Budget Review Committee

BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE JULY 14, 2014 A meeting of the Budget Review Committee was held Monday, July 14, 2014, at 7:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane, Chair, presided. Members of Committee present: Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire, Vice Chair Alderman Richard A. Dowd Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown, Arrived after Roll Call at 7:03 Alderman Ken Siegel Alderman David Schoneman Members not in Attendance: Alderman Michael Soucy Also in Attendance: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau John Griffin, CFO Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess Chairman Deane Mr. Griffin, I wanted to congratulate you on your recent accomplishments with your award of Financial Performance Achievement for Gopher. I think that’s good news. There was a lot of hard work done by a lot of hard working people under your leadership. People look at this. It’s nice to see that we’re in compliance and you’re on the upper-end of the curve. I’d like to say thank you for your efforts and your staff’s efforts as well. Congratulations. Mr. Griffin Thank you. PUBLIC COMMENT – None COMMUNICATIONS MOTION BY ALDERMAN BROWN THAT THE RULES BE SO FAR SUSPENDED AS TO ALLOW FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF A COMMUNICATION THAT WAS RECEIVED AFTER THE AGENDA WAS PREPARED REGARDING THE CITIZEN SERVICES DIRECTOR POSITION, OFFICE OF THE MAYOR ON THE QUESTION Chairman Deane You want to add that to the Budget Review Committee’s agenda? Alderwoman Brown Yes because it was a budget item. MOTION CARRIED Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 2 MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN BROWN TO ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE THAT THE RULES BE SO FAR SUSPENDED AS TO ALLOW FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF A COMMUNICATION REGARDING THE CURRENT ACTIVITY OF THE PROPOSED FY 2015 BUDGET THAT WAS RECEIVED AFTER THE AGENDA WAS PREPARED ON THE QUESTION Chairman Deane We also have another communication that Sue Lovering sent out. This is the request that Alderwoman Brown had on the current activity to date that Mr. Griffin was kind enough to supply to us. My one question is the Citizen’s Services Director position that action was taken on, that’s not reflected in the list even though it was neutral financially. Mr. Griffin We can add that to this list. Chairman Deane So, you will reflect those two motions that were made, the reduction out of 101 and the addition into our operating budget. Mr. Griffin Yes. MOTION CARRIED Chairman Deane We received an e-mail from Mr. Griffin pertaining to updated budget numbers and the entire Board received a copy of it. MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE MOTION CARRIED Alderman Siegel I was just wondering if Alderwoman Brown has a copy of the document. Alderwoman Brown Which document? Alderman Siegel The one that you wanted introduced here. Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 3 Alderwoman Brown Yes, I do. Alderman Siegel That we can see? Alderwoman Brown Yes. It was included as part of our packets to all of us. Chairman Deane Yes, it was just legal opinion that Attorney Bennett sent us. Alderman Siegel Okay, thank you. Alderwoman Brown MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN BROWN TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS MOTION THAT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE MADE REGARDING REMOVING THE CITIZEN SERVICES DIRECTOR POSITION FROM THE MAYOR’S OFFICE TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN Chairman Deane Number one, I don’t believe you need a motion to reconsider and number two, you didn’t vote on the prevailing side so you could not make the motion anyway. If you would like to make a motion to do whatever you want to do, I guess that’s fine by me. MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO TAKE R-14-034 FROM THE TABLE MOTION CARRIED R-14-034 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau RELATIVE TO THE ADOPTION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2015 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF NASHUA GENERAL, ENTERPRISE, AND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Chairman Deane Alderwoman Brown, do you have a motion? Alderwoman Brown I believe since I was not on the prevailing side… Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 4 Alderman McCarthy I believe that the intended purpose can be achieved by just a motion to further amend. MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN BROWN TO REDUCE DEPARTMENT 102 ACCOUNT 51 – CITIZEN’S SERVICES DIRECTOR BY $49,779 ON THE QUESTION Chairman Deane So, are you going to make a motion to reduce the Board of Aldermen’s budget? Alderwoman Brown That is correct. MOTION FAILED Division Taken Chairman Deane Do you have any other motions? Alderwoman Brown No. Chairman Deane Mayor, when we last left we were talking about capital downtown for the sidewalk project and we had asked about the construction season and the overtime and the amount of money that would be needed for what was anticipated for a stop for the season and you told us that you would get that information. Mayor Lozeau I just completed it actually and Mr. Griffin has a copy that he will distribute. I had hoped to get it out earlier in the day but we were in negotiations all day and as you know, the Director of Public Works was out last week and I wanted to make sure that she had an opportunity to participate. As you can see, based on our budget estimate, it’s approximately $500,000 per block. A block has typically been defined as both the east and the west side. This year we deviated from that plan because of plans on the other side, on the east side, so we have been on the west side. The funds remaining will show you that $107,191 and the amount that we need to finish blocks 4 & 5 comes out to $500,000. We drew it out a little bit to be able to show you what we are looking at for the FY15’ and FY16’ appropriation. This is our best estimate on the project but there you have it. In essence we are asking you for the $500,000 as budgeted for the FY15’ budget. Chairman Deane So, out of this $107,000, what’s left to do with that? Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 5 Mayor Lozeau The rest of this side of the street and the other side of the street. Chairman Deane How much funds are left sitting in the account when… Mayor Lozeau $107,000 is in the account today but that doesn’t account for the rest of the work. Chairman Deane Last year when they wrapped up, when the construction season ended, what was the balance in the account? Mr. Griffin I’d have to look at the escrows. Mayor Lozeau Typically what happens Alderman Deane is that the construction season runs from luckily, as early as possible in April and generally through October. We finished spending the allocation from the fiscal year that we are in up until this time of the year and at this time of the year we anticipate the new appropriation that we will begin spending some time in July through October/November, whatever the season allows and then we pick up in the spring finishing the rest of that fiscal years money and then request the new appropriation. That’s typically how the season works. Chairman Deane My question was how much money was left in the account that was unexpended when the construction season ended. Mayor Lozeau The question that you asked me that we went to work on was how much was left right now in the appropriation that we had and that’s what this demonstrates. We took it a step further to show you what we anticipate needing for FY15’ and FY 16’ to finish the sidewalk project. That’s what you have before you. Chairman Deane Okay, thank you, so which block are we on now? Mayor Lozeau Block 4. Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 6 Chairman Deane The estimated amount required to finish the project is $382,000 and you are going to be using $187,000 of that from this operating budget? Mayor Lozeau Blocks 3, 4 & 5, the estimate is for both the east and the west sides. Chairman Deane I know I am on Block 4 now; I’m just trying to understand this. Mayor Lozeau So to finish Block 4… Chairman Deane The estimated amount to finish Block 4 is $382,636. If I took that $382,636 and I subtracted the $107,000, that would give me a total dollar amount that would be needed to finish Block 4, is that correct? Mr. Griffin That would be correct. Chairman Deane So if I took the $382,636 and I subtracted the $107,191… Alderman Donchess Mr. Chair, just a question, what is Block 4 and what is Block 5, how are these things defined? Mayor Lozeau Block 4 ends at Santander Bank and Block 5 starts where that ends through up to Norton’s, West Hollis Street. Alderman Donchess So, Block 4 is Pearl to Santander and then Block 5 is south of that? Mayor Lozeau Right. Chairman Deane So, we are looking at $275,000 to finish Block 4? Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 7 Mr. Griffin The way this is organized was continuing down the west side of Block 4 and then in FY 15’ the new construction year to begin next spring, we would finish the west side of Block 5 and then move over to the east side of Block 5 and then move back up. The requested appropriation is the sum of the estimate for Block 4 which is $187,161 plus Block 5 which would be done hopefully in the fiscal year, fall of this year or early spring next year and then subtracting the funds on hand that are not encumbered of $107,000. That’s how the $500,000 is derived. Alderman Donchess I thought your question was how much it would cost to finish Block 4 on the west side. Chairman Deane It was. The way I figure it, it’s about $275,000. Am I wrong? Mr. Griffin It would be $187,161 plus the $420,030 is $607,091 and we have $107,191 on hand as funded so that’s what to nets out to the $500,000. We were trying to portray what it would take to get as far as we could with the requested $500,000 amount. Alderman Siegel Just to clarify, in focusing just on Block 4; Block 4 is listed here as $187,161 for FY 15’ and there is an encumbered $171,191 which I assume is because we are doing work on Block 4, is that correct? Mr. Griffin If I could just change that slightly, the $107,191 is appropriations that have not been encumbered or spent. That’s what left so we can use that. Alderman Siegel Would it be appropriate to subtract the $107,191 from that or is that number not all associated with Block 4? Mr. Griffin The $187,161 is totally associated with Block 4, west side. Alderman Siegel I understand that, it’s the $107,191 line item which is the funds remaining as of 6/30/14. Mr. Griffin As we continue down Block 4 that $107,191 logically would be the money we use to purchase and pay for things to finish up the west side of Block 4. Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 8 Alderman Siegel Okay, in other words, that money is available and it’s being spent on Block 4 as you go along which implies that the $187,161 you should subtract the $107,191 or is that not correct? That’s money in addition to the $107,191. Mr. Griffin Let me say it in a different way. The $187,161 is required to finish the west side of Block 4. If we didn’t have any money as of today, we’d need $187,161 because we have the $107,000 and we’d use that first on Block 4. Alderman Siegel So in other words there is approximately $80,000 remaining in net expense to finish Block 4. Mr. Griffin Block 4; west side, that’s correct. Alderman Siegel I’m not saying we don’t want to finish the project; I’m just trying to clarify Block 4. Mayor Lozeau It also doesn’t finish the west side. Alderman Siegel Okay. The question was about Block 4 so I’m just trying to get a handle on it. Mayor Lozeau I understand. I’m just saying that there are five blocks on both sides. Alderman Siegel This is a question that believe it or not won’t sound anything like it has anything to do with the sidewalks project but we talked about the Downtown Improvement Committee amount of money that was left over the budgeted over and above parking revenue and as I recall, and I could be wrong, the number that you had given for this budgetary year was about $124,000; is that correct? Mayor Lozeau $104,000. Alderman Siegel I wanted to clarify that because I want to see the sidewalk project finished. I don’t think we should start something and not finish it. I’m just trying to figure out what creative things we might be able to do to Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 9 make sure the money is there but we are not overspending in other areas. I had an idea that what we could do is at least for this fiscal year we could take the Downtown Improvement Committee funds, and after all, the sidewalks are the ultimate in a downtown improvement, and for at least this budgetary year, take those funds and move them over to help pay for this to offset our budgetary costs. We also have the Cotton Mill Square money that’s been escrowed. I’d like to see that money come out of escrow and also be used to help pay down this. I don’t know how best to make the motions, I’m putting the idea out there. I’d like to see those two chunks of money help pay for this and that reduces the separate line item for capital expenditures. The net effect would be the same amount of money to finish the sidewalks so we get that done but to do it with other sources of funds that are either currently unencumbered that we have or would be used in ways that’s a similar type of use but isn’t focused on the sidewalk specifically. Mayor Lozeau If I could just point out that if we don’t…whichever way you chose to appropriate the funds, we need $500,000 to stay on track with the sidewalk project for FY 15’ and if it’s not budgeted at $500,000; when the new season comes there won’t be the funds to continue the project in April. I just want to make sure that everybody understands that part of it. Chairman Deane So if we took $170,000 out and left you with $330,000; they’d be no money left in the spring? Mayor Lozeau That could be very likely and there are things that we have to order in advance of the spring, street lights, and curbing. The project has been planned around the city’s fiscal process. Alderman Siegel I respect that and that’s why I am saying I want to make sure the money is there, it’s just where it is coming from. That is my thinking behind this. I do want to see it get done and I understand the concept of long lead times. Whether I am for or against the sidewalk project, it doesn’t even matter, that shipped sailed so let’s just get it done and get it done well but let’s do it in such a way that the taxpayers don’t have to pay money over and above what they might otherwise not have to pay if we have other sources of funding. The first thing that would be required would be for the Board of Aldermen to move money in the budgetary process. The other thing would require some legislation which I would be happy to introduce but which would make no sense to introduce unless there is a consensus that maybe it makes sense at this level to pursue that. Alderman McCarthy None of it is at the budgetary level because neither of things is in the FY 15’ budget. The $104,000 for the downtown Improvement is proposed to be paid for out of escrows which don’t yet exist. The Jackson Falls money is also in an escrow account and I would point out with respect to that money that there is a resolution anticipating the transfer of $10,000 which encumbers that much out of that account until that resolution has been processed. With regard to the downtown improvements money, the ordinance says that we will take recommendations from the Downtown Improvement Committee and they did not recommend using that money for the sidewalks. We probably have a legal right to say that we are going to use $104,000 on the sidewalk project instead but we are completely removing our commitment to use that money in a way that is consistent to with the ordinance says which is that we will Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 10 take recommendations from the Downtown Improvement Committee. Alderman Wilshire Do we know what the plan is for the $104,000? Alderman McCarthy I don’t know what it is off the top of my head. I know that they did vote on it at a meeting that I was at a few weeks ago. There are about four purposes that it’s split up into that have to do with various downtown issues. There is a written plan but I just don’t remember what’s in it at the moment. Alderman Siegel Alderman McCarthy, perhaps you can clarify because it was my understanding that at least one of the items was façade washing. Alderman McCarthy Like I said, I’d have to go find the results and I can try to do that. Alderman Siegel I do respect that they had a certain idea of things that they want to do and I’m not trying to interfere with the normal process here. It’s just that the sidewalks are a very, very clear major downtown improvement that was part of the intention. I’m sure that there were other intentions also but it’s certainly a major intention so I don’t see where we are running a fowl in the ordinance if we earmark funds from the parking revenue towards something which is clearly a downtown improvement. Mayor Lozeau The Downtown Improvement Committee was involved with the recommendation on changing the rates on the parking meters. That whole discussion centered on an opportunity to spend funds beyond that $728,000 for things that were not things that the city should be doing anyway. Specifically, not to spend the money on sidewalks which one could make an argument that the city should be maintaining our sidewalks without that extra money. That money was, in their opinion, and in the ordinance, to be used for other things from marketing the downtown and things like that. Some of the committee members feel very strongly about that particularly right now where they are concerned about a lot of the negative attention on this project and how it is impacting downtown. There are banners and hanging flowers and things like that that they want to use out of those parking dollars rather than building a sidewalk or running a conduit. Those are the conversations that I have been part of and I had told them that I would bring their recommendation in as part of the escrow process with those funds. Alderman Siegel I do respect that and I’m sure the ideas are good and well intentioned. However, we do want to finish this but my constituency would like to see less money spent there but I also recognize that it would be irresponsible for me to just say well we are just going to not finish the project. In balancing those considerations, at least for this year, I would consider allocating that money to the sidewalks would be a better thing for the citizens as a whole and should the Downtown Improvement Committee wish to do things like banners, there are certainly other avenues that they can pursue to acquire those that are not Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 11 necessarily through the city’s means. I wish it were not so. Mayor Lozeau This is a good opportunity to point out that I don’t think it’s just a single constituency in the downtown. One could look at the merchants and say certainly there is a constituency but in 2009 when all of the work started looking at what needed to happen, there were 5,000 consumer households surveys sent out to people throughout Nashua, not in the downtown. There were 588 surveys sent to downtown businesses but 5,000 sent to the general public at large. The response rate was 19% from the community at large and the number one item identified for work in the downtown was repairing and/or replacing the sidewalks. I don’t disagree that there is a constituency of merchants but there is also a whole city that goes downtown for shopping and eating and entertainment and holiday strolls and all kinds of things in a location where we bring our community together. Alderman Siegel I appreciate that and as I said, I’m not trying to stop the sidewalk project, whatever my personal feelings are doesn’t really matter at this point. I do think it is reasonable to say if people want that as something that is desirable not just to the downtown merchants or whoever the main constituency is that the people that are the primary beneficiary of this, if we can call them that, should also be the primary contributors if it becomes city funds and that’s how I view these. It’s not unusual to have when things come up for a specific purpose even though there are advisory committee’s to have the governing body say we appreciate your efforts but this is something extraordinary and we are going to do this for this year and I think that’s what I am getting at. I’m trying to strike a balance on how best to accomplish the finishing of the sidewalks project but also be sensitive to the fact that right now, we are over the budget that you submitted to us. The amount of money right now with the things with the police and the schools that we have added back in were higher than what you gave us and I don’t think that would be something…I think we at least have to be revenue neutral or lower ideally and I think my ideas would make it lower which would be my goal. Chairman Deane Mr. Griffin, the uncompleted project status report that I was trying to find in the escrow process that’s coming in, the escrow requests are due by the 26th, is that right? Mr. Griffin The escrow request that I put out, or the submittal to the Board of Aldermen? Chairman Deane th That you put out. Was that the 26 of June? Mr. Griffin Correct. That was the submittals. Chairman Deane What is that looking like? Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 12 Mayor Lozeau I haven’t made decisions on that yet, Alderman Deane. Chairman Deane I’m asking Mr. Griffin. Mayor Lozeau You can ask Mr. Griffin but the decisions around those escrows are mine to make. Chairman Deane Not all of them. Mayor Lozeau I know but I mean it’s mine to make what I bring in for you to make decisions on. Chairman Deane I understand how the process works and I understand the like for like and your ability. For some of my new colleagues I will review that the Mayor has the authority to approve the like for like escrow and if there are monies that are unexpended that somebody wants to say that they had $10,000 for whatever and they wanted to spend it on some other item; then that would be a decision that we would be making. Mayor Lozeau Actually, Alderman Deane, before it gets to you; I may say no before we even ask the Board of Aldermen. Chairman Deane If that’s the case, it wouldn’t be part of the escrow process. Mayor Lozeau Which is why I’m saying it’s not done yet. Chairman Deane Mr. Griffin, what was the total of the requests, do you happen to know? Mr. Griffin I don’t know that but I do know that the departments that would put forth escrows have done that. The traditional departments that move for consideration, they have submitted that information. What we generally do in July is we capture all of that data and put it on a spreadsheet and then prepare for the submittal for the first meeting in August, the only meeting in August for the Board of Aldermen. Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 13 Alderman Siegel When we were discussing the parking revenue at a previous meeting, I think that you had pointed out, or maybe it was the Mayor, was the problem with the fiscal year and our fiscal year ends in June and they have their end of year fiscal year. Is it the case where we will know better where we are at with the escrow after December 31st because that’s when the end, is that correct? Mayor Lozeau I was referring to the legislation that created that threshold for above the $728,000 was done so on a calendar year versus a fiscal year. That really doesn’t have anything to do with the full escrow process that I believe Alderman Deane is referring to, this is simply as it relates to those parking revenues and we have already identified how much that would be. I just think at some point we might want to line those up together. That’s just a piece of the ordinance, the rest of the city is all on the same page with when the fiscal year ends and what those escrows may or may not be. Alderman Siegel So you are reasonably confident about that $104,000? Mayor Lozeau Yes. Alderman Siegel Okay but it would also be safe to say that there is a certain amount of money that we can allocate and there’s a certain anticipation either via legislation assuming that the escrow from Cotton Mill Square gets thrown into the kitty for this and then anticipating that $104,000, which I don’t know the best process is to make sure that gets transferred over but it sounds like we don’t have it in our hands at this point. When it gets there, we should have plenty of time before we have to actually pay the bills associated with the on-going project because that will be approximately the last $100,000 that we need. I’m guessing we have enough time to get that, is that reasonable? Mayor Lozeau I don’t think it’s unreasonable. Alderman Siegel I want to make sure that I am not proposing something that we come a month short of when we need the money. Chairman Deane Mayor, what’s the timeline on when we order the light poles for the street lights? Is it 6-7 weeks? Mayor Lozeau I think it’s a longer lead time than that. I think it’s about 8-10 weeks. Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 14 Chairman Deane It sounds to me like your proposal is to try to reduce this line and find the balance in the funds in other areas. Alderman Siegel That would be correct. To make sure that the money is ultimately there to finish the project but to withdraw it from those other areas as I said either via legislation which I would propose tomorrow morning, I’ll just make a proposal to the Legal Department to use the unencumbered funds in that escrow account and then to also make up the difference in the anticipated Downtown Improvement Committee money of $104,000. Chairman Deane Well, even if we looked for another source of unexpended appropriations during the escrow process where we could change what is being submitted to us that we have the authority over we could always use those funds as well if we didn’t decide to use the Downtown Improvement Committee’s $104,000. In the end, I think we would be able to find enough funds to cover the cost of what we needed towards the end of the project so that the project wouldn’t be short cash to slow it down or not finish it. Alderman Siegel That would be my intention so I guess for this committee, it would seem that we would take that line item and cut it right now by the combined amount of the $90 + $104,000 and then put it back by legislation into the escrow funds and then as that parking meter money becomes available. Chairman Deane Or we could find another source of revenue to cover that $104,000 if we chose not to use the Downtown Improvement Committee money. Alderman Siegel But we don’t have to make that decision today because that money won’t be needed for a little while so we have some leeway there. Chairman Deane Right. MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO CUT THE $500,000 BY THE $90,000 THAT IS CURRENTLY IN THE ESCROW FUND PLUS THE $100,000 ANTICIPATED ON THE QUESTION Chairman Deane I don’t think you can delineate your cut on where the money is going to come from. I think the understanding is to bring in legislation and to use that $90,000 and change the purpose of through the escrow process where it was approved to add it to the sidewalk project and then we’d find the other Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 15 $104,000 in other areas when we go through the escrow process. Alderman McCarthy Can I ask what the difference in the tax rate is if we leave the money in the budget and offset taxes by more surplus from the previous year versus taking it out of the budget and going through these machinations to pay for it out of multiple escrow funds? Chairman Deane Probably nothing. Alderman McCarthy Thank you. Alderman Siegel Could you clarify why taking the money out of an escrow fund, such as the Cotton Mill Square escrow fund, and using it to pay for the capital improvement doesn’t affect this year’s budget, I’d like to understand that. Alderman McCarthy I didn’t say it didn’t affect the budget, I’m saying that if we are going to spend it in this year, it should be in this year’s budget. It doesn’t change the tax rate because we can take the money from the previous year escrows and use it to offset taxes when the tax rate calculation is done. It’s just a truth and budgeting issue that if we are going to spend the money this year, it would be better to have it in this year’s budget and it doesn’t change the tax rate at all to be more transparent and straight forward about that. Chairman Deane So basically, if we just take that $90,000; we could use it to reduce the tax rate. Alderman Siegel Understood but if the ultimate intent is to put it back into this then I guess it becomes more specific targeting. We are not pretending that we are reducing the tax rate and putting it back into some fund and then allocating it out of contingency later, we are saying up front what it is the intention is here. Alderman McCarthy I thought that was what the appropriation in the budget did. Alderman Schoneman I think by pulling out this $204,000 now then I think we have more impetus to reallocate that money into this specific project later rather than letting it go somewhere else only to be used up in place of reducing the tax rate ultimately. I think the idea to pull it out here now is the best idea and then to use whatever source of funds later to replenish this as necessary. Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 16 MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO REDUCE THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT LINE ON PAGE 198 BY $194,000 ON THE QUESTION Alderman Siegel Can I have a roll call on that? A viva voce roll call was taken on the motion which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman Deane; Alderman Siegel; Alderman Schoneman 3 Nay: Alderman Wilshire; Alderman Dowd; Alderwoman Brown 3 MOTION FAILED MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE OF R-14-034 AS AMENDED ON THE QUESTION Alderwoman Brown Can I have a roll call please? A viva voce roll call was taken on the motion which resulted as follows: Yea: Alderman Deane; Alderman Wilshire; Alderman Dowd; 4 Alderman Siegel; Nay: Alderwoman Brown; Alderman Schoneman 2 MOTION CARRIED Chairman Deane My intentions are to call a special Board of Aldermen meeting next Tuesday night at 7:00 p.m. UNFINISHED BUSINESS – None NEW BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS R-14-052 Endorsers: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman Richard A. Dowd AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER TO ISSUE BONDS NOT TO EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($750,000) FOR THE PURCHASE OF A CITYWIDE TELECOM SYSTEM INCLUDING BOTH THE CONSULTANT PHASE AND EQUIPMENT  Public Hearing Scheduled for 8/4/14 at 7:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber Budget Review – 07/14/14 Page 17 NEW BUSINESS – ORDINANCES – None TABLED IN COMMITTEE R-14-046 Endorser: Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy AMENDING THE PURPOSE OF A FISCAL YEAR 2014 ESCROW FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GENERAL DISCUSSION - None PUBLIC COMMENT - None REMARKS BY THE ALDERMEN - None POSSIBLE NON-PUBLIC SESSION ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO ADJOURN MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared closed at 7:51 p.m. Alderman Ken Siegel Committee Clerk