Search

(Sa\ THE CITY OF NASHUA “The Cate City”

Financial Services

Purchasing Department

May 12, 2016
Memo #16-140

TO: MAYOR DONCHESS
FINANCE COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: TO APPROVE CONTRACTS FOR ADMIN SERVICES TO ANTHEM BLUECROSS AND
BLUE SHIELD, HARVARD PLIGRIM HEALTHCARE AND THE HARTFORD (VALUE:
NOT TO EXCEED $1,395,000)
DEPARTMENT: HUMAN RESOURCES; FUND: BENEFITS SELF INSURANCE FUND

Please see attached communication from Larry Budreau, Human Resources Director dated May 10, 2016
for the information related to these contract awards.

The Human Resources Director the CEO and the Purchasing Department recommend awarding these
contracts to Anthem BlueCross Blue Shield in an amount not to exceed $1,140,000, Harvard Pilgrim

HealthCare in an amount not to exceed $255,000 and The Hartford in an amount not to exceed $0.15 per
$1,000 of AD&D insurance per month.

Respectfully,

Dan Kooken
Purchasing Manager

Cc: L Budreau J Griffin

229 Main Street Nashua, New Hampshire 03061 « Phone (603) 589-3330 « Fax (603) 589-3344

A special meeting of the Board of Aldermen was held Monday, May 23, 2016, at 7:00 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; Alderman June M. Caron led in the Pledge to the Flag.
The roll call was taken with 11 members of the Board of Aldermen present; Alderman-at-Large David W.
Deane, Alderman-at-Large Daniel T. Moriarty, Alderman Richard A. Dowd and Alderman Don LeBrun were

recorded absent.

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

R-16-030

CREATING A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR SCHOOL CAREER
AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION (CTE) TUITION FEES

As provided for in NRO 5-28, President McCarthy gave a brief explanation on Resolution R-16-030.

President McCarthy

The proposed legislation creates an expendable trust fund for the provisions of RSA 47:1B that will accept the
fees that we receive for Career and Technical Education and restrict their expenditure to use in that area.

Testimony in Favor — There was none.
Testimony in Opposition — There was none.

Testimony in Favor — There was none.

Testimony in Opposition — There was none.

President McCarthy declared the public hearing on R-16-030 closed.

Special Board of Aldermen Page 2
May 23, 2016

R-16-033

AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER TO ISSUE BONDS
NOT TO EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF TWO MILLION TWO HUNDRED
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,200,000) FOR THE PURCHASE AND
INSTALLATION OF A CITYWIDE TELECOM SYSTEM

As provided for in NRO 5-28, Bruce Codagnone, IT Division Director, gave a brief explanation on Resolution
R-16-033.

Mr. Codagnone

When we first started this initiative our immediate concern was around the police department and the
elementary schools. As time went on we found that there were multiple failures in the high schools and they
became our priority as well as the police department. During that time also, Burke Street came into play which
added some confusion on how we priced it out and how to do an RFP and who is going into Burke Street;
those are still open discussions. We crafted an RFP, we were concerned about Emergency Management
Notifications, 911 and specifically locating people within classrooms if there was an emergency. We also
wanted to have redundancy and leverage via the fiber optic network we have in place throughout the city. The
plan was to have three core systems; one in the police department, one in Nashua High School South and one
in City Hall that was large enough to carry the city should the other two fail. The technology being used of the
winning bidder is using Cisco technology which allows us to automatically detect when there is a failure in any
of the communication lines and automatically route it through another line so with this solution there will always
be communications and 911 will always work. When we did the RFP we had seven vendors apply to it and the
price was one of the components that we measured it on as well as their plan, approach and the strength and
value of the vendor. We have the details of that analysis to support our decision. We picked a company that is
headquartered out of New York called Custom Computer Specialists. They overwhelming won the bid as far
as meeting all of the criteria. | am going to have the vendor come in when we have the Finance Committee
meeting to discuss this solution also.

Testimony in Favor — There was none.

Testimony in Opposition — There was none.

Testimony in Favor — There was none.

Testimony in Opposition — There was none.

President McCarthy declared the public hearing on R-16-033 closed.

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO ADJOURN
MOTION CARRIED

The meeting was declared adjourned at 7:08 p.m.

Attest: Patricia D. Piecuch, City Clerk

Board of Aldermen Page 4
August 9, 2016

Attorney Bolton

| don’t think that the communication from Alderman Cookson to President McCarthy violated the right-to-
know law. | would however caution you that there is at least one Superior Court judge who would think
that it does. There was a case out of Strafford County where this judges opine was that a single e-mail
from one member of a public body copies to all of the other members of that body was a violation of the
statute. My understanding is that is going to be appealed if it hasn’t already been, to the Supreme Court
and there are many municipal lawyers are eagerly waiting for further guidance on that. | think it would be
crystal clear if it was a direct communication from one Alderman to another or the President of the Board if
the other members were not copied. Certainly when it starts getting into two or three more members
voicing an opinion through e-mail to which the rest are copied then we certainly run into problems. My
office is in the process of preparing some advice on this, for not only this Board, but the other Boards and
Committees in city government and that should be forthcoming sometime later this month. We will do our
best to provide further guidance in that regard.

Alderman Cookson

Regardless, my action this evening covers us in any instance, whether it is the one opinion of the one
Supreme Court Justice or whether it is not a violation of the right-to-know law. By putting this out in the
public you will see the dialogue that took place.

MOTION CARRIED

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

Ms. Paula Johnson, 15 Westborn Drive

I’d like to pass down to the President a petition. | didn’t do a lot of work on it but its names regarding the
David W. Deane Skateboard Park. First of all, | think the right-to-know law was broken in this. | had a
little conversation with Attorney Clark. First of all, let’s talk about transparency which there was obviously
none when it came to these meetings. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information
for citizens about what their government is doing. Well, the area around Stellos, the neighborhood there;
we did not know anything that was going on because we are not direct abutters. The city is a direct
abutter. | went to 505 West Hollis Street and they didn’t know. | went to the Pratt Homes and they didn’t
know. Mayor, you were going to be the transparent Mayor after everything you said about our previous
Mayor. Information maintained by government is a national and city asset. We have to have
transparency. | have to ask if there was coercion and is this a rigged system? My answer to this is
absolutely because you kept the citizens out in the dark that live in that particular neighborhood and the
surrounding area on West Hollis Street. Some people say that there is no problem on West Hollis Street
but we all know that there is. When you get off of the highway at Exit 5W and from the highway all the
way down to Ledgewood Hills you are stuck in traffic and there is a bad intersection there and
supposedly it was fixed but it's worse now. Since there are no minutes to this meeting the last time there
were minutes, which | got from Assistant Corporation Counsel Dory Clark, the last time there were any
minutes to these meetings were from August of 2013. What happened to the last three years in that
there were numerous meetings because Alderman Deane talked about them? When Alderman LeBrun
asked if there were minutes to the meetings he said no, | don’t believe so. That’s a violation of the right-
to-know law. The question is since this committee was formed by the previous Mayor, there were
meeting minutes at one time but there’s none.

I’m going to discuss a few things that happened at the Infrastructure Committee meeting. Back in 2003;
we are going to talk about code of conduct again which was written by Alderman Deane. Members of
the public attending or participating at meetings and hearings shall be treated with respect and courtesy
in accordance with this section. Isn’t that great because let’s fast forward here; New Hampshire courts

Board of Aldermen Page 5
August 9, 2016

side with free speech and that’s what happened with the Alton man who got stifled and silenced and got
arrested. The New Hampshire Supreme Court says we can say, so if | think someone is smirking at me
and making a face or somebody here when | am speaking making a comment about me even later on in
the meeting, guess what, | have the New Hampshire Supreme Court on my side now. At the last
meeting | made a comment that someone was smirking and he went “point of order,” and | think | should
have an apology for that. Oh, that’s right; you don’t give apologies on this Board. Open to the public,
anyone can attend a public meeting. They can make notes, tape record, take pictures and video tape
because it’s open to the public but minutes of the meeting; minutes shall be kept of all public meetings.
The David W. Deane Skateboard Park Committee is a public meeting. There were meetings before and
there should have been minutes since this last time but there weren’t. Then back in January of 2013, |
noticed as | was doing some research, not only do they use it for skateboarding but they also have a
picture in here using their BMX bike. | had asked questions at the last meeting. What are the
demographics of the people who are going to use this park? Since it’s down on Bridge Street I’ve heard
Litchfield, Hudson, downtown people from Nashua; we don’t know. How do we know that there is not
going to be another invasion in that part of Nashua which none of us were even told about. Vhen | was
at the Infrastructure Committee meeting | had brought in pictures of what it looks like when they have
events here. It gets really tight at the boat ramp and although you are going to give more parking to
everybody it is very crowded there. People park at the Y, as Alderman Cookson would know. | hope |
am not boring anybody and that | can have your undivided attention. | don’t think this is fair and maybe
we should start putting this in other people’s neighborhoods. The congestion there is unbelievable so
now they are going to put a round peg in a square whole. As | did some more of my research |
happened to see what Mayor Donchess had to say about this area. Nobody knew about this and there
has been no Ward meetings and | Know my Alderman said that he was hoping to have a meeting in May
for all of us to find out about this but that never happened because obviously they couldn’t get a meeting.
Every time they set a date it was cancelled. The Mayor said “over time the city is gradually transitioning
this area.” Transitioning, it’s almost like the transformation that is going on in this country. “What is now
the public works garage into recreation area with Stellos, the Y and now the skateboard park.” This was
on July 26". Even when the Mayor had the neighborhood meeting back in January or February after you
got sworn in that you talk to us about this transition in this area? Not a word has been said to any of us.
He then says “I am sure in the end we will move the public works operation to Burke Street.” (Probably
about $40 million of our taxpayer's money.) “This would enable a more recreational area near Stellos.
What more recreation are you going to put in there? How much more can you put in there? We already
know that Conway Ice is going to get another sheet. Maybe this time you will sell the property for fair
market value instead of a buck a year at the taxpayer's expense. “I think overall we are reducing the
congestion over there in the sense that once public works functions have moved and the garage trucks
and everything else and we make this purely recreational.” “l think in the end we have reduced the traffic
congestion.” Oh really! “There has been a three year search and | don’t think that we are going to come
up with another location, there is not really any alternative.” A three year search, there hasn’t been any
minutes to any meetings in three years and in three years we’ve had two Aldermen; one of them left and
then we had Alderman Soucy and now we have Alderman LeBrun. Where was the transparency? | am
also going to blame Lozeau and people on the Board who knew about this like Alderman Deane who has
been on that committee since day 1 and he is an Alderman-at-Large and he has a responsibility to tell us
because he is an Alderman-at-Large if they had meetings. When you want something done on your
behalf and you want everybody to be happy then you have meetings even if you are an Alderman-at-
Large. Alderman Cookson did that when we were buying the property up by the landfill because nobody
was letting us Know. Then he organized a meeting. Alderman Deane could have organized a meeting
but that didn’t happen. Where are the meeting minutes? This is a rigged system. The people in this
neighborhood have to endure more traffic and skateboarders. How is it going to affect 505 West Hollis
Street or the people at the Pratt Home? The Y is in favor of it, well good, how much does the Y pay in
taxes in this city? We need to have more of a discussion on this before this goes through because if not
| will start talking and finding out how to file an injunction. | will go under the right-to-know law that this
was kept as a deep, dark secret. I’d like to know where the other locations were and exactly who were
the members of the committee because there was definitely a member of the Board of Aldermen,
Alderman Deane. | also believe Lisa Fauteux was on there. Can we have the right-to-know in this city

Board of Aldermen Page 6
August 9, 2016

for once and for all, enough is enough. When you didn’t want the Veteran’s down by the Dr. Crisp
School that got killed. Because this isn’t directly in that neighborhood but it surrounds it. We have the
right and we pay taxes in this city and the people in the neighborhood are outraged so | hope you will
table this and that you will send it back to committee and that we will have a fair hearing in Ward 5 so
everybody gets to ask the questions and find out what is going on and let’s see what the other sites were
because maybe there were better sites than over there by Stellos. Thank you.

Mr. Brian Fisk, 28 Daniel Webster Highway

| am here in support of the relocation of the David W. Deane Skateboard Park. | was on the relocation
committee. The park is extremely important to the skateboarders of Nashua. This is a city issue that we
have to have the relocation. It’s for the economic development of the city that we are doing this. This
isn’t something that the skateboarders wanted. We decided to get involved because it affected us. As far
as transparency goes, | know that there were articles in the Union Leader and multiple articles in the
Telegraph. | work at Eastern Boarder and people were approaching me all of the time wanting to know
more information. There was even a mock footprint printed in the Telegraph of what the skate park was
going to look like. This was more than six months ago. There were many articles about the skate park,
the skate park committee, the Broad Street Parkway site, about the relocation and about the
Renaissance project. The committee came together with a 1,100 signature petition saying that we
wanted to have a new park built before the old park was destroyed. At our first committee meeting the
school department was with us as well as park & rec, economic development and ultimately even the
School Board was interested in looking at New Searle’s, a patchy field on Broad Street, the soccer field
next to where the current skate park is located which was actually a perfect spot but it’s very viable land
and the city has potential plans for that in the future. We could have moved 100 feet to the left and been
fine. This site works for several reasons. As far as congestion, it’s basically right off of the highway.
You get off of Route 3 and you almost turn into the entrance to Stellos. The area where the park is going
to be is basically a cul-de-sac at the end of the road behind the DPW building. It’s buffered on one side
by the Nashua River and Mine Falls. We were talking about changing the footprint of the site to allow for
both parking and access to the new boat ramp for Mine Falls. It shouldn’t encroach on Mine Falls
whatsoever. The other side is buffered by Stellos, by parking lots and by a YMCA. It’s nowhere near a
neighborhood and it doesn’t bring any traffic through a neighborhood. There is no noise issue and as |
stated the last time | was here, even as far as a safety issue the police department is right there. It’s
going to be a perfect recreational site. It’s close to Nashua High South and Nashua High North so the
kids will be able to get there. You can also take the city bus there from anywhere in town. It’s probably a
much better location than where the park is now. The reason that site was chosen was because we
hoped it wouldn’t bother anybody because some of this “not in my backyard” attitude that comes out
when the city has to do anything like this is because people’s impression of young people is that they
don’t like the way they dress, they don’t like the way they look or the cut of their hair. The truth of the
matter is that this is one of the most used facilities in Nashua. You can’t play football or baseball with
two people. Initially there weren’t supposed to be bikes at the skate park because we were worried that
bikes going down would damage the concrete but we can’t stop the bikes or scooters from coming to the
skate park because this is the kind of facility that young people want. It’s outdoors and it’s healthy; it’s
not video games or an app on the phone. It is creative. I’m 42 years old, | am a Nashua native and I’ve
been skateboarding my whole life and it’s done a lot of good for me; for my health and for my ability to
enjoy my job. Getting exercise is a good thing. It’s disappointing that there is a small obstacle with the
School Board because we’ve been working on this for a long time. When the proposed site was on
Broad Street the businesses were saying that it would reduce their property value yet they were putting a
parkway across the street from their businesses. That sort of shows the attitude that people have with
young people. You hear about the Opioid epidemic in New Hampshire, | mean we have serious
problems in this state and these are the kind of positive outlets that are useful and it’s well supported.
These people come down because it matters to them; it’s not an inner city activity. They just built a $5
million skate park in Boston and a $1.5 million skate park in Burlington, VT and the skate parks that are
built in the northeast in the majority aside from Nashua because Nashua took guidance, a complete
waste of money. We are really hoping that we can do something good in Nashua to set the example for

Board of Aldermen Page 7
August 9, 2016

the rest of the region. It doesn’t matter how much money is in your budget if you don’t do it right. We
would put the park anywhere. We agreed to put it next the Broad Street Parkway so that the other park
didn’t get destroyed because our concern is after the park goes; they were here last time at the
Infrastructure Committee meeting saying this needs to happen this fall and guess what, they are
definitely not going to build a $500,000 skate park; $280,000 of which is raised by us, by the cell phone
tower on the property of the skate park. Half of the money for the skate park was not raised by the city or
tax dollars and that’s pretty impressive. | am personally very concerned that if the skate park moves
away and Renaissance moves forward what happens next isn’t really as much of a concern and that’s
why there was supposed to be legislation put it place saying that we had to build park before the old one
was taken down. If anybody has any questions about what we talked about at the meetings or anything,
there is nothing to hide. The city needs that land for a serious development and we need another place
to put the skate park and you guys all know that it’s not an easy thing to do. The major problems were
contamination and that the site development for any of the other sites would cost more than the park just
to get it flat. We would be open to anything but the options have closed in around us. | think that this
site is about as central as you can get in Nashua. | think if you drove by any field in Nashua it would be
empty but if you drove by the skate park there would be 20 kids down there. | don’t want that community
to be marginalized or stereotyped. The reason | came in the first place is to just let me know how | can
help, it’s not an agenda. It’s changed most of these guys here, it’s changed their lives. That may or not
make sense to you but it’s the truth and | appreciate your time so thank you.

PETITIONS — None

NOMINATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS

Appointments by the Mayor

The following Appointments by the Mayor were read into the record:

Mine Falls Park Advisory Committee

Jeff Hannigan (New Appointment) Term to Expire: August 31, 2019
32 Houde Street

Nashua, NH 03060

Paula G. Lochhead (New Appointment) Term to Expire: August 31, 2019
4 Westbrook Drive

Nashua, NH 03060
Nashua Airport Authority

Joseph R. Duquette (New Appointment) Term to Expire: August 31, 2021
38 Hills Ferry Road
Nashua, NH 03064

Zoning Board of Adjustment

Jonathan (Jack) M. Currier (Reappointment) Term to Expire: September 11, 2019
6 New Searles Road
Nashua, NH 03062

MOTION BY ALDERMAN CLEMONS TO ACCEPT THE APPOINTMENTS BY THE MAYOR AS
READ AND REFER THEM TO THE PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
MOTION CARRIED

Board of Aldermen Page 8
August 9, 2016

REPORTS OF COMMITTEE
Budget Review Committee .............. cece cccceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees 07/25/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the July 25, 2016
Budget Review Committee accepted and placed on file.

Finance COMMiIttee 2.0.0... ee eecceecceeccceceeeeeeeeeaeeeaeceeeeecereeereeereeereveraes 07/20/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the July 20, 2016
Finance Committee accepted and placed on file.

Finance COMMiIttee 2.0.0... ee cecceecceeccceceeeecececaeeeeeeeaeeeeetaeeeeereeereeeraees 08/03/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the August 3, 2016
Finance Committee accepted and placed on file.

Committee on Infrastructure ........cc ccc ccccecccecccecececececececerevereverevereeeranes 07/14/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the July 14, 2016
Committee on Infrastructure accepted and placed on file.

Committee on Infrastructure ........cc ccc ccccecccecccecececececececerevereverevereeeranes 07/27/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the July 27, 2016
Committee on Infrastructure accepted and placed on file.

Human Affairs Committee 2.0... ce cecccecccececeeeeeeeeeeeeeceaeseaeseaeeeaeeeaes 07/12/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the July 12, 2016
Human Affairs Committee accepted and placed on file.

Human Affairs Committee 2.0... ce cecccecccececeeeeeeeeeeeeeceaeseaeseaeeeaeeeaes 08/02/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the August 2, 2016
Human Affairs Committee accepted and placed on file.

Planning & Economic Development Committee ................ees 07/19/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the July 19, 2016
Planning & Economic Development Committee accepted and placed on file.

Strategic Planning Committee ............. ccc cece cc ccccceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetees 07/19/16

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the July 19, 2016
Strategic Planning Committee accepted and placed on file.

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja noted that at the time of the meeting she had indicated that Alderman
Clemons was not in attendance and no one had heard from him but she subsequently found an e-mail
from Alderman Clemons stating that he would not be in attendance. President McCarthy suggested that
Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja send a communication to Mrs. Lovering which would be filed with the minutes

as an addendum.

WRITTEN REPORTS FROM LIAISONS — None

Board of Aldermen Page 9
August 9, 2016

CONFIRMATION OF MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS — None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - RESOLUTIONS

R-16-044
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Sean M. McGuinness
Alderman Don LeBrun
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy
AMENDING R-15-188 TO ALLOW THE CLOSING FOR PURCHASE OF THE HYDROELECTRIC
FACILITY IN MINE FALLS PARK TO OCCUR ANYTIME BETWEEN DECEMBER 15, 2016, AND
DECEMBER 15, 2017
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-16-044
MOTION CARRIED

Resolution R-16-044 declared duly adopted.

R-16-045
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy
ESTABLISHING AN EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND FOR STATE EMPLOYER PENSION COSTS
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-16-045

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Siegel

This legislation establishes a bucket. It does not establish an expenditure it is a container to hold funds.
| want to make that clear. Whether we put funds in it or not is up to the Board of Aldermen and is a
separate decision and that is why it is different than previous legislation that has appeared before this
Board. | would recommend passage. Thank you.

Alderman Moriarty

| am going to vote against this because if you can spend the money without having to override the
spending cap then | believe you should just spend the money directly. In the past we had a similar trust
fund created and you could fill it with revenues that would normally be used instead of tax money to pay
the general fund and then in the end you end up effectively implementing a spending cap by-pass
without ever having to override the spending cap with ten votes. You create a fund with eight votes and

Board of Aldermen Page 10
August 9, 2016

you allow it to be filled up with revenues and it never violates the spending cap because it’s not general
fund expenditure. It becomes a self-funded expenditure using revenues that used to be used in place of
taxes so mathematically it ends up being identical to this override. | would much rather take the money,
if it's available, and pay it directly instead of going through this thing. Thank you.

Alderman Schoneman

| also sit on the Budget Review Committee and that committee recommended final passage by a
majority. In fact, | was the only member of that committee who voted against it and | will maintain that
vote against it. This first came up in the last term. It was a $2.7 million transfer into a bucket that was
created to receive funds that were apparently already there for the purpose of enabling us to spend this
money outside of the regular appropriation path for the fiscal year and enable us to spend more within
that without violating the spending cap. That failed and it came back this term with $2.3 million, again,
just to create a bucket to receive funds to enable more spending without violating the cap. That failed
also and it came back a third time for about $350,000, again just to create a bucket. Now here we are
just creating a bucket but at this stage it should be very clear what the purpose of the bucket is. It’s to
allow funds to be transferred to that more money in fiscal ’18 can be spent that would otherwise be spent
and that’s the issue. It doesn’t require the ten votes because it’s not technically a spending cap override
but by moving it out it becomes what is often referred to as an end-around the spending cap. The end
result will be that the $900,000 that the legislation recommends to go into this fund will allow that
$900,000 to be spent within the spending cap without violating it. | think it's a dangerous bucket and |
don’t support it.

Alderman Siegel

It is just a bucket and every decision made other than creating a bucket is an individual decision by the
Board of Aldermen; whether or not to transfer money. Either money that is already appropriated which is
not a spending override, otherwise | guess we are not going to fund our Capital Equipment Reserve
Fund account since that’s part of the recommended legislation that we have before us for a first reading
this evening. Again, we make a decision on that. We've already decided not to take the money that was
set aside. This is different than that. It’s not meant as an end-around the spending cap. We need
containers to hold money for funds that may cross budget years. It’s just that simple and the pension
obligations are something that isn’t calculated exactly for the next 20 something years which is what our
obligation is so to the extent that we do or do not fund this, that’s up to the Board of Aldermen but the
mechanism itself to me is right out there, it's a container. | would urge those that don’t even want a
container to come up with an alternative. We went through an entire budget season and there was one
budget cut recommended and it was my colleague, Alderman Schoneman, it was for $60,000 for the
Legacy Playground carousel. We passed the budget with that included so that is not much of a dent for
what we are talking about here. Please, if you have an idea how it is that we are to save the money and
what mechanism we will use to save the money to pay the $2.5 million bullet which will face us that we
know about, please, I’m all ears and |’m sure the rest of my colleagues will be also.

Alderman Schoneman

The budget that we recently passed went through with really no expansion other than for raises that
exceeded the spending cap. That’s why this is necessary. If there was no spending cap there would be
no need for a bucket so clearly this is in response to the fact that a spending cap exists. The money was
spent on were for raises that exceeded that spending cap number. If we hadn’t exceeded the cap
number then we wouldn't be in the jam that we are in. | would suggest that the way that we manage
these budgets is by keeping individual expenses with the cap. That way when the budget comes
around, the overall budget can be under the cap as well. That’s my suggestion.