Search

election, whether Municipal or State, is sworn in.

4, If the Mayor's Nominee is not confirmed, a new vacancy is declared, and the process will
be repeated until a Nominee is confirmed by the Board of Aldermen.

This process solves all of the concerns about the current process of Special Election, expresses
the urgency to have the Boards fully staffed, and minimizes the concern about cronyism. There is
no cost to the city for a special election; a replacement on the City Board could be in place in 30-
60 days, and duly elected representatives of the City are affirming any appointment being made
by the specific Board or the Mayor.

Other Important Local Election Considerations.

That said, if the city is going to make a change to the City Charter involving elections, please
combine it with other needed changes.

Election Closing Time.

Nashua is, I believe, the only city in New Hampshire that closes the polls at 8 p.m. The time that
WMUR and other state media "advertise" as the time of the poll closing is 7 p.m. Further, on
Election Day, WMUR and other media begin reporting election results while Nashua's polls
continue to be open. Nashua needs to get in line with the rest of the cities in the State and close
out polls at 7 p.m.

As Moderator for almost 6 years, I have been documenting the hour by hour traffic in my Ward.
I have observed that over the past 4 years, the traffic between 7 and 8 pm has dwindled
considerably. In last November's midterm election, the number of voters in the last hour fell from
an all day average of just over 200 an hour to about 50 voters in the last hour. (Getting the exact
number from the midterm are difficult because the election involved 2 ballots for each voter and
100s of absentee voters.)

At last week's election, we fell from an hourly average of just over 33 voters an hour to just 13
voters. I have been observing this trend since at least the Presidential Primary in 2016.

The City Clerk has informed me that the Election times are set by the Board of. Aldermen, not
in the Charter. Therefore, I recommend the closing time should be changed to 7 p.m.

Nomination of Ward Election Officers.

I would like the City to re-consider a previous Charter Amendment I proposed concerning the
Ward Election Officers that was narrowly rejected by voters after an editorial in the Telegraph
that misrepresented the proposal.

As the City is organized, the Moderators, Clerks, and Selectmen in each Ward are, in realty,
nothing but contract employees of the City Clerk's office. They have no role or authority other
that being "elected" officials of the city authorized to run the polling places on election days.

A City Ward is different from a Town in New Hampshire, although both appear to be similarly
organized. The Ward Moderators, Clerks, and Selectmen only have responsibility to run the
polling places for elections. The City Clerk sets the policies and procedures so that all Wards are
doing it the same. This is important to protect the integrity of our elections. The Ward
Moderator is in charge of their polling location in their Ward on Election Day, but must follow
the lead of the City Clerk.

From my experience, I know it is brutal work that the team does out of love for the city and a
desire to serve.

The reality is that too many of the 45 positions do not even have a candidate, and all too often
the "elected" official wins by a write-in of 1-3 votes. I was chosen to serve in my first term by
the City Clerk because the person elected by write-in vote, resigned, and I had volunteered.

The City Clerk shall attest that making sure each Ward has a full complement of election
officials and Ballot Inspectors for each election is difficult.

The current process is, in my opinion, demeaning to people who just want to volunteer their time
to serve the city. They have to find at least 15 people to sign and witness nominating petitions.
Then the City Clerk's office has to spend time to then certify each of those petitions, and then, if
the candidate falls short, they are not on the ballot. The number for these petitions required is the
same as the number of nominating petitions required to run for Ward Alderman which is a much
more powerful and responsible position.

I know that for the 2017 election, I worked hard to get candidates city-wide to run for these
election offices and too many of them gave up because of the requirement to submit so many
nominating petitions.

In contrast, if a candidate wishes to run as a State Representative, the candidate can either pay $2
or submit 5 nominating petitions.

My request is that we make it easier for someone to run for these Ward election offices and make
the requirement be the same as the requirement for becoming a State Representative.

I propose that the charter change for this be to simply say that the requirement to get on
the ballot be the same as the requirement to get on the ballot as a State Representative.

Improvements for Running Elections in Nashua.

I would like to ask you to consider these realities involving election officials. I believe all of
these suggestions can be implemented by the Board of Aldermen alone.

1. The number of ballot inspectors that the city allows assumes the election laws of long ago. We
now have a requirement to have election staff to photograph voters who do not present a photo
ID. At all partisan primaries, we have to have at least one, usually two, members of the election

staff to process voters who wish to return to Undeclared.

2. The current requirements for marking the checklist during an election require serious
concentration by the people checking in voters. This requires giving the staff breaks, especially
during busy elections.

3. In my six years as Moderator, the number of checklist books has increased from two (2) in all
elections to a minimum of three (3) and often up to as many as eight (8) for Presidential primary
and general elections. Each checklist book requires a Ballot Inspector or Selectman., all day.

4. The pay for election officials seems to suggest that they are just working on Election Day. The
Selectmen and Ballot Inspectors are currently expected to go through up to 2 hours of training,
up to 2 hours of pre-election ballot counting, about 2 hours of polling place setup, another hour
of pre-election setup on the morning of the election, 14 hours of election, and several hours of
work after the election to process the election. The Clerk and Moderator also have other pre- and
post-election duties. The police officer that now is a constant fixture of the city polling places is
paid much more for his or her time than any of the election officials.

T request you consider that:

* The pay for election officials be increased to recognize value of their service and the actual
time they have to spend.

* The number of allowed ballot inspectors be increased by at least two (2) for all partisan
primaries.

* The City Clerk be authorized to increase the number of ballot inspectors for any election based
on the historical turnout projections to keep the waiting times to check-in as short as possible. In
last year's mid-term election. we had to operate with only 4 books, and the a staff member from
the AG's office inspecting our polling place was strongly critical of the long lines.

* The city add an additional tabulator in each ward so that at high turnout elections, we keep the
lines short for voters waiting to cast their ballot. This is a problem in those elections when a
machine jams or when we need to empty a full box.

* The City recognize that, if the State authorizes, as is expected, more early voting, even "no
cause" absentee voting, that this will mean additional resources needed to process any election.

Thank you for considering,

John B. Lisle, Moderator, Ward 8

68 Bluestone Drive, Nashua, New Hampshire 03060
603-888-3333

603-324-9110 (cell)

jlisle@gmail.com

NashuakecyclekRight

The rules for recycling are changing— they are becoming more stringent—and the City of Nashua
must change with them! We will no longer be able to take your recycling if your recycling bin does
not follow the new rules. Please read the guidelines listed on this flyer to ensure that you:

KNOW BEFORE YOU THROW!

Recycle

Do NOT Recycle
Se)

PAPER

*ALL CLEAN—NO FOOD OR OIL STAINS*

Cardboard, Paperboard, Newspapers, Inserts, Maga-
zines, Mailings, Catalogs, Paper Bags, Office Papers,
Envelopes, Wrapping Paper & Phone Books

PLASTIC iN)

BAGS

*ANY BAG THAT IS NOT PAPER*

Trash bags, Shopping bags, Frozen Vegetable Bags,
Pellet Bags, Bread Bags, Newspaper Bags, Potato or
Snack Bags, Sandwich Bags & Animal Food Bags

PLASTIC

*ALL CLEAN—NO LIQUID INSIDE—NO
CAPS!*

Water Bottles, Milk Jugs, Detergent Bottles,
All Rigid Containers (marked with a #1—7 ONLY)

BATTERIES, BULBS
SHARPS & TANKS

Alkaline Batteries, Button-Cell Batteries, Rechargeable
Batteries, Lithium lon Batteries, Needles, Sharps, Pro-
pane, Helium, any Gas Cylinder, Knives & Blades &
Light Bulbs

METAL

*ALL CLEAN—NO FOOD OR LIQUID INSIDE*

Tin Cans, Aluminum Cans &
Aluminum Foil

Storage Containers
& Household Items

Styrofoam or Polystyrene Foam, To Go Lids, Oily Pizza
Boxes, Straws, Napkins, Paper & Plastic Plates, Plas-
tic Wrap, Wax Coated Paper or Boxes, Clothing &
Shoes, Bedding & Pillows, Diapers, Bubble Wrap,
Food, Toys, Tyvek Envelopes, Container Caps & Co-
vers, Electronics, Cartons with screw caps, Shredded
Paper & Hard Covered Books

GLASS

*ALL CLEAN—NO LIQUID OR FOOD INSIDE*
All Glass Bottles and Jars

Building Materials
& Miscellaneous

.
<= :

Large Metal Parts, Cars, Boats, Trucks, Wood & Lumber,
Pipes, Garden Hoses, Tarps, Vinyl Siding, Rope, String,
Chain, Boat Shrink Wrap, Yard Waste, Demolition Debris, Pet
Waste, Plants & Kitty Litter

amortized over the lives of the underlying bond obligations. The Series 2015A bonds, which
were issued at a premium, include $5.1 million to construct a new operations facility in 2016.
The $222,000 cost of issuance associated with both the Series 2015A and Series 2015B
bonds is being amortized over the 30-year and [5-year life of the debt obligations.

These bonds were issued under a new bond indenture and loan and trust agreement, which
contains certain covenant obligations upon Pennichuck Water, which are as follows:

Debt to Capital Covenant - Pennichuck Water cannot create, issue, incur, assume or
guarantee any short-term debt if (1) the sum of the short-term debt plus its funded
debt (“Debt”) shall exceed 85% of the sum of its short-term debt, funded debt and
capital stock plus surplus accounts (“Capital”), unless the short-term debt issued in
excess of the 85% is subordinated to the Series 2014 bonds. Thereby, the ratio of
Debt to Capital must be equal to or less than 1.0. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014,
Pennichuck Water Works has a Debt to Capital Coverage ratio of 0.4 and 0.4,
respectively.

All Bonds Test - Additionally, Pennichuck Water cannot create, issue, incur, assume
or guarantee any new funded debt, if the total outstanding funded debt (“Total Funded
Debt”) will exceed the sum of MARA (as defined in Note 12 of these consolidated
financial statements) and 85% of its Net Capital Properties (‘MARA and Capital
Properties”), and unless net revenues or EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation and amortization) shall equal or exceed for at least 12 consecutive
months out of the 15 months preceding the issuance of the new funded debt by
1.1 times the maximum amount for which Pennichuck Water will be obligated to pay
in any future year (“Max Amount Due”), as a result of the new funded debt being
incurred. Thereby, the ratio of Total Funded Debt to MARA and Capital Properties
must be equal to or less than 1.0; as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, this coverage
ratio was 0.4 and 0.5, respectively. Also, the ratio of EBITDA to the Max Amount
Due must be equal to or greater than 1.1; as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, this
ratio was 1.6 and 4.0, respectively.

Rate Covenant Test - If during any fiscal year, the EBITDA of Pennichuck Water
shall not equal at least 1.1 times all amounts paid or required to be paid during that
year (“Amounts Paid”), then the Company shall undertake reasonable efforts to
initiate a rate-making proceeding with the NH Public Utilities Commission, to rectify
this coverage requirement in the succeeding fiscal years. Thereby, the ratio of
EBITDA to Amounts Paid must be equal to or greater than 1.1; as of December 31,
2015 and 2014, the Rate Covenant coverage ratio was 2.10 and 3.52, respectively.

Pennichuck East’s loan agreement for its unsecured notes payable to a bank of $6.5 million
and $6.2 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, contains a minimum debt
service coverage ratio requirement of [.25. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, this ratio was
1.64 and 1.83, respectively. Also, Pennichuck East is required to maintain a maximum ratio
of total debt to total capitalization of 65%; at December 31, 2015 and 2014, this ratio was

50% and 44%, respectively.

31

y

%

Four Hills Landfill & Nashua Recycling Center

840 West Hollis Street, Nashua, NH (603)-589-3410

E-mail: solidwaste@nashuanh.gov
Hours of Operation: Monday to Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

Acceptable Materials & Residential Fees

“Electronics - Computers, televisions, VCR’s, CD players

The first two per year are free. Additional items will be charged at $5 per
item.

“Tires — Passenger vehicles only (must be off rim)

*Construction & Demolition Debris (C&D) — Lumber, plaster, drywall,

Sheet rock, shingles, siding, cabinets, tile, carpeting and underlay, fences, etc. -
$90/ton

* Asbestos — from single family, owner-occupied residences — $200 / ton
Must be pre-registered for disposal.

* Please note that all electronics, tires, C&D and asbestos must go over the scale.

Books, Clothing — No charge

Mercury Devices — Fluorescent bulbs, thermometers, thermostats (please bring to office) — No charge
Batteries —Vehicle — No charge

Waste Oil and Antifreeze — No charge

Single Stream Recyclables — No charge

Metal and Appliances — No charge

Soft Yard Waste — No charge

Brush / Wood Chips — No charge

Ink Cartridges, Cell Phones, & Rechargeable Batteries (please bring to office) — No charge
Household Trash — No charge

The Nashua Recycling Center is open to residents of Nashua. The prices listed apply to items generated from Nashua residences only.

Residents are required to purchase a $5 annual permit to use the Recycling Center.
(The fee is waived for residents who are 65 or older).

Commercial entities may use the Recycling Center under certain restrictions.

The hours of operation are Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and Saturdays 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
The scale closes 15 minutes prior to the facility closing.

Board of Aldermen 03-12-2019 Page 14

No.

Alderman Lopez

So first I’d like to thank Attorney Bolton for coming on his death bed.

Attorney Bolton

You're welcome.

Alderman Lopez

Everybody is working at the polls, like Mr. Sennett, they are doing it because they care about our City and
because it is not a career position, they are paid barely enough to apologize for being there all day. So |
want to recognize that happens and it is important for us to make a decision that doesn’t cost the City
unnecessary money and also acknowledges the position the position that people who are running the polls
are in. | also want to recognize the roll that the public plays in this; it is not, getting to the polls is not an
even race for everybody. Some people are walking from a distance, some people are taking buses, some
people are taking time off of work, they are juggling children.

So it is a challenge, so we’ve talked at length about poor voter turnout but at the end of the day there are
like 2 people to vote for on one position so it is difficult for the individual voter to show up for a special
election. So I’m in favor of changing this system. | don’t have a problem with the amendment that we have
at the moment because it is as fair as you can get given the circumstances, | can’t agree with the logic of
just picking the next runner up, because those situations vary wildly. | believe this special election we just
had, the next runner up would have been Chris Williams, regardless of whether he was still interested in the
position, regardless of how the community felt, we can’t just default to the next runner up. As Alderman
Klee referenced, if we have right now many uncontested elections, someone just has to put their name in a
hat and regardless of whether they are actually knocking on doors or really making a go of it, all efforts are
not equal. Therefore, they shouldn’t be treated equal.

So I’m not in favor of entertaining the next runner up just as an auto choice. | do appreciate the effort that
Mr. Lisle put into considering an amendment of his own. | think we should review it, because while it seems
problematic from what Alderman Klee and our City Clerk said, we have to be careful that we don’t
accidentally offset the balance of elections. There may be some opportunity there. But finally and | think
this is most important, we just heard a lot of public comment about it tonight so the larger public hasn’t had
a chance to review what is going on in the hearing, consider it and then give their feedback too. So to
Alderman Laws’ point, | think we can’t speed past this, we need to do our jobs and our due diligence.
Alderman O’Brien is right, we’ve gone over this over and over again, but that doesn’t mean that new
information wasn’t presented tonight that we could be reviewing.

President Wilshire

| just want to ask the City Clerk if we re-refer this, what is the time frame for this getting where it needs to
be on the ballot.

Patricia Piecuch, City Clerk

Thank you Madam President, | would need it probably back, no later sometime in June because it needs 45
days in order to be sent — the Secretary of State Department of Revenue Administration Attorney General’s
Office has 45 days to respond back to it. When their response comes back, then the Board will have 7 days
after that response in order to decide whether they order it to the ballot or not

President Wilshire

Board of Aldermen 03-12-2019 Page 15

Thank you very much.
Alderman Tencza

Just a logistical question for Corporation Counsel on a 15 member Board if someone steps down and there
is s tie 7-7 as to who is going to fill the open position, who breaks the tie?

Attorney Bolton

Someone would have to get a majority so if it stays 7 to 7 you haven't elected anyone.
Alderman Clemons

Thank you just briefly the only reason that, well the reason | am supporting sending this back to committee
is because | don’t support the way that it is currently written. | think that the way that we did it prior to
having a special election is a better way to do it because it promotes democracy and it promotes making
sure that the public is involved as much as the public can be involved in a democratic process.

So you know my suggestion would be to go back and change this to the way that we used to do it prior to
the charter change with the election because that way we are never appointing somebody more than 2
years to aterm. | think that would be a better balance and would balance the public’s right to vote on their
representative with the expediency of filling the vacancy. So for those reasons, are the reasons | think we
should send it back in addition to the fact that clearly from what | can see here tonight there still is some
debate that should be had on it.

Alderman Harriott-Gathright

Actually | feel the same way that it should go back | agree with Alderman Jette, Ben Clemons and who

else, Alderman Laws. | agree with them all: | was one of the ones that did not care for it in the very
beginning when we first started this process. So for me, | am glad that it will go back, | am really happy that
people came out and spoke about their concerns with this particular bill. So maybe we can all do a little
more diligence in changing it to something that is more amicable to everyone basically.

Alderman O’Brien

| would just like to say that we are not on any uncharted waters here or an legalities or anything else like
that. Many States, when a Senator steps down the Governor appoints, there is no special election. And |
think, | do trust my colleagues here on the Board to make the proper choice. If you want to usurp your
authority than that is up in a way to you but | think this bill was brought together by good intentions and
legal means and | think we lost sight of the goal of saving the tax payer the undue expense of $30,000.00
per election.

And yet may | remind that from | hear in some testimony my brother Alderman Laws says that kind of a little
bit of term what was the term? Frustrated. | am not frustrated, | think the proper term definition would be
perplexed. And the reason | am perplexed is as well as myself, let me read to you the endorsers and the
endorsers of this bill is the late Alderman-at-Large Brian McCarthy; Alderman-at-Large Shoshanna Kelly;
myself Alderman O’Brien; Alderman Schmidt; Alderman Lopez; Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws;
and Alderwoman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja. So | am perplexed. Where was the vetting, if this is the 6"
reading, where was, this is the 11'" hour, | hope we can get this done by June to perhaps to get it on the
charter, but this is the 11" hour, parachute that got thrown right about here.

Alderman Dowd

Board of Aldermen 03-12-2019 Page 16

Two quick things; if it gets referred back | would ask that the Chair of that Committee, Alderman Caron call
a meeting as soon as possible and not necessarily if it's not for 2 or 3 weeks, wait that amount of time.

President Wilshire
The next meeting is April 1°.
Alderman Dowd

Yeah | would move it up if it was my call. The other thing is | just want to tell you that voter turnout is a real
bugaboo with me and even in regular City Municipal Elections it just fries me because it should be much
higher than we have. I'll give you a quick story, the date of the special election | had “I Voted” sticker on my
coat and | went back to a Village at Kessler Farm Board Meeting, we have 7 members. All of the 6 asked
me what election is that? No one even knew about it. The City makes a very poor, if you are not on
Facebook or City Sounding Board, and you know, it just doesn’t get the word out, number one. Number
two, it was fairly chilly that day although the sun was shining but people are not going to take time off from
work or make a special effort unless they have some interest in the election. Fortunately Alderman
Clemons had a lot of support so all those people came out to support him. But the turnout was ridiculous
and for us to be spending $100,000.00 plus in the last 3 years is to me ridiculous. We could either reduce
the City budget by $100,000.00 or we could add another employee. But we certainly could spend the
money in a much better way because I'll tell you the budget this year is tight and to be spending it to geta
few hundred people out to vote is crazy.

Alderman Caron

So first of all | don’t think anyone that wants to send this back to Committee is looking to continue running
special elections. | think for me personally because we had this meeting before we had the public hearing,
| think it is important that we take some of what they’ve said, whether you like it or not, and really evaluate it
and maybe we have to make some changes. | myself, |’ve worked the polls, and been there and gone
crazy because no one shows up and | think that if appointing someone for a short period of time works, |
think we can do that. But my question, Madam President to City Clerk, if we hold this Personnel Meeting
April 1°*, is that too late.

Ms. Piecuch

No it’s not.

Alderman Caron

So Alderman Dowd, sorry but April 1* will be the day.

Alderman Dowd

It has to come back to the full Board too.

Alderman Caron

Right but it would be within 2 weeks. So my thinking is that everyone has some ideas and questions and
concerns. | think the place to do it is at the Committee on April 1*' and let the Committee put something
together that is conducive and a compromise that fits everyone. | certainly don’t want to see us spending
thousands of dollars for nothing, but let’s make sure that we have everything in place so that legal can say

“yes it’s concise” and we don’t have any problems up in Concord.

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

Board of Aldermen 03-12-2019 Page 17

Yes thank you just to address Alderman O’Brien’s point about being perplexed and for others who may be
listening because | did support that. As | stated earlier | was here ready to vote for that, but as | also stated
earlier, we had the public hearing, we got feedback and as Alderman Caron said, | think we have an
obligation to respond to that. And so again, | will be supporting it going back to Committee. Thank you.

Alderman Klee

Two things; one is | am not opposed of it really going back to Committee, | was just hoping that we could
move it forward. I’m not sure that there will be changes, but | do agree that the public has spoken and we
should listen and perhaps the comment that Alderman Clemons had made of doing the term can be
acceptable, we may just have to do a little bit more homework on it. But the other thing that | want to state
is that | make a joke every election, that | want Ward 3 to beat Ward 1 as far as voter turnout and it just ain’t
gonna happen. But however | do want to make a comment, percentage of voter turnout, we nailed it at
11.something% which is really sad

Alderman Lopez

| had a question for Attorney Bolton, if we do alter the amendment do we have to have another public
hearing.

Attorney Bolton

It depends how extensive the amendment is. If it is what I’ve heard being espoused by Alderman-at-Large
Clemons, | would recommend that we have another public hearing.

Alderman Lopez

Ok and then for myself | would just say that this isn’t the first time I’ve actually voted to table, postpone or
alter a piece of legislation that | sponsored. Because when | look at it and | have my initial impression of
what it is, that is just my impression and it looks like something | want to move forward to discuss. | think
that we have a process for discussion at the Committee level and for particularly important pieces of
legislation we have public comment and we have public hearing. We have to be receptive to that. The first
time that | changed my opinion on a piece of legislation | sponsored | was called dishonorable. In my
opinion it is my responsibility to hear more than just what my initial impression is and to move forward with
it. | have not actually changed my opinion of the legislation, | just think it is important that information that
has just been proposed that is valid, in my mind and at least should be reviewed by the public before we
move forward with something that affects their ability. So | just want to have a little bit more of a Hearing on
this, | don’t necessarily plan to pivot and completely change my opinion.

President Wilshire

Further discussion on the motion to re-refer.
Alderman O’Brien

Move to motion.

President Wilshire

Ok.

Alderman O’Brien