Search

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 6

President Wilshire
Anyone else? Responses to the remarks of the Mayor? Seeing none? Recognition Period?
RECOGNITION PERIOD - None

READING MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

There being no objection, President Wilshire declared the minutes of the Special Board of Aldermen
meetings of February 9, 2021, February 16, 2021, and regular Board of Aldermen meeting of February 9,
2021 be accepted, placed on file, and the readings suspended.

COMMUNICATIONS REQUIRING ONLY PROCEDURAL ACTIONS AND WRITTEN REPORTS
FROM LIAISONS

From: Sarah Marchant, Community Development Director
Re: Housing Trust Fund — R-21-118

There being no objection, President Wilshire accepted the communication and placed it on
file.

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

Is there anyone that would like to address the Board? Mr. Keating, name and address for the record please?
You're on mute Mr. Keating.

Bob Keating The name is Bob Keating from 5 Colburn Woods and | am speaking as a member of Granite State
Organizing Project. First off, just a comment about the process in terms of getting on tonight. | don’t know if
there’s some change, | found it — | got a message back when | was trying to get on Zoom that said there was
no meeting tonight. | tried a couple of times and then right at 7:30 it came on, so | don’t know if that’s a change
or what have you. So just giving that feedback.

Well first off my remarks when | saw the housing trust and then heard it directly from the Mayor in terms of the
proposal, very, very pleased about that. Hopefully you received our Communication about the housing trust it
was part of the email that we sent to the Mayor and to the Board. The idea of the housing trust just very
pleased about that and I'll speak a little about that in a moment.

As you have heard communication from us and residents of Bronstein in regards to the School Street Project is
that we think that there is a real opportunity here given that Bronstein residents are living very close to it and
that the opportunity here given that the City owns the property and tonight you will have a proposal to sell it to
a private developer and that the City has authorized a bond of $2.5 million dollars for the parking garage;
another $100,000.00 for the infrastructure and then linked it to the Performing Arts Center for another $5.5
million dollars.

You can clearly see the City sees that this is an important opportunity and we are looking at, as we have
communicated previously, this is an opportunity to offer some chance for families, | see one of the families that
is on tonight from Bronstein, to if they wish to be able to move to the new development at School Street Flats. |
don’t know actually how many people who will want to do that, | think many of the people who signed on to that
original petition were doing that for their neighbors to give them a chance to do it.

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 7

But how are we linking this project? Well we are linking the project in the way in which the Mayor and the
Aldermen have linked the Performance Arts Center with the School Street Flats. They see that it’s
advantageous in terms of the project. There were residents and abutters who really felt that the loss of parking
spaces was going to be a detriment to them. And in the same way, we think the Bronstein residents should be
honored and they can be honored in a variety of ways and supported in that by their house, if in fact the project
goes through and it is demolished, they will need to move. As a result of their loss, if you will, it will provide the
opportunity for another 165, actually another 200 plus families that will be able to move to Bronstein.

So we think in this way it will send a very powerful message to these families about what they are going to be
going through and it could be done in a very, | think, low cost overall to the City. Specifically what | mean by
that is if you look at compensating the families at Bronstein and looking at ways that my proposal today about
the housing trust, you can come up with a way that the housing trust could have been financed for about
$1,000.00 per unit.

President Wilshire

Mr. Keating, you need to start wrapping up. Thank you.

Mr. Keating Ok well in essence, in saying that for less than 3% of how much the Board is paying for the
authorizations for the two bonds that you can seed even further, which is a great thing that the Mayor is
proposing and at the same time to offer money to the residents of Bronstein if their project is developed. But
again, | am glad to hear the housing trust thing. The last one is | am able to speak at the end when it comes up
about the housing trust. So I'll save my remarks for that. Thank you.

President Wilshire

Not during the conversation, we have another Public Comment period after we take action.

Mr. Keating Right. OK.

President Wilshire

Thank you. Anyone else? Could you give your name and address for the record please. You are on mute, sir?
Mr. Keating It’s Prospero (? Spelling). Can anyone text him and just tell him to unmute?

Unidentified Speaker (inaudible) the people (inaudible).

President Wilshire

Ok we need your name and address for the record sir. I’m not sure that we got that. You have three minutes if
you want to address the Board, sir.

Background noise

President Wilshire

It’s your turn you can go.

Background noise continues — unidentified person speaking
President Wilshire

Did you want to address the Board.

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 8

Unidentified Speaker
What’s that?

President Wilshire

Do you want to address the Board.

Unidentified Speaker

Yeah | need to answer.

President Wilshire

| don’t have a question.

Unidentified Speaker

The question is which (inaudible) which months they move the people live in housing?
President Wilshire

This is not a question and answer and | don’t really understand your question.

Background interference continues

Unidentified Speaker

The question you need to move the people lived in the housing and move another house which months you
need to remove it?

President Wilshire

| don’t have that information, sir.

Unidentified Speaker

OK thanks.

President Wilshire

Anyone else wish to address the Board? Ok | am not seeing anyone.

Background interference continues

COMMUNICATIONS REQUIRING FINAL APPROVAL

From: Mayor Jim Donchess
Re: Multi-Year Contract Award — Internet Security Training

MOTION BY ALDERMAN LAWS TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE, AND APPROVE THE 3- YEAR RENEWAL
OF KNOWBE4 SECURITY AWARENESS TRAINING SUBSCRIPTION TO KNOWBE4 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$19,388.16. FUNDING WILL BE THROUGH DEPARTMENT 122 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY;
ACCOUNT 54407 SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE, BY ROLL CALL.

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 9

A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows:
Yea: Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Klee, Alderman Dowd,
Alderman Caron, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Lopez, Alderman Tencza,
Alderwoman Lu, Alderman Jette, Alderman Schmidt, Alderman Laws,
Alderman Cleaver, Alderwoman Harriott-Gathright, Alderman Wilshire 14
Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED

From: Mayor Jim Donchess
Re: FY22 Contract Award Funding — Infor Smart Office Software Maintenance

MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN LU TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE, AND APPROVE THE ANNUAL
SOFTWARE ASSURANCE RENEWAL TO INFOR SMART OFFICE IN THE AMOUNT OF $274,847.69.
FUNDING WILL BE THROUGH DEPARTMENT 122 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; ACCOUNT 54407
SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE, BY ROLL CALL.
A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows:
Yea: Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Klee, Alderman Dowd,
Alderman Caron, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Lopez, Alderman Tencza,
Alderwoman Lu, Alderman Jette, Alderman Schmidt, Alderman Laws,
Alderman Cleaver, Alderwoman Harriott-Gathright, Alderman Wilshire 14
Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED
PETITIONS - None
NOMINATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS - None

REPORTS OF COMMITTEE

Human Affairs Committee. ............ cece cece cece eceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeneenaeeeenteenars 02/08/2021

There being no objection, President Wilshire declared the report of the February 8, 2021 Human Affairs
Committee accepted and placed on file.

Budget Review Committee............. ier nre ied 02/10/2021

There being no objection, President Wilshire declared the report of the February 10, 2021 Budget Review
Committee accepted and placed on file.

Substandard Living Conditions Special Committee...............:e cece eee ees 02/11/2021

There being no objection, President Wilshire declared the report of the February 11, 2021 Substandard Living
Conditions Special Committee accepted and placed on file.

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 10

Finance Committee.......... ccc. cece ceececeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenneetnneeesaeetnneetennnernnees 02/17/2021

There being no objection, President Wilshire declared the report of the February 17, 2021 Finance Committee
accepted and placed or file.

CONFIRMATION OF BOARD OF ALDERMEN'S APPOINTMENTS - None

UNFINISHED BUSINESS — RESOLUTIONS

R-20-028, Amended
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman-at-large David C. Tencza
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
Alderman Patricia Klee
AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF NASHUA TO ENTER INTO A MASTER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
WITH LANSING MELBOURNE GROUP, LLC.
Given its second reading;

Alderman Dowd

Before | make the motion, I’d like to question Attorney Bolton. It says “replace with a Goldenrod copy”. It is my
understanding from Director Cummings that the contract was modified and amended and it doesn’t require a
Goldenrod copy? Is that your understanding.

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

Well a Goldenrod Copy is never required, but if this Board wants to make an amendment, you are going to
have to describe it sufficiently so that the minutes reflect what the amendment is.

Alderman Dowd
| can address the amendment.

MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD TO AMEND R-20-028 BY REPLACING IT WITH THE GOLDENROD
COPY OF AMENDMENTS MADE AT THE BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE, BY ROLL CALL

ON THE QUESTION

President Wilshire

You've heard the motion, the motion is to amend. Discussion on that motion?
Alderman Dowd

And I'd like to talk to it.

President Wilshire

Alderman Dowd?

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 11

Alderman Dowd

So | am going to be paraphrasing from the minutes of the Budget Committee Meeting. It says, so the
fundamentals of the deal have not changed except where we have changed it from being a fee interest to a
lease but otherwise still pretty much the same. It’s a 99 year lease at $900,000.00 lease rate, 144 apartments
so slightly down from the original figure they were looking at. The City would still transfer $100,000.00 to offset
some infrastructure costs, street scaping particularly on School Street where we would be looking to add some
parking space, 20 to 30 parking spaces in and around the street.

The parking itself will utilize the High Street Garage up to 150 parking spaces would be set aside and available
for rent. The first ten years would be $50.00 per space. This would be about a $90,000.00 a year if all spaces
were utilized. The original develooment agreement contemplated closing or execution sometime in May. We
pushed it out to the end of June, June 30" because of the lag getting this agreement in order. It does allow for
the TIF to create the public parking on the first floor as contemplated for $2.5 million. It caps it so the City’s
obligation would stay at just the $2.5 million and the developer would draw down upon any money through
certain intervals as construction proceeds. Going on it says, otherwise the agreement stays pretty much the
same. So that, in essence, is the changes from the original agreement that it was some wording changes to
the original agreement but basically the agreement is the same as it was when it was acted on before.

President Wilshire
The motion is to amend. Further discussion on that motion? Alderman Jette?
Alderman Jette

Thank you Madam Chairman. Part of this amendment is the provision that we are going to pay the builder
$2.5 million dollars in exchange for his providing a parking garage at the ground level of the building. And |
brought this up at the Budget Review Committee Meeting. The agreement that was presented to us does not
specify what the parking is going to be. It doesn’t say how many spaces are going to be in the parking garage.
It really doesn’t describe the parking garage, it does make reference to plans but they are not attached and
during the Budget Review Committee Meeting the Developer said that the plans were being worked on but
they weren't ready yet; but he thought that they would be ready soon.

| have trouble agreeing to vote for something where the specifics are not included. We are agreeing to pay
$2.5 million dollars that’s clear. But it is not clear what we are getting for the $2.5 million dollars as far as this
parking facility is concerned. The agreement makes reference to other attachments which also are not
included. This new concept is that we are not going to be selling this property we are going to be leasing it;
essentially we are going to be leasing the air rights. So the City continues to own the land but we are leasing
the right to build above that land to the Developer. But that air rights lease is not included. So | think there are
some loose ends here and for that reason | don’t want to cut off any discussion, but at some point, | will
reserve this until everyone has had a chance to speak but | guess at some point | would like to move that it be
referred back to the Committee so that these details can be worked out and provided so that when we adopt
this we know exactly what we are getting into.

| am not trying to stop this project, we voted to go ahead with this concept but | just cannot vote for a purchase
and sale agreement or a lease agreement without having the basic elements included. It just doesn’t seem
that we would be fulfilling our obligation to the taxpayers to go into this without knowing what all the details are.
So thank you.

President Wilshire

Alderwoman Lu?

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 12

Alderwoman Lu

Thank you Madam Chairman. Just had a couple of questions, this Legislation kind of came up a little quickly;
it's been on the table since April. | missed a Budget meeting and realized this week that it was going to be
heard again. So | tried to reach out to as many people as | need to speak with and | apologize because |
spoke Mr. Cummings today and | didn’t think of a couple of things. | wonder will the payment in lieu be
available for the School Street Parking Lot Bond Service. First question. | imagine | would ask Attorney
Bolton, Corporation Counsel, I’m unclear.

President Wilshire

Attorney Bolton did you want to respond to that?

Attorney Bolton

I’m not certain what you are speaking of talking about a “payment in lieu”. Is there something in the proposed
amendment that discusses a pilot agreement or payment in lieu of taxes?

Alderwoman Lu

You know what, excuse me, | think | misspoke, it’s in lieu, it's a payment of $150,000.00 and then $300,000.00,
$300,000.00, $300,000.00, $300,000.00, $300,000.00, in lieu of having a right to park they are paying us
because they can’t park underneath? That’s the way it reads in the agreement.

Attorney Bolton

lf they are paying money into the City, it is available to the City, assuming it is appropriated appropriately by
the Board of Aldermen it is available to the City to pay the City’s obligations. Earlier today, Alderman Jette
called me with his concerns about the lack of a more detailed description of the parking garage. And in an
effort to better familiarize myself, | read the agreement that was originally proposed and was attached originally
to the Resolution. As described in that agreement, as said earlier, the contemplation was a purchase. In any
event, prior to the closing of that purchase, the development plan which would have included the plans for the
parking garage had to be approved by the City. And if those provisions have survived the proposed
amendment then | think the concerns may be premature because if the City and when this agreement talks
about the “City” it is talking about the City acting through the Board of Aldermen and the Mayor. And, again,
unless that’s been amended out, that’s contained in Section 1.1 of the document.

So prior to any closing the development plan has to be approved by the Board of Aldermen and the Mayor. So
to the extent you want to be sure what you are getting, that should satisfy that concern. There was another
question Alderman Lu that | received in an email from you early this evening concerning payment of taxes on
the property. The general rule is the City does not pay taxes to itself. So City-owned property does not
generally have taxes paid. The exception to that is if City property is leased and used by a third party which is
subject to taxation, in other words, some entity that is not entitled to a charitable, religious or educational
exemption that user the lessee of publicly owned property is obligated to pay taxes. Now there are exceptions
to that and there are possibilities of payments in lieu of taxes. | don’t know if any of that is dealt with in the
proposed amendment.

President Wilshire
You’re all set Alderman Lu?
Alderwoman Lu

No | had a couple of other questions.

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 13

President Wilshire
OK.
Alderwoman Wilshire

Thank you. So | will skip to — well regarding my question, the terms of the agreement are that this in lieu
payment, there will be six of them in years, | don’t know 4, 3 through 7, whatever, 3 through 9, the terms are
that they will be set aside for use to guarantee parking. So that’s why | wanted an understanding, does that
mean these are not available unless we are going to repair a parking garage or build a new parking garage?
Or does that mean we can use that to service the bond that we have committed to this project? And that
wording is on Page, perhaps Director Cummings is more familiar with it, | mean I'd be happy to have him
address this if you'd like. | think it is page 11.

Drew Melville, Counsel for the Developer Can you hear me? Hello? My name is Drew Melville | am counsel for
the developer. If anyone can’t hear me just let me know but | am talking into my mic at the home studio. | just
want to point out that is on Page 11 and it is in the new version of the MBA that we were circulating. The
payment in lieu parking requirements that you are addressing is Section 4.7.

Alderwoman Lu

Thank you, | found it.

Attorney Melville And also just to address the earlier comments from Alderman Jette, we had circulated the air
right’s lease a while back. We also this week, Peter the Developer, my client for L&G, he had gotten plans
showing the 49 space parking garage and we had circulated those to Tim Cummings. So | don’t know, they’d
probably be on there now but | am happy to circulate anything to anyone who needs as well. And I'll write my
email address in that chat, so you know who to reach out because | have all these documents and updated
stuff.

Alderwoman Lu

May | continue?

President Wilshire

You may. | thought perhaps Mr. Melville was going to answer my question whether, you Know what the
restrictions were on that, whether it would be available for bond service.

Attorney Bolton
| can answer.
Alderwoman Lu
Alright.

Attorney Bolton

If it’s required to be held in escrow for another purpose it will not be available for that purpose.

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 14

Alderwoman Lu

Thank you. | just wasn’t sure if that would qualify as parking. My understanding of the RSA that applies to the
real estate taxes is that lease has to specifically name the lessee as the party responsible for the real estate
taxes. Unfortunately | wasn’t able to view the lease and | felt due diligence to ask is that going to be included
in the lease because my understanding that if it’s not it becomes murky.

Attorney Melville Yes | believe the tenant has to pay the taxes and I'll take a look too Alderman Lu, I'll take a
note of that to answer your question.

Alderwoman Lu

Unfortunately | have to vote on this tonight. | am not sure where Director Cummings decided to send that
lease but | certainly haven’t seen it and | have asked, | think, half the Board if they had seen it. OK | just have
a couple of other points. So | understood that we had an amended piece of Legislation but what | didn’t realize
is that the redlining would not show on the Resolution face page. | didn’t see until tonight because at the
Budget Committee meeting it wasn’t discussed, | wasn’t there, but | did read the minutes that there’s a new
further resolve that we are escrowing $40,000.00 from one fund and $60,000.00 from another. And just for a
point | think that if we have a redlined contract that the golden rod copy if there are changes, maybe there
ought to be some way for us to identify them as well. Because | was looking for red ink. And my last comment
is that, my understanding, | mean it seems as though, now Mr. Melville said 49 spaces and someone else said
30 spaces and it didn’t seem clear at the last Budget Meeting how many spaces would be in that parking lot. Is
there anyone that can give me an answer to that? If not | will just finish my point.

President Wilshire
Mr. Melville, you’re on mute.

Attorney Melville | apologize. I'll just answer that | am looking at the plans that | had from Peter from earlier
that said 49 spaces. | am looking at the actual plans.

Alderwoman Lu

| figured with 30 spaces it’s about $83,000.00 per space. It’s way out of what the going rate for parking
spaces. So that is a concern of mine that — my understanding is that like $20,000.00 to $25,000.00 per space
is a round ballpark figure but we are paying a lot more, maybe twice as much. Thank you. | also think it would
be prudent to defer this until we get answers to the information that we are asking. I’m all set, thank you.

President Wilshire
Alderman Dowd?
Alderman Dowd

Yes just a couple of things. This is entering into a Master Development Agreement, it does not finalize any
construction plans whatsoever. It allows the City to make a commitment to the developer that we are allowing
him to build this apartment building with the parking spaces underneath and it gives him some level of comfort
in going out and spending a lot of money doing the drawings for the plan. | am sure that the final plans will
come back, if through no other body to the Planning Board, and | am not sure about the parking space cost. If
you are talking about an outdoor parking space, that’s X but if you are making a parking space that has walls
on three sides of it and is an underground garage, | am sure the costs are much more especially with the other
things that you have to put into the garage that you wouldn’t have for an outdoor lot.

Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 15

Also, when we enter into a construction agreement on Schools, we enter into an agreement to select an
architect and a construction manager. When this agreement is put in place it allows the developer to finalize
things with the architect and the construction company that is going to build a building. Anything to do with
how the building is built including the parking garage will have to go through all of the City planning that normal
projects go through and all the constraints including inspections and everything else. So they will develop the
amount of parking spaces they can; right now they have plans for 49. If the Planning Board says, we don't like
this design then it’s going to be like 44 that’s beyond our control.

This agreement is allowing a good faith agreement with the developer to spend additional monies to move forth
with this project. The City will have many other checks and balances in the final design. The things that are
being questioned right now, | don’t feel are things that impact the Master Development Plan. Some of the
amendments will be added to. You know, when we build a school, we enter into an agreement with an
architect and a construction manager but we have initial drawings, we have design drawings, we have
construction drawings; there are three sets of drawings and they are very expensive. On School they are
probably about 6 to 8 inches thick and they are very, very expensive. | think this is just the City entering into a
good faith agreement, correct me if I’m wrong Attorney Bolton, with the developer to give them the
understanding that the City is willing to work with them to develop this project. Thank you.

Attorney Bolton

| think it’s correct to say that it locks up this space and the developer can be assured that if he goes and
spends money to get necessary approvals, building permits, Planning Board site plan approval, etc., we are
not going to pull it away from him and make a different deal with a another developer after the major
investment has been made. So | think it gives this developer that degree of assurance.

President Wilshire

Alderman Lopez?

Alderman Lopez

Thank you. First | just want to address some use of terminology for the public more than anything else. When
Alderman Lu is referring to “redlining” she’s referring to the red colored font when we edit documents and we
are looking at them digitally it's a Word document so you know when you make a change it is colored red. So
redlining has a particularly unfortunate connotation for poorer neighborhoods, not allowing them to get loans.
So | just wanted to clarify for anybody listening that there’s no redlining involved in this. She was referring to
corrections and changes and it is just as much jargon as using “golden rod” when it’s all digital and it is not
even exactly golden. So | just wanted to get that out of the way.

| do understand what Alderman Dowd is saying in terms of this being a Master Developer Agreement and not
needing all the details necessarily to enter into that agreement. And | do want to clarify that | think the
Developer has done his due diligence and has certainly provided things that we need like the lease and the
parking lot. But | think it’s important for us to consider those aspects of it because | am very mindful of other
large scale development projects which we have started on, we’ve committed on and then we found ourselves
pretty ensnared as the developer ended up changing things. | am thinking of the Riverfront Landing Projects
where things changed one step after another after the City had already agreed to it.

So while | don’t fault the developer at all, | think they've done what they are supposed to do, if we are not even
communicating plans and leases to ourselves | am a little concerned. | know that Attorney Bolton did some
review and only had limited time to do that review, but | would feel more comfortable with him being able to
confidently say 100% everything we need is in the lease, this is where it is, | Know where it is. | think it is
putting him on the spot to ask him to do that if we haven't really had a chance to all review it ourselves. So |
am more inclined | think at this point to support Alderman Jette’s request that we return it to the Committee,
unless there’s a reason, unless there’s a time commitment or there’s a countdown or something.