Aldermen, Board of

A regular meeting of the Board of Aldermen was held Tuesday, March 11, 2014, at 7:43 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. President David W. Deane presided; City Clerk Paul R. Bergeron recorded. Prayer was offered by City Clerk Paul R. Bergeron; Alderman McGuinness led in the Pledge to the Flag. The roll call was taken with 14 members of the Board of Aldermen present; Alderman Wilshire was recorded absent. Her Honor Mayor Donnalee Lozeau and Corporation Counsel Stephen M. Bennett were also in attendance. REMARKS BY THE MAYOR I would begin this evening by extending my support to the two contracts on your agenda for passage tonight for the food service workers and the secretaries and thank the School Board for their work in bringing those contracts to you. My second comment would be that the legislation that I sent you information on to move money from the contingency fund into the Snow Trust Fund. I understand that the Budget Committee has scheduled a meeting in April to deal with that. I'm a little bit concerned when I look at the 10-day forecast; it mentions snow multiple times - four to be exact. As you know from the information I've provided to you, we have $97,000 left in the Snow Trust Fund. That goes relatively quickly if we have multiple incidents. I would ask that the Budget Committee consider taking that up sooner rather than later so that we don't have a crisis situation. I would end my remarks tonight with some fun news and encourage some shopping in our community. Macy's has identified Greeley Park under their program called "Heart Your Park" and between the dates of March 7th to March 31st, customers at Macy's in Nashua, Manchester, and Bedford can donate $1 or more at the register with 100 percent of those donations going to benefit Greeley Park. As they call it, to further spread the love. Macy's will match the total customer donation across all stores dollar for dollar up to a quarter of a million dollars. So I would suggest that we shop and donate and I would thank Macy's for choosing Greeley Park. I think that can only help us enhance things at our park. With that, I would thank you as always for your kind attention this evening. RESPONSE TO REMARKS OF THE MAYOR - None RECOGNITION PERIOD – None READING MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING MOTION BY ALDERMAN McCARTHY THAT THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF FEBRUARY 25, 2014, BE ACCEPTED, PLACED ON FILE AND THE READING SUSPENDED MOTION CARRIED COMMUNICATIONS – None PERIOD FOR PUBLIC COMMENT RELATIVE TO ITEMS EXPECTED TO BE ACTED UPON THIS EVENING Bob Sherman, 7C Taggart Drive Thank you Mr. President. I'm Bob Sherman of 7C Taggart Drive. It is my office because I'm President of the Nashua Teacher's Union but I want to echo what the Mayor has just said. I hope that this Board indeed supports both these contracts. If any questions come up in any of the discussion about either contract, I'm sitting here and I will help you out the best I can. Thank you. Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 2 Fred Teeboom, 24 Cheyenne Drive Good evening. My name is Fred Teeboom. I reside at 24 Cheyenne Drive in Nashua. I'm here because I got concerned about representation since the authority of this Board made by various parties. One of these I will address in the Finance Committee the next time it meets. I don't think it's the proper forum for that. The other thing, however, I want to mention to talk about is the union contracts that are up on the agenda. In the analysis, and there's nothing earthshaking here, it says "the Board of Aldermen by law must vote whether or not to approve the cost items of this contract within 30 days". We're talking about the union contract. It says the law is really deeper than that. When I was elected the second time, I worked very hard to get the definition on this. If you write this down, RSA 273:83, item 2C. Those who were on this Board several years ago can understand the details and the analysis done by the legal counsel. I'm sure Attorney Bennett can further enlighten you. There's more to that than just approving or not approving the union contract. It says, and I'm quoting directly from paragraph 273:a 3. "If the aldermen reject any part of a submission of a union contract, or accepting the submission takes any action which would result in a modification of the terms of the cost items submitted to it, either party may re-open negotiations in all or part of the entire agreement." What that means is you have another option. I'm sure President Deane will enlighten you on that because he fought this with me. That is not just approve or reject, you're allowed to make a change. You're allowed to modify. That doesn't mean that modification takes action. Like anything else this Board does, if you modify you identify what you wish to modify and it goes to the bargaining unit and it goes back to the governing board, whoever the governing board may be. Whether it be the School Board, Police Commission, Fire Commission, Public Works Commission. You have an option to approve. You have an option to reject. You have an option to modify. When these came before me at least, I made several successful attempts. You can't do it by yourself. You have to have a Board vote, the terms are modified, and it went back to the bargaining unit. So you ought to be aware of that. In this case, specifically that I looked at, I didn't look at the details of the contract. I usually look at the cost analysis. In this case, the cost analysis for the police contract - I look at the total. We know that the spending cap this year is 2.1 percent. Average of the previous years is 2.1 percent. That's what the cap allows increase in the budget. We're talking about a budget of about $250 million. So we're talking about $5 million that you can increase by without over ridding the cap. It takes 10 votes. If you look at the police contract, you look at total costs. That the only thing that ever made sense to me. You have an increase of 2014 of 1.7 percent. Last year it was 5.9 percent. So this year, well within 2.1 percent. Now the total amount is about $5 million out of a total of $250 million contract. You have to consider that. When you see the teacher's union, it's going to be a huge number like $70 -80 million. So $5 million of the supervisors be it for the police department but it's 2 percent. Three is not going to make a huge difference. You should take a look at the percentage to see if it's outlandish. If you look at the other contract, which is the food services contract, the increase is 2.8 percent. So it's more than 2.1 percent. Now the total is above 1.8 million. Again, it's a small fraction of the total budget but it's over and exceeds the 2.1 percent. Think about it. If the cap is 2.1 percent and you're sincere in keeping the cap which it says it's basically (inaudible) for years now. The cap has been in place for 21 years. If you give more than 2.1 percent here, then you've got to give someone less than 2.1 percent someplace else. Thank you. Nancy Barnes, 40 Fifield Street I'm here to support our contract - the secretarial contract. I've been a secretary for 15 years for the city. I'm also here to voice the support of all of our secretaries, 80+ secretaries in this school and the negotiation team that worked very hard and very long to come up with this agreement. The school secretaries work very hard for the city and mainly they work for the children of our city. We love our Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 3 jobs. We show up every day and take care of the kids. That's what we do. We believe that the contract is fair to the secretaries and very affordable to the city. We did keep that in mind in our negotiations. We did go all the way to mediation to get here. So quite a lengthy process, expensive process as it is. We want to thank the Budget Review Committee for the work they did a couple of weeks ago on the contract. Thank you for your support with the recommendation for final passage. We hope that the full Board of Aldermen will agree with that and vote to pass it tonight. As Honorable Mayor mentioned earlier, we're thankful that she is behind the contract too and we appreciate it. Thank you. PETITIONS – None NOMINATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS Appointment by the Mayor The following Appointment by the Mayor was read into the record: Conservation Commission Donald Cederquist, Alternate (New Appointment) Term to Expire: April 30, 2017 18 Thoreau Drive Nashua, NH 03062 MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE TO ACCEPT THE APPOINTMENT BY THE MAYOR AS READ AND REFER IT TO THE PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MOTION CARRIED Appointment by the President of the Board of Aldermen The following Appointment by the President of the Board of Aldermen was read into the record: Board of Health Thomas M. Astolfi, M.D. Term to Expire: December 31, 2015 40 Hansom Drive Merrimack, NH 03054 MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE TO CONFIRM BY VOICE VOTE THE APPOINTMENT FO DR. THOMAS M. ASTOLFI, 40 HANSOM DRIVE, MERRIMACK TO THE BOARD OF HEALTH FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2015 MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE TO WITHDRAW FROM COMMITTEE THE APPOINTMENT OF DR. ANTHONY STORACE TO THE BOARD OF HEALTH MOTION CARRIED Board of Health Anthony Storace, DMD (Reappointment) Term to Expire: December 31, 2015 5 Coliseum Avenue Nashua, NH 03063 MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE TO CONFIRM BY VOICE VOTE THE APPOINTMENT OF DR. ANTHONY STORACE, 5 COLISEUM AVENUE, NASHUA, TO THE BOARD OF HEALTH FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2015 MOTION CARRIED Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 4 President Deane Just for general information to the Board, we have one more Board of Health member to be brought forward. Normally they're approved during our inauguration exercise. Dr. Storace had a conflict and I worked with Director Vigroux on the other two and now Dr. Storace I spoke to him earlier and they think they have the third member, a pediatrician reeled in. That will end the 3 members that we need. We'll be hearing about that shortly I hope. Thank you very much. President Deane declared Dr. Anthony Storace and Dr. Thomas M. Astolfi duly elected to the Board of Health for terms to expire December 31, 2015. Oath of Office administered by Corporation Counsel. REPORTS OF COMMITTEE Budget Review Committee ................................................................ 02/24/14 There being no objection, President Deane declared the report of the February 24, 2014 Budget Review Committee accepted and placed on file. Finance Committee ............................................................................ 02/19/14 There being no objection, President Deane declared the report of the February 19, 2014 Finance Committee accepted and placed on file. Committee on Infrastructure ............................................................. 02/26/14 There being no objection, President Deane declared the report of the February 26, 2014 Committee on Infrastructure accepted and placed on file. WRITTEN REPORTS FROM LIAISONS MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL THAT THE RULES BE SO FAR SUSPENDED AS TO ALLOW FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF A LIAISON REPORT RECEIVED AFTER THE AGENDA WAS PREPARED MOTION CARRIED Board of Public Works Liaison Report................................................. 02/27/14 There being no objection, President Deane declared the liaison report of the February 27, 2014 Board of Public Works Liaison Report accepted and placed on file. MOTION BY PRESIDENT DEANE TO ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE MOTION CARRIED CONFIRMATION OF MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS – None Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 5 UNFINISHED BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS R-14-007 Endorsers: Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman-at-Large Diane Sheehan Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess 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, UNIT D, FOOD SERVICE WORKERS FROM SEPTEMBER 1, 2013 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 2015 Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-14-007 BY ROLL CALL ON THE QUESTION Alderman Schoneman I just pointed to point out from our discussion at the Budget Committee meeting on this contract that no funds for this contract come from the city is my understanding. It's all from food service revenues at the schools and from federal funds. This has no impact on city funds whatsoever. President Deane That's correct. A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows: Yea: Ald. McCarthy, Ald. Dowd, Ald. Schoneman Ald. Chasse, Ald. Caron, Ald. McGuinness Ald. Sheehan, Ald. Soucy, Ald. Donchess Ald. Moriarty, Ald. Siegel, Ald. Melizzi-Golja Ald. Brown 13 Nay: 0 Abstention: Ald. Deane 1 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-14-007 declared duly adopted. R-14-008 Endorsers: Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess Alderman-at-Large Diane Sheehan Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane APPROVING THE COST ITEMS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 6 THE NASHUA BOARD OF EDUCATION AND THE NASHUA TEACHERS’ UNION, LOCAL 1044, AFT, AFL-CIO, UNIT C, SECRETARIES FROM JULY 1, 2013 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2015 AND RELATED TRANSFERS MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-14-008 BY ROLL CALL ON THE QUESTION Alderman Moriarty I'm going to have to do this via memory because I left my sheet that I printed out that had the financial assessment. I'm voting for this primarily because the bottom line at 80 percent approximately of the costs of our city budget, they cover salaries, pension benefits, etc. Eighty percent approximately. So the most important thing we can do in order to stay within budget is to maintain a steady and fair growth of the salary contracts. That is by definition the consumer price index cost of living. This particular contract stays within that. There are other contracts that are currently causing problems that we've read about that did not stay within that that I voted against in the past. It also was worth - I just found it interesting to note that this is the first of all the collective bargaining agreements between the Board of Education, etc., not various teacher's union. It's the only one that I found that the staff work 52 weeks. I guess the Tier 1 secretaries; I think they're called, work 12 months full time. The Tier 2 and Tier 3 are like the rest of the teachers and staff where they work 1,200 hours a year. Thank you. Alderman Schoneman I am on the Budget Committee and we did have this a few weeks ago. We had extensive discussion on it and I was the only one on the committee who voted against it. I've been given a great deal of thought and want to not go over every single detail we talked about at that time but I do want to clarify the position that I presented then and my thoughts tonight. I expect to be voting for this contract. I voted against it and I guess that's why I want to explain why I voted against it and while I'm now going to vote for. Fairness to me - I was elected by the voters of Ward 3. The idea of a contract being fair or not fair to me I think was based primarily on what's happening in the Ward. The folks that are paying the bills are the ones, I think, that we have to balance all of our expenses against with their consideration. We've seen in the city that property values are down. That median incomes whether its family or household income are down and yet city spending continues to go up. So it didn't seem to me to be fair while folks who are paying the bills have incomes going down that folks that receive the money should have incomes going up. It just didn't seem to be a reasonable position. Nevertheless, I do appreciate that secretaries provide a valuable service here in the city for the schools and I'm willing to defer it to judgment of the School Board on this. I think that as the point was made earlier in public speaking, the public comment portion, there is a balance that has to occur too between the requests that are made and costs that begin to fill those requests. We do have news in the newspaper about budgets that are being requested that are quite substantial. It seems to me that the School Board begins to tie their hands a little bit on what they might want to do while approving a contract that automatically begins moving in that direction. If they want to get some of the things that they want to get, then they have to begin at the beginning with saving some money because when we start spending money, then we have less to spend later. I deferred to the School Board; they can do their own prioritization. They can set their own priorities and they have apparently done that. I just want to explain that I trust the School Board to manage how they spend the money they get the way they want to. If this is what they want to do with the money that they're going to be allowed in this new budget, then that's their decision and I will support it. A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows: Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 7 Yea: Ald. McCarthy, Ald. Dowd, Ald. Schoneman Ald. Chasse, Ald. Caron, Ald. McGuinness Ald. Sheehan, Ald. Soucy, Ald. Donchess Ald. Moriarty, Ald. Siegel, Ald. Melizzi-Golja Ald. Brown, Ald. Deane 14 Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-14-008 declared duly adopted. UNFINISHED BUSINESS – ORDINANCES O-14-002 Endorser: Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane ELIMINATING THE 14 COURT STREET COMMISSION AND A RELATED EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN MCCARTHY TO AMEND O-14-002 IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REPLACING IT WITH THE GOLDEN ROD COPY PROVIDED WITH THE AGENDA ON THE QUESTION Alderman McCarthy The original legislation eliminated the expendable trust fund which I had expressed an interest in keeping because it may have use to us in the future. The facility is not going away just the 14 Court Street Commission. So the amended version retains the trust fund then makes the Board of Aldermen the expending agent for that fund. MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN MCCARTHY FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-14-002 AS AMENDED ON THE QUESTION Alderman Donchess Yes Mr. President I just had a couple of questions maybe for Alderman McCarthy. First how much is in the trust fund? Alderman McCarthy I don't believe it has anything in it at the moment. Alderman Donchess Now that the Board of Aldermen is what the expending agent or the trustees, does that mean that the Board of Aldermen needs to approve any expenditure made assuming there were money in the trust fund before the money can be expended? Alderman McCarthy Yes. Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 8 Alderman Donchess Thank you Mr. Chair. MOTION CARRIED Ordinance O-14-002 declared duly adopted as amended. O-14-003 Endorser: Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane ELIMINATING THE GREEN TEAM AND TWO RELATED EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-14-003 MOTION CARRIED Ordinance O-14-003 declared duly adopted. O-14-004 Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane Alderman June M. Caron ELIMINATING THE CHILD CARE ADVISORY COMMISSION AND RELATED EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-14-004 MOTION CARRIED Ordinance O-14-004 declared duly adopted. MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD TO TAKE FROM THE TABLE ORDINANCE O-14-007 ON THE QUESTION Alderman Dowd We had approved this at our last meeting and because we had amended it and changed the size from 8 to 10, as opposed to the original 18, we did send it back to the Board of Education. Unidentified Male Speaker This is procedural so it's non debatable. President Deane Yeah, you're right. Take it from the table and then Alderman Dowd can give us his skinny on what went on with this whole thing. MOTION CARRIED Alderman Dowd Reiterating - at the last meeting we approved this and we amended it from a level of 8 to 10 and because of that, we sent it back to the Board of Education to have them look at the amended motion and they unanimously approved it last night. Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 9 MOTION CARRIED O-14-007 Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy Alderman Paul M. Chasse Alderman June M. Caron Alderman Michael Soucy Alderman Ken Siegel Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderwoman Brown Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman-at-Large Diane Sheehan REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE JOINT SPECIAL SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE Given its third reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-14-007 AS AMENDED AT THE FULL BOARD ON FEBRUARY 25, 2014 ON THE QUESTION Alderman Soucy I was just curious. We're going from 9 to 5 so how are we going to determine who the 5 are going to be? Is that going to be appointed by the Chair or by the President and which 4 will be leaving and which 5 will be staying? Alderman Dowd At one point when we were 18, I had asked people whether they wanted to be on the Joint Special or not. I believe I only have 5, including yourself, that have volunteered. I will reiterate that with the President of the Board and we will put something out telling the 5 people who they are and the Board of Education has selected their 5. President Deane We'll have to have Ralph print up new green committee cards. If that's all the cost associated with the change. Alderman Moriarty This ordinance doesn't change the rules of establishing committees and the rules establishing committees are that the Board President establishes it. I think what Alderman Dowd was saying is you're working with the Board President to make recommendations to him but the selection is made by the Board President. Alderman Dowd He has asked me to get requests from everybody in writing whether they wanted to be on it. That's why I'll be getting back with him. Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 10 President Deane I've spoken with Alderman Dowd about the formality end of it. Although we're looking at maybe some communications from the folks that were appointed and decided that if there was an opportunity to be removed, that they would be more than willing to do so. Alderman Dowd when I spoke with him, he went out and he spoke with the members and he came back and said he pretty much had everything he needed. Alderman Moriarty Not to be a pain but just because I'm a stickler for procedure, I wonder if technically since this is a new - the makeup is substantially being changed and we're reappointing him that the Chair of the Committee would have to be re-voted. President Deane Fresh from vacation, Attorney Bennett what's your opinion on that? Attorney Bennett I believe that's up to the Committee to decide. President Deane Let the Committee decide whether they want to... Alderman Moriarty They'll probably vote for the same person. I certainly... Alderman Dowd It was unanimous the last time. MOTION CARRIED Ordinance O-14-007 declared duly adopted as amended. NEW BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS R-14-009 Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman Michael Soucy Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane APPROVING THE COST ITEMS OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE NASHUA POLICE COMMISSION AND THE NASHUA POLICE SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION FROM JULY 1, 2011 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2015 AND AUTHORIZING RELATED TRANSFERS Given its first reading; assigned to the BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE by President Deane Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 11 R-14-010 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman-at-Large Diane Sheehan Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman June M. Caron Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF APPLICATIONS AND EXECUTION OF GRANT AGREEMENTS WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR GRANTS UNDER THE URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 1964, AS AMENDED, FOR FISCAL YEARS 2015 AND 2016 Given its first reading; assigned to the HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by President Deane R-14-011 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Daniel T. Moriarty Alderman Sean M. McGuinness RELATIVE TO THE TRANSFER OF $200,000 FROM DEPARTMENT 194, ACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION 70 – CONTINGENCY INTO EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND #7038 “DPW SNOW REMOVAL FUND” Given its first reading; assigned to the BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE by President Deane NEW BUSINESS – ORDINANCES O-14-014 Endorser: Alderman Paul M. Chasse, Jr. REGARDING REAPPOINTMENT PROCEDURES Given its first reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN MORIARTY TO ACCEPT THE FIRST READING OF O-14-014, ASSIGN IT TO PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, THE PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AND THE NASHUA CITY PLANNING BOARD AND THAT A PUBLIC HEARING BE SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, APRIL 1, 2014, AT 7:00 PM IN THE ALDERMANIC CHAMBER MOTION CARRIED O-14-015 Endorsers: Alderman David Schoneman Alderman Diane Sheehan ESTABLISHING A HANDICAPPED PARKING SPACE IN FRONT OF 7-9 LEMON STREET Given its first reading; assigned to the COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE by President Deane PERIOD FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT Jim Cutter, 86 Palm Street I'll open a letter to Alderman Deane. "Dear Alderman Deane. The Assessing office gets deed changes to be made to the tax maps from the Engineering Department. Since 1886, the 88 Palm Street deed has not been changed at the Registry of Deeds. A number of years ago an attorney advised me to go to the city Legal Department to have them take care of our problem. I can't say it was a mistake because they would have gotten involved no matter what the problem. Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 12 Over a 2 year period, I contact them over 30 times saying our problem came from the 88 Palm Street building permits that were approved in error. I stopped seeing them after a friend advised me "attorneys are like a dog with a bone". It appears Mayor Lozeau is afraid of a law suit by admitting the city made the errors that has caused our neighbors to take part of our driveway, clothes line area of curtilage. That will not enforce both section 45 of the City Charter and RSA 45:8 Supervision. In Black's Law Dictionary - Sue - to commence or to continue legal proceedings for a recovery of a right. I interpret that to mean Mayor Lozeau can avoid a lawsuit if she enforces the law of the 88 Palm Street building permits of 1950, 1971. It just does not make sense to break laws in order to avoid a lawsuit. It is criminal. Sincerely, Jim" President Deane Thank you. Paula Johnson, 15 Westborn Drive Good evening. My name is Paula Johnson. I live at 15 Westborn Drive. I have an open letter to the Mayor. I'm not going to start with that. Mayor when I went to the Board of Public Works meeting, I mentioned about my taxes had gone up and I had mentioned - I asked you where you're going to be building a new car wash. I said it might pay at least another $209 in my check this year. You had mentioned to me that my taxes had gone down. So what I did was I personally dropped off a letter to your office. A little typos there. When you red check to work, it doesn't and when you don't want it, it does. The drift of it was as per our discussion at the Board of Public Works meeting last night, I am enclosing copies of my last 2 tax bills. As you can see, my assessed value went down but my taxes increased. My assessed value in 2012 was $232,800. In 2013, it was $221,800. My tax bill was $5,002 and in 2013, it was $5,212. It went up. The whole neighborhood went up. You live around the corner. So you knew it went up. So let's get that one straightened out. Number two from that meeting that night, I have questions about vehicles that was purchased - $17,000 for a vehicle that was for the wastewater facility and that very vehicle was only being used at that facility and maybe to make runs to pick up parts downtown. For $17,000 for a new vehicle, I think that's outrageous. You and I believe Commissioner Lavoie mentioned to me that you do not purchase used vehicles. I have asked Mr. Fredette to please supply with any and all information from 2007 to current. I used to work at a used car shop that used to sell to the city. I don't know if they still do. Let's move on with this. I am also a little bit concerned that even when I was an alderman Mayor Streeter didn't like us to talk to any city employees but not to allow anybody to talk to bring them in to a meeting, that's outrageous. The aldermen work for us the taxpayers. The employees work for us the taxpayers. You work for us in a way you get stipends. That's right, the employees work for everybody. I think it's in the best interest of this Board and any other board to have them come before us so that they can ask questions. I didn't get to see that meeting, the Finance Committee meeting but a lot of people called me up and said you gotta see it. It's unbelievable. I never saw it. I just read what was in the paper. I'm shocked and appalled by the attitude of the Mayor towards the Aldermen here. They are elected just like you are. You get paid a higher salary. Maybe the Aldermen this year when the budget comes out should take a look at the salary of the Mayor which I said last year when I was an Alderman - we took away the salary of Mayor Streeter. We took it down. We brought it down to a level amount. I don't see why we can't do it again. People are not having jobs. We're not bringing jobs in and I think it's time that we look at what type of jobs you are bringing in. I've listened to a lot of the Aldermen. I also got to read the newspaper while I was waiting here tonight. My biggest pet peeve is this public/private partnership that goes on in this city. A lot of the people in the community are listening to me about this. There's no such thing as a free ride with a public/private partnership except when the taxpayers pay for things whether it's a park, whether surveillance cameras, whether it's landscaping because what happens at the end we the citizens pay for it because it's turned over to us. Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 13 Now we have another partnership possibly coming on with RJ Findley and Company at the old Indian Head Plaza. We're talking about getting rid of High Street which I don't feel that we should be doing any of this right now because they say if you build they'll come. Who are we bringing in to come? We need to talk to the State about why aren't we bringing in jobs and companies into this State? They're staying in Massachusetts in an about way because it has to be something to do with the taxes. I don't believe the train is going to bring in. I took the bus down to South Station about 2 weeks ago and I thought it was a great ride. If I want to go to the North Station, I need to go down to South Station. I've got to take the Green Line. I don't even know what the Green Line is really because I don't travel in Boston. I don't like Boston. Put me in New York and I'm fine and I'll find my way around New York. It's easier. Straight lines not curved. When we want people to come here, we want to bring in the high skilled jobs but we also need to take a look at what are we going to do? What are we going to build? Just to say to bring the train in, build it they'll come. I don't think so. When we start talking about these public/private partnerships, again, I'm going to say we need to have that line item in the budget and then we need under that line item we need to have those subcategories talking about how much money are we going to allot for every public/private partnership? How much do we expend out of that line item? If we don't, this sidewalk project that we have downtown becomes a private/public partnership. The Mayor doesn't like to include labor into anything. Well labor is the biggest part of any project that you have because if you're going to go in and have a contractor come into your house, or you're going to have your car worked on, the two things they break out is labor and materials. When you look at it, it's usually the labor that costs more than the materials. That's when you usually scale back your projects here. I'm going to ask this Board again with this budget coming up that we have this public/private partnership line items here because I want to see how my tax dollars are being spent because this year my taxes went up, my assessed value went down $11,000, I had to pay another $209 for my taxes, and to tell you the truth, I just can't afford this anymore and most of the people in this city cannot afford out taxes going up more and more. What am I getting for this? Downtown sidewalk, that's only benefitting right now the merchants and the Chamber of Commerce who loves these private partnerships with the Dare to Begin and I'm going to tell you, I dare you all to have the guts to start eliminating and reducing the spending in this city this year. Thank you. REMARKS BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN Alderwoman Brown I'd just like to thank everyone that came this evening to participate and also the Board of Public Work Commissioners. Thank you. Alderman Siegel It was nice to see the Board of Public Works here. I guess while they were here, it would have been nice if we could have sat down and talked about trucks for a few minutes. I guess that wasn't going to happen. I read the legal opinion from Dory Clarke. It's a shame I didn't have the ability to read it prior to the Finance Committee meeting but I do thank the Mayor for forwarding it to us as quickly as possible. Just didn't have a chance to review that because we are in the audit review meeting at the time. I don't agree that this Memorandum - I wouldn't categorize it as some sort of declaration of the limits and the authority of the Finance Committee in any way or confirmation of the Mayor's position. That's my position on this. I won't make that argument in this forum but I'd be interested in what my colleague Alderman Donchess would like to say on this given that he is an Alderman, a member of the Finance Committee, a former Mayor, and an Attorney. I would like to point out the obvious here though. We have not taken an action. We have tabled the decision and we didn't say no or even vote on that. There seems to be a lot of controversy surrounding a non event at this point. To each his own. Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 14 One of the principles I think the Mayor seems to be embracing is this notion of the freedom of commissions to set policy and act accordingly with the funds that are available to them. However, I would refer my colleagues back to the Finance Committee meeting of September 4, 2013 in which the Police Department's stone sign was discussed. I know Alderman Wilshire is not here. She was there for that, Alderman Deane, I know Alderman Caron was there, and Alderman Chasse was there. Some of you may remember it fairly clearly. In that meeting of September 4th if you look at the minutes, it was the first thing that was dealt with. So starting with page 2, the Mayor explicitly states that she does not approve of this, which is certainly her prerogative, and that in fact the purchase item came in without the approval or stamp of the Purchasing Manager Robert Gabriel which once again that is certainly her prerogative to view things that way. However what I'm troubled by is the Police Commission approved this. An independent body appointed by the State. It involved the sign which is the property of the Police Department also which is under the purview of the Police Commission. It was to be paid for by funds by the pistol licensing fund which by Statute also is under only the control of the Police Department. It was approved by the Chief himself. Here we have this sign where no taxpayer dollars are involved, under the control of a Commission, and it really shouldn't be all that controversial. There seem to be general agreement that a sign was needed. If you look closely at the minutes which troubling is that there seems to be a sort of willingness or desire to massage the smallest details of this sign. I found that interesting given that there really is no authority for the Mayor to have had anything to do with that. That sign is under the purview of the Police Commission. In looking at these minutes, I was a little bit troubled about some things so I spoke to Alderman Soucy who has some insights into this given that he's a former police officer in Nashua and understands how things go. He suggested that we get together and set up a meeting with Chief Seusing which he was kind enough to help arrange and Alderman Soucy and I did speak to Chief Seusing on Monday afternoon regarding this to sort of get a better sense from his perspective of what really happened there. Most of this stuff is well know. It's in the public record but one of the questions that I had, I found curious, is in looking back and getting a copy of the Police Commission minutes, the Police Commission had worked on this going back to approximately 2012 and it looked like it was approved in around January of 2013 and there was a little bit of redoing of this as they found that they could get a fancier sign as it were. Something that would be a little classier. I'm sure the Aldermen that were there probably remember that debate about embossing and gold leafing but that's all in the minutes here. What troubled me was the length of time. How did it take from January to the September date? I asked Chief Seusing about that. I said did it really take that long to redo this sign? He said no. It turns out that the Mayor acting in her authority apparently as the Chairman of the Finance Committee was refusing to put it on the agenda. I guess I don't know if she as that right or not. That maybe so but I found that a little troubling that in a sense we can have this notion of a pocket veto where the Chairman of a committee, especially as important a committee as the Finance Committee, can decide well I really don't want to put something out there for it to be voted on for the full committee. I found that really surprising. I knew what the public details were. Clearly I could read the minutes but I found that somewhat surprising and troubling because now I have to say to myself well what else might be lurking there that just through some trickery of the legislative process or the administrivia might be there. For all I know, things might be delayed in Purchasing because we felt like delaying them not because there's any inherent delay. As I understand it, the Chief finally was able to prevail in September to get this on the agenda and I think I have to thank my colleague Alderman Wilshire for asking for a roll call vote because it passed 6 to 1. So clearly it was the desire of the Board of Aldermen, the Finance Committee that that be done. It's interesting because the Police Commission never really had a conflict with the Finance Committee. It took a really long time. It eventually happened fortunately but it's troubling to me that we're in a situation now where I have to question based on some research about what's been done with commissions, how the Board of Public Works somehow is being treated as though it's some entity which is above the reproach or examination as it were of the Finance Committee yet the Police Commission not only didn't receive that same courtesy but they're finance purchase was actively blocked it appears. This might be a one-time thing. It might be not be. The fact that it happened at all I think is extremely troubling to me. I Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 15 really hope going forward that we don't have to do something like Right to Know acts for what might be pending in the Purchasing Department. At a certain point, clearly that would be ridiculous. I'm troubled by both that problem of something not being brought before Finance and it effectively being pocket vetoed and also the inconsistency in the treatment in the various Commissions. So it seems as though like a Commission is good if a Commission agrees with a certain position but if it doesn't, then I can do what I want. That's my impression based on what I've seen. I find that troubling. I don't want to belabor that. I'm hoping to hear hopefully from my colleague Alderman Donchess hopefully about his opinion of the legal document that came from Dory but that's certainly his prerogative to discuss that or not. Alderman Moriarty I forgot to mention in our previous meeting we had it was pleasant to have John Vancour here. I had the pleasure of being on the Infrastructure Committee for the past two years. It was always refreshing to have him come in and hear it straight from the Engineer. Alderman Donchess Just a few items. Number one, I wanted to underline what was in the newspaper because I thought it was very encouraging news which was that 3,100 riders are estimated by the Rail Commission to - or estimated that would be the number of daily riders on the railroad were there service to Nashua and Manchester. I think that was an important estimate because that is more than people thought and I think that is encouraging news with respect to the possibility that there could be rail service in Nashua. Number two - Mr. Cutter. He's come before us many times and as I'm thinking about it, there is the possibility, maybe it's remote of helping him in this respect. The lot behind Mr. Cutter's house and behind his neighbor's house is owned by the City at this point because we took this property for taxes. It has on it a house which is I think asbestos laden and I believe we still own it. Mr. Fredette came before the Infrastructure Committee last term to ask about well what do you want to do with this? I think what we said is well could you give us some thoughts. Rather than try to sell it, are there other uses it could be put to before we decide? I believe we still own it. The boundary on the lot is very weird in the back and it kind of cuts in towards the abutter of Mr. Cutter. If Mr. Cutter's neighbor were to agree, I'm not saying we should file a lawsuit or anything but if Mr. Cutter's neighbor were to agree, we could trade a small part of that lot that we own for a shift in the driveway and maybe help Mr. Cutter by a foot or two on his driveway. Really the city wouldn't lose anything except for a few square feet of land on a property that we may do something else with anyway. I just throw that out there. It's probably a remote possibility but it would be nice to help Mr. Cutter if we could after all of his persistence regarding the narrowness of his driveway. I just thought of it actually as he was talking tonight. I was thinking about the boundary, and the land, and it just came it me. In any event, on the Finance Committee I hope that cooler heads can prevail on that whole thing. I think it would be helpful - I don't necessarily agree with the opinion that suggests that the procedures that have been used in the city for decades as far as I can tell, the city Ordinances that have been approved over and over again are somehow invalid. I don't necessarily agree with that but it would help if the Superintendent of Streets who knows about this equipment could come to the Committee and just tell us whether he thinks this is a wise thing to do to spend $300,000 with the fit up on a two trucks. I would renew my request that he come before the Committee and help to educate us regarding the decision we're called upon to make. Thank you Mr. Chair. Alderman Soucy As a former member of an independent Commission being the Fire Commission, I am in agreement that I would have never tolerated the Finance Committee or the Board of Aldermen to decide what we're going to purchase if it's a ladder truck, or a dollar truck, whatever but I fully support the Finance Committee to say no and to ask questions. I think this is why we're here for the checks and balances. Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 16 I did sit in that meeting with Chief Seusing and Alderman Siegel. My eyes were opened a little bit on this and I would just hope like Alderman Donchess said that cooler heads can prevail and that we can get a little bit more consistency in the future as we move forward. Alderman Sheehan I wanted to let people know that this weekend is the Nashua Public Library Friends of the Library fundraising book sale. If you are a member of the Friends of the Library, you can go Friday night and get first pick. Saturday and Sunday is their fundraiser. They offer books between $.50 and $2. I know I get a lot of best sellers that are current there but it funds a lot of their programs that do not get funded by our own city budget such as the One City One Book where we bring in an author who's written something current and we have a discussion. I encourage people to support this and to show up at the Library on Saturday and pick up a book that you might want to own and also see what some of the nice things are at the library that they have to offer. Thank you. Alderman Caron Just a reminder that Ward 7 is going to have a meeting on Thursday at Dr. Crisp School starting at 6:30 and it's concerning the use of the Arlington Street Fire Station and the VFW provided there's no snow. Secondly the Lions Club will be holding their annual green auction on Monday at the Crowne Plaza starting at 6:30. We certainly would love to see you come down and vote for some of the wonderful auction items that they've been able to receive. That helps them with the eye screening and the hearing that we do for the city and we get a lot of requests for glasses. We certainly would love to see you attend that event. Thank you. Alderman Dowd Two things relative to the Finance Committee. One I wish that we would bring the discussions back here and discuss them amongst ourselves before we parade them in the Telegraph. You have no idea how many people have come up to me and they think it's a joke. It doesn't reflect well on the city. It doesn't reflect well on this Board or city government. I would caution there. I do agree with some of the Aldermen you can say no but no for the right reasons. You don't have enough information on what's being purchased and you'd like a little more information. It hasn't been actively competed. There's some type of language in the contract that perhaps is not conducive to the city but some valid reason. If you have a valid reason, then you can say no and request additional information or make corrections. I would also agree that the final decision on what's purchased after the budget is approved is in the independent committees such as the Fire Commission and the Police Commission and the Board of Public Works. I would hope people take that in mind when they're going before the next meetings of the Finance Committee. Alderman McCarthy I'll comment very briefly on that and I want to go back to Alderman Soucy's comments about the Fire Commission. I guess the question I would pose is you have 8 members of the Board of Aldermen have said yes to buying a new tower truck and floated a bond for $1 million to do so. Can 4 members of the Finance Committee say no we're not going to buy it because this is the policy making board and the board by putting things in the budget or floating bonds has in fact set policy. I would encourage the Board to think about that. My understanding from the Charter is that the purpose of the Finance Committee is to make sure that we are paying for things for accounts that have money in them and that we are following the purchasing ordinances and the applicable State laws with regard to bid processes and purchasing processes and not making policy on the things that are being bought. The other thing I wanted to comment on was I had the privilege of attending the Chamber's annual business awards luncheon last Friday. I wanted to congratulate all of the people who won awards from our local business community and also to comment that the Telegraph's reporter made it look like I was Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 17 the only member of the Board who was there when I was in fact if I remember correctly joined by Alderwoman Brown, Alderwoman Melizzia-Golja, Alderman Siegel, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Sheehan, Alderman Schoneman, and Alderman Dowd. So a good portion of the Board was there to represent city government at that awards luncheon. President Deane I'm not going to make any remarks about the Finance Committee. I have my position. You've served longer than I have and I guess we all can look at Charter language and interpret it whichever way works best at the time. I have yet to have anybody come up and tell me that the situation of what they're reading is a joke. What I have had - my concern is the dysfunction and the unwillingness for a few questions to be answered. That's what I'm hearing about that troubles people in the community. I have taken the opportunity to actually talk to some of the truck drivers in the Street Department. Will go unnamed who I didn't talk to during working hours or ran into at different locations either having a coffee, or a soda, or lunch or something and asked them what their opinion was of the vehicles not of the process. Committee announcements: Alderman Moriarty Planning and Economic Development Committee next Tuesday the 18th at 7 p.m. in the aldermanic chamber. We will have as our guest speaker the Chairman of the New Hampshire Rail Transit Authority Mr. Tom Mayhan and the next day, Wednesday, Finance Committee at 7 p.m. in the aldermanic chamber. Alderman Donchess There's a meeting of the Infrastructure Committee tomorrow night at 7 p.m. There is something that I think will happen which is not on the agenda which is that Mr. Galligani messaged me today and said that Chris Fokas from Martha's wants to come. I think he will come tomorrow to just present his thoughts regarding the restoration of the wood canopy over the sidewalk in front of the Merchants Exchange Building which is a building that goes back - his building - it goes back to the 1850s. I think it's the oldest building in downtown. Anyway it should be very interesting and I wanted to let you know because it's not on the agenda if you want to come and listen to his presentation. There is meeting - a so-called round table pertaining to Greeley Park and Legacy Playground and other potential locations for that Saturday, March 22nd, in the auditorium at 9:30 a.m. Alderman Sheehan Human Affairs on Friday will be the site visits for the Community Development Block Grants. It will be kicking off at 10 a.m. at the Children's Home on Amherst Street going to the one on Concord Street, and then over to the Pal. Anybody in the public who would like to join. Thank you. Alderman Chasse Personnel the 24th, 7 o'clock right in these chambers. President Deane Happy birthday Alderman Chasse on the 14th of March. Bd. of Aldermen – 03/11/14 Page 18 ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE THAT THE MARCH 11, 2014 MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN BE ADJOURNED MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Attest: Paul R. Bergeron, City Clerk