Search

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 34

understanding that this is not something that is needed to be voted today and | know two of my colleagues
have just gathered the information and they feel that they would be better prepared with time to reflect and
maybe do some further whatever they need to do. And out of respect for them, | feel why do we feel that
we have to rush a vote when some of our colleagues want to go by the originally proposed schedule for a
vote at our regularly scheduled meeting? Thank you.

President Wilshire

Anyone else? Alderman Jette?

Alderman Jette

Could | ask through you, could | ask the Mayor whether the original plan to vote on this at our next regularly
scheduled meeting would give him enough time to implement this or does he feel that we have to vote on
this tonight?

President Wilshire

Mayor Donchess? Mayor Donchess you are muted we can’t hear you.

Mayor Donchess

Oh sorry, sorry, sorry.

President Wilshire

OK you’re good.

Mayor Donchess

Can you hear me now?

President Wilshire

Yes.

Mayor Donchess

| would defer to some extent to Ms. Kleiner and Mr. Budreau on timing. We do have an open enrollment
period coming up quickly and as somebody has already pointed out, we need to be creative about how we
engage employees who are now working remotely in terms of trying to get them involved or get them
informed so that if they wish to make a change they can do it. And they realize that the time is up and they
can have their questions answered. | mean | would say the sooner the better but beyond that | will refer to
Ms. Kleiner and Mr. Budreau.

Kim Kleiner, Admin. Services Director

Thank you, President Wilshire. It is going to be a challenge now with the fact that we have to reach out to
all of our employees who are working, most of whom are working remotely. Having said that, we wanted to
allow WBS some time to incorporate some of these new changes into our Annual Enrollment Documents.
To be honest it would be better if we could have a decision this evening but we would make next Tuesday
work as well. It’s just all about having that extra time for employee education.

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 35

President Wilshire
Thank you Director Kleiner and | know education is really an important piece of this Ordinance so | would
agree that the sooner we can get this done, the more time we have to educate employees and get the
Open Enrollment going. So thank you. Anyone else?
Alderman Caron
Me. Hello?
President Wilshire
Who is me?
Alderman Caron
Alderman Caron. Hi.
President Wilshire
Alderman Caron.
Alderman Caron
OK so we are talking about taking a vote today for an enrollment that is supposed to take place the
beginning of April for about a month or so. We don’t meet at the Board again for 2 more weeks. It is not
next Tuesday because that’s only the first Tuesday of the month and we usually meet the second. So this
is really going to make it difficult for HR to notify employees of these changes. So | think it is important that
we move forward with the vote. | have been looking at this all day and | have listened to the questions and
the answers and | think that it is important for the Board of Aldermen to do this vote tonight so that staff has
the time to get this ready for all its employees.
The other thing is that changes in benefits or deductibles happen all the time. That doesn’t preclude the
employees from staying in their HMO or moving to the high deductible insurance plan. I’ve seen it over the
years being an employee of the City. So | think it is important at this time that we look at what is good for
our employees and | will be voting “yes” on this particular piece of legislation. Thank you.
President Wilshire
Thank you, Alderman Caron. Anyone else? Seeing none, would the Clerk please call the roll?
Yea: Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Klee, Alderwoman Kelly, Alderman Dowd,

Alderman Caron, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Lopez, Alderman Tencza,

Alderwoman Lu, Alderman Jette, Alderman Schmidt, Alderman Laws,

Alderman Cleaver, Alderman Harriott-Gathright, Alderman Wilshire 15
Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED
President Wilshire

And that motion carries. Ordinance 20-011 is duly adopted. | think that’s all the business we have before
us this evening. Alderman Dowd?

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 36

Alderman Dowd

Yes | just want to address that given the guidance that we are getting from the Governor of the State of
New Hampshire of not wanting to have more than 10 people gathered at any one spot, | think that we
probably should be considering not allowing public comments at our meetings until after the epidemic is
over. It has nothing to do with R-20-009. We have access that people can watch it on TV, a lot of the other
State meetings and City meetings are being done that way. And it is not that we are precluding them from
coming to the meeting, but in lieu of having a larger group than we should have by State guidance during
the epidemic, we should probably eliminate public comment to minimize the public that might want to come.

President Wilshire

Well | think that’s worthy of a discussion. | guess | feel kind of mixed about it. | think you know; | understand
that there haven’t been people here for public comment at the last couple of meetings, but | am concerned
for the public coming in and maybe gathering and maybe not following the social distancing
recommendations. The public does have the opportunity to watch this on TV; they have an opportunity to
e-mail us or to send us in writing something. So I'd like to throw it out there and see how other people on
the Board feel about it? Alderman O’Brien?

Alderman O’Brien

Thank you. | would generally support Alderman Dowd’s proposal and the reason is, is like you said Madam
President, there are many ways | think that people can get ahold of us. So e-mail, phone numbers, our
contact number has been published. So people can feel free that they can get ahold of us. | know if I’m not
around, you hit my answering machine, | do try to get back to you and everything else. So coming to the
meetings in this type of environment that we are currently going around right now, does cause a hazard
and even we are trying to take the precaution. People can see it on TV, we are more than 6 feet away from
each other, many did not show up here in person. They are exercising their virtual rights in doing so. And
also, | take solace in the notion that | don’t think there is a State Law that requires the public to speak at an
Aldermanic Meeting. | can refer it to maybe Corporate Counsel to put us into that mud pile, but | may stand
corrected. But | have watched the Aldermanic Meetings over the years and this seems to have been
something that was invented by previous Boards that was brought in and not necessarily required by City
Statute or order.

President Wilshire
Is that a question to the Corporation Counsel? Attorney Bolton.

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

Yes in a few instances State Law requires Public Hearings. So if we were to authorize a bond issue,
zoning ordinance, the budget resolution every year, you have to have a public hearing and the essence of
that is the public gets a chance to come in and speak and provide an opinion. But other than those
instances where it is particularly required by statute, there is no requirement for public participation or
public comment at an ordinary meeting of this Board or most City Boards.

Alderman O’Brien

Follow up? | just want to clarify to anybody in the public that thinks that | am trying to stifle your voice, that
is not the case. What | am talking about is the pandemic that is going through right now and everybody’s
safety, you know, it is extreme measures | understand that. | am kind of uncomfortable with limiting the
input from the public as | am a public service and have been for a long time. But we’ve got to take some
precautions at this time, liming how, you know, close some parks, that our children traditionally go to and
enjoy. This may just have to be one for everybody, regrettably | agree.

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 37

Alderman Klee

Thank you and | agree to doing this all virtual would be the best thing, but I’d like to hear from Attorney
Bolton as far as do we set ourselves up for any kind of litigation that says that anything that we do here can
be undone? Do you know what | am saying? If we don’t do certain types of things like allow the people
there, they say “the Right to Know”. | just want to make sure that nothing that we do during this timeframe
can be undone because they said we didn’t follow the rules? | mean I’ve seen, | thought | saw something
that stated how our meetings had to go, like public comment at the beginning. As long as we are not
violating anything.

Attorney Bolton

You have your own rules and procedures which as they are now, provides for public comment at the
beginning of the meeting and issues expected to be dealt with at the meeting and at the end of the meeting
on general issues. But that is your rule, that is not imposed on you. You can change that at any time you
wish to change and you can ignore them when you wish to ignore them frankly. Were you proceeding in
violation of your own rules, that’s the equivalent of a unanimous vote to dispense for that purpose? As |
said, there are certain things in your power that would require to hear from the public first at a public
hearing, so you have to follow the State Laws. You have to follow the State Laws about open meetings
and public’s right to observe what you do. Under current circumstances the Governor has made some
orders to be waived, sometimes waived with conditions, some of those open meeting requirements. But as
long as we adhere to those conditions, where they’ve been made, but the statutes that have not been
made, you should be alright as far as the proceedings overruled or undone or what have you. So when in
doubt follow the law, when in doubt on the law.

Alderman Klee

Thank you. You and | have had discussion about meetings that if we did this that the public has to have
the right to say, “I can’t see this meeting and therefore the meeting has to be ended”. Is that follow through
with this?

Attorney Bolton

Now one of those orders that | was referring to about the Governor was that the portion of RSA 91-A that
requires that meetings be physically open to the public, that is they take place at a location, that location is
identified in the Notice of the Meeting and the public cannot be physically excluded from coming to that
place and observing the meeting; seeing and hearing the meeting. The Governor waived that requirement,
you can close the meeting to the physical presence of the public if you make the audio available by
telephone simultaneous through the actual time of the meeting and you provide a separate means of
communication, another telephone number that would be monitored during the meeting and that other
telephone number would provide a way for a member of the public to call in and let it be known that that
audio was not in fact being made available, that that person was not able to hear it when he called into the
number to hear the telephone broadcast of the meeting. That requires telephone, television doesn’t count,
computer video doesn’t count. You can do that too, but if you are going to exclude physical presence of the
public, you have to have a telephone audio simultaneous presentation available with a separate means of
communication by the public if that audio presentation fails. (inaudible) presentation by telephone fails, you
have to discontinue the meeting. (inaudible) Tonight happens to be no one here, but we did not exclude
anyone from coming.

Alderwoman Lu

Could | please just ...

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 38

President Wilshire

In a moment, I'll call on you. I’ve just recognized Alderman Klee.

Alderwoman Lu

| know | am just asking that the City microphones be turned off.

Alderman Klee

They are getting echo. Ok so just to follow up on it, if we do what we say what we are going to do and

everybody is in a remote area, all of us, all 15 of us are in a remote area, do we still have to leave this room
open for the public?

Attorney Bolton

If we are not going to take advantage of this telephonic procedure with the phone in potential, all 15
Aldermen would be elsewhere and you could notice that the meeting would be available here or whatever
room you chose and you set up the video computer monitor and everyone from the public who came in can
see and hear everyone of the 15 Aldermen participating in the meeting, that’s fine. You’ve got a physical
location and you’ve got the public being able to observe it, hear it at that location, that’s fine.

President Wilshire
If City Hall is closed to the public that would still stand?

Attorney Bolton

You have to have the room open to the public, so if you lock the outside doors that would be in violation of
the rules.

President Wilshire
Oh boy, anyone else want to weigh in on this? Alderwoman Kelly?

Alderman Harriott-Gathright

Linda?

Alderwoman Kelly

Yep so | have some questions and then comments. So my question is from a technology standpoint if we
were to do the telephonic dial in, is that a fairly easy thing for us to implement. | don’t know who answers
it?

President Wilshire

Yeah, | don’t either. We do have Director Codagnone here from the IT Department. Would you care to
weigh in?

Bruce Codagnone, IT Director

Yes you could actually just set up a separate conference bridge, like a conference call type of thing where

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 39

people could call in on the conference bridge and somebody, such as the Clerk, could monitor the
conference bridge.

Alderwoman Kelly

Perfect. If | could, so my comments are as follows, | think | am kind of with you Alderman Wilshire where |
feel somewhat uncomfortable with limiting public comment because | do want to make sure that we are
listening and taking public comment as we are bringing up our business. However, | do understand that it
is s crisis right now and physically being somewhere is something that we have been recommended
against fairly heavily by Government Officials all the way to the CDC. So | would generally be for this, |
would like to put it out there that if we do this that if anyone offers public comment | am happy to do it but
we should read it in and be a little more diligent if we get an e-mail or something from someone so it still
gets read into the record.

President Wilshire

And | don’t have a problem with that except if it is a 20 page, | mean we still have our limit, our 15-minute
time limit. So | guess | wouldn’t be opposed to that.

Alderwoman Kelly

Yeah and | would say clarification, obviously we would ask any public comment that comes through by e-
mail or even for calling us we would want it to be succinct as much as we push it to be when you are there
in person.

President Wilshire

Very good, anyone care to weigh in? Linda?

Alderman Harriott-Gathright

I’ve been waiting.
President Wilshire
| can’t see you Linda.

Alderman Harriott-Gathright

| can see you guys, | can see my picture there so you can’t see me now, literally?
President Wilshire
No.

Alderman Harriott-Gathright

Wow, | can see down in the bottom where | see you guys and | see me too. It’s weird. Ok but anyway |
agree, | think we can’t stop people from being able to be a part of the Hearings that we have. So for me, if
we can’t set up the phone bank or another line for them to call in when someone is monitoring it, then we
should be able to continue to have it open and available for them to come into City Hall for those meetings.
| don’t think people will come, because | don’t think anyone has come thus far, but | think legally, and |
agree that we have to have that for them. Thank you.

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 40

Alderman Clemons

Thank you. | think | am in support of simply accepting written communications to us in lieu of public
comment because the situation is that it is what it is. We should limit it to that, | don’t know about reading it
into the record, but | have no problem putting it on file and having it be part of the record for that evening.
What | would you know recommend is that you know we have, anytime we get any communication that is to
the entire Board that we just automatically put that on the agenda until this crisis is over.

President Wilshire

Thank you, Alderman Clemons, anyone else care to weigh in on that. Alderman Klee?

Alderwoman Lu

| have a comment.

President Wilshire

OK I'll get to you in a second.

Alderman Klee

Thank you very much. | guess my question will be, | think we are getting an echo, | think my question is to

Director Codagnone: Also, the bridge that you speak of that we could do, they would just listen or would
they be able to be part of the conversation?

Mr. Codagnone

You could have it so you could mute them and when you want them to speak be able to unmute them.
Alderwoman Lu

Yes thank you.

President Wilshire

You are welcome.

Alderwoman Lu

It is where there are people who can’t, there are, there is probably no one in this category but there is a
category of people who can’t call, might not be able to call in or write in, but will come in. So | wonder if we
could have someone there physically. | am just for liability sake, then the meeting is open. If things get
different and we are voting on something that is very, there are a lot of opinions about it, then | would think
we could ask people who want to offer in person input, to contact their Alderperson and so we can find out
how many people are coming in. If there are five people, we can distribute five people out there safely is
my thought.

My other thought is if we are going to proceed this way then we should be careful to not vote on first
readings because who in the public knows that something needs to be talked about if we are going to be
voting on it the first time it comes up? That's all.

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 41

President Wilshire

Thank you, anyone else care to weigh in on it.

Alderman Dowd

Yeah, | don’t think we do pass single legislation very often on the first reading, it has to be something that is
extremely urgent. | don’t like the idea of trying to figure out how many people would show up because
there are no criteria for limiting that. You already as | can see of the chamber right now it is looking like 6
or 7 people in the chamber right now and if you had 3 more or 4 more you violate the Governor’s rule on
meeting in 10, not matter how far apart you are. So at this point, I'd like to make a motion that we suspend
all public comment during the duration of the pandemic and that we ask the IT Department to set up the
proper communications to meet the criteria outlined by Attorney Bolton and hopefully we will pass that.
MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD TO SUSPEND PUBLIC COMMENT DURING THE COVID-19 CRISIS
AND HAVE THE IT DEPARTMENT SET UP TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATIONS AS OUTLINED BY
ATTORNEY BOLTON

ON THE QUESTION

President Wilshire

So that’s your motion. Discussion on that motion.

Alderman Clemons

Through you to the maker of the motion, would the maker of the motion consider an amendment to his
motion to add that the Board of Aldermen will accept written communication in lieu of in person public
comment?

Alderman Dowd

Absolutely. Totally agree.

MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD TO AMEND HIS MOTION TO INCLUDE WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
IN LIEU OF IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT

ON THE QUESTION

President Wilshire

Thank you.

Alderman Clemons

Thank you.

President Wilshire

Further discussion? Alderman Gathright?

Alderman Harriott-Gathright

| like his motion but | still feel as though people have the right to come to be heard. And | realize that the

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 42

room is not that large and as he stated I’m not there, so I’m not counting, but | am going to by what
Alderman Dowd said that four people would be OK, anything other than that | guess in that room would not
be OK. Just like the market, | go to the market | go to different places that I’ve had to go to, even the Liquor
Store and they have Police and other people that don’t allow more than a certain amount of people into
those locations. So if we want to have a limit of four, then people know if there are four people there, no
one else can get in. But! don’t feel as though we have the right to say, “you can’t come and you can’t be a
part of this in person”, because that’s their right.

President Wilshire
Alderman Gathright, you can’t limit people, you either have to have it all or none.

Alderman Harriott-Gathright

You absolutely can, because the Governor has stated how many people can be in different locations. So
you absolutely can because he did 17 and 17A. So there is, this is you know, we are basically a necessity
because you are part of the Government basically. So you absolutely can restrict how many people can be
in your presence.

President Wilshire

OK. Anyone else? Attorney Bolton.

Attorney Bolton

There’s a procedure by which the Open Meeting requirements of allowing everyone to come in who wishes
to come in and be waived and avoided. There is only one way to do that that’s why this telephone in with
an alternative means of communicating any difficulty with hearing. That is the only exception to the Open
Meeting Requirement. It would absolutely be an illegal meeting to let the first four people in and exclude
the rest. Anyone who participated in such a meeting would be subject to Civil Penalty, would be subject to
being ordered to take remedial education on the Right to Know law. There is no doubt at all in my mind
that we can either have fully open meeting or we can comply with the Governor's directive that waives that
open meeting requirement. But you cannot have half and half and allow some people in and some people
not.

Alderwoman Kelly

If | could ask a question through you to Attorney Bolton? So my question is and | know we are talking right
now about our Board and the provisions around that, but my question is how do we handle public comment
like you were saying, we have to have those hearings, are we in violation of the orders of the Governor if
we have our Budget Hearing and there’s 100 people in the room. | don’t know that we’ve been given any
guidance on that but | am just thinking ahead.

Attorney Bolton
We've been given no guidance on that. Right now we have to have a public hearing and we are not

supposed to have gatherings of more than 10 people. | have some hope that the Governor will weigh in
further on these issues.

Alderwoman Kelly

| appreciate that thank you.

Board of Aldermen 3-31-2020 Page 43

Alderman Klee

| just want to clarify Ordinance Number 16 that was the one that limited to 10, | am trying to read this ona
very tiny screen so | apologize, it says, “Scheduled gatherings of 10 people or more for social, spiritual,
recreational activities including but not limited to community, civic, public leisure, faith-based or sporting
events, parades, concerts, festivals ... the prohibition does not apply to the General Court, day to day
operations of or for profit or non profit organizations in Government, or gatherings for urgent medical
purposes, such as blood drives, meetings of medical personnel to discuss efforts to combat the COVID-19
pandemic. It doesn’t speak of municipal government in that such but would do you feel that because it
doesn’t say it in the either, limited to or the prohibited from, that we would fall within that more than 10?

Attorney Bolton

As near as practical, | think we should avoid gatherings of more than 10. | think from a legal point of view
you are safer and you know you are on the right side of the law if you were not promoting gatherings of
more than 10 people. Is there an argument that maybe we can stretch to have a Public Hearing and have
more than 10 people? Yeah there is a legal argument for that. Should we do it? | would say “no we
should not do it”. Modeling the most appropriate behavior that we want our citizens and residents to
observe so hopefully there will be some ability to conduct a Public Hearing telephonically or by means of
written communication or something else before we face those issues.

Alderman Klee

That’s what | wanted to hear, thank you.

Alderman Schmidt

Madam President, | just want to bring up Emergency Order Number 17 “requires the closure of non-
essential business and requires Granite Staters to stay at home. This isn’t the business of people to come
and speak to us if they can talk to us in an e-mail or snail mail or a phone call. | would say that because of
this order, that people should stay home and stay safe. Thank you.

President Wilshire

Thank you, Alderman Schmidt. Anyone else care to weigh in.

Alderman Clemons

Yes through you to Corporation Counsel and forgive me if | have this incorrect, but | do believe that the

President has given us an order to limit public gatherings to 10 people as well. Does Federal Law
supersede the States?

Attorney Bolton

I’m not familiar with an order of the President that would apply to us. If one exists, | would like to read it
thoroughly before | opine on that. | know there are extraordinary powers granted to the President in times
of great National distress, but generally speaking the Federal Government can’t interfere in the day to day
operations of localities. Normally, on issues that have a Federal Component, a Federal Law would
supersede State Law to the contrary, beyond that | can’t really say. | do not know of a specific no
gatherings over 10 people that has been erected by the President to local municipalities.

Alderman Clemons

Ok thank you.