Search

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 17

There being no objection, Vice President O’Brien declared the report of the March 27, 2019, Committee
on Infrastructure accepted and placed on file.

Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee..........0. 0.0 .cc ccc cce ce cee cee eeeerens 04/01/2019

There being no objection, Vice President O’Brien declared the report of the April 1, 2019, Personnel/
Administrative Affairs Committee accepted and placed on file.

CONFIRMATION OF MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS
Cultural Connections Committee

There being no objection, Vice President O’Brien declared Sandra Pratt, 24 Gingras Drive, Nashua,
duly appointed to the Cultural Connections Committee for a term to expire March 1, 2022

Oath of Office will be administered by Corporation Counsel at a later date.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS — RESOLUTIONS

R-19-114
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Ernest A. Jette
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER TO ISSUE BONDS NOT TO EXCEED
THE AMOUNT OF SIX MILLION DOLLARS ($6,000,000) FOR THE PHASE III LINED LANDFILL
EXPANSION OF THE NASHUA FOUR HILLS LANDFILL, TO INCLUDE ENGINEERING
SERVICES
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN JETTE FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-19-114 BY ROLL CALL
Yea: Alderman Klee, Alderman Laws, Alderman Lopez

Alderman Caron, Alderwoman Kelly, Alderman Jette

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman Tencza

Alderman Schmidt, Alderman Clemons, Alderman O’Brien 11
Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED

Resolution R-19-114 declared duly adopted.

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 18

R-19-117
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
CHANGING THE USE OF FUNDS FOR A WASTEWATER FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT FROM BRIDGE STREET OVERFLOW DETENTION BASIN IMPROVEMENTS TO WET
WEATHER FACILITY SCREEN AND RAKE UPGRADES
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN MELIZZI-GOLJA FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-19-117 BY ROLL CALL
ON THE QUESTION

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

May |? | would just like to comment for those who don’t see the agenda. The Budget Review Committee
recommended final passage and the Board of Public Works also gave a favorable recommendation for this.

Vice President O’Brien

Thank you Alderwoman; any other discussion on the Motion? Seeing none we will call the question by roll
call.

Yea: Alderman Klee, Alderman Laws, Alderman Lopez
Alderman Caron, Alderwoman Kelly, Alderman Jette
Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja, Alderman Tencza
Alderman Schmidt, Alderman Clemons, Alderman O’Brien 11

Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED

Resolution R-19-117 declared duly adopted.

R-19-120
Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
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-at-Large David C. Tencza
Alderman Jan Schmidt
Alderman-at-Large Ben Clemons
CHANGING THE NAME OF PANTHER DRIVE TO OFFICER JAMES ROCHE DRIVE
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN TENCZA FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-19-120
MOTION CARRIED

Resolution R-19-120 declared duly adopted.

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 19

R-19-124
Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman-at-Large David C. Tencza
Alderman Jan Schmidt
NAMING THE INTERSECTION AT GRAND AVENUE AND NORTH SEVENTH STREET
“LITTLE LEAGUE SQUARE”
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-19-124
MOTION CARRIED

Resolution R-19-124 declared duly adopted.

R-19-125
Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman-at-Large Ben Clemons
Alderman-at-Large David C. Tencza
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
APPROVING THE COST ITEMS OF A SIDEBAR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE NASHUA
BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS AND UFPO LOCAL 645 PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES
OF THE NASHUA POLICE DEPARTMENT REGARDING SPECIAL PROJECTS
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN CLEMONS TO AMEND R-19-125 IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REPLACING IT
WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS MADE BY THE BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Clemons

The amendment, all it did was put the effective date of the legislation in there.
MOTION CARRIED

MOTION BY ALDERMAN CLEMONS FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-19-125 AS AMENDED
MOTION CARRIED

Resolution R-19-125 declared duly adopted as amended.

Board of Aldermen 04-09-2019 Page 20

UNFINISHED BUSINESS — ORDINANCES

O-18-030
Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws
Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja
Alderman Patricia Klee
Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
INCREASING FEES FOR LEASED CITY PARKING SPACES
Given its third reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN LAWS FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT OF O-18-030
ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Laws

This has been talked about at length in many other Committees, but a quick synopsis is it was brought up
by Downtown Improvements Committee and Economic Development. We looked into it, we had a lot of
unanswered questions thanks to Alderman Clemons, welcome back. And we decided that we will re-visit
this when the time comes, probably Performing Arts Center related, when we need to do some renovations
to the garages.

MOTION CARRIED
Ordinance O-18-030 declared indefinitely postponed.

O-19-037
Endorsers: Alderman Ernest Jette
Alderman Tom Lopez
RAISING THE AGE TO PURCHASE, USE, AND POSSESS TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND
E-CIGARETTES FROM EIGHTEEN (18) TO TWENTY-ONE (21)
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN KLEE TO RE-REFER O-19-037 BACK TO COMMITTEE
ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Klee

May | speak to that motion?

Vice President O’Brien

There’s a motion to re-refer back to Committee which is a high priority motion. You are allowed to speak
on your motion.

Alderman Klee

My comments and the reason for wanting to re-refer this back to Committee is simply because there is an
Ordinance, | mean I’m sorry | mean an amendment that has been put forward and sent to us and so on. |
believe in the past when this has happened with this Committee any amendments and so on, it has gone
back to the Committee, they refer to wanting to basically vet it out and do all the things that are necessary.
And I'd like to have that voted on.

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.

Note 2 — Property, Plant and Equipment

The components of property, plant and equipment as of December 31, 2015 and 2014 were
as follows:

Useful Lives
(in thousands) 2015 2014 (in years)
Utility Property:
Land and land rights $ 3,078 $ 2,939 -
Source of supply 52,347 51,489 3-70
Pumping and purification 30,508 30,115 7-64
Transmission and distribution, including 138,756 130,983
services, meters and hydrants 15-9]
General and other equipment 13,189 11,358 7-75
Intangible plant 790 770 20
Construction work in progress 4,494 2,677
Total utility property 243,162 230,331
Total non-utility property 5 5 5-10
Total property, plant and equipment 243,167 230,336
Less accumulated depreciation (59,926) (57,049)

Property, plant and equipment, net $§ 183,241 $173,287

The provision for depreciation is computed on the straight-line method over the estimated
useful lives of the assets, which range from 3 to 91 years. The weighted average composite
depreciation rate was 2.53% and 2.43% in 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Note 3 — Investments — Bond Project Funds

At December 31, 2015, the Company held investments in marketable securities that were
classified as held-to-maturity and consisted of the following:

Unrecognized Estimated

Amortized Holding Fair
(in thousands) Cost Losses Value
U.S. government bonds $ 17,237 §$ (27) § 17,210

Investments - Bond Project Funds $ 17,237 $ (27) $ 17,210

16

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.