base Pay Increases on WU2011 Q 5250.00 per Employes 368,625 Projected Base Pay Increases on 8/31/2012 @ »75JO per Employes 122.875 Projected Base Pay Increases on 2/U2013 @ S250.0C per Employee 55.695,433 5B.941.1B3 $ 57^32,683 Total Base Pay 24S.7S0 5 491,500 $ Changs over Prior Year 0.43% 037% Real Annual % Increase ovor Prior Year Nashua School District NTU Teacher Contract Analysis: Final Position FY 2014 - FY 2016 All Funds Base Description FY13 FY-I4 FY15 FY16 1 Number of Employees in Analysis 1.005 1,005 1,005 1,005 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2 Base Salary Increases (new contract language) 3 4 Base Pay Calculations 56.588,690 % 58,191,239 s Base Pay Calculations (FY13 mid-year increase annualized) $ 55,555,585 t 55,555,585 s Base Increase $ 1,133.105 1.502,539 % 1,778.502 t Total Base Pay i 55,555,585 j 56,688.690 58,191,229 t 53.369,731