Search

Board of Aldermen 06-12-2018 Page 15

R-18-045

Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess

Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
Alderman Ken Gidge

Alderman Richard A. Dowd

Alderman Patricia Klee
Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws
Alderman Tom Lopez

Alderman June M. Caron

Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Jan Schmidt
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.

RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF $70,000 FROM THE STATE
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES INTO PUBLIC

HEALTH AND COMMUNITY SERVICES GRANT ACTIVITIES “FY19 AND FY20 TUBERCU-
LOSIS PROGRAM OF GREATER NASHUA”
Given its first reading; assigned to the HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by President McCarthy

R-18-046

Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess

Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman Ken Gidge

Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
Alderman Richard A. Dowd

Alderman Patricia Klee
Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws
Alderman Tom Lopez

Alderman June M. Caron

Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Jan Schmidt
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.

RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF $41,243.50 FROM THE STATE
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES INTO PUBLIC
HEALTH AND COMMUNITY SERVICES GRANT ACTIVITY “FY19 PUBLIC HEALTH

NETWORK SERVICES”
Given its first reading; assigned to the HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by President McCarthy

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 20

A budget override is a consequence, not a process. | would urge any of my colleagues that wish to put $9
million in additional money we have to find under the Cap, that’s fine; the process is to tell us all how that
happens materially because there’s a lot of very, very talented people on this board and in various
departments that have gone through it meticulously. And, by the way, | credit the Mayor with asking his
department heads to approach the budget well in advance with the idea that they are flat lining. That’s just flat
lining and to see what’s happens. Now we’re not flat lining. We're flat lining minus nine.

If my colleagues can find out how to deal with that, that’s great because that’s a process. Overriding the Cap
is a consequence. | don’t think we need to get to the consequence. We can select Option B and then deal
with how we manage our spending appropriately like we always do, like if we had a budget where we had an
inflation rate of 12 percent and all of a sudden we had a tremendous amount of space in the Cap. That doesn’t
mean we Say, oh great! We have 12 percent additional space in the Cap; let’s go spend away. And there are
years where, in fact, inflation was quite high. We are now in an extended very, very low inflationary period. So
we have issues to deal with that, but we also have expenses that we are not responsible for.

We have the pension obligation we did not create. We have special education funding we did not create. We
have raises and rates we did not create. It isn’t like we have been irresponsible. | understand we are going to
make tough choices, but guess what? We get to make those tough choices. That’s what budget season is
about. And that’s where the process really happens in budget season. Please, God, let’s go with Column B.
Thank you.

Alderman Schoneman

The Charter, | think, lays out the process. That’s where it is at. It’s not just a consequence. | think we’re in a
consequence because of a desire to continue to spend money that is going to exceed the Cap. | fully
understand there are some things we are going to have to do. | think | heard from my colleague, Alderman
Siegel, say that there are some things that, of course, some of us may not want to include. By the way, | read
in the paper that as far as the school budget goes, which is the largest department in this city, that the
superintendent was putting together a budget that was 1.3 percent over the previous year. Then the
superintendent found out that it was going to be 1.4, so she put together a budget for 1.4. | understand Mayor
Donchess went to the Board of Education and said, I'll get you 1.9. Now is that the kinds of controls over
spending that we’re going to have with that gap in there?

| understand the Mayor has priorities and desires to accomplish certain things. | don’t find fault in that. The
one thing | don’t like is | think we’re doing damage to the city by going around this process. That! think is
nuclear too. If there’s a nuclear option here, | think that seems to be the one that my opponents are proposing.
Thank you.

Alderman Lopez

With regards to education spending, | recall that we did voluntarily cut money from the education budget last
year and that education is directly linked to property tax values, the success of a city, all the economic
development issues that we have had. | know in my ward, particularly, we have a strong need for an effective
education program. Schools that are funded appropriately, schools that are supplied adequately. | don’t really
see that as discretionary, willful spending. | think that is our priority for us as acity. We need to make sure
that our education system is solid.

| think that is just forward thinking and responsible management the same way having a paving program that
we plan out instead of choosing other priorities regularly is forward thinking and responsible. | think we need to
be careful not to just prioritize using a formula to make decisions for us out of convenience when the truth is
we're stacking that formula right now if we decided to just pump $9 million more into the deficit. We've had
opportunities over the past year to take different strategies that would have avoided issues with the spending
cap. We didn’t take those. We waited until now. This option is on the table and unfortunately it also includes
even more of a deficit.

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 21

| think there’s a point where we are inflicting self-harm on ourselves. It is a difficult decision to make but we
didn’t take the steps when we could have prevented it earlier. If we don’t take the steps to prevent it now,
we’re going to have a serious problem with our budget. Mayor Donchess did have the department do
simulations, and some of those scenarios were pretty dire. | think our city is struggling in a lot of areas, and
this isn’t the time to cut corners and start taking shortcuts.

Alderman Wilshire

| think the damage to the city is going to happen if you vote with Column A. The problem is when the Mayor
asked the departments to come in at a 1.4 and he saw what those cuts were going to be, I’m sure they weren't
cuts that most of our constituents could live with. I’m not going to ask my constituents to live with cuts to the
education system, to police and fire, when they are already bare bone budgets to begin with. | am definitely
going to support Column B, and thank you, Alderman Siegel, for that scenario.

Alderman Clemons

| find it interesting my perspective in comparison to my colleague, Alderman Schoneman. He mentioned the
school budget going up. | think actually the final number was 2.03 percent of an increase. I’ve said in that
respect I’m not going to support that budget. I’m not going to support the Mayor’s budget when it comes in if it
includes the layoffs that are in there that are proposed in that school budget now and a few other things.

That’s because | believe that we, as a city, can do better. The economy has never been better in Nashua. It
really hasn’t. The unemployment rate is 2.7 percent. The stock market has never been better, yet here we are
with that economy and we're talking about how could we possibly fund our schools. How could we possibly
keep all of the current fire stations open. How could we possibly keep the number of police that are out on the
street at their current level. Yet, in the private sector we’re prospering.

There’s a fundamental disconnect. Former Alderman Teeboom put the nail on the head. We have a spending
cap. We can raise taxes as much as we want on people. And we do. We over tax people. How many
millions of dollars do we put back towards next year’s taxes so it defers the amount of money that that year’s
taxes go up?

| had a public conversation with the Board of Education president. He explained to me the different costs that
are going on on the school board, and how year after year the cost for special education goes up and up and
up. Those are things that we have to spend money on. You can’t deny a child’s education. So if it costs the
city $100,000; $200,000; $500,000 dollars to send that child to a particular special school because of their
special needs then the city has to pay that cost. Unfortunately what that means is we have to find other areas
where we can make up the difference. It is an unfunded mandate from the federal government. It is an
unfunded mandate from the state government.

We see this from everything. We see this coming down from Concord with the pension system. We see it with
special education costs. Things that we have no control over. Yet, we have a spending cap and those things
come under the spending cap.

It’s not right. It’s just not right. Not in this economy. When | first got elected in 2008 to the Board of Aldermen
and in 2009 when the economy crashed, ya, that was tough times. Those were tough times. That’s when we
had to make the difficult decisions. And | was proud to be on this board at that time and make the tough
choices and vote for a few budgets that Mayor Lozeau proposed because they didn’t lay people off. And those
were the most difficult times that this city has faced in the last 20 years, the last 50 years. We didn’t lay
anybody off. We did that because it was the right thing to do. Now we're faced with a budget that’s probably
going to come in and lay off people when the economy has never been better. | guess that’s good for them
because that means they can go out and probably find a job. But it is not the right thing to do.

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 22

Getting back to this ordinance, ya, it creates a little room under the cap. And thank goodness that it does
because you know what? The taxpayers would get jipped if it didn’t’ because they would be paying more
money for less services. That’s not right, and | will never support a budget, not in this economy, that says to
people give me a little bit more but I’m not going to give back to you what you’re paying me extra.

Alderman Siegel

Excess money is not because we overtax people. It’s because we haven't spent money. We have positions
that become unfilled because people leave. That salary money accumulates, and it is leftover. There’s a
number of reasons why we have leftover money. It’s not because we overtax people. | also want to say that
while the economy may be good for some people, there are people on fixed income that the ups and downs of
the economy are irrelevant. We should all be sensitive to that. | respect my colleague Alderman Clemons’
comments, but just want to add a little balance.

The point | want to make is again for those people who want to say we'll just have to go through a process, |
actually did go through a process at one point. We had a piece of legislation that took earmarked money that
was specifically set aside to deal with our pension issue. What it wanted to do was put it into an expendable
trust fund and use that money to help us in the situation we’re in right now. That money, which was
earmarked, would have had zero effect on the taxpayer. It wasn’t additional money coming out of taxpayer’s
pocket, it wasn’t going to be replenished. It was specifically earmarked, in fact bond counsel knew it was
earmarked so it wouldn’t have affected our bond rating either. It was earmarked for that purpose. This board
voted no on that. People had their reasons, they wanted to see what would happen down the road. Let’s see
if we can tighten our belt and maybe not do that. But that option was shut down. That doesn’t exist. We took
that one off the table. That to me was process. That was at least myself and some other people that are
creative in the mayor’s office thinking about what we could do. Again, | want to say: what’s the solution,
everyone? You tell me. I’ve come up with some. They got shot down. Any new ideas? | don’t see them.

| think it’s incumbent if you say this isn’t acceptable, | don’t want this to happen, you always want to have an
alternative. In my company when people come up to me and they want to say | don’t want to do this, alright.
Fine. What’s your alternative? That’s how we deal with things in real life. Tell me what you do want to do to
help solve the problem. So, | would urge that. Thank you.

Alderman Moriarty

It’s worth noting that there was, by example, a union salary contract that grew by 20 percent over a course of
three years that passed by this Board recently. In fact it did include pension costs, but the bottom line grew by
20 percent over three years. From the day | was elected on this Board six years ago, it was time after time the
majority of the board chose to ignore the warnings that | made that we can’t afford this; that this was going to
come back and haunt us. And, here we are today. | take great exception to the assertion that the problem that
we have before us is outside of our control and is because of the spending cap. That is not true.

We knew this was coming. We could have planned for it. We chose not to. Yet at the same time, many
people, my colleagues, have made, the Mayor in particular, has made very persuasive arguments for why we
need to continue spending money. | encourage you to make those persuasive arguments and abide by the
Charter and get ten votes to move money outside the budget as the Charter states. Basically, you override the
spending cap. You just got to bond, a massive $37.5 million bond, with 13 votes. What makes you believe
that you can’t possible get ten votes to do what you want? | think that’s the honorable thing to do to approach
this properly.

A month or so ago it was taboo it seemed to even admit that what we are doing, O-17-031 is a spending cap
end-around. People weren’t going to admit to the public that it was a spending cap end around. | simply
wanted everybody to know, | wanted the Mayor to know, | wanted people who are supporting this to know that
the public knows this is a spending cap end around. But we sure made a lot of progress in the sense that that
has no effect on anybody. Alderman Clemons has said from the get go, | respect you for that, your position

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 23

has been consistent. You outright say you’re against the spending cap. But for someone to not even answer
the question that it’s a spending cap bypass is just poor forum.

I’m going to vote against it out of principle. But may | remind you that 56-c refers to the combined annual
budget and section 5-154 defines what the combined annual budget is. There’s only one definition of the
combined annual budget. Only one definition. That definition applies to this year and next year. Whether or
not you move wastewater out of the budget or in the budget, it does not allow you to use one set of rules for
this year and another set of rules for next year. Nobody, | take that back, Attorney Bolton did, he is the only
person to make it an attempt to rebut that specific argument which he quoted 5-146 and 5-147 which defines a
separate term. The reality is, as the Charter is written, and the Nashua Revised Ordinances are written, this
does not accomplish the spending cap end-around that you want. The problem is what recourse do we have
as a public aside from a Writ of Mandamus? Do | personally have $2,000 to pay in attorney bills to fight the
city on a Writ of Mandamus to adhere to the law as it is written? | don’t know. So! am voting against it out of
principle. | recommend that afterwards you all read those sections, and insist that the Mayor adhere to the law
as it is written and not interpreted incorrectly.

Alderman Schoneman

With regard to the other attempts to fund the pension fund, or whatnot, these were appropriations that were a
spending cap end-around at the time. | think that all of these things should just be dealt with at the budget
time. That’s the time to do it. | didn’t support those then. I’ve never said that | don’t support paying the extra
$2 million. | never said that. | don’t want anyone to think that there’s an impossibility to get ten votes as
Alderman Moriarty just said. But those things should not be done in advance. They should be done at the
budget where we can talk about it and have a meaningful conversation on it. Thank you.

Alderman O’Brien

| kind of sat here quietly and listened to many of different points of views on both sides of the equation. |
thank you for your opinions. Wearing a double hat as a state legislator, we saw this coming down the road in
2010. It is here now. The elephant is right here in the Chamber. Many of us that are state legislators,
particularly this year and one colleague is sitting in this horseshoe, three bills were written trying to alleviate the
problem. But those that read the paper and kind of see what’s happening up in Concord, the Calgary coming
from the north, this is a Nashua problem right now. We have to pay the pension issue. You talk about bonds,
what happens if we default with the State of New Hampshire for $2 million? They will get it somehow. They
assess the tax rate for our community. The state needs to be paid.

Looking at that, we did our due diligence. We wrote bills. We looked at the current city budget. | complement
the Mayor. He looked through and saw maybe what was omitted, a loophole, or something. Fortunately it
was. lf it was intended to be under the spending cap, | take the former alderman who claims self-author of the
spending cap, he knew what he was doing when he wrote it. Why wasn’t it in in the beginning? This is not an
end around.

Necessity is the mother of invention. This issue that came down to us from the state gave us an opportunity to
relook at the ordinance and come up and Say it is not in it. | take great comfort in knowing what the city
counsel has said that we are not violating. | would never vote to violate any law. | take his advice, corporate
counsel advise that this is going to stand. If somebody wants to bring a challenge, they will bring the challenge
no matter what. | take confidence in knowing.

Therefore, looking at the whole problem, we got to do something because we don’t make anything sitting here
in the horseshoe. What we provide is a quality of life to our constituents. That is good education, good
schools, good fire, police, everything else. A wonderful downtown. We have the makings of one of the best
places in New England. | think if we don’t pass this tonight, we will probably do ourselves more harm and start
to erode something that many of us have stood here and tried to build. | think it would be prudent to support
this bill. Thank you, Mr. President.

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 24

Alderman Lopez

| would like to echo the comments made by Alderman O’Brien. It is difficult for me to be assured, as | have
constantly been every time this comes up, that if it is really important the ten votes will be there. The people
who are most likely not going to vote are constantly referring to this issue as an end-run, a work around.

The issue seems like it was clearly stated as this shouldn’t be a combined fund. It should be in Column A or in
Column B. That’s not a work to the Spending Cap. That’s a practical reality that we set this up differently than
it should have been set up.

We have apparently for years been operating under a spending cap where we had that ability to meet the
expenses while this fund was in two different columns. It shouldn't be in two different columns. | would argue
that a lot of the decisions made for stay within the spending cap while it was in two different columns
disproportionately affect people on fixed incomes. They are the ones who rely more on public transportation.
They are the ones who don’t have as much extra money to send their kids to school. They are the ones who
need to services that the city offers through city welfare. They rely as much, if not more, on the police and fire
for emergency intervention and things like that. We've been making decisions to stay under the spending cap
based on what we knew and when we cut back, it does affect people who are on fixed incomes more than
people who have other alternatives than to just use city services.

| don’t think this is an end run or a work around or anything of the kind. | think this is recognizing that this was
mis-categorized. We do need to address this. | am in no way advocating my responsibility to move forward
with a budget review process and make sure that if this is in the right column, Column B, as | believe it should
be, that we don’t go on a spending spree and start buying ridiculous things for the city or spending money that
would raise the taxes unnecessarily.

If there are arguments that some of this supports services in the city that need to expanded or should not be
cut, which | think really is the argument, | haven’t heard anything to the effect to let’s make anything bigger, it’s
more like let’s just not whittle away at whatever is left then | think we need to take into account the most
vulnerable in our city and remember that they are the ones who need these services. We may not ourselves
benefit from them directly. The whole point of a community and a city is a cooperative effort. | don’t think we
can ethically just adhere to here’s a formula and this is the process. We are not going to accept any decisions
other than ones that lead to a certain way.

| think what we are looking at right now will preempt the decision that’s being anticipated by many. | don’t think
we need to get to that spending cap override crisis that nobody really wants to do. | think it is a pretty clear cut
case of this should be in Column B and when the budget comes, we should look at the budget and review what
is being presented regardless of het spending cap. As Alderman Siegel pointed out, if we had a great year and
we had more money than we currently forecast as needing in our budget, we wouldn’t necessarily spend it all
either. | don’t see how there’s a difference with this.

Alderman Dowd

Whichever way this goes, the Mayor is going to be presenting us with his budget at the end of this month. I’ve
already started laying out the budget meetings starting in May and June. | heard people say that there’s room
in the budget for cuts. Because | know everyone will review the budget book in detail if you feel that there is
something that you think might not need to be funded, | would ask that you one of three things: talk to the
budget director for that particular budget and ask them the question and get the facts, or come to the budget
meeting where we address that particular budget and ask the question there, or you can send me the question.
| will send it to the budget director. | will get the answer and give it to everyone on the board so everybody has
the same answers. | would ask if you talk to the budget directors and you get data, please share it with me so |
can share it with the entire board or share it with Sue so she can send it out.

Last year, we went through the entire budget process and there was one motion, and it failed and the budget
passed. Obviously there wasn’t a lot of room in last year’s budget. | would ask that if you think there are
places that are under the control of the budget process, because union contracts are not, please do your

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 25

homework, make sure the rest of the board knows the answers if you talk to somebody, and formulate any
motions based on the facts that you gather. Thanks.

Alderman Deane

Do you remember a number of years back when legislation was brought in to exempt the capital spending from
wastewater because it fell under the cap?

President McCarthy

| remember us making amendments several times. Once, if |’m not mistaken in the late nineties and once
around 2007. I’m not sure | remember the details of each one at this point.

Alderman Deane

The capital spending in that 2007 ordinance, it was the CSO spending, it fell under the cap, | believe if |
remember correctly. | think former Alderman Teeboom was the one that brought that ordinance in because we
looked at that and all of that capital spending fell under the spending cap calculation. | could be wrong. I’m not
implying anything. | was just trying to ask if you memory a little bit.

A Viva Voce Roll Call was taken, which resulted as follows:

Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Dowd
Alderman Caron, Alderman Siegel, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja
Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Lopez, Alderman McCarthy 9

Nay: Alderman Deane, Alderman Cookson, Alderman Schoneman
Alderman McGuinness, Alderman LeBrun, Alderman Moriarty 6

MOTION CARRIED
Ordinance O-17-031 declared duly adopted.
NEW BUSINESS — RESOLUTIONS

R-17-094
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF UP TO $213,700 FROM THE
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES INTO
TRANSIT GRANT ACTIVITY “FEDERAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY JOB ACCESS AND REVERSE
COMMUTE (“JARC”) PROGRAM”
Given its first reading; assigned to the HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by President McCarthy

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 26

R-17-095
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO APPLY FOR AND EXPEND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT (“CDBG”) AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FUNDS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2018
Given its first reading;

There being no objection, President McCarthy assigned R-17-095 to the Human Affairs Committee and
that a public hearing be scheduled for Monday, May 8, 2017, at 7:00 p.m. inthe Aldermanic Chamber

R-17-096
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman Tom Lopez
AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF AN EASEMENT FROM GIRLS INCORPORATED OVER
LAND LOCATED AT 27 BURKE STREET
Given its first reading; assigned to the COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE by President McCarthy

NEW BUSINESS — ORDINANCES

O-17-036
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
AMENDING THE ACCESSORY DWELLING ORDINANCE
Given its first reading;

There being no objection, President McCarthy assigned O-17-036 to the Planning & Economic
Development Committee and the Nashua City Planning Board and that a public hearing be
scheduled for Tuesday, May 16, 2017, at 7:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber

PERIOD FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT — None

REMARKS BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN

Alderman Lopez

There was an article a couple of days ago in the paper about Charlie from the Boys & Girls Club. At the time,
they didn’t make a lot of comment about it, but Charlie did pass away. | just wanted to express my
condolences to the families that worked with him. A lot of the kids at the Boys & Girls Club who knew him as
the guy in the science, the guy who did the science fair, he had a lot of energy. He had a lot of commitment to
his job. He was just an overall great person.

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 27
Alderman Wilshire

| would also like to send my condolences to the family of Selma Pastor. | knew Selma since 1982. She was a
commissioner at the Housing Authority the whole time | worked there and far beyond. She and her husband,
Bernie, owned Fletcher Appliances and had a really good hometown business for many years. She was a
great lady, and she will be missed.

| also would like to send my condolences to the family of Mike Roubideaux.

And, | would also like to welcome to Paul and Julie Shea the birth of their son, Lincoln.

Committee announcements:

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

Strategic Planning was scheduled for this Thursday. It’s been cancelled. It will be Monday, April 17, at 7:00
p.m.

Alderman Moriarty

We have not confirmed yet. We are working on it, but there’s a good chance we’ll have Pennichuck Water
Special next Wednesday.

Alderman Cookson

The Committee on Infrastructure was scheduled for tomorrow evening. It has been cancelled. We'll have our
next meeting at the end of April.

ADJOURNMENT
There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the meeting adjourned at 9:34 p.m.

Attest: Patricia Piecuch, City Clerk

AGENDA MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN APRIL 11, 2017

10.

11.

PRESIDENT BRIAN S. McCARTHY CALLS ASSEMBLY TO ORDER

PRAYER OFFERED BY CITY CLERK PATRICIA PIECUCH

PLEDGE TO THE FLAG LED BY ALDERMAN SEAN M. MCGUINNESS

ROLL CALL

REMARKS BY THE MAYOR

RESPONSE TO REMARKS OF THE MAYOR

RECOGNITIONS

READING OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS

Sfor-| cee) av(e(- 180011 occ ce 03/21/2017
Budget Review Committee Public Hearing............... 00... cc cee cee ee eee eee eee tee cesses eee 03/27/2017

COMMUNICATIONS

From: Jeffrey L. Snow, Superintendent, Edgewood Cemetery
Re: Request for Joint Convention with Edgewood Cemetery Board of Trustees

From: Arthur L. Barrett, Jr., Chairman, Board of Library Trustees
Re: Request for Joint Convention with Nashua Public Library Board of Trustees

From: Celia K. Leonard, Esq., Office of Corporation Counsel
Re: Petition for Street Acceptance: Northwest Boulevard Extension

From: Larry D. Goodhue, CEO/CFO & Treasurer, Pennichuck Corporation
Re: Annual Meeting of Sole Shareholder — May 6, 2017

From: Mayor Jim Donchess
Re: Notification of Entry into Contract for Invasive Species Control and Management

From: Mayor Jim Donchess
Re: Award of 2017 Paving Program

From: Mayor Jim Donchess
Re: Notification of Entry into Contract for FY18-FY20 USDA Wildlife Management Service
Agreement

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

PETITIONS
NOMINATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS

Joint Convention with Woodlawn Cemetery Board of Trustees