Search

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 8
Alderman Cookson

No a full Board of Aldermen.

Mayor Donchess

Yes we do.

Alderman Cookson

Then our next Finance meeting would be a week and a half after that.

Mayor Donchess

| think two weeks. The next Finance meeting is the 16" of August.

Alderman Cookson

So then we don’t have a second Board of Aldermen during the month of August and then we would be meeting
again | think September 12". We're expecting this work to be done during the month of August/September?

Mayor Donchess
This won't go to the Board of Aldermen. This is a Finance Committee matter only.
Alderman Cookson

So this work doesn’t begin until mid-September of running through late October. I’m not sure why to expedite
this based on the timing of the work to be done.

Mayor Donchess

Well the motion on the floor is to approve the contract. Do you have a different motion?

MOTION BY ALDERMAN COOKSON MOVED TO TABLE UNTIL DATE CERTAIN AUGUST 16™
ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Wilshire

| assume that the vendor that got this bid has a schedule they have to work by. They have to fit this in the
schedule that they have. I’d hate to see that pushed off. | do agree that there are some places where line of
sight needs to be improved and |’m hoping that’s part of the plan for Director Caggiano. I’d rather not table it.

Alderman O’Brien

| would like to echo those same thoughts because | image he does have a schedule and has to do it. The
request from Alderman Cookson, unless | misunderstand it, you’re looking for additional. So nothing seems to
be wrong with what is on the plate right now on what Kohl Farms is going to do. | can see your need to look for
additional questions. So therefore | don’t think | could support the tabling motion at this particular time.

The other thing in echoing of Alderman Caron’s point, we put this out to bid for 8 vendors and we only got 1.
So if we get into a delay or a holding pattern and the company gets booked during that particular time, it
doesn’t seem it leaves us with a lot of choices. There’s not the number two person on the vending list that we
could go to to get this done. So | think it’s looking for a commitment tonight.

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 9
Alderman Cookson

| appreciate each of the concerns that have been raised by Alderman O’Brien and Alderman Wilshire. The
motion that | made was to hold it for two weeks until the middle of this month and understanding that if we
approve it on the 16" with the additional information provided by Mr. Caggiano, they should have plenty of time
because the work is not beginning until mid-September and running through late October. This is what is
stated within the memo that we received. That gives them an entire month after our approval to fit it into their
schedule. | don’t think two weeks is an inordinate amount of time to ask for some information and then get it
out of here so that they can schedule and get the work done. That’s just my opinion. Thank you.

Alderman Caron

| don’t have a problem with holding it because when you schedule these people to do the mowing, you’ve
already given them a start date which is basically mid-September to October. | don’t think that’s going to be an
issue. We have to remember that the staff basically does 25 playgrounds, ball fields. That’s their priority to the
city and as the Mayor says when there is a call for some of this, that’s when they go out. This is some big
pieces that have to get done by an outside company. | don’t’ think that Superintendent Caggiano would have a
problem as long as we got the information in time or he comes and speaks. | think that we can delay it. If we
delay it past that, then we could be in some Serious trouble. | think their scheduling is okay.

Alderman Wilshire

| appreciate your comments Alderman Caron and knowing that you worked there for 40 odd years, | kind of
respect your take on things. | guess | can go along with that.

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Perma-Line of New England for Purchase of Signs, Poles, Parts and Pavement Paint
(Value: $25,000)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT
TO PERMA-LINE OF NEW ENGLAND IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000. FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE IN
DEPARTMENT 161 STREETS; GENERAL OPERATING FUND

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: 2016 Street Paving Program — Change Order No. 2 (Value: $2,058,630)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE, AND CONTINGENT UPON BOARD
OF ALDERMEN APPROVAL, AUTHORIZE CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 TO THE CONTRACT WITH BROX
INDUSTRIES, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,058,630. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS DEPARTMENT 160,
ADMINISTRATION/ENGINEERING; GENERAL OPERATING FUND; MULTI-YEAR PAVING; AND,
DEPARTMENT 169, WASTEWATER; SEWER STRUCTURES

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Cookson

Can you just explain or somebody explain the increase of the $2 million?

Mayor Donchess

There’s a previous contract in place.

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 10
Alderman Cookson

For about $2 million.

Mayor Donchess

This is some of the bonded money that was approved beginning in July 2017 — in other words this past month
for the fiscal year beginning this past month — and what they’re proposing is that rather than put it out to bid
the price they have with Brox already there’s been a lot of paving here is favorable and because they'd like to
do the work this fall right away, they’re proposing a change order to this contract that previously does existed
with Brox add these streets to it and use the money $2 million approximately from the fiscal ’18 bonded
money to do the streets that are attached. There’s a list of streets that are attached. Do those streets in the
fall of this year.

Alderman Cookson
So it is using the bonded money. The money that the Board of Aldermen already said we were going to use

and instead of using it to go out to bid, we’re already going to use a vendor that we’re already doing paving
with. We're going to add an additional 6.5 miles with Brox with these streets. Thank you.

Mayor Donchess

This will have to go to the Board of Aldermen because it’s more than $1 million.

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: 2017 Street Paving Program — Change Order No. 1 (Value: $474,205)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE CHANGE ORDER #1
TO THE CONTRACT WITH E.J. PAVING COMPANY, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $474,205. FUNDS ARE
AVAILABLE IN DEPARTMENT 161, STREET; GENERAL OPERATING FUND; PAVING; DEPARTMENT
160, ADMINISTRATION/ENGINEERING; GENERAL OPERATING FUND; MULTI-YEAR PAVING; AND,
DEPARTMENT 169 WASTEWATER; SEWER STRUCTURES

ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Cookson
So I’m just going to ask. This is identical to the one that we just passed except that this contract is with EJ

Paving versus Brox. So we’ve got two paving companies coming into the city doing work and paving the
streets.

Mayor Donchess

So we entered a contract with EJ for the fiscal 17 money. In other words the pre-bonding — the money for the
$2.3 million that was appropriated in the beginning of fiscal 17 in other words July of 16. $1.729 million that
has been contracted, there’s money leftover and they’re saying with the company that has the fiscal 17
contract that we expend the rest of the money by expanding the streets that they would pave also this year.
Alderman Cookson

Okay so the $474,205 that is being added in change order 1 is that bonded money as well?

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 11

Mayor Donchess

No. that’s the money that was appropriated in the budget that we passed in late June 2016. We approved
about 2.3 so if you add the $1.7 million plus the 400 some thousand, you come up to the $2.2 million.

Alderman Cookson
Okay thank you.
MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Castings Purchase for the 2017 Street Paving Program — Change Order No. 1 (Value: $61,209)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE CHANGE ORDER #1
TO THE CONTRACT WITH E.J. PRESCOTT, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $61,209. SOURCE OF FUNDING
IS DEPARTMENT 169, WASTEWATER; SEWER STRUCTURES

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Headworks Upgrade Project — Change Order #5 (Value: $17,453)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE CHANGE ORDER
#5 TO THE CONTRACT WITH T-BUCK CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $17,453. FUNDS ARE
AVAILABLE IN DEPARTMENT 169, WASTEWATER; STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUND

ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Cookson

| just have a general question. It seems like the last two months we’ve had a lot of requests coming in from
wastewater. | know that some of that has been for chemicals and this is when we make our purchases. I’m
fine with that but over the last two months, the last two Finance meetings, we spent a half a million dollars on
the wastewater treatment plant. This evening we’ve got some big expenditures as well. | don’t understand
why these are coming in disparate over several months in time whether it’s to — if that truly is the timing or |
just don’t know. | don’t’ understand why we’re not seeing a more consolidated effort from wastewater to come
in and say we need this stuff and really rank them in priority. This is an A need. This is aB need. Do we
need all of this at one time? | just have a real question about what’s happening with wastewater and all these
requests that are coming in over the last three months.

Mayor Donchess

Now we had Noelle Osborne here last time to explain a couple of these. My general explanation to the very
detailed question is that it’s been a lot more than two months. There have been major expenditures on a
regular basis being approved for the wastewater treatment plant for a couple of years. The plant went into
almost a failure mode 2 or 3 years ago...

Alderman Cookson

Because of the digester.

Mayor Donchess

And a lot of other problems that were uncovered. The previous Superintendent that was not informed — this is
going back maybe 3 years now — the previous Superintendent at that time was not keeping the Director, or

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 12

the Board of Public Works, or the Board of Aldermen informed about problems, lack of maintenance and as a
result of the lack of maintenance, there were failures and the plant partially shut down for a period of time.
Public Works moved in particularly with Alderman Deane and Alderman Siegel involved on a very hands on
basis to make many corrections. We hired an engineering firm to design a lot of a different changes. The
whole plant is being rehabilitated really and we had issued with DES. They came in and they did an audit. As
a result of all this, there have been many changes, many upgrades, pumps, digesters, everything, is being
replaced and is being fixed. We're in very good shape now with DES. That’s the Department of
Environmental Services which regulates the wastewater treatment plant. A State agency. We've made great
progress. We’re in good shape with them but they continue to recommend a whole schedule of changes that
many of which had been planned for a long time. In addition, things occasionally happen which are not
expected and that then gets into the que as well. It’s not that they’re trying to play you or something. It’s just
that they’re going forward with a whole schedule.

Alderman Cookson

Let me ask it this way then. | didn’t want to imply that but what | am interested in is information in order to
make an educated decision. So the answers to these questions will have been discussed at a Board of Public
Works meeting?

Mayor Donchess

Not necessarily.
Alderman Cookson

So where is it that we can get the information that we need to make an educated decision on these
expenditures?

Mayor Donchess

Well as you saw two weeks ago, the details regarding each of these things are highly technical. The work has
to do with the process at the treatment plant and really the only people who have in depth knowledge or the
people who have most in depth knowledge are those that work at the plant. Noelle Osborne is kind of second
in command and she came in last time to explain a couple of large items.

Alderman Cookson

Again questions that | had posed at a Finance meeting that required her expertise to answer.

Mayor Donchess

| think four weeks or a month ago you had asked various questions regarding a couple of large items or one
large item and one smaller item. We had Ms. Osborne come in and explain them. | think she did a very good
job. We could have here come in again. If you want explanation regarding all the changes that are going on
in the treatment plant, we really need to bring her in to explain each of these things. I’m not saying that I’m
against that or that you’re questions are unreasonable...

Alderman Cookson

No, but wouldn't it be helpful for the committee to understand what direction we’re going in with the
wastewater treatment facility so that we can sort of anticipate some of the needs and when we get a request
for X, Y, and Z we’re going to say oh yeah Noelle was in here and she told us that we should anticipate this.
We're going to need to make this purchase to make sure that we’re up to 100 percent capacity or whatever

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 13
the case may be. | think that would be helpful. It would be helpful for me and | don’t want to speak for the

rest of the Committee. | would be helpful for me and hopefully some of that information would be helpful to
other members as well.

Mayor Donchess

Now I’m not contesting anything you’re saying. It just depends on the level of scrutiny or the degree of
overview that you wish to exercise. There have been times when both the Board of Public Works and the
Finance Committee basically when they see a written memo explaining this, they know there’s a lot going on
over there. They basically rely on the people that work there to have made accurate and responsible
decisions regarding what should be done.

Alderman Cookson

Your statement about the last Superintendent raises that we should have at least more purview into and more
explanation.

Mayor Donchess

And I’m not disagreeing. If you want more review, more insight into the details and the reasons for each of
the changes, | don’t have a problem with that.

Alderman Cookson

So no the reason why | was asking about is the information explained in Public Works is maybe | need to take
it upon myself to either attend or watch one of those if these are being discussed in that forum.

Mayor Donchess

I'd say there are sometimes they’re discussed with the detail that you’re asking but sometimes they’re not. A
lot of times the Board of Public Works knows these people quite well.

Alderman Cookson

But at least Ms. Osborne would be available at a Board of Public Works meeting so that if a question needed
to be asked at that point in time, she would be available.

Mayor Donchess

That’s true. She’s always there. Someone from the treatment plant is always there.
Alderman Cookson

So I'll make an extra effort to try to attend or participate in those.

Mayor Donchess

What do you want to do with this one? Do you want her to come in on this? Do you want to approve it or
what are you asking for?

Dan Kooken
Just to address this specific issue on this. This is a very big project. This is the fifth change order on this

project. It’s about $3 million. I’ve been out there a number of times and have seen what they are doing there.
It is very much down in the bowels of the facility and they’re finding things that they didn’t original anticipate or

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 14

couldn’t’ even see at the time when they did the original work. In this case, it’s one of those things they have
to change the size of the openings and do some work that was really unanticipated. It’s independent of for
example the purchase of chemicals and there are things coming forward that are going to continue to come
from wastewater that are pretty significant. They’re going to have a digester cleanout bid. There’s a lot of
work there and it kind of continues. | don’t think they can all fall in a pretty sequence for us. | don’t Know the
correct process | guess to get foresight of what’s going to come to finance because it’s going to continue to
come — here’s 1, here’s 1, here’s 2. It’s been that way for quite some time.

Alderman Cookson

| just picked on the last three months just because | knew that was $500,000 and what we’re seeing tonight. |
would love at some point in time for Ms. Osborne to be invited back into the Finance Committee and just give
a nice overview about the wastewater treatment facility and some of the projects that she sees forthcoming. |
think that would be helpful for me and that would be the request that | would make this evening. I’m not
necessarily interested in holding any of these up but | would like to see some more information from Ms.
Osborne.

Mayor Donchess

No problem doing that. This became extremely detailed and the depth of the work was very — this happened
during the previous administration when this started. In order to give the Board of Aldermen a little more
participation and insight into what was happening, Mayor Lozeau had asked Aldermen Deane and Siegel to
become very involved in the project. They did that and they helped outline, they understood what was going
on. The idea was that they were more technically minded than a lot of the other aldermen and they could
understand the situation a little better. | think to some degree we as aldermen relied upon them to make
judgements to what was happening was correct. No they’re not involved on that level anymore because kind
of the crisis passed and a lot of the major work was done. | don’t have a problem with bringing Ms. Osborne
in to explain an overview on what — | think the Aldermen should be informed if you care to be. Sometimes
people don’t but if you care to be, it’s great if the Aldermen want to be informed and know what the details of
what’s going on. That’s maybe why we have the Finance Committee.

Alderman O’Brien

I’m glad we’re not really going to tie this up. | could see this happening in my limited forays into construction
at the time. You always rip off something into something. Really strategically rotten underneath that’s going
to happen. From reading on the discussion here, it said it was almost impossible for them to measure this
because this is an active flowing. Thank God it is flowing. | could see that it was not possible for them to
really properly measure this and this is it. When we’re dealing with these two channels that are active
channels, it wasn’t noticed until they were able to block up one. There is a highlight here and it’s the same
situation will occur when the contractor demolishes the long tunnel because additional (inaudible) tunnels
maybe needed on that. At least they had the foresight to give us warning that they would be back on
something similar like this in the future.

Mayor Donchess

| think the depth of where — again I’m not disagreeing. We're going to bring in Ms. Osborne but the depth of
their involvement is suggested for example “when flow is blocked from entering the short channel, it was
determined that the existing cutouts along the concrete walls would not allow the new screen to fit properly.
This change order is for the additional saw cutting needed so that the new screen would fit within the existing
concrete channel. The same situation will occur when the contractor demolishes the long channel, however it
is premature to determine the additional costs until they begin the work and assess the needs.” Obviously
they’re deeply involved here. This is highly technical. You practically have to be down in the water to
understand all this. We'll get Ms. Osborne to come in. That is not a problem. | think she kind of enjoyed
herself. She did a good job and she'd probably like to come before us. It’s pleasant to have her come in. A
new face.

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 15

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: WW TF Plant Oversight Services - Amendment #1 (Value: $23,920)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE AMENDMENT #1
TO THE CONTRACT WITH OSPREY OWL ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $23,920.
SOURCE OF FUNDING IS DEPARTMENT 169, WASTEWATER

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Grinder Replacement (Value: $15,292)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE
FROM JWC ENVIRONMENTAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,292. FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE IN DEPART-
MENT 169, WASTEWATER

ON THE QUESTION

Mayor Donchess

You might ask what is a grinder. | do know that. It is like a disposal in your drain. It grinds stuff up before the
solid material hits the pump so that it doesn’t damage the pump as it goes through. It’s in front of the pump. It
grinds up any solid material into smaller particles before it hits the pump.

Alderman Cookson

That’s amazing. Thank you.

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Analytical Testing Services (Value: $43,650)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND, CONTINGENT UPON BOARD OF
ALDERMEN APPROVAL, AWARD THE MULTI-YEAR CONTRACT TO ENVIRO-SYSTEMS, INC. IN THE
AMOUNT OF $43,650. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS DEPARTMENT 169, WASTEWATER

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Cookson

Just confirming before we vote. It’s a three year contract - $14,550 annually. So we’re only expending the
$14,550 this year.

Mayor Donchess

That’s correct but that will go to the full Board of Aldermen because it’s a multi-year contract.

MOTION CARRIED

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 16

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Raw Sewage Pump Impeller Repair (Value: $14,250)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE
FROM XYLEM WATER SOLUTIONS USA, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,250. FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE
IN DEPARTMENT 169, WASTEWATER

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Tire Recycling — Three Year Pricing Agreement (Value: $41,111)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE, AND CONTINGENT UPON BOARD OF
ALDERMEN APPROVAL, AWARD THE CONTRACT TO NORTHEAST RESOURCE RECOVERY
ASSOCIATION IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $41,111. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS DEPARTMENT

168, SOLID WASTE
MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: FY 18 Landfill Engineering Services (Value: Not-to-Exceed $80,000)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO

SANBORN HEAD ASSOCIATES IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $80,000. FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE

IN DEPARTMENT 168, SOLID WASTE

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager

Re: To Approve the Purchase of Recycling and Trash Carts from Toter, Inc. (Value: Not-to-Exceed
$145,000)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE

WITH TOTER, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $145,000. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS DEPARTMENT 168, SOLID

WASTE

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Cookson

How much is each toter?

Mayor Donchess

It’s like $60.

Alderman Cookson

So how many can we purchase with $145,000 and are you equally distributing those between recycle bins and
trash bins or is one going to take majority?

Mayor Donchess
It’s about 16 per thousand. If you multiply 16 times 145 you get the number. It’s mostly recycling.
Alderman Cookson

Do we have an inventory already? What are we going to do...

Finance Committee - 8/2/2017 Page 17

Mayor Donchess

It’s running down. So what they do is they buy a big bunch of them and they’re for sale to the public. They get
a whole group and they sell them gradually. They’re selling like | think fairly rapidly — 20 to 30 at a time in the
course of a week maybe. Then they buy a big supply. They sell those until they get down close to running out
and then they buy another set of them.

Alderman Cookson

So at $60 apiece, $145,000 goes in about 2,400 times.

Dan Kooken

We buy them in a truck load lot so that we’re taking advantage of the freight. These are a lot of air even
though they nest them together. So they do buy in a truck load lot. I’m not specifically aware of exactly how
many that is. | can get that for you if you need that.

Alderman Cookson

So again | just took the $145,000 and divided it by 60 which is the approximate price which | just heard,
correct? So it leaves me with about 2,400 toters that are available. You said a majority of those are going into

the recycling area. Some left for trash pickup. My understanding correct me if I’m wrong | thought that only the
recycling bins were available for purchase and that the trash bins were provided to the citizens of Nashua.

Mayor Donchess

That’s correct.

Alderman Cookson

Is there a need for trash cans?

Mayor Donchess

The vast majority of this is recycling. They’re selling | believe the figure is 20 to 30 a week. This is a supply so
that would be 1,000 to 1,500 a year. So this is a supply that would last a year to two years.

Alderman Cookson

80 weeks. You said 20 to 30 a week. So it would last 80 weeks.
Mayor Donchess

A ballpark. Let’s say somewhere between a year and two years.
Dan Kooken

| think we'd have to verify the calculations. It seems a little off to me. We're buying them in truckload lots. It
seems like we buy at least a couple times a year.

Mayor Donchess

| don’t’ think that’s correct.