Search

A regular meeting of the Board of Aldermen was held Tuesday, May 24, 2016, at 7:30 p.m. in the
Aldermanic Chamber.

President Brian S. McCarthy presided; City Clerk Patricia D. Piecuch recorded.

Prayer was offered by City Clerk Patricia D. Piecuch; Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja led in the
Pledge to the Flag.

President McCarthy
Before | ask the Clerk to take the roll, Alderman Dowd is participating by telephone and under the

terms of the state law that allows him to do that, he needs to explain why he can’t attend, if he
can hear us, and who he is with, if anyone.

Alderman Dowd stated the reason he could not attend, confirmed that he could hear the proceedings
and stated who was present with him.

President McCarthy

Acknowledged that those present could hear Alderman Dowd as well.

The roll call was taken with 14 members of the Board of Aldermen present; Alderman Richard Dowd
was not in attendance but participated in the meeting via telecommunication; Alderman Deane was
recorded absent.

Mayor James W. Donchess and Corporation Counsel Steven A. Bolton were also present.

President McCarthy

Before we begin | am going to recognize Alderman Wilshire to make a motion so we can accept
procedural motions without the roll call vote.

MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE THAT THE RULES BE SO FAR SUSPENDED AS TO
ALLOW FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF PROCEDURAL ACTIONS WITHOUT OBJECTION

A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows:
Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Dowd, 13
Alderman Caron, Alderman Siegel, Alderman Schoneman,
Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman McGuinness, Alderman LeBrun,
Alderman Moriarty, Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Lopez,
Alderman McCarthy
Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED
REMARKS BY THE MAYOR
Mayor Donchess
We have two contracts on the agenda that have been recommended by the Finance Committee. The

first is the contract for the LED Street Light Conversion Project with Siemens in the amount of $1.5
million. This project, which will replace all of the existing lights with LED lights, will enable the city to

Board of Aldermen Page 2
May 24, 2016

save about 40% of the electric bill devoted to street lighting. That bill is $830,000 so it will help the city
realize a savings of over $300,000 a year. At one point there was a proposal that we do a sole source
project at a cost of $2.1 million and as a result of the decision to go out to bid with this we reduced the
price by $600,000 so that’s good news.

The other contracts that are on the agenda are the contracts for the administration of our medical
benefits. These have not come to the Finance Committee or the Board of Aldermen before just through
custom but technically since they are larger contracts they should come before us. As you know we
have a self-insured system of medical payments except for catastrophic claims but the individual claims,
the medical claims that are made by employees are administered by these three carriers. What is before
us is the contracts to approve the administrative services rendered by Anthem, Harvard and the Hartford.
The Finance Committee is recommending that you approve those contracts.

A few good things have happened. On Sunday there was the dedication of the Child Victim Statute at
the Holocaust Memorial, it was a wonderful ceremony. Mr. Fred Teeboom was responsible for the entire
memorial as well as this sculpture. The Holocaust Memorial is a great addition to Nashua and the only
one of its kind in the State of New Hampshire.

Mary Zhu, one of our Nashua students, won a second award at the Intel Science and Engineering Fair
which is a big award. She did a project in behavioral science. In addition, the Granite State Challenge
Team from Nashua South won the State of New Hampshire and that was the first time that has
happened. The students on that team are Dody Eyd who came here before to be honored for another
accomplishment that he had; Nisha Davacia, Sam McIntyre and Noah Telerski were the team members
and the coaches were Neil Claffey, Katherine Poulin and Greg Montine. They did a really good job
representing the city.

Finally, Mr. President, coming up of course we have the Memorial Day parade on Monday and hopefully
as many of the Board members can join us to march in the parade as possible. One week from Friday
the Silver Knights open on the 3.

RESPONSE TO REMARKS OF THE MAYOR — None

RECOGNITION PERIOD — None

READING MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the minutes of the Board of Aldermen
meetings of May 5, and May 10, 2016, accepted, placed on file and the readings suspended.

COMMUNICATIONS

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared that all communications be read by title
only.

From: Mayor Jim Donchess
Re: LED Street Light Conversion Project

MOTION BY ALDERMAN COOKSON TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT
TO SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,455,694

Board of Aldermen Page 3
May 24, 2016

A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows:

Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Cookson, 14
Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron, Alderman Siegel,
Alderman Schoneman, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman McGuinness,
Alderman LeBrun, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman O’Brien,
Alderman Lopez, Alderman McCarthy

Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED

From: Mayor Jim Donchess
Re: Approval of Contracts for Administrative Services to Anthem BlueCross and
Blue Shield, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare and The Hartford

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACTS TO
ANTHEM BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,140,000; HARVARD
PILGRIM HEALTHCARE IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $225,000; AND THE HARTFORD IN AN
AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $0.15 PER $1,000 OF AD&D INSURANCE PER MONTH

A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows:

Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Cookson, 14
Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron, Alderman Siegel,
Alderman Schoneman, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman McGuinness,
Alderman LeBrun, Alderman Moriarty, Alderman O’Brien,
Alderman Lopez, Alderman McCarthy

Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED

There being no objection, President McCarthy suspended the rules to allow for the introduction
of a communication received after the agenda was prepared

From: Stephen Dookran, P.E., City Engineer
Sonia Shahnaj, P.E., Senior Staff Engineer

Re: R-16-038, Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into an Amendment to the Railroad Agreement
With the State of New Hampshire and Pan Am Railways for the Purpose of Replacing a
Railway Highway Crossing on East Hollis Street
— Request for the First and Second Reading at the May 24, 2016, Meeting

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared that the communication accepted and
placed on file

Board of Aldermen Page 4
May 24, 2016

PERIOD FOR PUBLIC COMMENT RELATIVE TO ITEMS EXPECTED TO BE ACTED
UPON THIS EVENING

Mr. Fred Teeboom, 24 Cheyene Drive

Mayor Donchess, thank you very much for your kind comments. I’m not sure any of you attended the
commemoration last Sunday but | invite you all to go to the memorial and take a look at the latest
sculpture, it’s very impressive.

O0-016-011 — Reducing the Taxation for Certain Chartered Public Schools. One of the truly most
incorrect and inappropriate statements that | ever heard made before the Board of Aldermen was made
on May 10" and | refer to the minutes on page 12, referring to the charter schools Alderman Clemons
said “I think that they syphon money off of the district for the benefit of the few and then the rest of the
population is left behind.” The Academy for Science and Design is a top scoring school on NECAP in
New Hampshire and it is rated the 50" best school in the entire United States by Newsweek Magazine.
Let’s look at the figures. The average cost for students in the public schools K-12 in Nashua is $13,000
per student. The cost per teacher is almost $89,000 per teacher. There are 1,005 teachers in Nashua
for 11,500 students in K-12 and that’s from the Board of Education data. This means that there is a load
of $11,500 divided by 1,005 teachers or 11.4 students per teacher. There are 257 Nashua students in
the Academy of Science and Design. The entire enrollment is 525. That saves 257 divided by 11.4 is
22.5 teachers that you don’t have to hire because they are at the Academy of Science and Design;
otherwise they would have to be educators in the Nashua system. 22.5 teachers at a rate of $89,000 per
teacher is $2 million. You add to that the 45% overhead it doubles the teachers cost. The savings just
for the Academy of Science and Design is $2.9 million that the taxpayers don’t have to pay. If you look
at the 464 Nashua students at all of the regional schools; Manchester, Derry; there are about 10 or so, all
of it is in the Board of Education data, that would save $3.6 million and if you multiply that by the 45%
overhead that amounts to $5.2 million that Nashua taxpayers do not have to pay because those students
do not go to public schools. Let’s look at it another way, the state pays Nashua $40.1 million in
education aid and that computes to $3,400 per student in education aid and if you multiply that times the
275 students who are at the Academy of Science and Design, that’s a savings of $2.62 million. Look at
all of the charter schools, there are 464 students and multiply that by $13,000 and the state aid of $3,400
you end up with $4.4 million. No matter how you look at it the savings are enormous. In O-016-011 we
are talking about a tax reduction of $80,000 for the Academy of Science and Design and $145,000 for all
the other charter schools; that compares with up to a $5 million savings? This is a no brainer. You can
see that the Nashua taxpayers are going to get tax relief, you get better schools and you should fully
support O-016-011.

The other thing that | wanted to talk about is R-16-015; the expendable trust fund for pensions but there
is no such thing as an “expendable” trust fund. Now this came before at a cost $2.3 million and now it is
$350,000. It wasn’t needed at $2.3 million and it isn’t needed in the form of $350,000. Here are the
facts. The fiscal 17 budget covers the additional $350,000. Look at account 52150 on page 21. A
question was asked by Alderman Schoneman of CFO Griffin on May 18'" and CFO Griffin said “yes, we
funded it.” Why do you need to override the spending cap in 2016 when it’s already funded in 2017, it
makes no sense, unless you have an ulterior motive. (inaudible) This account 52150 is funded at
$21.67 million, its $350,000 above last years’ funding as | mentioned earlier. Then there is account 5175
just for the schools alone, they got an additional $800,000. Then there is account 89725, that’s another
$500,000 in transfers and it’s attached to the city retirement fund. Then there is 7025, trust funds, the
city retirement trust fund which was set up in the year 2000, then there is a trust fund 7076 which is the
school retirement trust fund. | think | still have $300,000 in it, | think it was $700,000 a month ago. There
is funding for pensions all over this budget. Many mentioned the savings set aside in the fund balance,
there is no such thing as savings set aside in the fund balance but there is a term called designated fund
balance. The designated fund balance is recommended in the CAFR report. They recommend that the
CFO set aside some delegated money but that set aside has no legal authority because it doesn’t have

Board of Aldermen Page 5
May 24, 2016

the legal authority from the Board of Aldermen; it’s just an artificial designation by the CFO. If you are
going to set aside savings then take the end of year surplus and escrow that money into one of these
expendable trust funds; 7025 or 7076. Now, talking about surplus, there has been a consistent $1
million surplus in the pension fund; in the 52150 fund; it’s been consistently underfunded by $1 million.
Look at the profile in 2017 if you look at 5150, it looks like it’s about $1 million ahead this year. It was
just like last year. This was recognized by the very champion of the current plan B, Alderman Siegel,
who two years as a freshmen Alderman said he did this fantastic analysis and he came up with a
$400,000 savings and guess what? Those are $400,000 savings in the very same pension but not the
regular budget for. This entire Board voted unanimously to cut $400,000. You surely do not need to
override the spending cap with 10 votes required. Six votes | hope hold out. | think Mayor Donchess did
an outstanding job and held to his pledge of sticking with the cap. Alderman Siegel and some others
want to override the cap. They say why is there a cap? There is a cap because citizens want you to cap
and prioritize your budget not override it even when it’s not necessary to override it. There is no
emergency here. CFO Griffin admitted that the $350,000 is funded and the whole discussion degraded
into well, we have to override the cap so we have another $350,000. The fact that it overrides the
spending cap in 2016 to spend the money in 2017, 2018 or 2019 is craziness. Plan B, just like plan A
makes no sense, Alderman Siegel.

| should also mention that Alderman O’Brien is beneficial of this legislation because he gets a very
generous pension. His pension is about the same as the highest salary he ever made.

Alderman Siegel

Point of order, that’s out of line, it has nothing to do with any legislation.
Alderman McCarthy

Please don’t refer to any personnel, Mr. Teeboom.

Mr. Teeboom

It’s got to do with the pension.

Alderman McCarthy

He does not receive any additional pension benefit whether or not this legislation passes. What he will
receive is set by law.

Mr. Teeboom

That’s correct, | certainly don’t deny that but there are funds for that. There are accounts all around
starting with the state law. The Trust Fund Board is inundated with union representatives.

On a persona note, on April 26", Alderman Siegel named himself Prometheus who is a God and a
Greek...

Alderman Siegel

What are you talking about?

Board of Aldermen Page 6
May 24, 2016

Mr. Teeboom
| suggest you take a look at the April 26 Board of Aldermen meeting discussing this pension funding.

It's appropriate that | respond to that. It says “I look at myself as Prometheus, and Prometheus by the
way is a protector of mankind and creator of mankind. He said he worried that...

Alderman Siegel

What does this have to do with the legislation?
Mr. Teeboom

We are discussing O-016-015, you brought it up.

Alderman Siegel

| discussed it in the context of being Prometheus feeling like his liver was being pecked out on ai cliff
which | feel like | should revisited that analogy, Mr. Teeboom.

Mr. Teeboom

He said “like an eagle | would swoop down and peck out his liver.” Alderman Siegel, | wouldn’t mind
pecking out your liver if you offered me a glass of Chianti.

Alderman Siegel

| wasn't talking about you, Mr. Teeboom.

Mr. Teeboom

You mentioned my name.

PETITIONS — None

NOMINATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS — None

REPORTS OF COMMITTEE

Budget Review Committee .0.0.0......... cece eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeteeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 05/16/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the May 16, 2016
Budget Review Committee accepted and placed on file.

Budget Review Committee .00..0.....0... cece eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeteeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 05/18/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the May 18, 2016
Budget Review Committee accepted and placed on file.

Finance COMMiIttee 2.2.0... cecccecccecccececececeeeceeceseeeseaueeaeeeaeeeaereaeeeaeeeaes 05/18/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the May 18, 2016
Finance Committee accepted and placed on file.

Board of Aldermen Page 7
May 24, 2016

Human Affairs Committee 20.0.0... cece ccecceeccceeececeeeeeeeseeeeeaeseaeeeaeeeaeeeaes 05/09/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the May 9, 2016
Human Affairs Committee accepted and placed on file.

Planning & Economic Development Committee .............. eee 05/03/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the May 3, 2016
Planning & Economic Development Committee accepted and placed on file.

WRITTEN REPORTS FROM LIAISONS - None
CONFIRMATION OF MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS

Conservation Commission

William S. Parker (New Appointment) For a Term to Expire: December 31, 2018
1 Rockland Street

Nashua, NH 03064

e Tabled until 6/14/16

UNFINISHED BUSINESS — RESOLUTIONS

R-16-015
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
ESTABLISHING AN EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND FOR STATE EMPLOYER PENSION COSTS
AND APPROPRIATING $2,230,000 FROM FUND BALANCE ASSIGNED FOR THIS PURPOSE
INTO THE EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND
Given its fourth reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO AMEND R-16-015 IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REPLACING IT
WITH THE GOLDEN ROD COPY PROVIDED WITH THE AGENDA

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Siegel

| want to go over the changes in the “plan B.” The major objection that | heard from several of my colleagues
on the Board was the feeling that an expansion of the spending cap limits was an unfortunate by-product in
that transferring the entire $2.23 million in one lump and divvying it up amongst three different years while
potentially a desirable outcome for dealing with the pension issue had the undesirable side effect of
expanding the spending cap. | thought about it and came up with an alternate plan which was to recognize
that we have a known additional pension obligation of $350,000 and for this year we have the fund balance
that was designated for that purpose and that it would make sense to transfer that over and leave years two
and three unfunded in anticipation of the new numbers. The plan modifies the title of the legislation to have it
change to $350,000 and it modifies the amount and the year so we transfer just that amount this year and
years two and three will be at the discretion of the Board in future years as we address the pension overhang
that we will have to address. After this discussion if this amendment passes we can discuss the greater

Board of Aldermen Page 8
May 24, 2016

problems.
A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows:

Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Cookson, 13
Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron, Alderman Siegel,
Alderman Schoneman, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman McGuinness,
Alderman LeBrun, Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Lopez,
Alderman McCarthy

Nay: Alderman Moriarty 1
MOTION CARRIED

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-16-015 AS AMENDED BY ROLL
CALL

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Siegel

Let me deal with some of the issues that were raised both in the Budget Review Committee and just
recently in public comment. This idea that this money is something that is already accounted for; on its
surface one could say yes, we have a budget in front of us but you have to look and see what happened
in order to make that happen. | would particularly like to focus on the Capital Equipment Reserve Fund
which has been hacked down by $700,000. So, yes, we made a budget but what we are doing is playing
a dangerous game of kick the can. We can play that game, for that matter why not just have no Capital
Equipment Reserve Fund amount. At a certain point there is a threshold by which we are cutting our
own throat. You can bleed out from a little razor cuts just as well as you can bleed out from just slicing
your aorta. | believe that this is a fairly significant problem so with the money | am going to propose
eventually that we help to restore our Capital Equipment Reserve Fund because we cannot allow the
maintenance work in this city that our reserve funds to go down to the point where we are not replacing
our equipment. It is a fallacy that this has been accounted for or that there is some ulterior motive, in
fact, | am specifically going out of my way to demonstrate that this has absolutely nothing to do with the
desire to expand the spending cap. If the amount was $100,000 or $1 million then that would be the
amount. It is the exact amount specified by CFO Griffin and in fact, we have an estimate for years two
and three that we are going to have a $2 million additional pension problem. Clearly, we aren’t going to
solve that with any existing money in the fund; we can solve it partially but not completely so there will be
other changes and again, when the time comes which is in Budget not before this committee, | will try to
make some suggestions which hopefully can constructively address that problem. This is not about
playing some weird fiscal game. Frankly, | think it’s a flaw in the spending cap legislation the way it was
crafted that we have this expansion, for example, you can’t level fund a budget and say I’m going to take
from this account and move it here and have the same amount of money but now you need 10 votes to
do that. | was never quoted as having any desire to override the spending cap and my reference to
Prometheus has to do with the agony involved in trying to get a budget through and the feeling that we
have revisited this before. While Mr. Teeboom would like to classify himself as the eagle that pecks out
my liver, | would not discredit the eagle with that analogy because that is not what | had in mind,
unfortunately | don’t believe that there is any other bird that | can think of and be in polite company but
he is not who | was referring to. | certainly didn’t refer to myself as Prometheus, the giver of fire to the
humans which is what he really was; sorry to correct you on that. Nonetheless, getting back to the
legislation, | believe this is important to pass because this is a real problem. Again, we have this issue in
the budget; it’s a very clear hole. I’m not looking to put this into random areas, for example, beautifying
the city, additional salaries; | was very explicit in this legislation. It was there to plug the pension hole.

Board of Aldermen Page 9
May 24, 2016

Now, because of the timing of how this legislation was debated, a budget had to be put forward before
this legislation had its final determination. Nonetheless, that hole exists in the Capital Equipment
Reserve Fund and | believe if this were here that hole would not be the same size but we would still have
to do something. | strongly urge my colleagues to adopt this recognizing that this is a solution to a real
problem and that problem is going to manifest itself on us not doing proper replacement of our capital
equipment.

Alderman Schoneman

| appreciate all the work that Alderman Siegel did in concert with CFO Griffin to work this out and | think
there are clearly serious issues and | don’t take them personally. VVhen we had the last full Board of
Aldermen meeting we talked about an amount that could be suitable that would be less than $2.2 million
and | said | would consider it and | have. The $350,000 sounded attractive for a couple of reasons but in
the end | have to maintain my opposition to it for a couple of reasons. One, it is a spending cap override
of fiscal ’16; | cannot count on that spending cap override. The fiscal 17 problem for pensions has been
solved. | totally recognize the Capital Equipment Reserve Fund that has been created but | don’t share
the same view that we cannot do anything about CERF in this budget. | think there could be 10 votes to
increase the Capital Equipment Reserve Fund as necessary if there were 8 votes to reduce a line
somewhere else. It is about prioritization. In an effort to keep all city soending within the spending cap
for fiscal °16, 17 and on | am going to continue to oppose this legislation and when fiscal ’18 and fiscal
19 rolls around we will address those issues when the time comes.

Alderman Siegel

| appreciate the views of my colleague. | would point out that we have a $2 million overhang in the
following two budget years as estimated by CFO Griffin. That could get worse but that is the current
estimate from the state. In looking at the current budget, you can’t just say well where can | find that
$350,000 and plug it in here and call it a day. You have to think where can | find this in the next two
years because it isn’t going away. It’s all well and good to just say we will do an across the board cut but
anyone who has actually done a real budget knows that is impossible. The second that you start
defining those areas where there are fixed costs that are non-negotiable, then you are back making
decisions and trade-offs. You just don’t get to make a blanket statement about cutting it across the
board; that’s a very naive way to do budgets. This is looking forward and seeing what the rolling effect is
is. It’s easy to focus on the Capital Equipment Reserve Fund because that problem is going to multiply
itself. We've already seen what happens when we neglect our maintenance. If | take that $500,000 and
put it towards the pension well guess what, that’s a spending cap override but are we going to sit in
dogmatic debate and say oh my God, | can’t override the cap or what is the threshold over which we say
alright, now it’s so bad that | am willing to do something, | am going to override this religious conviction
because my arm is hanging off and | guess | better apply a tourniquet; is it a $3 million pension
overhang, a $5 million, a $7 million overhang? At a certain point these kinds of arguments fall by the
wayside and they become silly. You have to view the world as it is and not how you wish it to be. What
we are proposing does not affect the dollars out of the taxpayer’s pocket and that is ultimately what we
are talking about. Are we taking more money from taxpayer’s to do this, if we were | would not have put
this legislation in place. That is the point; to cap the amount of money that flows out of the taxpayer’s
pockets. | would serious urge everyone to be very careful in consideration of that and consider that as a
key point in all of this.

Alderman Schoneman

It’s clear that moving money from inside of the budget to outside in an expendable trust fund does not
affect taxes. If the cash is already there you spend it from account A or B but it doesn’t affect the tax rate
but what is does do is that if we were to take that gap of $350,000 and apply it to the Capital Equipment
Reserve Fund in the fiscal °17 budget then that would increase the budget and it would ultimately result

Board of Aldermen Page 10
May 24, 2016

in an expense to taxpayers. | don’t think it’s a religious conviction but it’s a promise to taxpayers for us to
hold the line. As time goes on we will have discussions around this horseshoe and set priorities and
come to conclusions.

A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows:

Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Dowd, 9
Alderman Caron, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja,
Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Lopez, Alderman McCarthy

Nay: Alderman Cookson, Alderman Schoneman, Alderman McGuinness, 5
Alderman LeBrun, Alderman Moriarty

MOTION FAILS

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT OF R-16-015
ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Clemons

I’m disappointed with the way the last vote went. | kind of look at this situation as the miser who has
millions of dollars and lives in a mansion that has a leaky roof and mold growing everywhere and doesn’t
pay his taxes. The idea is the miser sets his budget and says | am not going to spend more than
$30,000 this year, even though he lives in a house that leaks every time it rains and he sleeps in a room
that has mold and that affects his health. But he wants to continue to be a millionaire so he keeps that
money in his account rather than spending a little bit of it to fix his house and have a better quality of life
and to pay his taxes. | look at this situation as something that’s similar. We have an obligation from the
State of New Hampshire that says we have to pay for these pension costs. There is no way around it.
We have millions of dollars set aside to pay for these pension costs and yet a minority of this board is
holding hostage that money against the will of the majority so that we can take it from a need that is
going to make the quality of life for our citizens in this city better. | really have a problem with that. Like
Alderman Siegel said, at what point do we take that ideology and look at the reality and say this is
something we just have to do? We have the resources, we have the funds. Let us not forget that all that
money that is sitting aside, we have already taxed people on. Our citizens have already paid taxes for
this purpose. Essentially what we are telling them is even though we’ve already taxed you and put your
money aside, we’re going to tax you again for what the state is telling us what we have to pay. | don’t
think that’s right. You folks can hide behind the Spending Cap and say | made a pledge to this, but in
reality what you’re doing is you’re double-taxing people. You can use the Spending Cap as a way of
saying | pledged | wouldn't override the Spending Cap but in this situation you are double taxing people.

Alderman Siegel

One, | don’t believe Nashua is a leaky house. We're not a miser millionaire. In fact the taxpayers of
Nashua deserve us to be very careful with their money so | respect that. | respect my colleagues on the
board that voted both for and against it. | believe they did in good conscience; | appreciate that. | want
to make that very, very clear. This is done. We argued it. We went through and it’s not a minority of the
Board holding the majority. It’s exactly the way the rules work. It takes 2/3; we didn’t have it. We're
done. That’s the way it goes.

Alderman Schoneman