Search

0-20-016

Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman-at-Large Ben Clemons
Alderwoman-at-Large Shoshanna Kelly
Alderman-at-Large David C. Tencza
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Patricia Klee

RELATIVE TO TEMPORARY 15-MINUTE PARKING

Q-20-017
Endorsers: Alderwoman-at-Large Shoshanna Kelly
AUTHORIZING FREE PARKING AT METERS AND PAY STATION SPACES THROUGH

NOVEMBER 15, 2020

ADJOURNMENT

Board of Aldermen

City of Nashua
229 Main Street Lori Wilshire
Nashua, NH 03061-2019 President, Board of Aldermen

(603) 589-3030

May 19, 2020

Susan K. Lovering, City Clerk
City of Nashua

229 Main Street

Nashua, NH 03061-2019

Dear Ms. Lovering:

Please be advised | am hereby calling a Special Meeting of the Board of Aldermen for Thursday,
May 21, 2020, at 7:00 p.m. via Webex to introduce and discuss four pieces of legislation concerning 1)
temporary road closures and elimination of certain on-street parking for expanded outdoor dining; (2)
temporary 15-minute parking; (3) temporary free parking at meters and pay station spaces; and (4)
requiring face coverings. The proposed legislation will be forthcaming as soon as it is finalized.

Thank you.

incerely,
Lori Wilshire
President

cc: Mayor Jim Donchess
Steven A. Bolton, Corporation Counsel
Tim Cummings, Economic Development Director
Sarah Marchant, Community Development Director
Lisa Fauteux, Public Works Director

. THE CITY OF NASHUA “The Gate City’

Economic Development

To: L. Wilshire, President
Members of the Board of Aldermen

From: T. Cummings, Economic Development Director

Ce: J. Donchess, Mayor
Date: May 17, 2020

Re: Request for Special Board of Aldermen Meeting to Seek Approval to Narrow Main Street

Context for Request

The Covid-19 pandemic is unprecedented in the challenge it has posed not only to our physical health, but
also to our economic health. I have been working closely with local businesses in an attempt to help them
mitigate financial and economic damage during this difficult time.

The Governor of New Hampshire is now allowing restaurants to open with severe restrictions. The only
on-site dining that will be allowed for the foreseeable future, will be limited to outdoor dining. To that end,
my discussions with area dining establishments has been how to implement the re-opening of their
restaurants, while adhering to State Guidelines to maintain social distancing practices.

Main Street is the heart of our City both figuratively and economically. We have many fine food and drink
establishments that add quality of life for our residents. After much discussion and debate, our best plan
going forward would be to extend outdoor dining into the street/parking spaces, allowing for enough
distance between tables (8 feet table edge to table edge) and enough tables to make these businesses viable.

Proposal

The plan would call for the temporary blocking off of parking spaces; as well, as intermittently blocking
some travel lanes to facilitate this plan and allow for small businesses to begin to recover . Concrete
barriers will be placed along the edge of the road for pedestrian safety. Pedestrian egress and ADA
compliancy will be maintained. There will be one lane open in each direction for vehicular traffic along
with turning lanes. We worked with Nashua Police, Nashua Fire, Public Works, Public Health,
Community Development and the Mayor's Office to move forward with this plan.

I facilitated two meetings with over sixty (60) participants of various downtown stakeholders. The initial
meeting occurred May 8" and created an opportunity for participants to give feedback on how Main Street
should be narrowed while providing commentary on differing issues and observations that narrowing Main
Street may bring about such as where deliveries need to occur or the amount of curbside/take out business
is part of an individual’s business plan. Based off of this information we developed a plan that adheres to
the concerns of city staff. The plan was refined by numerous individual conversations I had between the
first and second meeting. During the second meeting the draft plan was reviewed in detail and received
overall positive commentary.

Before you is the plan we are seeking to implement. There may need to be adjustments as time goes on and
some flexibility is going to be necessary to ensure timely recalibrations can occur, but the plan before you
has been reviewed and vetted receiving positive remarks to date.

Request
I am requesting a special Board of Aldermen meeting where final passage can occur all in the same
evening due to the time sensitivity of this matter. Should you or any Member of the Board of Aldermen

have any questions or would like to discuss this matter in greater detail I am available at your earliest
convenience.

Thank you for your kind attention to this important matter.

Graham, Donna

eee EAL a ET
From: Travis Tripodi <tttripodi326@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 5:50 PM
To: Board of Aldermen
Subject: Board of Public Health Recommendation

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is
unknown.

Dear Aldermen,

I am writing this as a concerned resident of Nashua. My understanding is that during yesterday's meeting on
Wednesday, May 13th, 2020, the Nashua Board of Public Health decided to propose a city ordinance to the
Board of Alderman to require restaurant patrons and customers in retail and grocery stores to wear face
coverings as the COVID-19 pandemic persists.

I am disappointed in the conclusion that the Board of Health has come to and even more so disappointed that
the representatives of the Board of Alderman that were present at the meeting endorsed the recommendation. I
was not able to attend the meeting and the minutes are not yet posted to the city website, so all I have to go on is
the Union Leader article written in response, but the quotes in the article were concerning to say the least.

There is simply no conclusive evidence to suggest that wearing masks in public will decrease the number of
deaths that occur as a result of COVID-19. "Social" distancing and wearing masks have only ever been a
method to slow the spread of the virus. The logic behind this guidance from the federal and state governments
was to ensure that we have sufficient capacity in our hospitals to ensure that individuals that need care are able
to get it (Le. flattening the curve). It is increasingly evident that the population of individuals that are at risk of
being hospitalized and potentially dying from this virus is incredibly small and far below the capacity of our
healthcare system. We are seeing this number shrink rapidly as we increase testing for asymptomatic
individuals across the nation. All evidence suggests that individuals that are not at risk have very little to fear
even if they do contract the virus. Evidence also suggests that as more healthy individuals contract the virus,
recover, and develop immunity, the safer the at risk population will be (i.e. herd immunity).

A remedy or a vaccination is likely 6 months away at minimum, if they are successful at all. By continuing to
mact policies designed to slow the spread at this point we are simply imcreasing the amount of time that at risk
individuals will be at risk. If the goal is to save as many lives as possible, it is arguably counterproductive. |
think that there was a time that these policies were prudent, as we did not have the data on the virus we have
now, but as data is gathered, policies need to adapt.

Our focus, as a community, both private and public, should be towards encouraging at risk populations to stay
isolated and to dedicate the resources we have to enabling them to do so as comfortably and safely as possible
until it is no longer necessary. Our focus should not be on what we can or cannot legally do to control the
behavior of citizens.

It is still unclear at this time what the specifics of the proposed ordinance will be, but it is my belief that any
ordinace that makes the wearing of face coverings for patrons and customers compulsory is misguided.

‘That being said, | fully support any private business that determines that wearing a mask is a requirement to
enter their premises. We as customers or patrons have the right to determine if we would like to comply in order

1

to take advantage of their services or purchase their products. We also have a right to determine if the risk of
shopping at a store without such requirement is too great for us or our families,

It is important to me that it is understood by those who do not know me that this is not written with lack of
compassion for those who have lost loved ones during this crisis or with lack of respect for those in positions to
make difficult policy decisions. I simply believe that this course of action is the most fair and beneficial to all
concerned and I thought it was worth communicating to those that are currently in the position to make a
difference.

I think that we have an opportunity in Nashua, as one of New Hampshire's largest cities, to lead our state in
inacting common sense policies that show that we can respond to a crisis with impactful actions that are driven
by data and not allow ourselves to be guided by fear. I would appreciate if the Board of Alderman would
consider this when evaluating whatever the proposed ordinance from the Board of Health ends up being.

Sincerely,

Travis Tripodi
Concermed Citizen

Graham, Donna

From: Andy Cooper <andrewjohn.cooper@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 8:10 PM

To: Board of Aidermen; Mayor's Office Email
Subject: The wrongness of wearing face masks

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links’open attachments if source is
unknown.

Dear Aldermen

Enough is enough! Along with Mayor Jim Donchess, your ineptitude and gross mismanagement of the COVID-
19 situation constitutes a grave assault on personal liberties.

What you are attempting to do by attempting to pass an ordinance requiring mask usage has no basis at all in
statistical inference, no rational basis in scientific fact, and runs counter to World Health Organization
recommendations regarding the usage of face masks, amongst other things. I urge you to read the actual
document at hitps://Awww.ewho.int/publications-detail/advice-on-the-use-of masks-in-the-community-during-
home-care-and-in-healthcare-settings-in-the-context-of-the-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)-outbreak - and
specifically note:

"Advice to decision makers on the use of masks for healthy people in community settings. As described above,
the wide use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not supported by current evidence and
carries uncertainties and critical risks."

Also note that the document highlights the fact that there is no evidence that community transmission is
impacted at all by the use of non-surgical face coverings, and the evidence for surgical face coverings is
confined to healthcare settings where multiple other protocols are also in place.

Furthermore, the actual numbers regarding the spread of covid-19 and the prevalence of severe cases simply
does not justify the draconian measures you are attempting to enforce,

Let's look at the facts here. As of May 13,

1, 3,299 - the number of *confirmed* cases of covid-19 - 0.24% of the NH population
2. 150 - the number of deaths from covid-19 - 0.01% ofthe NH population
3. 126 - the number of current hospitalizations - 0.009% of the NH population

These numbers, at any other time, would not be something that anyone would be concerned about. This is life
and reality. And lest you counter with "but Massachusetts...” - the numbers there are broadly similar, with a
population fatality rate of 0.07%, and a confirmed infection rate of 1.2%. And remember furthermore that the
*observed* case fatality rate does not in any way correspond to the actual infection fatality rate of covid-19
which has been pegged at 0.4-0.8% by scientific studies around the world.

As of May 11:

1. 101 deaths associated with long term care settings (out of a total of 133 deaths). 76% of the deaths occurred
in long term care situations. As callous as it sounds, long term care is not a place where people recover from
things. When the influenza virus hits long term care facilities, it is expected that one sees spikes in mortality

1

rates.
2. 7 deaths of people under the age of 60. Seven. Out of 1.36 million NH residents.

You are effectively denying employment to tens of thousands of people in the state and the city of Nashua,
unjustifiably affecting the lives of all residents. This must be reconsidered, and rational thought guided by
statistics and science must come to the fore.

Furthermore, remember that you are ali elected officials. The longer you perpetrate this injustice on the
population, the more likely you will find yourself- Republic *or* Democrat - voted out of office. Rest assured
that not a single one of you will get my vote.

Once again, please read the WHO guidance. Please take some time to research the facts around mask wearing.
The notion of "it may do something” does not constitute sound scientific thinking, and is outweighed by the
risks that attempting to enforce mask wearing in public entails.

Graham, Donna

From: Jeff Locke <jlocke07@comcast.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 8:28 PM
To: Graham, Donna

Cc: Jeffrey Locke

Subject: Face masks

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is
unknown.

Please advise all of the alderman that my family and , all of who live in Nashua are totally against mandating
the wearing of face masks. There is no law that requires this. If you want to make it the law, then put it on the
ballot for a vote. Also, there is not 100% proof that they are successful. It needs to be an option for citizens to
decide .. [TS OUR CHOICE, NOT YOURS . Thanks

Jeff Locke,CFP®
603-860-2080 cell

Graham, Donna

ee

From: Mary Ellen Carter Gilson <maryellenc@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 12:05 AM

To: Board of Aldermen

Subject: Please support the mask ordinance

CAUTION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is
unknown.

Hello;

I am writing to ask you to please, please support the mayor's proposed ordinance requiring masks in public
areas. | work in a public-service job, and both | and my husband have health conditions that put us at very high
risk of death if we contract COVID-19. We are as careful as humanly possibile -- we stay home, we socially
distance, we wash our hands until they're raw, and we always, always wear masks when we have to go out. We
know that wearing a mask is a proven way to reduce the risk that we might spread germs to other people. We
know that, the more people wear masks in public, the more we can flatten the curve and reduce the number of
infections. But a lot of people refuse, citing their preference not to, or their personal freedoms. I have had
people tell me that 1fI'm so scared if a few little germs, I should stay home and never go out. That's not an
option, though -- we need groceries, We need prescriptions.

I understand that no one likes being told what to do. But I also don't think that my necessary trip to the grocery
store should cost me my life. Wearing a couple of layers of cloth over your mouth and nose to protect other
people isn't trampling freedom. It isn't too high a price to pay. Our neighbors' lived are worth the inconvenience
-- or at least they should be. They are to me. I hope they are to you, too.

Thank you for the work you're doing. I know it isn't an easy time, for any of us.

Mary Ellen Carter-Gilson
Ward 3