Search

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 21
Alderman Caron

Thank you, | have no problem taking this back into Personnel, | think it is a very complicated process and |
think with some of these amendments, there are a few more questions to be asked and we don’t really

have the answers to that at this point in time. So | don’t see a problem with holding it until our May
meeting.

Alderman Lopez

Personally I’m not in favor of re-referring it but | would also like to point out that the amendment wasn’t
actually formally made. It was proposed after the meeting which recommended final passage so if we are
going to re-refer it due to an amendment, shouldn’t we make the amendment?

Vice President O’Brien

To me the Ordinance that did come forward and is always open for further amendments and probably that’s
why it should get referred back to Committee. But | am going to refer to Corporate Counsel, that’s why he
gets the big dollars.

Steven Bolton, Corporation Counsel

The motion to re-refer it takes precedence over the motion to amend. So the motion to amend is not now in
order.

Alderman Laws

Does that mean that the amendments that were proposed which were the catalyst for this being referred
back to Committee are no longer being voted on tonight?

Attorney Bolton

Well it depends on how you vote on the motion to re-refer. So for example if you defeat the Motion to Re-
Refer someone could make a Motion to amend. On the other hand, if you re-refer it, nothing prevents the
proposed amendments from being taken up in Committee. So either way you can accomplish that
objective if that is the will of the Board.

Alderman Clemons

| was originally going to make the Motion to Amend, but | have no problem with discussing this further in
Committee.

Alderman Jette

I’m surprised by this. The Personnel and Administrative Affairs Committee has had two meetings on this
Ordinance. People have come out and spoken for and against. The Committee listened to them; the
Committee has received as the rest of the Aldermen, have received letters in support and against. At the
last Committee meeting, it was recommended for final passage by the Committee 3 to 1. And the one
person who voted against it, is the person making the amendments that was going to make the motion for
the amendments.

In response to the objections and in response to the objections made by the person who voted against it, |
suggested making amendments to it. Those amendments were discussed with many of you. The
amendments were approved by the person who had the objection at the Committee. And the amended
version was sent to you all and any questions were asked. | think sending it back to the Committee, I’m
assuming the 3 people who voted for it are going to vote for it again and I’m assuming the person who

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 22

voted against it going to vote for it now because the amendments are in response to his objections. So
sending it back to the Committee, | think, is just going to result in it coming back here with recommendation
for final approval.

So | don’t see that there is anything to be gained by sending it back to the Committee other than delaying it.
So | am against sending it back to the Committee, the amendments have already been vetted and | think
we ought to reject this motion and allow Alderman Clemons to make this motion to amend then vote on it.

Vice President O’Brien

| cannot entertain that motion because the motion to refer is the high priority and that is what is to be
discussed in this discussion.

Alderman Klee

Two issues, one issue is I’m going to probably ask Attorney Bolton, but and maybe | jumped the gun,
maybe | should have asked for the referral after the amendment had been put forward if we want to play
that game of going that way. But in respect to Alderman Jette, the truth is that other Resolutions that have
gone through Personnel including the one to bypass a special election has gone back and forth to the
Personnel Committee and it has been talked about in that way. But again that’s another issue, but we do
have a precedence, especially with Committee and | sat there and heard that talked about. Now you had
not voted on that, it was amendments and so on. But the comment that had been made was that they
would be vetted out by the Committee. And | think there are a lot of changes to this amendment and | hate
to talk before something, so perhaps | jumped the gun. Should | withdraw my motion and let the
amendment come forward and then do it, because that’s what | am going to do.

Attorney Bolton

That’s up to you, you have the right to do that.

Alderman Klee

Would it be more appropriate that’s what | am asking, as far as Parliamentary Inquiry and all that is
concerned. | would prefer to just to have it sent back but if the sticking point is that the amendment isn’t
heard, in any case, | think it should go back. | think the amendments that have been sent to us by e-mail
that have been talked about and so on, | think it should be vetted fully. Whether it gets voted 3 to 1; there’s
a lot of changes, there’s a lot of changes in that particular one and | think they should be discussed by that
Committee.

Vice President O’Brien

| am going to take the liberty to ask the question of Corporate Counsel. It seems that the good Aldermen

would like to have it referred back to Committee so that the motion that she currently has introduced would
exactly do that, refer it back to Committee, correct? Where it can receive additional anendments?

Attorney Bolton
Yes that’s certainly would appropriate for the Committee to discuss, possible additional amendments.
Alderman Klee

That’s what I’d like please.

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 23
Alderman Laws

| am just going to say that I’m going to vote against re-referring it. | spent a good part of my weekend
negotiating the terms of this and trying to come up with some kind of compromise that everyone could
agree with. All of the amendments actually weaken the original legislation, it’s not like anything is making
any stronger so the people who were for it in the first place are probably still going to be for it; and the idea
was that the people who were against it would be able to come on board by having a little bit of leniency
written into the law. So that being said, | feel like the amendments are ready to be voted on by the whole
Board and hopefully have that opportunity tonight.

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

I’m not going to vote to re-refer it back to Committee but that being said, | think we have had some
legislation come forward in the past year where once it got to the Full Board there was significant
discussion that made members of the Board feel like it needed to go back to Committee to be discussed. It
is also not unusual in my time on this Board as well as on the Board of Education for what you thought was
a finished piece of legislation coming to the Board, and then finding out that someone would like to amend
that at the Full Board. And it was discussed there and if the Full Board felt this was useful and let’s just
discuss it, amend it, and move forward, we have rather than taking additional time.

| feel like we’ve had this | believe Alderman Clemons is ready to speak to it based on his earlier comment.

| feel at this point we should just listen to the amendment and then vote the amendment up or down and
then make a decision on whatever comes out of that. An Ordinance that is amended or an Ordinance that
is not amended and goes back to what we had and then decide where we should go from there. But |
guess | just want to clarify that it's not standard procedure every time someone says “Oh I'd like to amend
something that comes before the full board that it goes back to Committee”. | think the circumstances have
been interesting especially in the piece of legislation that you referenced about filling vacancies. Thank
you.

Alderman Schmidt

| am going to vote to re-refer this. The reason is that | wasn’t on the original Committee that discussed this.
| didn’t like that at all, it was just full of punishments and | didn’t think that was the best way to deal with this.
| received this amendment in an e-mail and | liked some of the changes but | really need more information
on this. | can’t make a decision just by reading this, | need to hear more about it. And just having it
presented won’t do enough. | will attend your, should we send it back, | will attend and listen and
participate, because | think there is more in this than should be and perhaps a few things are missing. So
thank you.

Alderman Lopez

I’d just like to speak to the example Alderman Klee gave regarding referral with regards to the election.
Personally | was in favor of referring that because it included a public comment and the public didn’t have
an opportunity to review it before the public comment changes that were suggested. And then some major
changes were suggested throughout Public Comment that | thought bore looking at. In this situation, | think
the public has very thoroughly reviewed it, | think there has been plenty of discussion about it and we had
the discussion at the Committee level to move it forward. There was a motion to amend it; I’m not
personally in favor of the amendment because basically of what Justin commented on in public comment
because | think removing the possession aspect of it, neutralizes most of the intent of the Bill in the context
of us being a City not a State.

So | personally am not favorable to the amendment, but | don’t see a purpose in referring it if we don’t even
approve the amendment because we would be referring it with no actually confirmed reason. So in my
opinion the only reason to even considering referring it would be is if the amendment was proposed and
then the ordinance was amended. If somebody had second thoughts about the amended version and

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 24

wasn’t Sure it was ready to go for a full vote | could understand that at that point but at this point there are
no formal amendments. So it could go back to the Committee and the amendment dies stillborn.

Alderman Klee

I’d just like to add one other additional point to it and it really it has no bearing on it but | would like to point
out that we are missing four members of this Board. | don’t know, truthfully, | don’t know how they would
vote. But! think | would like to get a Full Board on this if we are going to be changing it on the fly.
Alderman Tencza

So | will just say | am favor of the proposal, I’m not sure I’m in favor of all of the amendments as they have
been proposed. So | would think that tonight the best course of action for the Board is to re-refer it to the
Committee. | don’t know what Alderman Clemons would be proposing, whether it is a wholesale change or
a piecemeal change, asking us to consider each amendment from the ordinance that came out of the
Committee, but rather than go through that process tonight, | think it makes more sense to do that in
Committee and come back at a later date and see. And | think there were points raised tonight and | agree
with Alderman Lopez and many people have said “Hey possession should be” to give this Bill the intention
that we are looking for. So for those reasons | support the Ordinance but think we should re-refer it to
Committee. And | would just say too | mean on a number of things, | think well if | may ask a question of

Corporation Counsel? There’s an effective date of this Ordinance would that have to change at all if we
took another two weeks and brought this back?

Attorney Bolton

| don’t see any reason why two weeks would cause the effective date to require a change.
Alderman Tencza

Thank you.

Alderman Clemons

Roll call.

Vice President O’Brien

Roll call? Ok there is a request for a roll call on the vote. Would the Clerk please call the roll on O-19-037.
Alderman Laws

Are we voting to send it back to Committee right now or are we voting to pass it?

Vice President O’Brien

The Motion before is to refer it back to Committee.

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 25
Alderman Laws
Alright, thank you.

Yea: Alderman Klee, Alderman Caron, Alderwoman Kelly,
Alderman Tencza, Alderman Schmidt, Alderman O’Brien 6

Nay: Alderman Laws, Alderman Lopez, Alderman Jette
Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman Clemons 5

Vice President O’Brien

Ok the motion to refer O-19-037 back to Committee has passed. This will be referred back to the
Personnel & Administrative Affairs Committee.

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

Could you just have the date of the next Personnel & Administrative Affairs Committee Meeting so
members of this Board as well as the public know when to show up?

Vice President O’Brien

As the Alderwoman does know that usually gets discussed at the end of the meeting but it’s a fair question,
Alderman Caron do you have a certain please?

Alderman Caron
Yes Monday, May 6 at 7:00 p.m.

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

| do know | just noticed they were getting ready to leave so | wanted to make sure our audience heard.
Vice President O’Brien
No | agree to keep the public informed, point well taken thank you.

O-19-039
Endorsers: Alderman Patricia Klee
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
AUTHORIZING STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF FAIRMOUNT STREET AND
CHARLES STREET
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN KLEE FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-19-039
MOTION CARRIED

Ordinance O-19-039 declared duly adopted.

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 26

O-19-040
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman-at-Large David C. Tencza
Alderman Jan Schmidt
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
ESTABLISHING AN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION AND DIRECTOR POSITION
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SCHMIDT TO AMEND O-19-040 BY REPLACING IT WITH THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS MADE BY THE PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

MOTION CARRIED

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SCHMIDT FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF 0O-19-040 AS AMENDED

ON THE QUESTION

Alderwoman Kelly

| just wanted to comment, | think that the proposed narrowing of scope makes this a little bit more tangible,
so | am definitely going to support this. | still think that we should consider what that Chief Assessor looks
like later down the road, but that’s for Budget Committee.

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

| am going to support this but | am concerned and am going to be looking at what the impact is of not
having a Chief Assessor. In terms of it being cost-neutral now | understand that, but | think we also need to
look at what a contract with a private firm might cost the City. So | think that is something that we need to
look at it moving forward. Do we actually hire someone or do we go forward with a contract. Thank you.

Alderman Klee

| want to kind of reiterate what Alderman Melizzi-Golja said as well as Alderwoman Kelly had said. | agree,
| would like to see a little bit more oversight directly within that organization. But I’m happy to pass this and
as long as we are getting updated reports and so on and make decisions later as we go on. Thank you.

MOTION CARRIED

Ordinance O-19-040 declared duly adopted as amended.

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 27

NEW BUSINESS — RESOLUTIONS

R-19-128
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Patricia Klee
Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderwoman-at-Large Shoshanna Kelly
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman-at-Large David C. Tencza
Alderman Jan Schmidt
EXTENDING AND ENLARGING THE NASHUA RAIL TRANSIT COMMITTEE
Giving its first reading; assigned to the PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by Vice

President O’Brien

R-19-129
Endorser: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Ben Clemons
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderwoman-at-Large Shoshanna Kelly
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws
Alderman Patricia Klee
AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF NASHUA TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS WITH NASHUA
COMMUNITY COLLEGE, RIVIER UNIVERSITY, TOWN OF HUDSON, TOWN OF MERRIMACK,
SOUHEGAN VALLEY TRANSPORTATION COLLABORATIVE AND THE PLUS COMPANY FOR
TRANSIT SERVICES
Giving its first reading; assigned to the FINANCE COMMITTEE by Vice President O’Brien

R-19-130
Endorser: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws
AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF TAX DEEDED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4 % - 6 CANAL STREET
Giving its first reading; assigned to the COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE by Vice President O’Brien

R-19-131
Endorser: Mayor Jim Donchess
AUTHORIZING THE GRANTING OF AN EASEMENT TO THE NASHUA MILLYARD ASSOCIATES,
INC. OVER LAND LOCATED AT 2 PINE STREET EXTENSION

Giving its first reading; assigned to the COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE by Vice President O’Brien

R-19-132
Endorser: Mayor Jim Donchess
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A SUCCESSOR “CONCESSION AGREEMENT”
WITH GRANITE DIAMOND, LLC

Giving its first reading; assigned to the FINANCE COMMITTEE by Vice President O’Brien

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 28

R-19-133
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Patricia Klee
Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderwoman-at-Large Shoshanna Kelly
Alderman-at-Large David C. Tencza
Alderman Jan Schmidt
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH
SPECTACLE MANAGEMENT, INC.
Giving its first reading; assigned to the FINANCE COMMITTEE by Vice President O’Brien

NEW BUSINESS — ORDINANCES

O-19-041
Endorser: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Jan Schmidt
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderwoman-at-Large Shoshanna Kelly
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman Patricia Klee
ADDING TWO STUDENT MEMBERS TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY COMMITTEE
Giving its first reading; assigned to the PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by Vice
President O’Brien

O-19-042
Endorser: Alderwoman-at-Large Shoshanna Kelly
Alderman-at-Large Ben Clemons
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Tom Lopez
Alderman Jan Schmidt
DESIGNATING THE SOUTHWEST CONSERVATION AREA AS CITY CONSERVATION LAND
Giving its first reading; assigned to the PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE by
Vice President O’Brien

O-19-043
Endorser: Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
UPDATING THE ORDINANCES REGARDING THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS RETIREMENT
SYSTEM
Giving its first reading; assigned to the PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE by Vice
President O’Brien

PERIOD FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Vice President O’Brien

We have six speakers. Again as what we spoke about earlier, we are going to try to keep at 15, it’s been a
long night folks. But we are willing to hear you.

Laurie Ortolano 41 Berkeley Street. | was kind of glad tonight | was last and there were people before me,
but here | am. So | wanted to share with you after the last meeting, | went home and did a Google search
knowing very well that what has happened in our Assessing Office has happened in other communities,
surely we are not the first one to go through a struggle where we are trying to rebuild. | came up with an
interesting article and a transition that happened in Chicago with their Assessing Office.

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 29

Chicago some has some areas that are notorious for their crime so they've had an assessing structure that
has had a tough element to it because they Chief Assessor is an elected position. In the office over there,
they were willing to accept gifts brought right to the office and donations brought right to the office which
had just become a major issue among folks. So in comes February 21*' or February 19", a gentleman,
highly educated, had never run for elected office, he had an MBA out of Stanford and worked 5 years in
Russia as a financial analyst in a large mutual fund firm. He wins the election and he comes in and he has
three principals that are going to guide his tenure as Assessor: ethics, fairness and transparency.

He starts writing Executive Orders immediately and generates a 100 day plan which is moving along nicely,
| get an e-mail every day from them and he sets up a visitor's log, which we have done, so the public so
would be aware of any meetings with direct level employees or higher people in the office. He wanted to
end so-called access to preferential outcomes. He described his work as complex and difficult and the
referendum and reform of the Assessor’s Office would be objective of taking a complicated system and
making it better. Another policy he implemented on his first day in office was terminating any employee
who had been hired or who had any form of nepotism, he implemented a strict anti-nepotism policy. He
looked to eliminate many appeals and he introduced a number of new staff members, including outside
experts he hired from the IAAO, data scientists and assessing officials from other states.

He summarized it by saying the work isn’t sexy but it is very important. And | thought it was interesting
because | raised that issue regarding anti-nepotism in our policy and | know it struck a few notes but | think
it's very important especially in an Assessing Office, because they operate with standards, ethic standards
that are additional guidelines beyond an anti-nepotism policy that | think create a problem when there are
relatives in an office at that level.

| just want to let you know that | did reach out to Larry Budreau and he was the one who sent me the policy
and | wanted to meet with him to talk about what was going on. | received a response back that he did not
feel a meeting would be productive and he was respectfully declining any meeting. | do feel that you have
some issues with your Human Resources Department that you should address and the one issue or the
one item | raised with him is “do we know what other departments we have relatives working in or related
people”. The response that | got back is that we have documentation on that type of information and
because there is documentation there is no right under RSA 91:A to answer the question because nothing
is in writing. Really when you create an anti-nepotism policy or any policy and you are going to violate a
policy, you should do a manual over-ride. | have a friend whose been a Human Resource Director at a
company with 30,000 employees for 30 years. And they were the ones who said to me “you’ve got have an
over-ride, you can’t break a policy without an over-ride and the over-ride should be signed off by the
management chain and it should be fully documented”.

| believe in that; | think that’s good business and is good for the City and | am not certain we do have an
over-ride policy. | am not sure all hires are going through Human Resources so that the screening for
these issues can take place. You know if | had the chance to meet with him | would have said that | think it
is important to send a letter to all Department heads to understand who might be in your departments that
are related or have a relationship and identify them, identify what their titles are and do we have a conflict
here? And hiring that is handled that’s handled in non-public session that’s very typical for hiring to be
handled in non-public session, | understand that if you are discussing personnel matters. But! know when
| was on a Board once we discussed those matters and we knew the individual was going to accept the job,
we came into public session and put the nomination into public session and did our vote in public session
so that the public would know who we are hiring.

My opinion is that if you are going to break an anti-nepotism policy in public session you should identify that
and you should say “there is an issue here, we’ve over-ridden our policies, we have the proper sign-offs on

this and we are moving forward this is our decision”. My feeling is if you’re not comfortable doing that, then
you probably shouldn’t be doing the hire because if you want to keep it a secret and not say it, then maybe

it’s not the right thing to do. And | bring it up because | happen to have some information come my way that
other departments have had hires that are relatives or have relations that have made it into the system

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 30

without an apparently screening process at all. So | don’t think we are living up to our policy and | think it
affects the quality of the work and the process and the product that we deliver here out of City Hall.

So that’s one thing. The other thing is | know that Ben wanted details, | needed to be more detail-oriented
on what | saw was wrong and all | can tell you is when | filed my PA71 with the State this is the binder that |
delivered. It contained many, many property cards, probably 300 pages. | put together a lot of detail
because | was disturbed by what | saw here in the City. | can’t come to a meeting like this and address that
kind of detail here. It just won’t work. Anyone can reach out to me and ask me if you want to be more
educated about the things | am concerned about, that’s fine.

The other thing is the Board of Assessors, | would like to be able to take most of my issues to the Board of
Assessors and have them addressed there. | don’t think they belong here. But! can’t make that avenue
work and it’s very frustrating. | delivered a letter on effective year build and concerns with an example on a
property card to them three weeks ago. It was completely ignored, not even acknowledged for the record.
They brought it back last week; they acknowledged it on the record but with no discussion. So if you can’t
get to a substantive discussion on issues that affect the quality of the assessing data base and a lot of
home, then what good are they?

| tried to track your meetings and one gentleman is very combative, so it is very difficult for me because |
see an individual who | believe has a personal agenda. They are not willing to look at the big picture stuff
that affects — you know — sales chasing, effective year build, these are all letters | kind of had sent to you,
MLS Correcting, Permit Captures. We are dealing with valuations; favoritism and unethical conduct when it
comes to assessing properties of potentially influential people. Those are important issues and if you can’t
have substantive discussions about those, | really don’t know how you improve the quality of the data. All
the software stuff you are doing is great but the software does not create the assessment on its own; the
judgements are coming from the people and ultimately the management within the office.

When | look at the Board of Assessors, last year they had 20 meetings, one cancelled, the average for
those 20 meetings was under 30 minutes with almost half of them being under 20. They have meetings
that are 6 minutes, 10 minutes, 10 minutes, 12 minutes, 13 minutes, 18 minutes, there are a lot of short
meetings over there. | think there is room to up their meetings, take yours down by pushing these issues to
them and getting them to respond. So it is super frustrating because they just won’t recognize anything.
They won't sink their teeth into anything or even acknowledge the need for potentially creating policy. So |
think policy is so important on a lot of these issues and they just won’t address it. | felt like we took a huge
step backwards last week with the use of the equalization ratio. One member doesn’t really believe in it: |
didn’t even know that was the case So that was difficult. There was a resident that came in to represent
an abatement and | thought it went really poorly for that individual and you really get this “us against them”
adversarial feel. It’s horrible, it’s uncomfortable; it was so stressful for the gentleman who came; he was
exhausted for two days after that whole event.

So | hope that there is some way that someone can give some assistance to what is happening in those
meetings so that they can become more substantive to work on what | think are the bigger issues. | know
that the City’s position, certainly with me, is “we’ve given you tons of time, you’ve talked to everyone, you’re
not happy, we’re never making you happy”. The reasons that I’m not happy is because the substantive
issues aren't addressed. They are waived off and told they’re nothing which is ultimately why | created a 3
inch binder that went to the State, because | couldn’t get any of that really looked at here. And |’m really
concerned about what is going on in that office. Management | think is very important; I’m super happy that
a few of you spoke about potentially a Chief Assessor or some management in that office. | cannot tell you
how important | think that is. | don’t want to hear from anyone here how hard the staff is working; some
work hard, some do not. We have some issues that have to be resolved: all is not equal. And that’s just
the way it is.

When it comes to HR and our Chief Position, we don’t even have a policy where upper management the
higher level people check in. The biggest issues is he wasn’t at work, he was at work 20, 25 hours a week,
this went on for years. So we don’t have a way that our people check in and get recorded to be paid, our