Aldermen, Board of

A regular meeting of the Board of Aldermen was held Tuesday, December 8, 2015, at 7:34 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. President David W. Deane presided; City Clerk Patricia Piecuch recorded. Prayer was offered by City Clerk Patricia Piecuch; Alderman-at-Large Daniel T. Moriarty led in the Pledge to the Flag. President Deane Before I ask the Clerk to take the roll, Alderman Siegel and Alderman Cookson are participating by telephone and under the terms of the state law that allows them to do that, they needs to explain why they can’t attend, if they can hear us, and who they are with, if anyone. Alderman Siegel stated the reasons why he could not attend, confirmed that he could hear the proceedings and stated who was present with him. Alderman Cookson stated the reasons why he could not attend, confirmed that he could hear the proceedings and stated who was present with him. President Deane Acknowledged that those present could hear Alderman Siegel and Alderman Cookson as well. The roll call was taken with 12 members of the Board of Aldermen present; Alderman Siegel and Alderman Cookson were not in attendance but participated in the meeting via telecommunication; Alderman Donchess and Alderman Wilshire were recorded absent; Alderman Moriarty arrived after roll call at 7:34 p.m. Her Honor Donnalee Lozeau and Corporation Counsel Stephen M. Bennett were also in attendance. President Deane Before we begin I am going to recognize Alderman McCarthy to make a motion so we can accept procedural motions without the roll call vote. MOTION BY ALDERMAN McCARTHY THAT THE RULES BE SO FAR SUSPENDED AS TO ALLOW FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF PROCEDURAL ACTIONS WITHOUT OBJECTION A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 12 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Siegel Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 2 REMARKS BY THE MAYOR Mayor Lozeau This evening I would begin by letting you know that there are two items that are under suspension tonight which I hope you can support. The first are two members that are being nominated for the Nashua Airport Authority and two members that are being nominated for the Board of Registrar’s. I am sure the Board would like to know that I did have a conversation with Mayor-Elect Donchess all of these names coming forward and he supports the names being provided this evening so the opportunity for the Personnel Administrative Affairs Committee can take it up on their December 14th meeting. We did take an unusual step for the two positions of the commissioners for the Nashua Airport Authority. I asked Alderman Schoneman and Alderman McCarthy to participate in an interview team. We actually put an ad in the paper and solicited resumes and they spent a day conducting interviews and they have recommended two members for your consideration later this month. The second item that’s coming in under suspension is a remarkable gift from Dick Stahl. That may be a familiar name to some of you. He owned Downtown Lincoln Mercury back in the day and he’s been looking at some of the projects that we have been working on and has decided to provide a gift to the city of $150,000 for the purchase and installation of LED lights along the River Bridge. These are not street lights but LED lights for the opportunity to change colors or do events or other things like you see on Bridges in Boston and other communities. It’s pretty exciting for us to have that opportunity and I think it’s a generous gift. I spoke with the President about that and I am hopeful that maybe he can do a second reading tonight. If you don’t feel comfortable with that, that’s fine. What’s really important is to accept it by the end of the year. I want to mention something about both Mine Falls and the LED streetlights. These are two separate items that are on the agenda this evening. I just want to say that I think it’s a remarkable opportunity that was 30 years in the making to have the city be able to consider the purchase of the Mine Falls Dam. It has a funding stream. I think that there is a really terrific opportunity there and really your action tonight is saying that you are making the decision in that window of time to say that you want to purchase it and how and what kind of management you use moving forward is certainly up to you over the next year. The LED streetlights while it didn’t take 30 years to get here it certainly feels that way. I know some of you have been anxiously awaiting that happening. It’s on your agenda tonight and I think that again, has a funding stream from the cost savings and I think that’s very helpful in making that decision. I wanted to take a moment to just also mention the secretaries’ contract that’s on your agenda tonight. I bring it up because I think that it’s really important to recognize that this is a contract that actually heard the message from many of us here about coming in below the spending cap. This is a contract that expired in June and negotiations took place and it’s coming in at 1.25% increase. The spending cap was 1.5% and the money was set aside and budgeted for in the fiscal ’16 and I think it’s important for people to see that once you send that message out if they then return and bring it in as you requested, I think it’s important that they see that you can find your way to support that. I know that there’s been discussion about the issues surrounding the janitor’s contract and the impact that has and how some of you feel about it. I have to tell you that from my perspective as it relates to the action of the school board as it relates to the janitor’s, I have to tell you that I have faith in the school board and that they have made that decision based on facts that maybe not all of us know what they are. That is their responsibility and their prerogative whether we agree with it or not. I can understand that people have different opinions on that but I’ve had great luck working with the school board in my term here and I have faith that they made a decision that they think is in the best interest of their responsibilities that they have. I would end on a really high note. I am very excited to announce that the Broad Street Parkway is going to open. We are going to do a pedestrian sneak peak of the Broad Street Parkway on December 12 th from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. People will be able to come only from the Millyard side and they will be able to park down on the lot. We’ll have it signed and we will run a shuttle for people to be able to meander along the parkway from that vantage point. Then on December 19th the intention is to have the dedication at 10:00 a.m. and then it will be officially open to the public and motor vehicles. Christmas may arrive early for some of us. With that I will thank you all, as always, for your kind attention. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 3 RESPONSE TO REMARKS OF THE MAYOR President Deane Mayor, it is my intention to have that motion made to ask for a suspension for the second reading of 197. Mayor Lozeau Thank you. RECOGNITION PERIOD R-15-194 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Board of Aldermen RECOGNIZING AND CONGRATULATING LIEUTENANT CARLOS CAMACHO FOR RECEIVING THE SAINT MICHAEL AWARD FROM THE CATHOLIC LAWYERS GUILD OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Given its first reading; There being no objection, President Deane suspended the rules to allow for a second reading of R-15-194 Resolution R-15-194 given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN SOUCY FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-15-194 A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 13 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness. Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-15-194 declared duly adopted. READING MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS There being no objection, President Deane declared the minutes of the Board of Aldermen meetings of November 24, 2015, and the Public Hearings conducted by the Budget Review Committee on December 1, 2015, accepted, placed on file and the readings suspended. COMMUNICATIONS There being no objection, President Deane declared that all communications be read by title only. From: Jeffrey L. Snow, Superintendent, Edgewood Cemetery Re: Request for Joint Convention with the Edgewood Cemetery Board of Trustees Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 4 There being no objection, President Deane accepted the communication, placed it on file and scheduled the Joint Convention with the Edgewood Cemetery Board of Trustees for Tuesday, December 22, 2015. From: Sarah Marchant, Director of Community Development Re: Review and Comment on the H.L. Turner Group, Inc. Report by D R Brown LLC There being no objection, President Deane accepted the communication and placed it on file. From: Nashua TS Lodging, LLC and 110 Grill Two, LLC Re: Request for Installation of Directional Signage in City Street Rights-of-Way Chapter 320, Vehicles and Traffic, Section 320-9  Committee on Infrastructure Recommends the Request be Granted until 1/1/17, with the Stipulation that the Applicant be Required to Comply with any Applicable New Ordinances upon Passage MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD THAT THE REQUEST BE GRANTED UNTIL JANUARY 1, 2017, WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH ANY APPLICABLE NEW HAMPSHIRE ORDINANCES UPON THEIR PASSAGE ON THE QUESTION Alderman Dowd We’ve been discussing this for almost a year in the Infrastructure Committee and we considered the legislation but it was deemed that we grant this request since we have no other requests pending before us so it was felt that the legislation at this time wasn’t required but that we grant the request to this new business in town. A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 13 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED PERIOD FOR PUBLIC COMMENT RELATIVE TO ITEMS EXPECTED TO BE ACTED UPON THIS EVENING Mr. Robert Sherman, President of the Teacher’s Union I am President of the Teacher’s Union and also the representative of the secretaries and I thank the Mayor for her opening comments and hopefully you will listen to her as she is correct that this meets the spending cap. I have some very brief reasons why you should approve the contract coming before you. Number one, the Board of Education membership changes in January and this new Board could change the decision as far as outsourcing the janitor’s contract. Secondly, this contract is for the current school year which has been budgeted for, as the Mayor says, is just as the current (inaudible) in the contract has been. The money is there in the budget and this is just below the spending cap. Third, the Board of Education reviewing the RFP has not considered the re-worked RFP and the (inaudible) representative that is present on that Board is going to present tomorrow night an alternative plan that outsources the management and supplies but not the Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 5 employer’s. The employees will remain city or school employees as has been done in the Oyster River School Cooperative School District. I have their RFP and that is going to be given to this committee tomorrow night. We are working to try to keep these workers here in the city and employed as such. Fourth, there is no guarantee that the pay increase in this contract will be used by the Board of Education to save the custodian jobs and at the end of this financial year the surplus goes back to the general fund. The current situation is that you’ve got the money in the budget and the contract should be approved. This contract will end as of June 30th and I think that you ought to wait and see what happens as far as the contracts go in the school department until the next year. Therefore, I urge the majority of this Board to approve this one-year agreement so that I can bring it back to the secretaries and we can continue with the school year. I’ve got an Oyster River RFP which I can get to you where they have kept the employees as members of the district. Mr. George Farrington, 24 Lutheran Drive I was surprised and a little bit confused when your budget committee voted against the proposed contract for our secretaries. I was also surprised by the comments of a couple of members who indicated that they don’t intend to vote for any district contracts until the custodians have their jobs back. We are accustomed to being criticized for bringing in a contract with raises that exceed the spending cap, we are accustomed to being asked if this is the way we want to spend our money but none of that happened. Our secretaries have agreed to an increase in their income of 1 ¼% this year which is a number below the spending cap. They have agreed to this in spite of the fact the teachers are getting a 3% raise, the custodians are getting a 2 ½% raise and other groups in other city departments are also getting raises that exceed the spending cap this year. They know this but they understand the situation and are willing to accept less than these other groups. With regard to the process of outsourcing the custodial services, I’ve only had very brief conversations with a couple of you and they were general in substance with regard to this subject. Nobody from this Board has ever contacted me to ask why we are going through this process, which is fine unless you attempt to derail the process as a condition of passing our contract. Let me give you a little background. We are often criticized by you folks for not doing enough on-going maintenance and simply waiting to do that as part of a major renovation project. That is totally unfair but our deferred maintenance budget has dwindled to $100,000 and we are trying to keep class sizes down and of course offering jobs at a higher grade. That figure is totally inadequate as I am sure you would agree for a district with eighteen buildings and it probably should be $500,000; in fact this very evening our Finance Committee is reviewing a recommendation from our Director of Plant Operations for undeferred maintenance that covers fiscal 2017 through fiscal 2022 at an average annual cost of in excess of $600,000, that would mean a $500,000 annual increase in our budget. If we are going to adequately prepare our students they must have access to technology. When I checked this weekend we had fifteen teachers requesting funds for technology on Donors.Choose. We’d like to maintain an annual hardware budget of around $500,000 and in our current budget we started out at $450,000 but that was reduced by $100,000 to keep from cutting more teaching positions. That should at least be restored another $100,000 next year because it’s back on track. Our CTE Programs provide great opportunities for many of our students and some of you have actually toured a few of those offerings. Until recently the city has been transferring funds equivalent to what we receive in state funding for tuition into the capital reserve equipment account. Those funds are used to keep these programs up-to-date but that transfers thought as part of another effort to make the budget work under the spending cap. If we are going to keep these programs current and meaningful we need to add $150,000 to our budget. Since school began this year we’ve had to add two teaching positions having to get the money from a variety of other places in our budget and the administration tells us we may have a need a third teacher before the end of the year. Those three positions cost $125,000 and it wasn’t in our base as we began the year. The high school guidance counselor’s tell us we need at least one and they think two drug and alcohol counselor’s and we have to transfer funding for a Title 2 position from our operating budget next year; whether it’s one or two counselor’s at the high school that would broaden anywhere from $85,000 to $125,000. We are not satisfied with the overall success of our students. Some do very well and other’s struggle and we think that one of the critically important places to change that is in the early elementary years. If a child doesn’t have a sound foundation in reading and math by the third or fourth grade it’s likely that they are going to struggle for as long as they stay in school. That struggle is difficult for them, for their parents, for the teachers and it’s expensive for the district. We have children starting in first grade already reading and understanding fundamental math and we have children Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 6 starting first grade who are unable to identify their letters or numbers. We should be having a discussion about how to get these children a more even start or whether the answer is all day kindergarten or something else that will have a price tag and we don’t currently have the money. There have been a lot of changes in the district in the last couple of years and I personally think it will be prove to be worthwhile but our teachers need to be supported in this process. To be more effective we need to provide them with professional development opportunities and that too cost money. They are discussing the implementation of a new math book at a cost of perhaps $400,000 and finally I believe the city is due for another increase in our state pension contribution in fiscal 2018 and the last one as I recall was a seven digit figure so where does the money come from? For next year’s budget it seems likely that the cap will be 1.3%. I realize this applies to the city budget that we are frequently reminded of. We aren’t the only department in the city and I expect other departments have needs also. As it applies to us that means our budget can grow by about $1.3 million and that’s a lot of money. If you look at what our cost increase are going to be in fiscal ’17 I think you will see it as another factor to be considered. As I have said before our transportation contract will increase by $250,000. The out-of-district special education line in our budget will probably be increased by $300,000 or so to address those needs. It would be irresponsible not to set aside money for the six contracts that have yet to be negotiated for fiscal ’17. One percent of our payroll is about $800,000 and that covers the $1.3 million. It doesn’t address any of the areas that I have mentioned. There seems to be little doubt that interest rates will rise but I don’t believe Fed is going to stand by legislation take-offs so the cap is going to be a small number for a number of years. The Mayor-Elect made a commitment to live within the spending cap and it seems clear to me that at least six Aldermen are not inclined to override the spending cap which means there aren’t enough votes on the Board to override the spending cap. I realize there’s little evidence among the voters of the city because they want to override the spending cap and that’s not what I am proposing, rather I am looking for a way to; I don’t want more money from the taxpayers, I am looking to find a way to change the way we do business at the school department and repurpose some of the money we already have. Very different members of the Board of Education agreed that we need to look at all possible options. Back in September I was encouraged by the following comments in the Telegraph by an Alderman in response to a Telegraph editorial “Absolutely nothing has been decided by the action of the Board of Education, they had to take this action to leave the option open to potentially privatize these services. This does not mean they are going to do it.” It went on to say “it would have been irresponsible for the Board of Education not to take the action to allow all possible alternatives to be explored. If there are reasons to believe that alternatives to the current custodial contract are not in the interest of our school system then those alternatives are likely going to be rejected. I don’t believe any member of our school board puts personal ideology above the quality of our school system.” I couldn’t have said that better myself except interestingly enough this same Alderman agreed that no contract should be approved until the custodians get their jobs back and voted against the secretaries contract. This process isn’t easy for anyone, least of all the custodians. Nobody on the Board of Education wants to be responsible for putting anyone out of work. We have to look these people in the eye but we also have to look into the eyes of students who are struggling as well as their parents. We don’t want to have to explain to parents that class sizes are going to have to increase and course selections are going to be decreased. We want to offer meaningful CTE programs to the students. We want our students and teachers to have access to current technology. We want to be able to do the maintenance that’s necessary to keep our facilities safe and in good repair. With all of that said I ask that you approve the secretaries contract this evening and bear with us because we are doing our very best to be thorough in a process that we believe needs to be completed. I personally believe that it would be irresponsible for us not to complete the process and explore the options. Although it seems longer, it has only been about three months since we began and in another three months we will have worked through the budget and reviewed the proposals from the custodial terms. Then we can have a discussion based on facts and not speculation. Thank you. Mr. Mark Conrad, Superintendent of Schools I didn’t come tonight to make comments but I feel compelled to do so having thought a lot about the action of the Budget Committee last week. My initial reaction was one of shock because quite frankly for years as I sat in front of the Board of Aldermen and members of our Board bringing contracts in front of you the concern that we have consistently heard and I’ve heard this for twenty years is we contracts to come before us that fall below the spending cap. This Board has supported those contracts with the understanding that it is going to Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 7 have implications in the budget process. I had no thought that this contract might not be called to passing because for the first time in many years we brought the contract that falls below the spending cap for which money has been set aside and reflects a far more modest increase than virtually any other group in this city has received. The real issue here is I think the test of governance for any Board, one of the tests of governance is fairness to employees. Do you have any idea how hard our school secretaries work? When we added school security and locked down our main entrances for middle schools and elementary schools two years ago, we added a significant responsibility for them with constant interruptions to the point where they don’t even get lunch and they are the face of our schools. Over the last five years we have consistently reduced high school secretaries and district office secretaries. This is one of the hardest working groups in the city. Am I really supposed to go out tomorrow and based on the recommendation of the Budget Committee and say to those employees I’m sorry but the modest increase that we budgeted for which your union and our Board agreed, that modest increase we can’t provide to you because of an issue between members of the Board of Aldermen and the Board of Education over a contract that they have nothing to do with? Is that really a fair response? Monday night coming up we are hopeful to bring a para-educator contract before the Board of Education and if they approve that then that’s the new contract the new Board of Aldermen will see in January. Are we going to pride them with the same response? I hope you will think about the fair treatment of employees. Mr. Farrington gave a very articulate case of why the Board of Education has pursued the direction with our custodians that they have but in my view, at the end of the day, it shouldn’t matter whether you agree or disagree with him, that’s a separate item. What we have to think about is fair treatment within budget constraints, for any group of employee’s in this city and our secretaries certainly deserve fair treatment and they have been very modest in what they have asked for and it’s well within our budget so I would encourage you to support them. Thank you. PETITIONS – None NOMINATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS There being no objection, President Deane declared that the Board of Aldermen meet in joint convention with the Board of Library Trustees for the purpose of electing two trustees and called for nominations. Trustee Arthur Barrett nominated Holly Klump for a term to expire March 31, 2016 and John Farrer for a term to expire March 31, 2022. There being no objection, President Deane declared the nominations closed. A Viva Voce Roll Call vote was taken on the appointment of Holly Klump and John Farrer to the Board of Library Trustees for terms to expire March 31, 2016, and March 31, 2022, respectively, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 17 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane, Arthur Barrett, Jr., Linda LaFlamme, David K. Pinsonneault, Mayor Lozeau Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED President Deane declared Holly Klump and John Farrer duly appointed to the Board of Library Trustees for the aforementioned terms. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 8 Oath of Office administered by Corporation Counsel Stephen Bennett. There being no objection, President Deane declared that the convention now arise. There being no objection, President Deane suspended the rules to allow for the reading of Mayoral Appointments received after the agenda was prepared Airport Authority Michael Mahoney (New Appointment) Term to Expire: August 31, 2017 112 Highland Street Hudson, NH 03051 Robert Scheifele (New Appointment) Term to Expire: August 31, 2019 7 Erion Drive Nashua, NH 03062 Board of Registrars Kathryn Fogal (Reappointment) Term to Expire: December 31, 2018 105 Coburn Woods Nashua, NH 03063 Patricia Lucier (Reappointment) Term to Expire: December 31, 2018 2 Bowman Lane Nashua, NH 03062 There being no objection, President Deane accepted the Appointments by the Mayor as read and referred them to the Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee REPORTS OF COMMITTEE Budget Review Committee ................................................................. 12/01/15 There being no objection, President Deane declared the report of the December 1, 2015 Budget Review Committee accepted and placed on file. Committee on Infrastructure .............................................................. 11/19/15 There being no objection, President Deane declared the report of the November 19, 2015 Committee on Infrastructure accepted and placed on file. Planning & Economic Development Committee ................................. 11/17/15 There being no objection, President Deane declared the report of the November 17, 2015 Planning & Economic Development Committee accepted and placed on file. Substandard Living Conditions Special Committee ............................ 11/30/15 There being no objection, President Deane declared the report of the November 30, 2015 Substandard Living Conditions Special Committee accepted and placed on file. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 9 WRITTEN REPORTS FROM LIAISONS Nashua Senior Activity Center Liaison Report ................................... 12/01/15 There being no objection, President Deane declared the liaison report of the December 1, 2015 Nashua Senior Activity Center accepted and placed on file. CONFIRMATION OF MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD THAT THE RULES BE SO FAR SUSPENDED AS TO RECONSIDERATION THE CONFIRMATION OF KATHY VITALE TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ON THE QUESTION Alderman Moriarty Didn’t we indefinitely postpone this? President Deane Yes. Alderman Dowd wants to reconsider the motion to indefinitely postpone. Alderman Dowd Unfortunately I was unable to be at the last meeting and I’m not sure why her appointment was turned down. She has not been convicted of anything and I don’t think that this Board ought to be taking the position to take that approach on people. Also, she has been serving as a part-time member of the Zoning Board of Adjustment for some time doing a good job and no action was ever taken by this Board to remove her from that position so I see no reason at this point why we should lock her confirmation to be a full-time ZBA member. She’s done a good job and the people on the Zoning Board of Adjustment want to see her on there and I think it’s a reconsideration. Alderman Soucy I know I used the same parliamentary motion a couple of weeks ago, however, if something has already been indefinitely postponed I’m just looking for an opinion from legal if this is something that can be done. Attorney Bennett I believe that they can reconsider as long as it’s at that meeting or the meeting after. Alderman Schoneman The motion is to suspend the rules, is that correct as opposed to reconsider because first we must suspend the rules. President Deane Yes, first we must suspend and if that passes then another motion must be made to reconsider and Alderman Dowd cannot make that motion because he was not present. Alderman McCarthy That is precisely the rule that is being suspended. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 10 President Deane You are correct, I stand corrected. A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron, 5 Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown Nay: Alderman Schoneman, Alderman Chasse, Alderman McGuinness, 8 Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Siegel, Alderman Deane MOTION FAILED UNFINISHED BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS R-15-110 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau ESTABLISHING AN EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND FOR STATE EMPLOYER PENSION COSTS AND APPROPRIATING $2,730,000 FROM FUND BALANCE ASSIGNED FOR THIS PURPOSE INTO THE EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND  Amended & Tabled, 2/24/15 R-15-183 Endorsers: Alderman Michael Soucy Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman Ken Siegel Alderman June M. Caron ESTABLISHING AN EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND FOR APPROPRIATIONS EQUIVALENT TO CONCEALED CARRY FIREARM LICENSE FEES FOR THE USE OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND APPROPRIATING $10,000 FROM UNANTICIPATED REVENUE INTO THE EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN SOUCY TO AMEND R-15-183 IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REPLACING IT WITH THE BLUE COPY PLACED ON OUR DESKS THIS EVENING ON THE QUESTION Alderman Soucy The amendment is basically three words. In the original the first paragraph states that the Board of Police Commissioners is appointed as the agent to expend. The amended blue copy version states that the Board of Police Commissioners “or their designee” is appointed as the agent to expend. This allows the Board of Police Commissioners to allow their chief or the deputy chief to expend. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 11 A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 12 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: Alderman Moriarty 1 MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN SOUCY FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-15-183 AS AMENDED ON THE QUESTION Alderman Soucy This is not costing the city anything; this is just basically flipping things back to how they have been running for a while, at least since 1998. When you look at our resolution 98-125, in the state law back then it states clearly that “the fee for licenses issued to residents of the state shall be $10.00 which fees shall be used for the of a law enforcement department of the town granting said license.” Just recently there was a new House bill passed, 607, and the change of language for that was “the fee for license’s issued to residents of the state shall be $10.00 which fees shall be for the use of the town or city granting said licenses.” The $10,000 is just an average of what the permit fees are to give this much needed money back to the police department to continue to buy the things that they have been using in the past. Alderman Moriarty I am going to vote no on this for two reasons. One is that there is a budget for the police department and that budget is voted on and approved and this does cost the city money because currently the licensing fees would go to the general fund and pay for expenditures and it will come out of the general fund to pay for additional expenditures instead. A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 12 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: Alderman Moriarty 1 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-15-183 declared duly adopted as amended. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 12 R-15-187 Endorsers: Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire 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 C, SECRETARIES FROM JULY 1, 2015, THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016, AND RELATED TRANSFERS Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-15-187 ON THE QUESTION Alderman Dowd This, as was pointed out by the President of the Board of Education, this contract falls within all of the guidelines that we’ve presented as a city. The reason it was not accepted by the Budget Committee was because of actions of the Board of Education against another union. I don’t think that we should be in a positon to be taking actions against one union for actions the Board of Education took on another union entirely. It strikes me as almost an unfair labor practice and I actually would ask through the Chair if legal counsel can comment on that when I am done. I think that given everything that we have put forth for the union’s to come back to us that this meets all of that criteria and I see no reason why it shouldn’t be approved. Alderman Soucy I do respect my esteemed colleague’s opinion on this but I want to be clear about one thing. This is not because of the actions of the Board of Education; this is not an issue in my opinion between the Board of Education and the Board of Aldermen. It’s my opinion that there’s no money and it’s going to be a very difficult budget year this year. I have to believe that the reason why these 101 jobs are probably on the chopping block is because of the budget to save money. I can’t look them in the eye when 101 of our city employees are losing their jobs and then on the flip side give raises to another group. I do understand how hard our secretaries’ work and I also understand how hard our custodians work and appreciate the fact that they came in with a very good contract but in any department, whether it was fire or police, I just can’t. I don’t believe in giving raises while other people’s jobs are on the line. That’s just my opinion. Alderman McCarthy Can Alderman Dowd’s question please be answered by Corporation Counsel? Attorney Bennett Is the question or the comments or the position taken by for example, by Alderman Soucy an unfair labor practice, my answer would be no. Alderman Moriarty It’s good to know that my colleague, Alderman from Ward 5 came to this realization with only one month left of his term after voting to approve raises that greatly exceeded the spending cap for almost two consecutive years so there’s still hope. I am of the opinion that all salary contracts that exceed the spending cap should be voted no and if you check my voting record I’ve voted no on practically every one of them. This one has got to be the lowest salary increase that I’ve ever seen since I’ve been an Alderman. The 1.82% bottom line increase is still higher than the 1.7% spending cap but it’s the lowest I’ve seen. Maybe there’s another salary contract out there somewhere that came through here that was less than 1.82% increase but if there was I don’t remember which one it was. I am personally going to reward whoever negotiated this contract and the Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 13 secretaries for at least recognizing some fiscal limitations for the first time in nearly four years that I’ve seen. I am going to vote yes. Alderman Soucy Thank you, Alderman Moriarty, I’m not sure if you complimented me or not and I agree with what you are saying however, I have agreed to the past contracts, I’ve always agreed to the past contracts and the reason Mr. Conrad sat right here and he very carefully and eloquently explained how he is going to mitigate those expenses and never were we in a position where jobs were going to be lost so because of that I didn’t accept the contract. This is the first time where I’m worried for all of our departments. There are 101 people that are possibly going to lose their job and that’s my primary reason as I explained earlier. Alderman Moriarty I have the contract analysis that was handed out to us originally and it has a numerical error in it. It had the bottom line at 1.82% which would exceed the spending cap by a very small amount. In reality… President Deane But it does exceed the spending cap. Alderman Moriarty No, that was an error. The actual increase is only 1.23% which is below the spending cap. Alderman Siegel My big objection was related to some people losing their jobs so that others could be rewarded with a salary increase. I find it somewhat ironic that Mr. Conrad talks about fairness while on the one hand removing the jobs of certain people in order to provide a reward to others and crooning about it because it somehow is under the spending cap. It seems to me that getting a 0% increase for example, would be preferable to waking up in the morning having nothing coming into your bank account. That was my thinking and that’s one of the things about is this how you want to spend your money that we ask. Part of that is that you don’t want to spend your money to reward others while some don’t reap those rewards and lose their jobs. Mr. Farrington quoted me in his remarks during public comment and it is my sense that I do not believe that the custodians should lose their jobs and while I understand that the Board is investigating options to save money, in fact, Mr. Farrington outlines several instances where there’s a tremendous amount of money being spent that may not be voluntary. I am empathetic with my colleagues on the Board of Education but it seems to me, given this situation they should be looking even further. I am not so sure that the justifications for the determination of a contract and the types of money that’s being saved add up based on the information that I had since I responded in a public quorum to the commentary that was made on the Board of Education’s decision. That’s all I have to say on that. Alderman Dowd My concern relative to the unfair labor practice was slanted with the comments that seemed to indicate that no contracts coming forth from any unions that haven’t even been negotiated on the Board of Education yet would be rejected by this Board because of the actions taken of the custodians union. I’d like to ask Corporation Counsel if that something that can be done without it being considered an unfair labor practice when we are saying that no union associated with the Board of Education can get any kind of a raise even though we haven’t negotiated with them yet. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 14 President Deane You are using the words “we’re saying;” there were members that were saying that. I have not seen the majority say that. People’s positions are under of code of conduct and their votes aren’t to be questioned. Obviously if they make those comments then that’s what they are standing behind and that’s what their position is. Attorney Bennett This Board has the obligation and duty to approve all cost items. That’s what you are discussing now is the approval of a cost item. So far the discussion has been related to the lack of funds that the school board budgeted which and there’s been an attempt by the school board to take a look at options to make up the lack of funding. This Board has the right to look at and discuss the cost items and the pass them but they cannot tie them to requiring the Board of Education to take certain actions in regards to other contracts. The comment made by Alderman Soucy regarding his concern that there seems to be a lack of money for funding contracts is a legitimate comment. I don’t believe that constitutes a basis for an unfair labor complaint. Alderman Schoneman This is a difficult choice and we are facing very difficult time financially. I voted for the secretaries last year and I believe we get good value from secretaries and I believe that they work hard. I also believe that the Board of Education has taken appropriate and necessary steps as they deem fit to try to make a very difficult budget year work. None of these choices are easy and it’s difficult and I commend their efforts. The fact that they are taking extraordinary steps speaks to the fact that this is as difficult a year as we know it to be. Given that difficulty, as much as I appreciate the secretaries I am unable to support this at this time. It’s too difficult of a financial situation that we are facing and I am unable to support this raise at this time. A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron, 8 Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Moriarty, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: Alderman Schoneman, Alderman Chasse, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Siegel, 5 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-15-187 declared duly adopted. R-15-188 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy Alderman Richard A. Dowd AUTHORIZING THE EXERCISE OF THE OPTION TO PURCHASE THE HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY IN MINE FALLS PARK Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN MCCARTHY FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-15-188 Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 15 ON THE QUESTION Alderman Moriarty There was a communication from Director Marchant that summarized a review of a report of the Turner Group which… President Deane We accepted that and placed it on file earlier. Alderman Moriarty One of the things that it says in that is the report identifies a significant number of issues that should be corrected before the closing date should the city choose to exercise its option to purchase. The report says there are some issues with the dam that we should mitigate before we agree to buy it. Alderman McCarthy The report says that we should have them corrected before we close on it but that is different from us agreeing. When we agree to buy it that says we will close on it at some future date as I understand it. Alderman Moriarty The sentence from the report from the H.L. Turner group says or Director Marchant says “the report identifies a significant number of issues that should be corrected before the closing date should the city choose to exercise its option to purchase now.” President Deane That means you can sign a contract but these are things that will be addressed prior to closing. Alderman Moriarty Okay so are we going to actually do that, are we going to address them? President Deane It would be in our favor to do that, wouldn’t you think? Alderman Moriarty Saying we are going to do them before we close is not an actual admission that we are going to do them. President Deane I think it would be absolutely irresponsible on the administrations part as well as the Board of Aldermen to approve the expense and purchase and then not follow through with what Turner has recommended that we do. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 16 A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 13 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-15-188 declared duly adopted. R-15-189 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy Alderman Richard A. Dowd AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER TO ISSUE BONDS NOT TO EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF FOUR MILLION TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($4,200,000) FOR PURCHASE OF THE HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY IN MINE FALLS PARK Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN MCCARTHY FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-15-189 BY ROLL CALL ON THE QUESTION Alderman Moriarty Over the past year I have encountered a few people wondering why are we buying this power dam, it seems like a horrible waste of money and I was sort of like minded until at one point recently we learned that we are sort of stuck because we buy it now at one price but if we don’t buy it then the current owner just lets it fall apart and then we are stuck whether we like it or not with paying for repairs later. I’m paraphrasing poorly but my understanding is that it actually is in our financial best interest to purchase it now. Alderman McCarthy I believe the terms are that at some point it becomes our responsibility and at that point we are responsible for reimbursing half of the repairs that have to be done to it between now and then. So yes, we potentially will wind up having to pay for repairs that we don’t have control over if we don’t buy it now. President Deane Are you happy? Alderman Moriarty I am thank you. Alderman Siegel I will point out that we have to make repairs whether we like it or not because there are environmental regulations that we must meet especially with the fish ladder. Whether or not we decide to keep this and let it Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 17 go completely into disarray there is still costs of things that suggests economically it is far more beneficial to purchase this than to not. Alderman Chasse Normally I don’t play my cards but this is a no brainer, it’s Christmas and I’m going to give the Mayor a gift. I am going with a yes. A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 13 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-15-189 declared duly adopted. R-15-190 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER TO ISSUE BONDS NOT TO EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($550,000) TO PURCHASE A NEW PUMPER TRUCK FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-15-190 BY ROLL CALL A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 13 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-15-190 declared duly adopted. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 18 R-15-191 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER TO ISSUE BONDS NOT TO EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF TWO MILLION TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,200,000) FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE (“LED”) STREET LIGHTS Given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN MCCARTHY FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-15-191 BY ROLL CALL A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 12 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: Alderman Moriarty 1 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-15-191 declared duly adopted. UNFINISHED BUSINESS – ORDINANCES – None NEW BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS R-15-195 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau APPROVING THE PROPOSAL BY PENNICHUCK CORPORATION TO EXTEND THE TEN MILLION DOLLAR ($10,000,000) REVOLVING LINE OF CREDIT WITH TD BANK, N.A. Given its first reading; assigned to the PENNICHUCK WATER SPECIAL COMMITTEE by President Deane R-15-196 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman Michael Soucy Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderman June M. Caron RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF $66,500 FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY “STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM” INTO FIRE GRANT ACTIVITY “2015 HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM” Given its first reading; assigned to the HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by President Deane There being no objection, President Deane suspended the rules to allow for the first reading of a resolution received after the agenda was prepared Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 19 R-15-197 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF A GIFT FROM RICHARD STAHL IN THE AMOUNT OF $150,000 FOR LED LIGHTING ON THE BROAD STREET PARKWAY RIVER BRIDGE Given its first reading; Resolution R-15-197 given its second reading; MOTION BY ALDERMAN MCCARTHY FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-15-197 A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 13 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED Resolution R-15-197 declared duly adopted. NEW BUSINESS – ORDINANCES O-15-077 Endorser: Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane ESTABLISHING A SUBSTANDARD LIVING CONDITIONS ALDERMANIC SPECIAL COMMITTEE Given its first reading; assigned to the PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by President Deane O-15-078 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau RESCINDING THE AUTHORIZATION FOR PARKING METERS ON A PORTION OF GARDEN STREET Given its first reading; assigned to the COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE by President Deane PERIOD FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Robert Sherman, President of the Teacher’s Union I want to thank the majority of the Board members for the vote supporting the secretary contract. I do understand those that were opposed. We are working with the custodial union to keep those people employed. Mayor, over the years we have been on different sides but we have always been able to come to an agreement. I wish you all the best in whatever direction you decide to go. Mr. Schena When they find a custodian sleeping under the (inaudible) the man should be fired to set an example. I just don’t understand this. They had a grievance against him and the man stayed on the job, this is ludacris. When it comes to Main Street, it’s nothing but an obstacle course. We spent what $3 million so far and it’s probably going to go to $4 million. We have three men standing around with only one working. They get their dinners from the (inaudible) and the City of Nashua pays for that. I’ve lived in this city for 51 years, my wife and I, no children and paying taxes and what goes on sometimes scares me. It boggles my mind. When it Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 20 comes to Franklin Street, I don’t know what the credit union is going to do when it comes to they build that building across the street. How they are going to get in and out of Franklin Street is beyond me, you can’t get in and out now. Then there was a proposal that they would build some kind of connection to the parkway but that never got approved. We’ve spent like $80 million and I think we budgeted something like $47 million way back when. Thank you ladies and gentlemen for listening to me, have a good one. REMARKS BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN Alderman Chasse I have a question for the City Clerk. When someone goes out and they have a boot day like the when the fire department was out there or PAL was out there the past two weekends. Do they get a permit from City Hall? Ms. Piecuch If they are in the street, it all depends. Alderman Chasse No, just if they are going to run a tag day or a money day do they have to get a permit? Ms. Piecuch Yes, that is correct; they have to pull a tag day no fee permit. Alderman Chasse Are there any rules on paper that is handed to them as it regards to what they can and can’t do? Ms. Piecuch We do not give them a copy of the ordinance but they do have to fill out a license application and they receive a license that they have to have on them so if they are questioned for it they have that license and show that license. Alderman McCarthy When is the caucus for the Board scheduled? President Deane I haven’t scheduled one yet. Would you like to schedule one? Alderman McCarthy I would, yes. President Deane Okay, I’ll look at the calendar and schedule one. Board of Aldermen – 12/08/15 Page 21 Committee announcements: Alderman Chasse Personnel is next Monday night right here at 7:00 p.m. Alderman Dowd The Infrastructure Committee is tomorrow night at 7:00 p.m. right here. Alderman Moriarty On Thursday we have the Pennichuck Water Special Committee. We are going to take up R-15-195 which we had a first reading of tonight. Please tune in. This coming Tuesday, a week from today, Planning and Economic Development Committee, we have a couple of people in from the Business and Industrial Development Authority here in Nashua. The Chairman, Jack Tulley will be here and they are going to report on the status of the Renaissance Nashua Bridge Street Waterfront Redevelopment Project which I am sure a lot of people are wondering how that’s going so please join us or tune in. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja In Alderman Wilshire’s absence, on December 14th at 6:00 p.m. there will be a Human Affairs Committee meeting. Alderman Moriarty This Saturday Symphony New Hampshire is having its yearly Christmas special event at Keefe Auditorium at 8:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN CHASSE THAT THE DECEMBER 8, 2015, MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN BE ADJOURNED A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Schoneman, 13 Alderman Chasse, Alderman Caron, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Soucy, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderwoman Brown, Alderman Deane Nay: 0 MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Attest: Patricia Piecuch, City Clerk  AMENDED R-15-183 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND FOR APPROPRIATIONS EQUIVALENT TO CONCEALED CARRY FIREARM LICENSE FEES FOR THE USE OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND APPROPRIATING $10,000 FROM UNANTICIPATED REVENUE INTO THE EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND CITY OF NASHUA In the Year Two Thousand and Fifteen RESOLVED by the Board of Aldermen of the City of Nashua that pursuant to NH RSA 31: 19-a, the City of Nashua hereby establishes an expendable trust fund for the use of the police department. It is the intention of this board that an annual appropriation will be made to this expendable trust fund in an amount equivalent to the estimated annual concealed carry firearm license fees. The Board of Police Commissioners or their designee is appointed as the agent to expend. Any balance remaining in this expendable trust fund at each fiscal year end will not lapse or be closed out to the General Fund, but will remain in this expendable trust fund. FURTHERMORE, BE IT RESOL VED by the Board of Aldermen of the City of Nashua that $10,000 is appropriated from unanticipated revenue into this expendable trust fund. As this is a resolution which supplements the budget, the following information is provided pursuant to NRO § 5-145, E: Prior to passage of this legislation, the accumulated sum of all appropriations of the FY2016 combined annual municipal budget is $260,526,617. The FY2016 dollar amount under the limit established by City Charter Section 56-c is $50,276.  R-15-197 RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF A GIFT FROM RICHARD STAHL IN THE AMOUNT OF $150,000 FOR LED LIGHTING ON THE BROAD STREET PARKWAY RIVER BRIDGE CITY OF NASHUA In the Year Two Thousand and Fifteen RESOLVED by the Board of Aldermen of the City of Nashua that the City of Nashua is authorized to accept a gift from Richard Stahl in the amount of $150,000 for the purchase and installation of light-emitting diode (LED) lighting along the new Broad Street Parkway River Bridge. The lights will be able to be programmed to change color in order to celebrate special events or enhance the beauty of Nashua's riverfront and millyard.  LEGISLATIVE YEAR 2015 RESOLUTION: R-15-197 PURPOSE: Relative to the acceptance of a gift from Richard Stahl in the amount of $150,000 for LED lighting on the Broad Street Parkway River Bridge SPONSOR(S): Mayor Donnalee Lozeau COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT: FISCAL NOTE: Fiscal impact is a $ 150,000 gift to the city to be used for a specific purpose. ANALYSIS This resolution authorizes the acceptance of a $150,000 gift as described in the resolution. Approved as to form: Office of Corporation Counsel By: Date: I 1 , IQ