Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee

PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE AUGUST 20, 2012 A meeting of the Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee was held on Monday, August 20, 2012, at 7:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. Chairman Paul M. Chasse, Jr. presided. Members of the Committee present: Alderman Arthur T. Craffey, Jr., Vice Chair Alderman June M. Caron Alderman Diane Sheehan Members of the Committee absent: Alderman Kathy Vitale Also in Attendance: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Mark Cookson Alderman-at-Large Barbara Pressly Chairman Chasse I'd like to entertain a motion to go out of order and take the interviews first seeing we're going to have quite a few individuals speaking on the Ordinance that we have tonight. MOTION BY ALDERMAN CRAFFEY TO GO OUT OF ORDER AND TAKE THE INTERVIEWS FIRST MOTION CARRIED INTERVIEWS Board of Registrars Patricia Lucier (New Appointment) For a Term to Expire: December 31, 2015 Mayor Lozeau Thank you. As always it's my pleasure to come in with volunteers that are willing to serve our community. This evening we have 3 members here that were able to be with us tonight and we have 3 members that are being rescheduled for the next meeting because they were unable to attend. First on the agenda is Pat Lucier for the Board of Registrars. Many of you probably know Pat. She served in the City Clerk's Office for about 35 years, 3 days, 22 hours and 6 minutes. No just kidding. Clearly Pat brings to the table a significant amount of experience with the responsibilities of the Board of Registrars. She served as the Deputy Clerk for probably the last 18 years. So she really understands the job. We have 3 Registrars that serve the City and one has asked to not re-up his term. We're all kind of sad to see Mr. Paupich go. He's done a great job. We are very fortunate to have Mrs. Lucier willing to serve. Chairman Chasse I'd like to let the record reflect that Alderman Cookson is here and Alderman Sheehan as well. Pat would you like to make a comment? Anything to say? I know you're never at a loss for words. Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 2 Patricia Lucier Oh you'd be surprised Alderman Chasse. I just consider it an honor to be nominated for this position. It is one that I'm familiar with. I've worked with the Board of Registrars for just about 35 years in different manners. I have been working at the polls every election since I've retired. I haven't been totally away from the voter registration arena. Chairman Chasse Does anybody have any questions? Alderman Caron I just wanted to say I think this is great of Pat that she'd want to continue on. Elections are really difficult and having someone with your experience as I know very well. I think that's great. Mayor you have a great person here to come on board and replace the gentleman that's leaving. Mayor Lozeau Thank you Alderman Caron. Alderman Craffey Thank you. Sure you don't want to take a year off? Patricia Lucier Well I've been retired for 4 1/2 years. There's only one or two elections a year. So I haven't been overworked in the voter registration area. Alderman Craffey You're coming in at a very good time. We have September coming up where we have the Primary but then you have the Presidential election. I worked one of those. I don't envy your job. Thank you. Welcome aboard. Chairman Chasse Let the record reflect that Alderman Pressly is now in the chambers. Anybody else? You got off easy Pat. Historic District Commission Frank H. Mellen (Reappointment) For a Term to Expire: September 30, 2015 Mayor Lozeau Thank you Mr. Chairman. Before you is Mr. Frank Mellen. I asked him how long he served on the Historic District Commission. He said he started with the first meeting. I don't know if that's entirely accurate but I think he might argue that it's pretty close. Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 3 Mr. Mellen is another long-standing member of our community like Mrs. Lucier who really has a lot of experience to bring to the table, understands what the job requires, and frankly I appreciate that he's willing to serve another term at this. I know that it's not an easy job. He's doing it at the same time as being a member of the Historical Society. They've asked him to do it again. He also serves as a Trustee for the Hunt Board. So he stays very busy and involved in the community. I appreciate his willingness to serve again. You don't have a bio or a resume on him because frankly I didn't ask him to put something like that together. I think all the time that he's served this City speaks for itself. Frank Mellen Well if I did, it would be 12 to 15 pages long. I really hope that I'm helping to serve the heritage of Nashua. Alderman Sheehan Not so much as a question but just to say that I've worked - this is my second term on the Historic District Commission with Mr. Mellen. He's generally a person who goes there with the best interest of Nashua at heart but with an open mind to what is the potential for some of this area that hasn't been recognized yet. I'd like to thank him for serving before and continuing to do so. I enjoy serving with him. Nashua Arts Commission Tina Cassidy (New Appointment) For a Term to Expire: September 1, 2015 Mayor Lozeau Before you this evening is Mrs. Tina Cassidy. You've had an opportunity to meet a couple of Board of Aldermen meetings ago. She is the new owner of the Northern Ballet Theater and has expressed an interest in serving on the Arts Commission. That is a discipline let's say that is not represented yet on the Arts Commission. I believe that her enthusiasm and her perspective which has not actually had an opportunity to be heard within the arts community here in Nashua will serve that Commission well. You have a very long...and I don't mean that disparagingly. My apologizes but an extensive resume, curriculum vitae, that really demonstrates her experience around dance, and performing arts within the City, and her dedication to her craft. I'm certain she'd be happy to answer questions. I'm quite confident that she'll be a wonderful member of that Commission. Tina Cassidy Good evening. I'm very, very honored and happy to be nominated. Thank you very much. I would come to this Committee as the Mayor was saying a fresh new perspective. I'm a new artistic director but I'm not new to the Nashua arts community. I have been on the Board of the Actor singers, and I work with the Peacock Players. I've been a professional dancer in the Nashua area for over 15-16 years. So I would bring a fresh new perspective to the arts and just sharing my viewpoint. I'm very passionate about the arts. I would like to share my ideas with some of the other leaders in the arts community and just see how I can serve this community. This community also means so much to me. Thank you. I'll answer any questions at this time. Alderman Craffey Not a question more or less a comment. This is a good choice. It's sort of rough rounds out. This is a choice that we're missing in that art - in the arts community. Someone with a dance background - theatrical background that has actual performed in that area. I think this is a very good selection there and I commend you on this. Thank you. Chairman Chasse Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 4 I just want to thank all three of you for your willingness to serve the City of Nashua and we'll take your appointments right now. Mayor Lozeau Thank you Mr. Chairman. I would just like to thank the members of the public that were willing to let you recognize these individuals first. APPOINTMENTS BY THE MAYOR MOTION BY ALDERMAN CRAFFEY TO RECOMMEND TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION - FRANK H. MELLEN, 10 MEADE STREET, NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 30, 2015; NASHUA ARTS COMMISSION - TINA CASSIDY, 30 ARLINGTON STREET, NASHUA, NH, FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 1, 2015; BOARD OF REGISTRARS - PATRICIA LUCIER, 2 BOWMAN LANE, NASHUA, NH, FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2015; BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS - KEVIN SLATTERY, 54 BERKLEY STREET, NASHUA, NH, FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 1, 2015; BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - CAMILLE PATTERSON, 3 FARLEY STREET, NASHUA, NH, FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 30, 2015; JAMES B. HAVERLAND, 29 TODD ROAD, NASHUA, NH, FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 30, 2015 MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON TO TABLE THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS: CAROL RUST AND PAUL BUNKER TO THE MINE FALLS PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE; AND ROB SHAW TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MOTION CARRIED Mine Falls Park Advisory Committee Carol Rust (New Appointment) For a Term to Expire: September 1, 2015 Paul Bunker (New Appointment) For a Term to Expire: September 1, 2015 Zoning Board of Adjustment Rob Shaw (Reappointment) For a Term to Expire: September 11, 2015 MOTION BY ALDERMAN CRAFFEY TO REVERT BACK TO THE REGULAR SCHEDULE MOTION CARRIED PUBLIC COMMENT Chairman Chasse If you would step forward if you feel like speaking on something that's on the agenda tonight, state your name and your address please. Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 5 Daniel Richardson My name is Daniel Richardson. I live at 70 Berkley Street, Nashua, New Hampshire. I've come today to talk about two Resolutions that you have. No I believe one is an Ordinance and one is a Resolution. The Resolution that I'd like to talk about only slightly is the one that affects what's called the "public butchering" I guess proposed by Alderman Cookson. Chairman Chasse That is an Ordinance 12-19. Daniel Richardson The other one is a Resolution on redesigning the band shell. I know both Alderman Pressly and Alderman Cookson are outstanding individuals with the best intentions. Mr. Cookson is a gentleman. I know him personally and I know he has nothing but the best intentions. I'm sure he's trying to solve problems with this proposed Ordinance. However as you can see behind me, there's a number of people who have something to say about that. A lot of them I recognize from the Horse pond Fish and Game. I believe there's quite a few of them also here from the Nashua Fish and Game. I'd like to say about that is even though you're getting comments now from an organization - two organizations, there are a great number of other individuals who hunt and fish in New Hampshire and in Nashua in particular that do not belong to a club. We are here essentially representing a much larger group. Hunting I do not consider it a sport. Hunting I consider to be one of those things that you do to reach back to your roots and provide food. There is no hunter that I know of that goes out and shoots an animal and then leaves it. You do it for the food. Getting on to the Resolution I guess to put together a committee to look at the band shell. I was first alarmed by that by an article that showed up in the Union Leader where Alderman Pressly was quoted as saying that the band shell be rebuilt as a magnificent work or art that could be showcased especially at night. That alarms me because what it was alluding to, and look at the words of the legislation, it looks like to be it's going to be at looking at the possibility for a complete redesign of the band shell. That is something that it's a Pandora's Box. It opens up a real can of worms. People can perceive problems with the existing structure and the whole of the band shell in the park and use of the band shell in the park. I have had, being a neighbor and an abutter, problems myself with certain performances over there. In fact, one night I went over there and had to take photos and e-mail them to various aldermen to let them know what kind of a problem that there is. You're probably already aware of what goes on there. In the past where we've had neighbors show up to talk about the noise and its degree of loudness. You've heard a lot about that and we recently passed legislation that prohibits amplified sound from the band shell from amplifiers and speakers that people bring in for those performances. Now the Ordinance says that you can just use the internal amplifiers and internal speakers to the band shell itself. That has solved the problem. The neighbors that I know of have agreed to the concept of improving not redesigning the band shell but improving it by completing it. By putting on the sound absorbers which was left off during the original construction. That is not a redesign. Redesign opens a big can of worms to include other perceived problems. One of the problems that could be perceived is parking. The last think I'd want to see happen in Greeley Park is to have more green space committed to parking. It has been haphazard attempts to put in more parking by dumping rocks along the roadway. We've seen what happens over at Artillery Lane when you put in parking there. That was a big mistake. It consumes more green space and really you don't get much out of it. We've got a problem with the whole concept of how it was originally proposed that the band shell being there. Should that band shell have been used for live performances that bring in 1,000 at a time? No. I don't mind cars being parked along the highway. I don't mind them being in my neighborhood. It's temporary. There's no problem with that. If you were to open this up and say we're going to redesign it and we're going to cause it to be a performance center, you could have a concept where you Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 6 bring in parking, consume green space in a pastoral setting that it was not meant to be. The other thing is like I mentioned in the Union Leader, it was mentioned that I believe Alderman Pressly's words were "especially at night". That indicates to me that we'd have lighting. The park - the neighbors do not want lighting at night. It's just the last thing you'd want. Right now at least it's darkness at nighttime. You don't want to have big lights around there for all the parking that would go in and for attendees that would be there at night into the evening. I think this is really a big mistake to consider that. If the legislation was changed to say look at completing the design instead of redesign, that could be supportable. As it is right now, it's a pursuit of a non-problem. Really people don't need it to be redesigned and it's a money sink. It's considering spending money that you really don't need to consider because it really doesn't solve the problem. It's just a redesign. I guess I'd like to end it right there and as I said, this has nothing to do with the personalities involved or the people involved. They have hearts of gold. They want the best. Alderman Pressly wants the best for the north end. She used to be a resident there. This I'm sure emanates from that. I do believe that people make mistakes. I make mistakes all the time. I'd certainly like this to be reconsidered as being the wrong projectory. Thank you. Chairman Chasse Next. Before we go, I want to thank everybody for allowing us to get rid of the interviews so that they wouldn't be around here because I have a feeling that this is going to go for a while. Rick Olson Good evening. My name is Rick Olson. I'm the President of the NH Wildlife Federation. We're at 54 Portsmouth Street in Concord, New Hampshire. NH Wildlife Federation has been around since 1933 and we are the advocates for sportsmen, hunters, fishermen, trappers all across the State of New Hampshire. I'm here tonight to give comment on the 12-19 Ordinance as its written. For the record, NH Wildlife Federation opposes this Ordinance. It's a local issue I understand that. NH Wildlife Federation comes to Nashua is because as stated, no place else in the State does this Ordinance exist. The way the Ordinance is written, it's rather vague in its language and I think the intention is all wrong. This is effectively a ban on dressing game in the City of Nashua and I'll tell you why. You look at the way cities are laid out with house lots. There's as little as an 1/8 of acre and some even smaller. If I take a deer in my back yard and I gambrel it hanging up to dress it out, I might be facing another neighbor's front yard. I live in Manchester. That's the reality there. So that's how that Ordinance operates under those particular circumstances the way cities are laid out. The second thing is the ambiguity that says "it shall be unlawful in a residential zoning district for any person to slaughter, dress, or skin animals or fowl". Then it states, "This prohibition shall not apply to wild game or fowl legally taken for sport and not to be sold". What are you trying to do here? Are you trying to control commercial slaughter? Are you trying to regulate game? That's not real clear. The second part of it is just bizarre. No wild game or fowl intended to be dressed as permitted by this section shall be delivered between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. When I look around my neighborhood between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., most people are gone to bed. They're watching TV. They're reading books. They're not peering out the windows to see if their neighbors are getting a deer delivery. So I don't understand what the intent is behind that. I talked to Mr. Cookson briefly about it on the phone and I told him about things in the Ordinance that were problematic. Finally the thing that this Ordinance does is it kind of imbalances those who perhaps oppose hunting or don't like hunting. It really gives them the latitude to really pick on hunters and to oppose hunters and harass them. I don't think that's the intent of the Ordinance. I don't think that's the intent of Ordinance. I don't think that's the intent of what folks here are trying to do. I understand there might be an issue where somebody is in your face Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 7 a little bit with game or what have you. Maybe you need to contact another hunter to go have a chat with them and say remember the ethics portion in the hunter ed. and bull hunter ed. portion that we talked about. Let's revisit that. As far as rising to the level of making an Ordinance, I think the thing is problematic and I disagree with it fundamentally. Thanks for your time. I appreciate it. Ray Smith Hi. I'm Ray Smith. I'm the President of Horse Pond Fish and Game Club at 13 Horse Pond Avenue. Horse Pond Fish and Game Club has been there since 1945. As the President, I represent 244 members. I'm also a Chief Hunting Instructor for the State of New Hampshire. We oppose this Ordinance as it is written. Same as all the rest of the aldermen. You people put in a lot of time. You do a great job. As it's written, we don't have to go over this again. We oppose it 100 percent and I believe most of the people back here belong to my club feel the same way. I think other people here from Lone Pine and from Nashua Fish and Game feel the same way. I'm at 19 Briand Drive, Nashua, New Hampshire. I've been there for 25 years. Thank you. Judd Bottle My name is Judd Bottle, 120 Walnut Street. I'm a life time resident of Nashua. I also sit on the Board at Horse Pond Fish and Game. When I heard about this on a Friday morning in the Telegraph, I couldn't believe my eyes. The first thing that came to my mind is how do you enforce an Ordinance like this? I'm just going to leave it at that because there's a lot of good points brought up behind me which were on my agenda to talk to you about. I just couldn't imagine how the City of Nashua could enforce something like that and how would you go about it? Thank you for your time. Bruce Justusine Bruce Justusine, 31 Dodge Street. I'm not a member of any fish or game club. I'm just a citizen of the City. I oppose this completely. I think it's fruitless. I'm not a big public speaker but I did write down a few things that I would like to say. I think I'm speaking for a big crowd here. There's not a lot of trophies in New Hampshire. We're all looking to fill the freezer. With the money we spend on our licenses and everything else that goes along with the hunting and now we'll have to go to a butcher. We might as well just go to the supermarket and buy our meat. As a responsible hunter, the hunt is not only about the harvest of the animal, it's also about the time spent quartering up, talking with your friends and family about the hunt, telling stories, processing the meat timely so it doesn't spoil or anything. I just want to say I think it's really a foolish Ordinance. If it does pass, I think it should include clam bakes, lobster bakes on your deck, dropping the live lobsters into the pot, cracking them open on your deck. Same thing. Somebody else harvested it. Thank you for your time. Dale Carouthe I'm Dale Carouthe. I live at 65 Elgin Street in Nashua. I'm an active member in civil organizations including the NH Chapter for Safari Club International. I'm a delegate to the NH Wildlife Federation; a member of Ducks Unlimited, and also a member of Nashua Fish and Game. I too want to speak in opposition of this Ordinance. It seems to me that it's maybe an issue that's a one of case where you have a neighbor that's had problems and was mentioned, perhaps it's time to have other hunters address that. Certainly all of the folks that I know that do hunt do so in an ethical manner and look to process their game also on their property. I know personally as a game hunter is this going to restrict me from processing my harvest in my backyard? I would certainly hope not. There are lot of folks here also in cases that folks do this for a livelihood. The Ordinance could in fact take money out of their pockets. We all know that at this economic time that's also not a good idea. Again, I think the Ordinance itself is really meant to address an individual problem and need not be something that is spread city wide and something that we could address on that individual basis. Thank you. Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 8 John Richard My name is John Richard. I live at 107 Flint Log Drive in Nashua over in Ward 9. I addressed the full Board of Aldermen when the Ordinance first came up and I talked to Mr. Cookson. We had a nice chat. As I stated back then, and I don't stand alone, there are many, many hunters that go out in the woods. By the time you get back if you're from northern New Hampshire or if you're out of State, you arrive at the city at different times of the night. When I came back with my moose last year, it was well after 11 p.m. If this was in, all the meat would have spoiled. I think there's some personalities, some people going on here, and has nothing to do with the residents of the City of Nashua and all the people back here and there's many, many more back there that hunt and would oppose this Ordinance. In addition to that, I noticed in the Manchester Union Leader at one time. It stated this Ordinance has been shared with the Horse Pond, Nashua Fish and Game, and the NH Wildlife Federation. I can't speak for those organizations but I did check with all the officers and trustees at Nashua Fish and Game and no one ever heard anything about this Ordinance over there. I've gotten a lot of calls from different members of the club. I came in as a regular citizen but I'm also the President of the Nashua Fish and Game Association. I got no contact from anybody. I'd be glad to sit down with anybody to discuss anything. I've had a lot of vendors calling me up. I come here to not only speak to this as myself but also representing some members of the club. I hope you guys listened to everything that's going on behind us. We're the people who are opposed to this. I thank you very much for your time. Thank you. COMMUNICATIONS - None APPLICATION TO LICENSE HAWKER'S, PEDDLER'S, ITINERANT VENDOR'S LICENSE - None UNFINISHED BUSINESS – None NEW BUSINESS – RESOLUTIONS – None NEW BUSINESS – ORDINANCES O-12-19 Endorser: Alderman-at-Large Mark S. Cookson PROHIBITING THE DRESSING OF WILD GAME OR FOWL IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Alderman Cookson If somebody would like to make a motion, I can speak to it. Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 9 Chairman Chasse Didn't we pass a motion a while back saying that the endorser could do it himself? MOTION BY ALDERMAN CRAFFEY TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE ON THE QUESTION Alderman Cookson Thank you Alderman Craffey and Mr. Chairman. First just for everybody, especially members of the audience this evening. The motion by Alderman Craffey for final passage is just to allow us to have discussion about the Ordinance. By no means indicates his or anybody's final recommendation of the Ordinance. I'd also like to thank each and every one of you for coming here this evening. I've had several conversations with many of you. I think it's been good conversations. I believe that this is how democracy is intended to work. I truly appreciate you coming this evening and providing your opinion and sharing your input. Let me just address just a couple of comments that were made publicly. I'll start with the last one first which I did make a comment that this Ordinance was shared with the Horse Pond Fish and Game with Nashua Fish and Game. I believe that Mr. Olson's organization. I want to say NH Wildlife was the other organization. Mr. Olson was one of the first persons that I spoke to and I shared the Ordinance with him. It was my understanding that that Ordinance would be forwarded on to the Nashua Fish and Game. I know Mr. Smith personally - Ray Smith, who is over at Horse Pond Fish and Game. I was able to share that with him personally. Mr. Richard I didn't have your contact information so I apologize that you did not receive that and you had to field questions on it based on the Manchester Union Leader article which indicated that I had reached out to you. I had honestly thought that that information had been forwarded on to you by another individual. My apologies for that. The Ordinance as its stated was created in my attempt and I think several people know this that we as aldermen only have the ability to modify law, to modify the police within the City. So I was made aware of an issue in which anybody could view the butchering of an animal. I will say that I was made aware of this well over a year ago. Several conversations through discussions with Legal, with several discussions with our City Clerk, the City Clerk actually identified two similar ordinances in different States. One in Arkansas and one in the State of Washington. Those persons here this evening have said there's no other ordinance like this in the State of New Hampshire. You'd be correct. So we took based on the ordinances in Arkansas and Washington, we tried to craft something that we thought would address the need of a constituent concern. That was primarily having to watch the butchering of animals at all times of the day and evening from their home, from their yard, as they were walking up and down the street. In this particular instance, Legal crafted a paragraph that basically said it would be unlawful in a residential zoning district for any person to slaughter, or dress, or skin that animal or fowl. That prohibition does not apply to any wild game or fowl that's legally taken for sport and not to be sold. The additional provision, and I think many of the hunters that are either here this evening or not able to be in attendance, could speak to that they probably already dress their game in a not in the front yard. I think that's probably a fair assumption that many of you don't do that. To Mr. Olson's point, I understand the ramifications of the way that cities are structured, neighborhoods are structured and if you attempted to dress your game in your backyard and it actually faced another neighbor, that would be difficult but the Ordinance in and of itself says that you're attempting to do it in a closed area and out of public view. I think there would be issues. I'm sorry that Mr. Gallagher is not here this evening. He lives in an R9 zone which doesn't have fences that separate property, and he does the processing of his game when he's looking up to get an animal behind his home but still it's in what he would consider public view of his Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 10 neighbors. So I understand that there are issues and concerns with the language within this. The essence of it is to allow neighbors that don't want to see it the ability to have it done in a private area so that it's not in their front yard or not open to them as they're walking by. So that's the first part of the Ordinance. The second part of the Ordinance speaks about the time limitations. Again, I'm very cognizant of travel time and the amount of time that it takes to go into the field, to track an animal especially if they're in bow season. It may take several hours for you to actually track an animal. I understand that aspect but again have had several conversations with several hunters along those lines. Again, this was more intended maybe to address the neighbors concerned that we're having animals dropped off at those particular times and not just 1 or 2 animals, and not just 1 or 2 animals during a hunting season. I think you're very lucky if you get 1 to 2 animals. Again, this is what I've been told. In this particular instance, what we're hearing is that this is happening repeatedly throughout the season. This may be a particular instance where somebody is doing some work for their friends but in a neighborhood of 30 to 50 animals during a hunting season or maybe even more than that where they're processing game at all hours of the evening. They're dropping off animals and backing up their pickups to a cooler and dropping their tail and loading up the animals. Again, this was trying to be respectful to neighbors that you live near both in not necessarily making it public viewing for them when you're processing the meat or processing the game, and then being cognizant of noise limitations between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. where people may be sleeping. That in essence is the Ordinance as it's proposed. It was not intended to (inaudible) hunting or limit the enjoyment of hunting. Like I said in many instances, the hunters that I've spoken to aren't processing the game in their front yard. So it's already outside of public view. I think it's important to respect neighbors as well that may not be of the same mindset of the enjoyment of watching game being processed. At that, I will yield the floor and take any questions. Alderman Vitale I understand the respect part and coming from a family that hunts and not only do we hunt, we have our own place that many people come to hunt at. In many cases, my brothers and in the past my father happened to be the best person to actually clean animals and get them ready for people to take them home. Some people can do the hunting part. They haven't necessarily learned the part about how to dress them out, or they need to be taught, or they don't have the time, or whatever but they've been to the farm to hunt. In this case, this is something that I don't think you can legislate respect. I do like the comments about teaching and maybe having another hunter go and maybe speak to the person and give them a different way to do things. I oppose the Ordinance as it's written. I think it goes against what we as a State and as a country have pride to do through the times and passed down traditions. I think we're talking about one individual or a couple of individuals that might come up. In my experience, most hunters are extremely respectful and I do think this would put a sour taste in quite a few people's mouths would it pass. Not everybody has a place that's private from their neighbors to work on their game. We don't all have that luxury. Father to son, mother to daughter, back and forth, it's something we need to pass on to our children. I know that New Hampshire has a weekend and an organization called "Becoming Outdoor Women". One of the things that they do and they try to instill in the State is to pass on traditions of hunting, fishing, anything else that has to do with outside. Many of the people you see here, that's what they're doing. They're passing on traditions. In this case, I do think it's a neighborhood issue. A piece of legislation will not solve that problem more than likely. Maybe one hunter speaking to another would be the proper procedure in this case. Hopefully that gets done but I wouldn't support this Ordinance as is written at all. Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 11 Alderman Craffey Thank you. I, too, support Alderman Vitale's ideas. I, too, am not going to support the Ordinance as it is written. I do believe that hunting is what we should be doing. It's been passed down father, son, mother to daughter. I'm not a hunter. I never hunted before but I have friends that hunt. We sit around and have a few beers and tell me about what their hunt was and things like that. Not that I don't want to hunt, it's just that right now in my life I don't have the time. I understand it takes a lot of hours to go out there and track and hunt. Maybe as I get a little older, or maybe younger I should say, I'll be able to find the time. If I do, I hope one of these gentlemen out here would be kind enough to show me the way. Me I can't support this Ordinance as it sits now. Thank you. Alderman Sheehan Thank you. I echo a lot of Alderman Vitale and Alderman Craffey's points. I have hunters in my family as well. Some of the problems that I have with this are addressed with a few things. I'd like to hear from the sponsor after I'm done what the police's input was on this because the issue that I have is with saying it's okay if it's yours but it's not okay if it was for sale, or it's okay if it was at 9:35 but not after this hour to tell somebody you can or cannot enter somebody's property for a different purpose during different times of the night just doesn't seem to be constitutional use of your own private property. So that part it's not zoned for business, I get that, go after zoning for that. This is not really seeming to address that. For me, a big concern is how is this enforceable? Do we have to get a subpoena or a search warrant to find out what's inside somebody's trunk? When somebody gets an animal out of the woods and they drive back, they're trying to get there before the animal is not consumable. So I understand that things need to be done when they need to be done. With that said, there's a way to do it tastefully. I saw chickens when I was young going for dressing I guess is a nice way of saying it. That's something that stuck with me for a very long time as well as a deer hunter across the street who based on the time of the year upset a little sister very greatly when she thought the reindeer was on his truck. There's ways of doing things without upsetting your neighbors. That I think is the issue rather than trying to create an Ordinance that nobody in the State seems to have a need. I just can't see how the police would enforce that. I'd like to know if that discussion was made and what their input was because we often get a report that gives some sort of recommendation. Those are my concerns. I do not think that small children should be watching this but I know that if you grew up on a farm, and my sister has a farm with a couple hundred animals, that some children do see this every day. Some do not. Again, I tried to legislate the taste as well and other things and it doesn't always fly. I can appreciate that there's a cause for this to be looked at but I'm just not sure this is the way to do it without impeding on people's rights to use their property. I will not be supporting this as it is written either. Alderman Cookson Do you want me to respond to that at this point or do you have other comments? So to Alderman Sheehan's question with regard to the police, I did speak with Chief Seusing. He in fact referred me to City Clerk Bergeron. Basically what Chief Seusing said was whatever Ordinance has passed the police will enforce. I know we've heard that before. That was his response. His additional suggestion was to go to City Clerk Bergeron to identify other ordinances which may be similar to the dressing of game in a residential zone. That's when City Clerk Bergeron provided me with the two ordinances. One from Arkansas and one from Washington which this Ordinance is based upon. Code Enforcement was engaged. I believe Code Enforcement made 3 to 4 visits to the location which was the impetus for this proposed Ordinance. Code Enforcement came back and said that there were no issues at the location as far as cleanliness but Code Enforcement always visited after the game was processed and there wasn't any game that was there. Alderman Caron Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 12 I will be opposing this as well. My husband has been a long time hunter. Not that he gets a lot of deer but his friends. I've gotten plenty of phone calls concerning this. I won't repeat everything that my fellow aldermen have said, but I think that training or teaching someone respect for dressing of game might be a good issue. My real concern is that sometimes we have neighbor problems and we want to help them and we bring in ordinances or rules that only affect really that person but they don't realize the ramifications that go with it and it affects a lot of other people that do do things the right way. So I think that if we can work with that person, whoever this problem is with and with the neighbor that they're having the problem with, I think we can do away with this. I don't think this State needs this kind of legislation. When I was in the State House, there were a lot of rules and regulations that were brought in. We don't have to have that many rules and regulations. Hunters really work well together. I think they can work with you and get this done. I will definitely be opposed to this Ordinance. Alderman Cookson I honestly appreciate the discussion that's occurred this evening. Again, I go back to the public comment. I appreciate you taking the time this evening to come out and express your opinion each and every single one of you and the aldermen who expressed their opinion as well. I think that it is a good suggestion that in my particular case that somebody speak to again the person or the situation that was the impetus of this legislation and I'm fine with that. The second part is, and I'll leave it up to the Committee, whether you want to table it. What I heard from the Committee this evening was that there is an issue. We don't necessarily know if legislation is going to solve the issue but whether you want to hold it in Committee until we're able to address it in another fashion. Whatever you think is most appropriate. We can always come back with another piece of legislation if the first method doesn't work. Again, I appreciate the comment. I think some people speaking to this case might just be the right answer without imposing any additional restrictions on these good ethical people. Alderman Vitale I won't support this Ordinance in any format. I'll make that part of it clear. I don't see in any wording or anything else. I don't see an issue necessarily with the person that's, the one person that I'm listening about and I don't know who it is. I don't see an issue with them taking game in, cleaning it, or whatever. It may be has to do with a little bit on whatever is going on between the neighbors. As far as this Ordinance goes, I will not support it in any format. I don't see any wording change that I would see this going to be something that would be good for the community as a whole. We're talking about if people visually don't like the look of something, sometimes it's not what's being done that's wrong, and its how the person is looking at it perceives it. Much of that has to do with education and among families that hunt as in many other circumstances, it's how the education is done with the person watching as much as the person is doing the doing. Having grown up as a child, I went hunting - I know the first time when I was 5 years old we went pheasant hunting. I knew what was going to happen. My father educated me as to the process. When we got our pheasant and you clean it, you knew what's going to happen. When I was 8 years old, we raised chickens I knew we were going to be dunking them by their feet in hot boiling water to get the feathers off. I knew the process. Having people watch maybe it's education of both sides and I don't see any issue involved. The picking it up in the middle of the night, maybe that's when they can pick it up. Some people work night hours. Some people work day hours. What are we going to regulate when they can do some of the stuff. Maybe that's what their schedule is. I don't see anything to do with the hours. I won't be supporting anything. I see no reason to hold this piece of legislation. Alderman Pressly Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 13 Not being a member of this Committee, I cannot vote tonight. I will also not be supporting this. I'm from a family of hunters. At about the age of 8 had the interesting experience of seeing a pig being slaughtered at my Uncle's farm. It was really a very interesting experience. I think one good thing about this being sponsored is that now the Nashua hunters are organized. I think that's a really good thing. I cheer you on for coming out and thank you for being here tonight. Chairman Chasse Nobody came here tonight and has spoken in favor of this. Everybody here is opposed. Here's my philosophy behind it. I am a hunter. If I got a neighbor that is offended by me cleaning my deer, I will do everything in my power - put up a tarp, do something to stay friends with that neighbor. Hunting is a seasonal thing. It starts September 15th with bow and arrow. It goes to the beginning of October with muzzle loader, then it turns into shot gun with riffle, and it goes until mid December. It all depends when the State decides to close it down. There's also 10 days of moose during that time. It's very important when you get a moose or a deer, especially if it's warm weather like we've had over the past few years, you can't hang them in your garage. You're going to lose the meat. You have to have it butchered right away so you have to get it done. To me seeing it's seasonal, I will not support legislation where 2 neighbors are dooking it out. Let them fight their own battles. Put up a tarp, do something, pay for your neighbors vacation, send them to Florida for those hunting days or whatever. That's the way I look at it. I will not be supporting this. I don't think Alderman Cookson that we should even hold it. We should let it go up. Alderman Cookson I’d like to make a motion to Alderman Craffey Point of order. There's a motion on the floor now. Chairman Chasse You're correct. There is a motion for final passage. MOTION BY ALDERMAN COOKSON FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT ON THE QUESTION Alderman Craffey I just wanted to also point out that I agree with you that I would not support this in any way, shape, or form. Thank you. Alderman Sheehan Me too. That's all. MOTION CARRIED Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 14 O-12-21 Endorsers: Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman June Caron Alderman Michael Tabacsko Alderman Diane Sheehan Alderman Richard A. Dowd AMENDING THE COMPOSITION OF THE REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMISSION • Also assigned to the Human Affairs Committee; to appear on its 9/6/12 agenda MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE ON THE QUESTION Alderman Craffey The maker of the Ordinance isn't here. I was wondering if some of the other co-sponsors is willing to address this. Chairman Chasse One of the co-sponsors Alderman Caron who... Alderman Craffey Can we discuss the motion please of what this consists of? Alderman Caron I made the motion. Chairman Chasse So to recommend final passage. Alderman Craffey What are we making changes for? Chairman Chasse Removing the... Alderman Craffey Are they removing the review and comment liaison? Alderman Cookson There's still a liaison to the Review and Comment Commission but that Liaison is no longer a Commissioner of and therefore is not responsible for the review of any of the nonprofit organizations requesting funding. So Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 15 there's still a liaison. There is still expectation for communications back and forth between the Board and the Review and Comment Commission but they no longer have the responsibility of a Commissioner role. Alderman Craffey Is that tied back into Ordinance 12-18 where we had the procedure? Does that affect this at all - procedure for following by the Review and Comment Commission where procedures shall be reviewed annually by the... Alderman Caron No. Alderman Craffey It's all by itself. Thank you very much. Alderman Vitale For anybody that has not been to Review and Comment at all, there's 5 Commissioners normally and they lead a group that they break down all the organizations that are coming before Review and Comment and each Commissioner has their own little committee that interviews a set of nonprofits that come before them. Then they bring the recommendations forward. So that's what they're talking about as the Commissioners and in the past, the liaison has been one of those head of one of those committees. That's what will change. Alderman Sheehan I had spoken to Alderman Melizzi-Golja quite a bit about this. Being I'm the prime sponsor of the other piece of legislation regarding the Review and Comment Commission and one of the thing we had talked about was potentially meeting in Congress with the Human Affairs on this as a joint committee. Is that something she discussed with you at all? Chairman Chasse No she did not. What does this have to do with this? Alderman Sheehan For the purposes of discussing this and the other piece of legislation where they are both also sent to Human Affairs to perhaps have the two committees meet at the same time regarding both pieces so that there was conversation about the same both of them. Alderman Vitale As far as any discussion between Human Affairs and Review and Comment, probably the best time if Human Affairs wanted to do it and it's really not something that we need to worry about, probably the best time is that Review and Comment only meets at a certain time of year. If Human Affairs is really interested in it, when they have their first gathering meeting, Human Affairs could probably take part of it or they could do it the same night or something. So any questions that are coming up for that session or season of Review and Comment, Human Affairs can probably get their answers then and that communication can take part at a Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 16 logical time. This Committee does not necessarily meet year round and just gather at any time. It's known to all the people that volunteer that it's at the beginning of the year. A few of the people meet at the end to kind of get it organized. Alderman Cookson Correct me if I'm wrong Alderman Sheehan, I don't think that addresses the concerns we were raising. I think the concern that Alderman Sheehan was raising was the joint convention between this Committee, Personnel and Advisory Affairs and Human Affairs, to discuss the two Review and Comment Ordinances that are before each one of the committees. So that was Alderman Sheehan's point. Alderman Vitale's response with having Human Affairs meet with Review and Comment didn't address Alderman Sheehan's question. Chairman Chasse News to me. Surprise. I have no clue. MOTION CARRIED O-12-22 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane AMENDMENTS TO THE PURCHASING ORDINANCES TO ALLOW SALE OF SURPLUS STOCK BY ONLINE AUCTION MOTION BY ALDERMAN CRAFFEY TO TABLE O-12-22 MOTION CARRIED TABLED IN COMMITTEE MOTION BY ALDERMAN CRAFFEY TO TAKE FROM THE TABLE R-12-52 MOTION CARRIED R-12-52 Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Barbara Pressly Alderman Diane Sheehan Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane ESTABLISHING AN INTERNATIONAL DESIGN COMPETITION TO GENERATE DESIGNS FOR THE GREELEY PARK BAND SHELL • Amended & Tabled – 7/23/12 MOTION BY ALDERMAN CRAFFEY TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE OF R-12-52 AS AMENDED ON THE QUESTION Alderman Pressly Thank you. I would like to respond to former Alderman Dan Richardson's concerns. I apologize for not contacting him and explaining what happened. Something really sort of interesting happened. In 2010, we passed 2 resolutions. One was to get a request for a proposal to improve the band shell both aesthetically and for sound. The other one we established is R-10-31 and R-10-69. The other was to establish an expendable Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 17 trust fund to accept donations for the purpose of completing the Greeley Park bank shell. Since 2010, both of these have been out there. What happened that I found very interesting number one the administration was not able to do anything about it for about a year because if you recall, Pennichuck was on the front burner. When they did it was interesting. The only applicant for the request turned out to be the same group that gave us what we have. So they worked with them a while and all they came up with was to just encase what was there. The Mayor had graciously found some people that thought they wanted to fund it all at one time and they backed away from it. Other people that she approached chose not to support it. Quite frankly, I also felt give the fact it was really not much of an improvement of what we have that I could not support that either. What this new legislation does is to try a different approach to find a designer to take basically what we have, the slab that we have and come up with something new and interesting and exciting. This approach is to use the methodology that the Mayor had done to have a design competition for the Mill Yard. If you recall, they came up with all sorts of fascinating design ideas. So it seemed appropriate to try that same technique and see if we could come up with some interesting and creative designs. So that's what this is all about. The amendment is a great improvement. It supports the aesthetics. It supports the sound concern were two. One was the looks of the band shell and the other was - I had to even call it a band shell. It's sort of a structure that was not supposed to be what it looks like. This is a new approach. I think everyone involved would consider using it. Any decision on what the design would be would come before this Board for final approval. At that time, there would be ability for the public to comment. This is not intended to use any public money. Since we already had the ordinance in place to raise money for it. I would be pleased if you could support this. It's following through on what was passed 2 years ago. Alderman Vitale Quick question. It says that members of the jury for the Nashua Mill Yard/Broad Street Parkway design competition shall be invited to participate. What I want to know is have those members already been asked to participate at this point and what happens if they would all deny participation. Not that I see that happening but what if. Alderman Pressly Thank you. Those that I've been able to reach I have approached them. They're willing to do this. This scope is much smaller than they had to go out for ideas for the whole Mill Yard. It took a lot of map work. This should be a much less time consuming effort. Some of the people have been a little bit difficult to reach but I think the Mayor has been in contact with all of them. What we need from them is their process. Not them themselves but how did they go about doing this and how were they able to get so many...I think they had 25 people from around the world that came up with really interesting ideas. It's what they did and their process that we're looking for. Some have said yes. The ones I approached have said yes. Chairman Chasse It's only a design. I don't really care this way or whatever. I'll go with the design. Let them see what you come up with. In my opinion having experienced a problem in my ward, that band shell can be corrected very easily, finish it off, finish all the sides, and put rugs on the walls. It kills the sound. I'm going backwards. I know that for a fact because when I had Sharky's down at Globe Plaza, we were going all the way out to Harbor Ave. and that's exactly what the sound engineer came in and did. He put rugs on the walls. It took care of all the problems. I think that's what we should be doing. Even if we go with a new design, even if you find something different and you destroy this, that's cheap. Cheap money. That could have been done a long time ago to help the neighbors out there. Not finishing it off and leaving that open hole, I could see where those people - and it's all the same people complaining. Alderman Pressly Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 18 That's basically what the same team came up with was to encase it and to do all the things and make it look better. The price tag was $200,000. Nobody wanted to spring for that. This is a chance to look for something that's more creative and that accomplishes the sound. Chairman Chasse You can't tell me pieces of plywood and a rug are going to cost $200,000. It's impossible. Alderman Pressly I think a lot of us have a hard time with what it looks like. I really think it's probably the ugliest structure that we have in the City. I think it's worthwhile to at least try to make it better. This all started - I ran on wanting to do this because 35 years ago when I was an alderman there was a big promise when we did this. We chose the location because every weekend they came in with a flat bed and there was a performance right on that spot. It seemed like the natural thing to do. There was a big promise that there would be this wonderful design. It would be acoustically correct and all that. I moved onto the Senate and all of a sudden we got this thing that's not complete. That's what started this whole thing. We never did get what we were supposed to get 35 years ago. I don't know anyone who really things it's a great looking piece. I know they have improved some of the sound but not completely. This should not cost any money to take this step. It might be worthwhile to see if we could find a design that meets the acoustical needs, the aesthetic needs, and see if it's something that the Board of Aldermen would like. Chairman Chasse How about a new place? Alderman Pressly Well the Mayor has mentioned and I think it's an interesting idea to have band shells at various locations. Today you could come up with band shells... Chairman Chasse That's not what I meant by putting band shells all over. A new place. If you took the band shell and put it down at Mine Falls Park way down the end. It could be a walk for people to get there but between the traffic on Concord Street - they scare the neighbors, they ain't going to hear it from down there. The only thing you're going to wake up is the mosquitoes. I don't know. There's got to be some other place in the City of Nashua where they could put it and it doesn't involve the neighbors. Alderman Sheehan I can see what you're saying but anywhere you move it, you're going to get them in base. You're going to get someone who if there's ever a problem, inherited a house and doesn't like some of the things that are near that - pretty much everybody except Mr. Early moved into their neighborhood knowing that there was a band shell there. It's been there longer than almost everybody that owns their homes. There's a couple exceptions. That's why I worked to try to address that initially. The neighborhood is defined by the fact that it's a park and I don't want to move it somewhere else. I don't think we have to say there's too much traffic around the park. There should be that much traffic. It should be that highly used. It's a great park. I went to Greeley Park as a child before we moved to Nashua. Is that a coincidence? I don't think so. If we have great parks, younger families want to be here. It's something that should be being used. The art show was there this weekend. It was wonderful. The performances are wonderful. I can hear them when I'm down working in the garden in the back. We shouldn't be trying to say parks are too noisy for the neighbors. The park has been there longer Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 19 than the neighbors have been there. So when you buy a house next to a park, there's some things that come with it. When you buy a house next to a school, there's some things that come with it. There are some positives. There are some disadvantages so by addressing where issues are and making it the best it can be - I mean we cleared out the sound buffer. There was a stretch of trees and things that did stop the sound waves. As soon as they came down, that's when the problem was there. There are things that can be done and that's what we need to do. Might it be great to have performances down by the river as well, yes. I very much enjoy Lowell's Boardinghouse Park where you can go and hear live performances. Theirs is a very similar look where it's all pipes but it's done correctly and its up against a solid thing so the sound does not spill and they're having placed it correctly and have the sound system wired correctly means for a short period of time, you have some excellent music and then it's gone. I think that we need to remember that this is a park that is supposed to be enjoyed by everybody of Nashua and not just putting first the neighbors. There's a way to be responsible neighbor and that's what we need to do rather than looking at taking it out of there. I for one am happy to see when people start pulling up at 6 p.m. because there's something going on. I go I wonder what's going on. That's how I end up at a lot of these things because that how I know. I don't want to see anything done in terms of reducing the people that use it. We're trying to make it only be Nashua people that use it. I think it's an asset for everybody and just making it so that we are the best neighbor we can be but keeping in mind it was a park first. That's where I stand. Chairman Chasse It's only, like I said, a design competition. MOTION CARRIED DISCUSSION - None PUBLIC COMMENT - None REMARKS BY THE ALDERMEN Chairman Chasse I have a quickie here. Code of Ethics. We received them. You got them in your packet. I just went and put I, J, and K. This is not really negotiable for the full Board. We'll bring it up there and vote on it. It's either going to go or it's not going to go. I put down "any violation of the above parties involved will be asked to attend a Personnel Administrative Affairs Committee meeting where the Committee where decide on the issue." In other words, something happens up there it affects aldermen, they will have to come visit us. The first offense if found will be a $10 for the sunshine fund. A second offense or any future offense will be $25 until the end of the ward term. That's all I came up to try to see if we can do something and have a little respect in this chamber. We took a vote, like I said, the last time to uphold a Code of Ethics and since then there's been some more issues between aldermen in the chamber, and meetings, and whatever. All I can say is it's embarrassing. People come up and say, and they're calling it looney tunes. You want to watch looney tunes; they turn on the Aldermanic meetings in the aldermanic chambers. This is what I'm trying to stop. Does anybody have any $.02 they want to throw in? Alderman Pressly Thank you. I haven't seen this paper. I can't... Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 20 Chairman Chasse It was just for our Committee. Alderman Pressly Okay. So you're thinking that if we fine people... Chairman Chasse Absolutely. Alderman Pressly Who would determine that a fine was appropriate? Chairman Chasse The Personnel Administrative Affairs Committee. Alderman Pressly The Committee or the... Chairman Chasse Let's say for instance that you and Alderman Cookson decided to go take a take at a meeting, we will request both of you to show up at the Personnel Administrative Affairs Committee and we will make the decision. You will be fined, he won't be, or vice versa, or whatever. Alderman Pressly Well that's an interesting approach. I've always been of the belief that the presiding officer was in charge of keeping order and keeping decorum. So you're... Chairman Chasse Evidently it's not working is it Alderman Pressly? It's not working. I saw an alderman out there, mentioned something about him, supposedly our leader. Now that is uncalled for and it never should have happened. Things like that. Both of the things that...I'm only trying to stop it. Taking it to the Personnel Administrative Affairs Committee, coming in front of us and if it's one of us that has to recuse themselves from the meeting, they will not get to vote on it. Like I said, it's not something I want to take out and I want to start chopping up and amendments to it or whatever. This is what it is. Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 21 Alderman Pressly May I continue? I just want to say I commend you for trying that. I think it's an interesting concept. Maybe we should see if it works or not. I don't know how it's going to work. There's only one way to find out. Chairman Chasse Nobody likes change but we'll change it and see what happens. Maybe somebody later on down the road will come up with a better idea. Alderman Pressly So if someone was unhappy with what was taken place...it has to be on the record in the chamber right? Chairman Chasse Absolutely Alderman Pressly You can't rely on something that's said out in the hallway. So if anyone feels that there was inappropriate behavior, they would file the complaint with this Committee? Chairman Chasse It doesn't necessarily have to be a complaint. If we see it happen in the full Board, I'll say okay I want to see Alderman Caron and Alderman Sheehan at the Personnel Administrative Affairs meeting, and then we'll take up the issue there. Alderman Pressly I commend you for coming up with a new and creative approach to it. Chairman Chasse It looks like it's always the same ones. It's very discouraging for the rest of us. Like I said, I've been on this Board for quite a few years and I have never attacked another alderman. I'll go back to my old words, "I want to be treated the same way I'll treat you." I may not like what you're saying and the hairs are standing up on the back of my neck but you're entitled to your opinion. Let it go. Alderman Pressly I have another question. Would this all be in the public? I mean you wouldn't have a meeting and then go into nonpublic session? Chairman Chasse I would not go into nonpublic session... Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 22 Alderman Pressly You would discuss... Chairman Chasse We want the people to see that we're trying to do something to correct it. I don't want to hide anything. Alderman Pressly I agree with that. I think the more transparent this is the better. Chairman Chasse Like I said, this will be brought up at the next full Board hopefully and then we'll take it from there. Alderman Pressly Will it be legislation that you're bringing up? Chairman Chasse No legislation. I just added on. We vote that the add ons are good and that's it. We never voted on the Code of Ethics. The Code of Ethics was just written up and that's what we were just abiding by. We didn't really make them legislation I don't believe, right Alderman Cookson? Alderman Cookson I don't recall. It was hanging on the wall prior to me being elected my first time. It's been there for several years and I'm not sure where it is now. Alderman Sheehan A couple of things. I believe it is in our Ordinances. So I think has been codified at some point with some sort of legislation. I'm not positive but I know it was in our books. I have a couple of questions just trying to figure out the process on without assigning a motive some of what I've witnessed to be politically motivated and so my concern with sending it to a peer review board is if the political makeup is similar. Would it not make sense to instead be sending it to an Ethics Committee which is not an elected board is one of my concerns? The other concern is things that perhaps fall outside that are not necessarily captured. For example, at one particular meeting a vote didn't go the way somebody liked. They leaned back and let some expletives that are barely hearable on anything but they were there. It's not reflected and that is not addressed because it's not part of the public or somebody who lays a patch of rubber when they leave City Hall because they're upset, or doesn't return phone calls of people that are on his board. Those are some of the things that I think also maybe need to get captured just because of lack of respect. Chairman Chasse I don't want to make it a big story. Personnel – 8/20/12 Page 23 Alderman Sheehan I don't either. I just wanted all... Chairman Chasse What happens in these chambers that's it and if I have to put it in legislation, that's fine. I don't want to be making amendments, after amendments, after amendments. It's just something to... and I didn't believe I had to do it by legislation. If I do, Sue will you please let me know. I just want to put something in there. It's a start. Alderman Sheehan I agree. Alderman Pressly I just want to say I think it's a really...I commend you very much for coming up with this. I think it's worth a try. I'm not on your committee but I think it's certainly worth a try to see if it makes a difference. It certainly will put people on notice. It's in the chamber. It's what's on the record. It's worth a try and see what happens. Chairman Chasse I don't want to send it out to the other committee. I'd like to keep it right in this chamber, right with us. Let us handle our own baggage. Like I say, that's it. Does anybody have anything else they want to discuss? POSSIBLE NON-PUBLIC SESSION - None ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN CRAFFEY TO ADJOURN MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared closed at 8:29 p.m. Alderman June M. Caron Committee Clerk