Search

Board of Aldermen Page 14
July 12, 2016

R-16-043
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman Tom Lopez
RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF $63,648 FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY INTO FIRE GRANT ACTIVITY “FY2015
ASSISTANCE TO FIREFIGHTERS
GRANT”
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-16-043
ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Deane

Are these two pieces of legislation time sensitive?

Alderman Wilshire

We don’t have another meeting in July and typically wnen we get grants in June and pass them in July
it’s because we only have one meeting in July and one meeting in August.

Alderman Deane

But it’s not because they are time sensitive in the body of the grants that we are getting. We don’t have
to meet a certain timeline or holding up a process.

Alderman Wilshire

| would have to ask Deputy Chief Kerrigan who is here this evening.

(Inaudible from a member in the audience)

Alderman Lopez

You said one year and it looks like it says 2015. When did the year start?

Alderman O’Brien

Deputy Chief Kerrigan, if we delay on this would it be detrimental if we didn’t act forthwith on this?

Deputy Chief Kerrigan

The equipment that it is replacing is 20 years old so we’d like it replaced as soon as possible. It’s costing
us money to maintain the current systems that we have in place.

Board of Aldermen Page 15
July 12, 2016

President McCarthy

| guess the direct question is if we were to accept the grant at the beginning of August does that do any
damage.

Deputy Chief Kerrigan

| guess not. The time already started once they sent it to us, it’s already been two months now.

Alderman Siegel

We've known about the legislation and it’s not that controversial and it was debated prior to this meeting.
| don’t know what purpose is served by delaying the vote on it. It seems straight forward to me.

Alderman Deane

It gives the public a right to know, whether there’s an interest or not. They had a committee meeting a
half hour prior to this one and then the legislation comes in. We were just told that they have had it for
two months and we’ve had other meetings where this didn’t make it on the agenda or it wasn’t acted

upon. | understand the premise of not wanting to spend money on things that are antiquated, it’s just
process, it’s not the grant itself.

Alderman Siegel

Just to briefly address the right to know, the legislation was available when it had its first reading. The
meeting was prior to the Board of Aldermen so there was opportunity for the public to review and
comment and to my knowledge no comment was made other than members of Nashua Fire & Rescue.
Alderman Deane

That’s not the point.

Alderman Siegel

That’s my opinion.

Alderman Schoneman

What are we planning on doing with the existing equipment that is in use?

Assistant Fire Chief Brian Rhodes

That equipment will be traded in. This equipment is known to the public as the “Jaws of Life” and this
particular brand is called Amcus which are the spreaders we use for vehicle extrication and industrial
accidents. If it would make it more palatable for Alderman Deane we can wait until the next meeting.
We have nothing to hide and if you need more information we will surely do that.

Alderman Deane

It’s not a point of being palatable, it’s a point of government expediting things as a governing body and |
don’t agree with it. It’s the reason behind expediting.

Board of Aldermen Page 16
July 12, 2016

Alderman Dowd
| can see Alderman Deane’s point if we brought something up that wasn’t on the agenda already but it
was on the agenda for a first reading and it was referred to committee and it’s on the agenda now and

has been since it was posted in the time required. | don’t see an issue with any concern regarding
public knowledge of the two motions.

Alderman Schoneman
| want to voice my support for proper process. | don’t see anything wrong with the purchase but we do

have a process and it’s best for our image and the people sitting at home that there is a process that’s
being followed. There is no time sensitivity and | don’t know why it didn’t wait.

Alderman Siegel

The only point | can see is that where the minutes of the meeting might be critical for review for the full
Board or the public at large. Alderman Wilshire, was there any specific discussion in your view point
that would be germane to this or was it a fairly quick meeting? | don’t think we are violating the process

but if the meeting minutes were such that it might potentially change somebody’s mind if a piece of
information came out then | would be in favor of waiting.

Alderman Wilshire

There was nothing like that. Deputy Chief Kerrigan gave us the information we needed. There was no
public to give comment and it was posted on the full Board’s agenda. There was nothing that would be
controversial.

Alderman Siegel

Was there more information presented at that meeting regarding this purchase than what was just
presented now describing it?

Alderman Wilshire

No.
Alderman Siegel
So we have all of the information in front of us?

Alderman Wilshire

Yes.
Alderman O’Brien

This seems to be a procedural question and | would like to explore that. Attorney Bolton, did we meet
the Right-to-Know Law?

Attorney Bolton

| believe every requirement of law was properly addressed.

Board of Aldermen Page 17
July 12, 2016

Alderman Schoneman

I’m not saying that it wasn’t proper but there is a custom and the public should know that we follow that
process unless there is an emergency.

Alderman Lopez

It seems like the process was followed and | wouldn’t see why this should be delayed or why we have to
maintain equipment that we are going to trade anyway.

Alderman Cookson

There is nothing controversial about this and we followed the letter of the law. Everything was done just
fine up to the point where a meeting was conducted 30 minutes prior to this meeting and then acted on a
meeting that the public hasn’t had the opportunity to review it. Even if there is nothing controversial
about it you don’t take that right away from them to be able to react to something that we do on their
behalf. There’s no rush, that’s what we heard. If this goes to a vote this evening | am voting no only

because of the procedure that we did not follow and not give the citizens of Nashua the opportunity to
react to it.

Alderman Schoneman
| think the public’s involvement is key.

Alderman Wilshire

| just want to say that this is not precedent setting, we’ve done this many times. It followed the letter of
the law and has not set any precedent and | would urge you to support it.

Alderman Siegel

We have definitely seen anticipated recommendation notations for legislation. It had a first reading and
public comment was available. _l’d like to see more rapid response for legislation that seems fairly
straight forward. | can’t agree with my colleagues who want to delay this.

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SCHONEMAN TO POSTPONE R-16-043 TO THE AUGUST MEETING OF
THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN

ON THE QUESTION
Alderman O’Brien
Again, | think we’re losing focus here. | talked to Corporate Counsel. You were all here; | asked. He

said by the letter of the law, but what more than that it’s almost biblical that the letter of the law was
founded.

President McCarthy
The comments only should be about the date to which we’re postponing the legislation
Alderman O’Brien

Then | will yield at this particular time.

Board of Aldermen Page 18
July 12, 2016

Alderman Dowd
Since there seems to be some division, roll call.
Alderman Schoneman

The motion to postpone is largely based on the comment from the fire department that said it is not
necessary to do it tonight.

Yea: Alderman Deane, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Schoneman, 6
Alderman McGuinness, Alderman LeBrun, Alderman McCarthy

Nay: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron, 8
Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman Moriarty,
Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Lopez

MOTION FAILED

President McCarthy

The motion is for final passage of R-16-043.
MOTION CARRIED
Resolution R-16-043 declared duly adopted.

R-16-046
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman June M. Caron
RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF AN ADDITIONAL $39,862 FROM
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION INTO GRANT
ACTIVITY “TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM (TAP) GRANT” AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER OF MATCHING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,972.40
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN MELIZZI-GOLJA FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-16-046
ON THE QUESTION
Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

If we were to delay this to the August meeting, is there a problem with that?

Mayor Donchess

Of course | was thinking about that as you were discussing the last one. I’m not sure if there’s a time
problem. | can’t say that there is, but | didn’t ask that question specifically. The project is really a
fantastic project which will link the rail trail and improve Everett Street and break through the fence along
the canal for the first time in decades and create a bridge crossing into Mine Falls Park. It will enable
another entrance and will make the park more accessible to people in the tree streets and surrounding
neighborhoods. Is it time sensitivity? | suspect not, but I’m not sure of that. | expect not. If it was
delayed and it was time sensitive, | would call a special meeting to address it because it is such an

Board of Aldermen Page 19
July 12, 2016

important piece of legislation. | understand the procedural points. | wish | could answer the question as
to whether it really should be done today. | suspect August is good enough, but I’m not actually positive
of that.

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

Based on the response from the Mayor, | withdraw my motion and move to postpone until August. |
would just say | voted to accept and to pass R-16-043. | did that because | think it’s really important that
we in a timely manner acquire equipment that could save a life. | would hate to know we delayed
something and it put off the purchase of that equipment and then the old equipment was needed and
failed. For this piece of legislation, it appears that we can postpone it. So my motion would be to
postpone until the August meeting.

MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN MELIZZI-GOLJA TO POSTPONE TO THE AUGUST MEETING
ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Siegel

I’m not sure what the construction season is going to be like for this or the lead time to get this done. If it
were going to take longer than a construction season anyway then it makes sense, and | don’t get if it is
postponed as much. But it seems to me that if we allocate the money now, we can get started sooner
and we might get this done before the season is over rather than just waiting around another year.
Again, the same arguments apply. Let’s not rehash them.

Alderman Lopez

| wasn’t against the last one. | don’t understand that we have violated anything other than maybe
tradition. | don’t see any reason to wait.

Alderman Deane
It’s the coming of the new board; vote your conscience.

Division Taken
MOTION FAILED

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-16-046
MOTION CARRIED

Resolution R-16-046 declared duly adopted.

Board of Aldermen Page 20
July 12, 2016

R-16-049
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman Ben Clemons
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’ Brien, Sr.
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy
AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ENTER INTO A TWINNING (SISTER CITY) AGREEMENT
FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FRIENDSHIP AND COOPERATION WITH THE CITY OF
MYSORE, KARNATAKA STATE, INDIA
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-16-049

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Siegel

I’m pretty sure this legislation is going to pass, but | am against it for a very specific reason. | certainly
respect the Indian population. As far as I’m concerned, I’m thrilled that we have a lot of immigration from
India and from Mysore here because it’s nothing but good. I’m 100 percent in favor of that. My problem
is | don't like legislation like this, frankly. | just think its empty stuff. | don’t believe that we are going to
send a delegation to Mysore because we don’t have the money. |’m trying to figure out what the net
benefit is for the city here. It’s kind of funny that we have a contract. What happens if we violate the
contract? Obviously I’m being facetious but we’ve had great success in having citizens migrate to
Nashua and contribute a lot to the city up to now. | don’t believe a twinning agreement matters. We have
a twinning agreement with South Korea. | don’t believe that ever materialized into anything either
detrimental or important. It was just a fantastic hand wave. The concept of being friendly with a city is
great; the concept of welcoming citizens into the city, | love it. | just personally can’t stand this kind of
feel-good legislation. It has no purpose whatsoever as far as I’m concerned. | know I'll go down in
massive flames, but | just felt like | had to say my peace on this just a matter of principle on legislation.

Alderman Lopez

| understand the hand wave, but | also think if someone offers you a high five, you don’t leave them
hanging. | think this is a good opportunity for us to formally recognize that we have that diverse
population and the opportunities and signal that to a city that is interested in partnering with us. | did
want to point out that the Cultural Connections Committee hadn’t actually gotten a chance to meet yet. |
would be really surprised if they were against it in any way. It’s still on their agenda so they can discuss
the outcome of tonight’s meeting no matter what.

Alderman Wilshire

| support this legislation. | think it’s good for our community. | think it’s good for the Indian population in
our community to feel that their government is supporting them and the contributions they make to our
community. What's the harm? | think this is really a good piece of legislation. There are some really
good people in the audience tonight and at home who really would like to see this happen. I’m going to
support it.

MOTION CARRIED
Resolution R-16-049 declared duly adopted.

Board of Aldermen Page 21
July 12, 2016

UNFINISHED BUSINESS — ORDINANCES

O-16-011
Endorsers: Alderman Don LeBrun
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderman David Schoneman
Alderman Tom Lopez
ADOPTING PROVISIONS FOR REDUCED TAXATION FOR CERTAIN CHARTERED
PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES
e Tabled at Full Board Level — 5/10/16

O-16-013
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Sean M. McGuinness
Alderman Don LeBrun
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman Tom Lopez
INCREASING THE COMPENSATION OF ELECTION OFFICIALS
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN LEBRUN FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-16-013

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Siegel

Briefly, it’s election officials. VWe had some members of the public that thought it was elected. It’s
“election” officials. We're not raising our salary. | just want to make that clear.

MOTION CARRIED
Ordinance O-16-013 declared duly adopted.

O-16-014
Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien
Alderman Ben Clemons
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Sean M. McGuinness
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman David Schoneman
ENABLING THE SAMPLING OF BEER OR WINE AT FARMERS’ MARKETS
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-16-014

Board of Aldermen Page 22
July 12, 2016

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Moriarty

This seems to me this must somehow violate some sort of alcohol permit.

President McCarthy

This is with keeping with state law that becomes effective on August 1.
Alderman O’Brien

| did have a communication with our Chief of Police, and he saw no problem with this as state law is
written. Thank you.

MOTION CARRIED
Ordinance O-16-014 declared duly adopted.
NEW BUSINESS — RESOLUTIONS

R-16-050
Endorser: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Tom Lopez
AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF SURPLUS BROAD STREET PARKWAY PROPERTY
Given its first reading; assigned to the COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE by President McCarthy

R-16-051
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF APPLICATIONS AND EXECUTION OF GRANT AGREEMENTS
WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR GRANTS UNDER THE URBAN
MASS TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 1964, AS AMENDED, FOR FISCAL YEARS 2017 AND 2018
Given its first reading; assigned to the HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by President McCarthy

R-16-052

Endorser: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.

RELATIVE TO THE TRANSFER OF UP TO $59,861 FROM DEPARTMENT 194 -CONTINGENCY,
ACCOUNT 70150 — GENERAL CONTINGENCY INTO VARIOUS SALARIES & WAGES AND
FRINGE BENEFIT ACCOUNTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADDITIONAL SALARY INCREASES
FOR MERIT EMPLOYEES OFF THE MERIT SALARY SCHEDULE

Given its first reading; assigned to the BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE by President McCarthy

Board of Aldermen Page 23
July 12, 2016

NEW BUSINESS — ORDINANCES
O-16-015
Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
PROVIDING FOR CONFIDENTIAL REDACTIONS ON THE RECORD OF EXPENDITURES

Given its first reading; assigned to the PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by
President McCarthy

Alderman Siegel

Why isn’t this going to the Finance Committee? This is the Record of Expenditures.

President McCarthy

Normally it would be taken up by the Personnel Committee. That's where traditionally changes to
process have gone. | can refer it to the Finance Committee as well if you like.

Alderman Cookson
| think we could change that tradition, don’t you? Let’s send it to Finance.

Alderman Siegel

| honestly think we will get a better vetting of the legislation before the Finance Committee. That’s my
opinion; obviously it’s not my choice.

President McCarthy

It is if you want to make a motion to refer it to the Finance Committee.

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO REFER O-16-015 TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE
ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Deane

Is that in lieu of the Personnel Committee?

Alderman Siegel

My preference is...| don’t see why we have to send it to multiple committees. It would be instead of the
Personnel/Administrative Affairs specifically because of what it involves.

MOTION CARRIED
Ordinance O-16-015 assigned to the FINANCE COMMITTEE

PERIOD FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT — None