Human Affairs Committee

HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE DECEMBER 14, 2015 A meeting of the Human Affairs Committee was held Monday, December 14, 2015, at 6:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire, Chairman, presided. Members of the Committee present: Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja, Vice Chair Alderman June M. Caron Alderman Sean M. McGuinness Members Not in Attendance: Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown Also in Attendance: Mr. John Cepaitis, Commissioner, Review & Comment Commission Ms. Teresa Barr, Commissioner, Review & Comment Commission Mr. Doug Tremlett, Commissioner, Review & Comment Commission Ms. Kathy Nelson, Commissioner, Review & Comment Commission Deputy Michael D. Carignan, Nashua Police Department PUBLIC COMMENT - None DISCUSSION Discussion with Review & Comment Commission Chairman Wilshire I would like to invite the commissioners to come forward to talk about the changes that you want to make to the Review & Comment Application. Alderman Caron As you know, the Review & Comment Committee for the last two years has tried to make some changes and adjustments to the application form to make agencies a little bit more conscience of the fact that this is a lot of money and grants are not giving out lightly. We tried to look at the application and see what was missing. Over the years it seems like applications weren’t completed fully so this year after the award of the agency money in July the committee decided that they would like to add a few things to the application. It was nothing extravagant but again, to remind CEO’s that signatures are important and to kind of focus on the checklist that had to be there. As you saw, because you have a copy of the application, that we would do a follow-up report from the funding that they received from the previous year. They just felt that it was important to know how much money they got and did they use it for that purpose and do they have any money left over because the amount was less than what was anticipated. I know that John and Tess and Doug have some comments about it but we felt that we needed your approval because as you know, this has to go out the first of January. There are a lot of things we could do but we felt that these were the important things for this commission to work on. Mr. John Cepaitis, 16 Shakespeare Road I really don’t have anything to add about the application process. We do want to make agencies accountable for the funds that we make recommendations to distribute on behalf the City of Nashua and we feel that as we are committed to a very thorough process of reviewing their applications. We have had some brainstorming Human Affairs – 12/14/15 Page 2 sessions about other areas but to try to bring a multitude of changes before you; we didn’t feel that was reasonable, especially where this is probably the last meeting of this committee for the year. I think that we will probably come back with some other thoughts, simple things like the title of our committee, Review & Comment. In the newspaper, people are notified that these monies are available but they are notified under Review & Comment and if you are not in the know in the city you may not know that the monies are available by the title Review & Comment. We have to think of a better way to communicate to perspective agencies that these funds are available and I don’t have any specific ideas right now. On page two there are five areas where we traditionally have distributed funds under and this year the city has made, as a targeted social service to be addressed, the drug explosion in the city. Some people may not be able to recognize how they might be able to apply these monies without some expansion of the five areas. We’d like to add drug and alcohol and I know it’s more than just prevention because it’s a multi-faceted approach but drug and alcohol abuse would be an added area to be considered. We didn’t put it in here as a change because in the sentence above it, it says it doesn’t meet the set criteria of the city ordinance. That may have to be set aside for another year. The final change is that we want agencies to be able to report back to us on how and when they use the money and whether or not they were able to secure the monies that they said they were going to in the application process. If the City of Nashua ends up being the only contributor to the project that they propose it seems like the proposal would be irrelevant because they said they were going to raise money in addition to what the city is going to contribute but if they raise any of those other monies then the city ends up providing all of the funds for that project. I am not sure that is originally what was intended for the use of these funds. Ms. Teresa Barr I think June and John really summed up the whole package and what we have tried to accomplish and what we want to do in the future. Chairman Wilshire One of the things that John was talking about, the categories of funding that are available, I don’t see why that wouldn’t fall under healthcare and dental. I think that is a good fit for that. Mr. Cepaitis I know that June has been shepherding us in this process and that’s the comment that she made over the years. I am relatively New Hampshire to this process; I’ve only been involved for three years. If people in the city who are responsible for social services know that they can apply under those broad categories then that’s fine. Chairman Wilshire I believe they do and for the most part, even in the three years that you have been involved you probably see that it’s the same organizations for the most part looking for funding so I think there is some pretty widespread knowledge among the non-profits on what the funding can be used for but rather than change categories maybe we should put it out there somehow in our education piece that money is available for mental health, substance abuse and all of those categories. Ms. Kathy Nelson We have been working for two years to make sure that this is an accountability program since we represent our taxpayer’s money and it’s our responsibility to make sure it’s spent properly. We were finding that some of the information that we had on this form before was either unclear or really wasn’t measureable so we think the few changes that we’ve made had improved it fairly because we want to make sure that people get their fair change at the funds. I think the applicant’s will be served well by the clarity that we’ve put through and Human Affairs – 12/14/15 Page 3 some of the metrics that we’ve added so they can see what they have done with these funds and we can see what they have done with these funds. Chairman Wilshire Do you believe that funds that were given in the past weren’t used appropriately? Ms. Nelson I think that’s a really good question but we just don’t know. We made assumptions that they were and you assume the best but we just didn’t know. We found that when new people came on and we were trying to explain year after year how we were measuring whether the funds were being used as they were requested, it’s not up to us to judge their use if the city approves the services they are doing, it’s just up to us to make sure that what they say they are going to do with it is done. We didn’t have the information from prior years readily available. We thought there were some pieces missing in order to do this job well. That’s part of what we are asking now that last year’s information is available to all of the volunteers and the Review & Comment commissioners so we can say yes, this is what you requested it for and yes, this is how you say you measured it and it was achieved. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja Every year when we get updated on what funds are available and what funds have carried over from year to year, we get an update from the Urban Program office and they tell us like this organization asked for $5,000 and they’ve used $4,750 of it so the other $250 is being rolled back or there have been time when contractors have bids haven’t been in the beginning been what the actual cost has been so we have had to use money that we had to fund that. My question is do we know if there are reports that Urban Programs get that don’t get back to the committee because we certainly get some of that information. Chairman Wilshire We do when it’s bricks and mortar projects when they apply for CDBG but not operating funds. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja Okay so we don’t get anything for… Chairman Wilshire No. Alderman Caron I think once we have given them the money; let’s say $15,000; they are using it for that project or if they have a little left over they might use it for something connected to that. They don’t have to return those funds. Chairman Wilshire It can be confusing to distinguish the difference between CDBG funds and Review & Comment money because at some point they mesh. CDBG is bricks and mortar and up to 15% of the Community Development Block Grant can be used for operating which is why we give you an allocation every year up to 15% of what we are expecting from CDBG that you can allocate as well as the funding that the Mayor puts in the city budget from the tax base. Human Affairs – 12/14/15 Page 4 Ms. Nelson I’m glad you brought that up, Lori. On this application that precedes my time on this commission and I’ve probably been on it about five or six years, there is a section here that asks the area under which the funding requested falls under and what we assume it was the five areas that the city had decided were important that I guess came out of the study for that block grant. I just want to know if that will change. Chairman Wilshire Every five years the city does a consolidated plan and the consolidated plan does a lot of planning and outreach to the community to see what is important and what they need. These are really the five categories that are kind of there. They are what is needed here in the community and they have been identified every year. There’s not really been much we’ve given more to one of these categories than the other. Like John said, certain years like this year, maybe there is more of a need for substance abuse and that kind of funding. There have been no definite put to more of one of these categories than the other. Ms. Nelson Do you see value in…I mean is this important to you to keep in this application? Chairman Wilshire I believe it is. I think it follows the consolidated plan which is the road map for CDBG and there are some organizations that fit better in the bucket of CDBG funding because they are more familiar with the HUD reporting. I think the Nashua Soup Kitchen is one of them. With HUD funding there are a lot more requirements and paperwork and reporting to do. Ms. Nelson We were trying to steam line this and when we looked at that case John was really focused on and I really couldn’t tell him what value it was to us. I knew it probably had value to you and maybe quantifying these things but we weren’t sure. Chairman Wilshire They are kind of buckets that HUD has, right? Ms. Nelson Right. Chairman Wilshire I think if you start changing those categories you start muddying the water in my opinion because the consolidated plan is our road map and it’s been developed by the community. They invite non-profits in and they send out surveys. It’s a plan that we are required to file with HUD every five years. That plan really dictates with this committee how we spend our CDBG funding. If it’s not been identified in that plan it’s hard to justify funding it. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja I would say that’s where the accountability is because everything should go back to what the priorities are that are identified there. Human Affairs – 12/14/15 Page 5 Chairman Wilshire I had a question about this follow-up report and wondered if what if somebody who got money last year doesn’t file this year does that mean they don’t have to do the report? Could they sign something that says I promise or I attest to the fact that this money will only go toward this widget or this project? Ms. Nelson That really is a good question. Is it possible for a person to apply for funds and then use them for something else? Chairman Wilshire They shouldn’t be. If they are telling us that they want to use the money for a certain program or project then that’s what they should be using the money for. I’ll agree with you that there has been no way for us to follow- up. Ms. Nelson These are all wonderful agencies and I don’t think that we’ve ever really had; I mean they are reasonable people and they seem to want to give us the information that we need. The question always was what information do you need and how do you want it because everyone interpreted it so differently we really felt like we brought this around over these past two years to make sure everybody understood what was needed and how to provide it. That seemed to make it better for everyone and I think that when we would ask the CEO’s or whoever would represent the agency to come into our meetings, often those individuals couldn’t attend or they didn’t send somebody who had some of the answers that we really needed to make sure that this was what we wanted to give the money to. We allow the taxpayers themselves, the volunteers in our group to do the voting because it’s very fairly represented that way. They need the information so not being able to get some of that information properly from the individual that is sent, we had decided to try to put together as much as we can get from the agency itself, hence the follow-up. I think that they would follow-up and if they don’t and they ask for more funds then they shouldn’t get them until they do what we’ve asked to let us know what they did indeed use the funds for. If they did ask for funds last year and didn’t last year then kudos to them because that’s kind of where we want them to go. Chairman Wilshire Maybe they do apply and their application is rejected for some reason. We are saying on here now that we want a completed application with no missing signatures or financial reports and now we are cracking down on that which okay and I think that’s fair. My question is you have somebody that’s been funded for the last several years and they apply this year and they don’t provide some of the information and we are not asking for follow-up reports from them if we are not funding them I guess. Ms. Nelson Right, it’s a new thing. I think that what we tried to build into this time is certainly that understanding and that reminder. I think in three different places I have placed it because people really have to hear and see some things a number of times before it becomes comfortable and you remember it. We built it in three different ways; the original letter that’s going on the front from the chair of our group explaining all of the new things that will be asked, then at the front of this form there is a checklist and at the bottom of the checklist it reiterates that a new follow-up form will be requested and then on the back we have asked for the signature of the CEO or the head of the program and that that person go through a list that is repeated. When they sign they are signing that all of this is complete. I do understand that there will be some mistakes but if I did that on a loan from a bank they would not be happy with me and this is taxpayer’s money so we felt there was an Human Affairs – 12/14/15 Page 6 obligation to do this. In the future we would like to offer some support to programs that don’t have grant writers and programs that have never done this. I think we want to be kinder and gentler and not be seen as an arbitrarily punitive group of people. Alderman Caron I agree with everything Kathy says and as a group we’ve agreed to. The other thing is that we are also dealing with volunteers and the more information that they have when they are reading these applications it’s so much easier for them so that when we go to a meeting with these organizations they have an idea and the questions aren’t as long and complicated. Last year, with John’s help we developed a way of having these meetings and working with the agencies and all we did was facilitate the five volunteers that were reviewing these applications. Doug was really good because he was the money guy and he figured out how we should do this so that no one commissioner had all of the $50,000 requests and some only had the $3,000 and $4,000. I think that the ideas that this group has developed over the last two years; it’s not to hinder any agency but to provide them with as much help as we can in order for us to do our due diligence and give them the funding. I applaud these wonderful people that have worked so hard to get this done and I appreciate you allowing them to come before you because it was very difficult going back and forth and I felt it was very important for them to speak directly to you. Chairman Wilshire Anytime. Alderman Caron, I have one question. When the letter goes out and the interview is set up, are you asking them to send somebody who can answer financial questions? Alderman Caron Yes. We want the financial person to come not the programmer or the secretary because they are not going to be able to answer some of those important questions concerning finances. Chairman Wilshire Sometimes it’s nice to have both the financial person as well as the program person because then you get to know both sides of the equation. Ms. Nelson I think in the past two years in some of our recommendations we were very clear to say that we felt if the agency didn’t receive the funding part of it was the inability of the person that it was sent to answer the questions we had. It wasn’t any statement on their agency or what they did; we simply didn’t get the information. I think if they knew that they might send somebody more knowledgeable the next year. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja I think what you are doing is very helpful for the agencies but I think by providing a structure and clarity and requesting people with the information come to the meetings also makes our volunteers feel better about their ability to make this decision. I think the people who volunteer to be part of the review group are invested in the community and so I think it just gives them a better sense of doing things and making decisions with as much information as possible. I think it’s important that people who volunteer feel their work is meaningful. Ms. Nelson Absolutely and I appreciate that. There’s no training module for this so we all came together understanding that some of the information that we had didn’t compute with someone else next to us so we started to feel unpowered and putting this together made such a difference. Some of the people returning have said Human Affairs – 12/14/15 Page 7 absolutely, I feel it’s my civic duty and I thought that was wonderful. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja That being said, thank you for all you do as volunteers and hopefully having these meetings makes you want to continue doing what you are doing. Ms. Barr Every year the question of the follow-up comes up about what did you do with the money last year and that is one of the reasons why we added that in there because every year a volunteer wants to know. Alderman McGuinness I am very encouraged by your initiative and accountability is a very important thing. Your amendments look great and the follow-up is fine, I notice that the Review & Comment Follow-up Form is kind of general. I wonder if you would consider asking for some kind of evidence in a way; like did you put the money in the personnel administration or direct aid or do you think that might be too much for now? Ms. Nelson We thought maybe it would be too much the first year. Maybe is we get some support and corroboration this year with the open-ended easy going follow-up form then I can assure you that we can get more specific. We just ran out of time to be able to make sure it would be done well enough for this year so it was put on our agenda for next year. Alderman McGuinness Too much too fast is probably a good argument unless you really feel it’s not being done in a sincere way. Ms. Barr It was a time crunch. We want to make it friendly to start with and no one likes a lot of change all at once. Chairman Wilshire When you do make a lot of changes all at once the application tends to get like well, we forgot that and we are not going to get reviewed because of the changes…good thought, Sean. Ms. Nelson There’s a form already existing in here that we thought we would use and then extrapolate from that when their requests and in-kind donations and have them show when that was done and the kind of disbursement. Chairman Wilshire I have a question about the amount received and date of disbursement. The city sends one check for the year. Ms. Nelson I think we just want to be sure they are aware of. The people that fill out this form may not be the people that have the information. Human Affairs – 12/14/15 Page 8 Chairman Wilshire Right. Ms. Nelson We want them to be knowledgeable enough to say oh yes, that came to us in August. It shows a little bit more of a trail of accountability. Chairman Wilshire I can see that more in the brick and mortar piece but in the operations piece I don’t know that it makes as much sense to me. Ms. Nelson I suspect that we should ask the agencies what they think of the follow-up form after this and they can give their suggestions as to what they thought was difficult about it. Chairman Wilshire Okay fair enough. MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE APPLICATION FROM THE REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMISSION MOTION CARRIED COMMUNICATIONS – None UNFINISHED BUSINESS- None NEW BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS 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” MOTION BY ALDERMAN MELLIZI-GOLJA TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE ON THE QUESTION Deputy Michael Carignan This is another FEMA grant, Federal Emergency Management and it was specific to hazardous materials equipment. We have a hazardous materials team here in the city on the fire department. This particular item is just another piece of the equipment but it’s very expensive. It’s just one meter. Last year I was able to get a Human Affairs – 12/14/15 Page 9 grant for a similar meter that this works with so now that we have both of them we have an all-inclusive meter that will do what we need to do with the issues of chemicals. It reads just about everything so it would be a long time before we bought one on our own. Chairman Wilshire What’s the life expectancy of this meter? Deputy Carignan This particular meter; part of this grant was to get the money to update the software so we’ve got a five year software upgrade so for five years anyways but it will still be good after that but then if more chemicals are added to it we won’t be getting those. I would say probably after eight years you start losing the technology anyways. It will be a good compliment to all of our meters and we will be in very good shape once we get this meter. Chairman Wilshire Where do you use it? Deputy Carignan For us, again on the fire department we have an in-house hazardous materials team that takes care of the city but we also take care of the Souhegan Mutual Aid response area which is nineteen other communities that we cover. Some of these smaller towns don’t have the resources like we do so that is why we are involved in the state mutual aid so the City of Nashua hazmat team is allowed to get some of this grant money because we cover those towns. We do get called out to help them out. It could be anything from a spill in the river to a car accident with a trailer carrying chemicals or a leak at a manufacturing facility that we need to meter whatever is spilled. These meters allow us to identify materials that we are not sure of and you can be able to look them up and learn how to handle them. This particular meter is an identifier that tells you exactly what you are looking at. Chairman Wilshire How do you do it now? Deputy Carignan Stuff has to go to labs first or we generalize but we can’t be quite sure what it is. We just try to mitigate the problem. This will help us do things more on the spot and be more accurate. Alderman McGuinness I am very interested in the equipment. So you point and shoot, it must work on some kind of a light spectrum thing? Deputy Carignan That’s exactly it; it identifies what the make-up of the material that it’s looking at. It’s called a spectrometer. Alderman McGuinness So you could probably get hundreds and even thousands of different compounds and chemicals? Human Affairs – 12/14/15 Page 10 Deputy Carignan Exactly. The one we got last year was $78,000 and it does so much and then this one will pick up the other half. Together they do everything. It’s definitely state-of-the-art. There is no city match. MOTION CARRIED NEW BUSINESS – ORDINANCES – None GENERAL DISCUSSION Alderman Caron On behalf of the Review & Comment Commission I want to thank you for your support in the recommendations that they made for the new application. We are right down to the wire and we are getting a new Mayor in January. We’ve worked really hard to get the dates set for the volunteers. It’s not so much spending time at the meetings but reading the applications. The commission was working hard to make some changes but not overwhelm everyone. We are still looking for a few more volunteers. PUBLIC COMMENT REMARKS BY THE ALDERMEN Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja I would like to thank Alderman Caron for her work every year with Review & Comment. Chairman Wilshire I too appreciate the work you do, Alderman Caron. POSSIBLE NON-PUBLIC SESSION ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON TO ADJOURN MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared adjourned at 6:47 p.m. Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Committee Clerk