Search

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 10
Oath of Office administered by Corporation Counsel Steven A. Bolton to Dana Farwell.
There being no objection, President McCarthy declared that the Convention now arise
REPORTS OF COMMITTEE
Budget Review Committee... cccccccccccecccsteseeeeeeeeeeeeestseeeeees 03/27/17

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the March 27, 2017, Budget
Review Committee accepted and placed on file.

Budget Review Committee. ............. cc ccccccccccceccenteseeeeeeeeeeeeestseeeeess 04/04/17

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the April 4, 2017, Budget
Review Committee accepted and placed on file.

Finance Committee. 0... cece ccecccececceeeceeeececeeeceeaeeesaeeeraneetnaneetanees 03/15/17

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the March 15, 2017, Finance
Committee accepted and placed on file.

Finance Committee. 0... cece ccecccececceeeceeeececeeeceeaeeesaeeeraneetnaneetanees 04/05/17

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the April 5, 2017, Finance
Committee accepted and placed on file.

Human Affairs Committee. 20.0.0... ccceccececcecececeeeeeeeuuseeeeveeeuneennaneees 03/13/17

There being no objection, President McCarthy declared the report of the March 13, 2017, Human Affairs
Committee accepted and placed on file.

WRITTEN REPORTS FROM LIAISONS — None
CONFIRMATION OF MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS - None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS — RESOLUTIONS

R-17-091
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
DISCONTINUING THE CAPITAL RESERVE FUND FOR BUILDING REPLACEMENT
OR RENEWAL DUE TO DISUSE
Given its second reading;
MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-17-091

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

Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Deane
Alderman Cookson, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron
Alderman Siegel, Alderman Schoneman, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja
Alderman McGuinness, Alderman LeBrun, Alderman Moriarty
Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Lopez, Alderman McCarthy 15

Nay: 0

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 11
MOTION CARRIED
Resolution R-17-091 declared duly adopted.

R-17-092
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER TO ISSUE BONDS NOT TO EXCEED
THE AMOUNT OF THIRTY-SEVEN MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
($37,500,000) TO FUND A MULTI-YEAR PAVING PROJECT
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO AMEND R-17-092 IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REPLACING IT WITH THE
GOLDEN ROD COPY PROVIDED WITH THE AGENDA

ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Deane

I’d like to reflect the amendments that | made. The first one was in the title where after the word “fund” we
added “the first five years of a multi-year paving project.” And in the first paragraph down below, we added the
number “20” after the number 15. Those were the two amendments that were made.

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

Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Deane
Alderman Cookson, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron
Alderman Siegel, Alderman Schoneman, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja
Alderman McGuinness, Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Lopez,
Alderman McCarthy 13

Nay: Alderman LeBrun, Alderman Moriarty 2
MOTION CARRIED

MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-17-092 AS AMENDED BY ROLL CALL

Alderman Moriarty

Without reviewing everything that we discussed at the most recent Budget Review Committee, | would still like
to touch upon the highlights and try to simplify things for anybody who might be new to this. If someone was to
come up to you and give you a presentation and say | am going to building you a car that has 500 horsepower,
and then the person on the same team and says I’m going to build a car for you that gets 50 mile per gallon,
you would immediately know instinctively that those two cars are not the same car. Then you would ask about
it and at some point if you wanted to resolve if it were the same car, you would instinctively understand that
you can’t get the 500 horsepower and the 50 miles per gallon at the time. The presentation that we got at the
Budget Review Committee is analogous to that.

We had a presentation that was a good presentation. They used software and quantified the results of it. The
presentation said that if you spend this much money the roads will improve. Right after that person gave that
presentation, the same group of people, the same staff, gave a presentation and presented a cost, a budget
that showed taking a bond out for five years and spending 20 years to pay it off. After looking at the two |

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 12

asked a couple of questions, and eventually got the question confirmed that the presentation contemplates
spending $7.5 million a year for 11 years. The budget that was presented spends $7.5 million for five years
and then spends the following 15 years to pay it off. The two were so far apart from each other. Essentially
the presentation said if you spend $82.5 million dollars the roads will improve greatly, but we’re only going to
figure out how to pay for $37.5 million of it. Which lead, and I'll take some credit, to changing the title. At least
the people in the audience recognize there’s an inconsistency there. The assertion is we will figure it out later.
Let’s change the title that what we’re doing now is only budgeting for five years but we'll figure out the rest of it
later is the assertion.

| don’t like the idea of the presentation and the budget, the sales pitch and the cost being so far apart from
each other. If you look at the quantitative numbers, there is a better way. There is ahappy medium. We don’t
need to spend $7.5 million every year for the next 20 years. We could get away with $4 million. We can get
away with $5 million, and that we can afford. The problem with the $7.5 million bond, which the vote today is
for just this bond, that’s all we’re voting on today, and even if you have faith that we will figure out how to pay
for the rest of it, the current bond obligates all our available road paving resources for the next 20 years. The
current bond vote is we’re going to spend all that money in five years and we will have nothing left for the next
15 years. That’s what this vote is for. That’s the reality of it. That's the black and white.

You can believe that that is silly to think that we’re not going to do any paving for 15 years after the first five
years. | agree. But that’s the part where you try to recognize the difference between a 500 horsepower car
and 50 miles per gallon. We have something that looks allegedly self-contained that isn’t going to raise the
taxes but when you actually go and reconcile how you are actually going to pay for the paving beyond the first
five years that’s when the devil is in the details. | mentioned this at the Budget Review Committee. | said this
is a great idea of paying for some money upfront with a bond so you can catch up with the roads, get them in
position so they are not failing so quickly, but don’t let the bond be so large that you have exhausted every
penny available to you. Why not go somewhere in-between? Use the simulation to think about it more. Find
an approach we can actually afford that actually accomplishes the maximize of it. That was discarded out of
hand.

| recommend highly that you vote no for this particular bond. There is a better way. Thank you.

Alderman Siegel

Let’s look at where this came from. With all due respect to my colleague, a grizzle veteran of two budget
committee meetings came in and did not understand where this came from. $7.5 million is sort of a magic
number because it is the most amount of paving that we can actually accomplish per year in the city given the

Alderman Moriarty

By the way, personal privilege. May |?

Alderman Siegel

In the middle of my sentence?

Alderman Moriarty

Personal privilege, the motion takes precedence over the current speaker. Some people often misuse the
phrase...

President McCarthy

Alderman Moriarty, move on to your point of personal privilege please.

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 13

Alderman Moriarty

Thank you. | was given the presentation at the Budget Review Committee before | even started talking, | was
admonished that dare | make fun of anybody, which | went out of my way not to do. | made a point of giving
the presentation systemically like an engineer. | tried to speak clearly and highlight facts and did everything
within my power not to go out of my way and insult somebody. | ask you that you apply the same rules to my
colleague, Alderman Ken Siegel, who started his comments by insulting me.

Alderman Siegel

| apologize. Let’s just move on. Thank you. Now, let me gather my thoughts again and hopefully | won’t be
interrupted. The $7.5 million has to do with what we can do as a city paving because we have issues with
utilities, we have cut throughs in the streets. There is a whole lot of other logistics that happen. There’s been
several things said that were flat wrong. As the DPW liaison, I’m familiar with all the discussions that have
been going on. I’ve seen the paving presentation multiple times and have discussed this, including the older
presentation that Mayor Lozeau had suggested.

To address Mr. Teeboom’ s concerns, in fact, the local streets do not get choked off. They, in fact, do get
taken care of and that’s part of the plan. This is not a $75 million program. We are voting on a $37.5 million
five-year program in which we are spending $7.5 million to catch up and repair our infrastructure. This is what
we are doing to prevent to kick the can. Our streets are degrading every year. That’s just a fact of life. We
live in New England, things decay. If you have seen the paving presentation, and again I’ve seen it multiple
times, once things go below a certain level, it’s not a linear function. In other words, you go below a certain
paving index and now it’s a multiple of what it cost before to fix because you're using different techniques.

We are at the point now, actually, in a lot of our city streets where we are going to slip to that level. If we do,
there is little or no way we can dig out of it. This is a responsible way to approach the maintenance of a key
component of our city. | can’t emphasize enough that we really are at the point of what | wouldn’t say no
return, but we are at the point where we can spend this money and get a return on our investment that gets our
streets back to the point where they are reasonably maintainable. To not do so now risks a huge amount of
money and an inability to catch up.

Remember as a city, we can’t really do more than about $7.5 million a year in paving because of the logistics.
What happens if we get to the point where that’s well underneath what we have to do? We're now then faced
with a situation where the roads really materially degrade and we actually have little to no hope of doing them
again. It’s areal potential logistical nightmare.

| understand the budget issues. As far as the 4 or 5 million dollars being an appropriate compromise, it’s not.
The consultant these specific figures. There’s some very, very smart people that work on this: the consultant,
there’s a lot of people at DPW that have gone over this. We have a brand new software program. Remember,
one of the things we didn’t want to do when Mayor Lozeau proposed this was two elements. It wasn’t just that it
dealt only with the arterials. That was a big concern because the neighborhoods weren't going to be taken
care of. But the other thing that was very, very important is we had purchased a software program and what
we wanted to do was implement that program and populate it with data to understand what is the real condition
of our streets. Rather than rush in and adopt a bond and not know correctly how to deploy our resources so
we are most effectively deploying the capital to hit the streets at the right time to maximize our return on
investment, we decided not to do that.

Now we are at a position where we fully inventoried our streets. We have the data. Now we have to do
something. | got to tell you, having been exposed now for several years of working this stuff at BPW, we really
don’t have a choice. | don’t really like spending this money. | really don’t. But do you know what | really, really
don’t want to do? Spend $100 million more in a city that is pot-marked and cratered. | strongly urge you to
consider that in voting for this. This is very important.

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 14
Alderman Clemons

| have a question through you to Alderman Deane. Alderman, you have in the past have expressed your
distaste for bonding paving. I’m curious as to your reasons why you felt this was important to do because |
respect your opinion, and | think | would like to hear it.

Alderman Deane

After seeing the presentation and the indexing that was brought in and the conditions of our streets, it was time
to move forward with the plan. | am really happy that Alderman Siegel has answered that question that has
been asked time and time again about Mayor Lozeau’s plan. It wasn’t a plan. We had purchased that
software. There was a lot of data to collect. They had to input all the data to come up with the indexing that
was done that was made part of what brought this resolution forward.

People are throwing these questions around that you can’t commit future boards. | got on this board in 2002.
My then colleagues, Alderman McCarthy, Alderman Bolton, | think Lori was here, you guys had committed me
as an alderman who had never served before to a couple of high schools, the stadium. All of these things
were in the budget. Well you know what? | look at that as there were previous boards, there were people that
were here, and those were the decisions that they made. Citizens elected those people to make those
decisions. And they made them. Whether you liked them or not or whether you showed up your first day on
the rodeo and you’re going to be complaining about it, but to sit there and say this is the first bonded paving
project, what about the Broad Street Parkway? There was $40 million or Lord knows what the figure is, it’s up
and down all the time, that were committed to future boards for a big paving project. Right? Where’s the
maintenance plan for that? There isn’t one.

So to sit there and throw rocks at this, we’re in a position now where we have to do something. | urge you
folks. | was down by Exit 4 today. Come up Exit 4 up off Harris Road. You'd be tripping from the ruts in the
street. When we look at the comment about the arterials. Get on Daniel Webster Highway. That’s a little bit
wider than say Taylor Street. If we had to reconstruct those roadways, the cost would enormous.

We're retiring debt every year, every year. You can look at bonding in many different aspects and the
availability of cash and things of that nature, but | like this plan. | think it is a good plan. | was disappointed
that the amendment that | had to make wasn’t included in the original piece of legislation because it should
have been. | wanted to put it in there. Nobody is hiding anything from anybody. Decisions are going to have
to be made. It’s time for us to do something.

| was up in Concord the other day. Their roads are atrocious. | have two colleagues here that drive up there
all the time. You go through those back streets of Pleasant Street and up through there, it’s unbelievable. |
think it’s a good project, and | think we should move forward.

Alderman Clemons

| appreciate your response, Alderman Deane. Thank you very much. I’m compelled to support it as well. |
look at the roads we drive on every day and the conditions are bad. They are bad in my personal
neighborhood. We do have to do something. One way or the other, we are going to pay for it. You're either
going to pay for the roads through your taxes by doing this or you are going to pay for it when you pothole and
you have to realign your car, replace a tire, pay a higher price for auto insurance. These are things that you're
going to pay for one way or the other. We might as well do it right and get the streets in good condition so | will
support this.

Alderman Dowd
| agree it is a lot of money, but how did we get here? We've been ignoring the streets for so long taking money

out of previous budgets. The paving we did do, Tinker Road is a good example. About a year ago they skim
coated it and it looked great until the first winter. The plows dug it up and now it is like going through a mine

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 15

field. Southwood Drive is totally gone. | don’t? know when we will get to those in this project, but the main
roads, Amherst Street and Hollis Street, are in really bad shape. | am definitely going to support this. If we
don’t do it now, it’s going to be far more expensive. It’s time to grab the bull by the horn and get this done.

Alderman Schoneman

| share Alderman Dowd’s sense that we didn’t do it right all along and that’s how we got into this jam. | think
we are in this jam because we didn’t do it right over the years. That’s my biggest frustration. We
misprioritized. While we’re not kicking one can down the road, perhaps we're kicking another one down the
road. The previous mistakes that we can’t totally fix and we have to rely on a future board, future mayor, future
administration to do something. | hope that they do because we’re in a deep jam because we didn’t do it right
before. It’s going require that we maintain the roads that we build, that we find the money. There’s going to
have to be some kind of operating money somewhere that we’ve been reluctant to allocate because we have
preferences or priorities, special interests perhaps, that we like better. As a result we’ve wound up in a jam.
It’s bad. | hate spending the money. | think we have to do it, and it does rely on folks in the future. | hope they
can do a better job than perhaps some of the boards did in the past. Thank you.

Alderman Siegel

We do have a certain amount of bonded debt right now but that does retire every year. It isn’t strictly additive.
Yes, we clearly have to be very careful. I’m not thrilled to have to dig ourselves out of a hole created by
previous mismanagement but nonetheless here we are.

Alderman Schoneman

| agree with we have to extremely careful. My point is we have not been perhaps as careful as we should have
been. | hope we can be more careful in the future. More careful, not just as careful; more careful. Thank you.

Alderman Lopez

| think we’re recognizing that we have this responsibility and that we have to repair these roads. | think they
are a critical component of our city. To a point made earlier, | don’t want to see emergency vehicles losing
their axle into a pothole trying to respond to an emergency. | understand what Alderman Moriarty was trying to
advocate for, and | think it is an important perspective, but | also think that the arguments made by Alderman
Siegel and Alderman Deane are equally important.

Alderman Cookson

This is a very, very difficult decision for the board and future boards to saving the infrastructure of the city. One
of the things that | would be most concerned about as we move forward, and | understand our process only
involves approving the bond amount of $37.5 million, but | would really be interested in knowing what the plan
is. Alderman Dowd’s comments with regard to Tinker Road ring loudly in that again Tinker Road received a
skim coat last year and one year later or one winter later, we’re dealing with a road that’s dug up. How do we
prevent that from happening again with the roads that we are going to move forward with if this is ultimately
approved? How do we ensure that we don’t run into that same problem again as we re-evaluate the roads with
the PCI on an annual basis? I’m assuming Tinker Road is going to become another highly important road
based on these PCI index even though it was only paved last year.

Alderman Siegel

Again, one of the things that was very important was to have the database populated. That just recently
happened. The Tinker Road repair was done in an environment in which it was not entirely clear that the CPI
was properly calculated for that road or looked at for what the correct means by which that road should have
been treated or repaired. That’s exactly what we are trying to avoid. | appreciate my colleagues concern
because that is a very, very valid concern. That is what motivated a rejection, at least on my part, of the

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 16

previous administration’s plan because we didn’t have that information. Thank you, Alderman Cookson for
bringing that point up. | think that’s very important.

Alderman Dowd

There was another part of Tinker Road that failed and they had to dig it up and pave it right, not just skim coat
it. It’s last just fine. When they skim coat, it is very narrow; just covering up potholes and dents. The plows
dig it up. If you do it correctly, it will last.

Alderman Lopez

| just want to suggest to the Mayor that this is a large project, and all of the city is probably concerned about
when is my road getting paved, what is the reasoning behind how this done. If we have a new public relations
person at the department of public works, | think this is an ideal role for them. | personally was in favor when |
heard about it because | think the public could use a lot more support in learning how to deal with snow
emergencies or when roads are being plowed. | think this is in the same vein. It is important for the public to
know how the roads are being prioritized and when they can expect them to be fixed.

Alderman Cookson

Going back to some of Alderman Siegel’s and Alderman Dowd’s comments, | just wanted to raise the question
of who actually signs off on the roads with regards to the quality or the quality of the material that is used. For
example if we do use a skim coat, what quality assurance do we go through to confirm that material is of high
quality and it will last?

Alderman Deane

The area that | think Alderman Dowd was referred to that failed was mill and fill. They come and take a
machine that is carved by teeth and they come down and grind those edges and then they fill it with asphalt
afterwards. We have specifications through engineering. Those specs are given to whoever we buy our
asphalt from. That’s the way the asphalt is mixed.

The other thing about the program is it’s going to be a massive program. You have utilities in the street. We
have to get everybody on board so when we go in and put a plan in place, we’ve got to make sure that
Pennichuck and the gas company and everybody else in the roadway is well aware of our intentions. When
we go out and start paving, any new services or water lines, those things, will be taken care of. The sewer
lines will be cameraed, the drain lines will be cameraed to make sure there is no failure in place before we
pave. There’s a plan in place on how they would move forward and in with what areas of town they would start
with. | know the plan doesn’t include going in to the east side of town and totally taking over and paving every
road down there. That’s not going to happen because it wouldn’t be conducive to quality of life. People
wouldn’t be able to deal with that. There is a plan in place. | would assume and | would imagine the mayor is
going to have plenty of public input sessions, public knowledge sessions where he will host what is going to
happen, what has happened in the past when we go into neighborhoods to do work. All the CSO work we’ve
done, they’ve had neighborhood meetings so everybody knew what was going on and what to expect, how
long the project was going to last and things of that nature. All of that is in the pipeline and it’s just ready to be
funded.

Alderman Lopez

| didn’t mean any over simplification of the process involved. There’s a lot of knowledge and experience on
this Board. Most of the aldermen here really know what they are talking about because they have been doing
this for years. Even in public comment, there’s a lot of knowledge being delivered. A lot of Nashuans don’t
necessarily sit down and read that or have that. They may think there is a road guy just driving around fixing
roads. They may not know that all that elaborate work has to go into it. There’s a lot of expertise going into
this.

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 17
Alderman Cookson

| just wanted to confirm what | heard from Alderman Deane and that was the asphalt specs are determined by
our Department of Public Works and those are conveyed to the company that is ultimately going to be doing
the paving.

President McCarthy

Yes.
Alderman Cookson

That would be a question either to you or through you to Alderman Deane.

President McCarthy

Yes, that is what you heard from Alderman Deane.
Alderman Cookson

Thank you, Alderman McCarthy.

A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows:

Yea: Alderman Wilshire, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Deane
Alderman Cookson, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Caron
Alderman Siegel, Alderman Schoneman, Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja
Alderman McGuinness, Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Lopez,
Alderman McCarthy 13

Nay: Alderman LeBrun, Alderman Moriarty 2
MOTION CARRIED
Resolution R-17-092 declared duly adopted as amended.

R-17-093
Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Brian S. McCarthy
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
AMENDING THE PURPOSE OF THE EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND FOR FUNDING THE JULIA T.
WARD PRIZE TO A MEMORIAL MURAL PROJECT AT THE AMHERST STREET ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
Given its second reading;

There being no objection, President McCarthy re-referred R-17-093 to the Budget Review Committee
pending the public hearing scheduled for April 24, 2017, at 7:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 18

UNFINISHED BUSINESS - ORDINANCES

O-17-031
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Ben Clemons
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
RELATIVE TO THE WASTEWATER SYSTEM FUND AS A SEWER FUND
Given its third reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN DOWD FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-17-031
ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Deane

| have a question for our attorney. Attorney Bolton, | served on the Board of Public Works for four years, and
from 2002 to today I’ve been an alderman. I’ve seen many operating budgets, and I’ve seen the positions that
had percentages that were part of or service thereof be it solid waste or wastewater, which are both enterprise
funds. Tonight | hear there’s a state law that does not allow that to take place. Could you let me know what
that state law number is so | can look at it or can you comment on the state law that’s been mentioned?

Attorney Bolton

| wish someone would let me know what that number is because | do not read the laws that reference sewer
fund or as we call it wastewater fund to provide for that at all. When you allocate time that is spent by one city
employee, if they are working on something related to the wastewater system, it is proper to allocate if you
allocate correctly. If they are spending half their time, you allocate half their time. If they are spending ten
percent of their time, you allocate ten percent. The fact is that’s not only allowable, that’s required because
you are not allowed to fund your wastewater system through general tax revenue. You must fund it through
your sewer fees, which we sometimes call wastewater fees. That’s what the law requires, that’s what we are
doing.

It is not a lot different than the positions that spend some of their time on various federal grants or other grants.
They all have a budget. It’s all how much time is spent by a given position working on, for example, the bus
system. Again, we have to account for the federal government for all the time spent by the employees,
allocate their salary appropriately to expenses related to the bus system as opposed to expenses of that
position to fulfill other tasks. All of that is proper. All of that is not comingling.

There is a prohibition against comingling, if that’s what people are referring to. But that does not prevent the
proper allocation of time when people spend some of their time doing work on wastewater system and part of
their time doing work on other things.

Alderman Deane

So there’s nothing illegal or underhanded or anything of that nature that’s been going on?

Attorney Bolton

Not as far as this allocation of a position.

Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 19
Alderman Deane

The way the position has been allocated through wastewater and solid waste as enterprise funds is above
board and completely legal.

Attorney Bolton

Yes.

Alderman Deane

The public should know that. People get up and imply things that aren’t correct. Thank you.
Alderman Schoneman

| had a question on the same topic for Attorney Bolton or for anyone who can answer the question. How do we
account for that time? Is it punch card or just a note in the book? How do we account for an accurate time?
Just again, for public knowledge and for mine?

Attorney Bolton

I’m not an expert about how it is done for every position. | think in engineering it’s done by keeping track of
hours work. Whether they do that through the Kronos automated computerization system or whether they do
that by means of handwritten time records, | am not qualified to answer that. But | believe it is done on an
hour-by-hour basis.

Alderman Siegel

The split positions are approved in the budget. Nobody is punching a clock. When we get the budget book,
hopefully everybody recognizes when they read the budget, there is an entire set of pages on split positions
which happen across multiple departments. The street department has that, of course, in addition to
wastewater. It’s allocated based on historical data of how employees have typically allocated their times. That
happens upfront.

| also want to point out that the first step in that process is the Board of Public Works. Should the Board of
Public Works choose to do something different with their split positions, they control those personnel. Before it
even gets here, that decision is up to the Board of Public Works. So to have a Board of Public Works
commissioner come in here and say there’s an issue, well there’s a venue for that and that’s the venue that
that elected official is part of. There’s nothing going on that’s weird. It’s very, very common. In most
companies, it is a requirement because you want to properly allocate for resources. So let’s set that aside
because that’s a non-issue.

Getting to the specifics of the legislation, I’m going to simplify this as simple as it can be. There’s Column A
and there’s Column b. Column A, everything gets put under the Cap. We have to find $9 million to fund that
above all our other obligations. Column B, is okay, some people are nto happy because it potentially, not
actually, potentially leaves some space for spending that they otherwise may not want to do. But that’s of
course why we have budgeting processes. We can approve or disapprove anything we want. Column A is a
nuclear option which basically will very much harm the city in my opinion. | don’t believe that there are many
options for us to deal with Column A. Column B is a perception issue which some people may or may not like
and that is their prerogative. We all vote for different reasons, and we all have different perspectives. My
colleague, Alderman Schoneman, said that we shouldn’t necessarily accept this the way it is, and | understand
he said there is a process in place, which is an override process, to deal with these situations. | would suggest
to you that that is not a process. That is a consequence. A process is what you look at to get yourself out of a
situation before you pull the rip cord and have the consequence happen.