Search

-8-

Water Infrastructure and Conservation Adjustment (WICA)

On April 30, 2015, the Public Utilities Commission issued Order No. 25,784 approving a WICA
surcharge of 1.81% for customers of Pennichuck Water Works, Inc. in the Nashua Core System.
The surcharge is effective for service rendered on and after June 1, 2015. The order was
effective May 20, 2015.

Financing

On January 20, 2015, the entire balance in the Restricted Cash Bond Refund Escrow Account,
which included $23,350,000 of principal due on the Pennichuck Water Works, Inc. refinanced
bonds, as well as approximately $375,000 of accrued interest due on those bonds, was paid out to
holders of the debt instruments.

On March 4, 2015, Pennichuck East Utility, Inc. completed a financing transaction with CoBank,
ACB in the amount of $625,000 for a term of 25 years at an interest rate of 4.9%.

On March 16, 2015, Pennichuck East Utility, Inc. completed a financing transaction with the
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services under the State Revolving Fund
Program in the amount of $510,000 for a term of 20 years at an interest rate of 2.72%. The loan
will fund the replacement of mains at the W&E System in Windham.

On May 15, 2015, Pennichuck Water Works, Inc., Pennichuck East Utility, Inc. and Pittsfield
Aqueduct Company, Inc. completed a financing transaction with the New Hampshire
Department of Environmental Services under the State Revolving Fund Program in the amount
of $3,500,000, $400,000 and $165,000, for a term of 20 years at an interest rate of 3.1689%. The
loans will fund main installation and/or replacements in Merrimack, Barnstead and Pittsfield,
New Hampshire.

On May 29, 2015, Pennichuck Water Works, Inc. filed a financing petition for up to

$25.5 million with the Public Utilities Commission relative to its Integrated Capital Finance
Plan. On September 2, 2015, the Public Utilities Commission approved the financing. On
October 27, 2015, the Company closed on the financing which included the refinancing of

$16.2 million of existing debt and $7.0 million related to the construction of an operations center.
The all-in interest rate relative to the financing is approximately 4.3%.

On September 29, 2015, the Public Utilities Commission issued an Order approving an
increase in the short-term debt limit to 18% for Pennichuck East Utility, Inc. and Pittsfield
Aqueduct Company, Inc., until June 30, 2019.

Succession Planning

The Company’s Chief Executive Officer, John Patenaude, retired on November 6, 2015. On that
date, Larry Goodhue, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Controller, was
promoted to Chief Executive Officer. Also on November 6, 2015, George Torres was promoted
to Corporate Controller, and Carol Ann Howe was promoted to Assistant Treasurer.

Special Bd. of Aldermen — 05/14/2019 Page 3

maybe one or two spots. | have seen people circle around trying to vote and they can’t vote. In fact, on that
point | will probably submit a complaint to the Secretary of State about obstruction of voting.

Nevertheless | do think Special Elections are expensive and unnecessary. Special Elections as Paula pointed
out came about because of cronyism. Cronyism in School Boards and some people get elected, they step
down soon after their election because they really didn’t intend to serve 2 years or 4 years and then somebody
else got appointed that the Board liked. For awhile there was a practice in the City to appoint the person with
the next highest vote. That was the person that lost the election but was the next highest vote getter. That
was practiced in the School Board until somebody showed up, was the next highest vote getter that the school
didn’t like, namely me and then they got away from the practice.

So that’s why this charter change came about to stop cronyism and hold elections. Nevertheless, what |
recommend is some change to your legislation. What | recommend is to reinstitute as a charter amendment
namely that if there is a vacancy the first person that can fill that vacancy is the person that ran in the previous
election and was the next highest vote getter. It is only fair. Now if the next highest vote getter isn’t available
any longer or doesn’t want the position any longer, then you can have the Board make the appointment, but
only following an advertisement for the vacancy so it isn’t an inside deal of making this appointment. You
understand that? So the next highest vote getter is allowed to fill this appointment. That is my
recommendation. Thank you.

Justin O’Donnell Good evening Madam President, members of the Board of Aldermen, my name is Justin
O’Donnell and | live at 355 Main Street. | am opposed to that legislation, not in spirit, | do understand the costs
of special elections are a burden to the tax payers and the management of the City, but rather as a purpose of
representation. And | do disagree with the two previous speakers that the next highest vote getter should get
the job, because in the previous election the majority of the voters in the district disapproved of them to do the
job in the first place. What | would ideally love to see the special elections happen if it weren’t for the cost,
there are some Boards that | think should not be filled by an internal vote, namely this one, the Board of
Aldermen. My recommended change that | would recommend and | would fully support this legislation is if the
other Boards were allowed to solicit applications and make recommendations for the Board of Aldermen to fill
those vacancies until the expiration of the current term, so long as this Board, that Board that holds the
Legislative and Executive Power in this City and where the rules derive from is continued to be elected by the
people you serve. Thank you.

John Lisle Bluestone Drive, Ward 8, Moderator. As some of you may know | sort of started this whole
campaign against the special elections after the election of proposed with for the replacement of Bob Hallowell
because of the cost and effort put in for a low turnout election that was demeaning of both the citizens who so
many couldn’t show up, the fact that we had the schools open, which was always a problem. And the fact that
it was just a bad deal. So | proposed an alternative and | have sent all of you my proposed alternative to this.

But let me give you a very tangible example of why | think the proposal that you have is defective. It goes back
to the resignation shortly after the 2017 municipal election of Bob Hallowell from the Board of Education.
When he resigned, the question, it was unclear from the reading of the Resolution which board would appoint
his successor; the board that was in place that he resigned or the one that had just been elected. The other
thing is we have an election every November in this City. Why do we have to wait for the end of the municipal
term to have the election; why not have it at the following November? | mean we have the election, we have
the mechanism in place, why wait? | mean this is an important step, it is an expensive step and | think that the
Legislation that we have in front of us is just not appropriate. It goes back to cronyism that some of the
previous people talked about; that the City rejected this approach some years ago and put in a new approach.
But what we need is to meld the idea of appointments with an election using the Board of Aldermen as a way
of assuring that there is minimal if any cronyism involved. Thank you.

Special Bd. of Aldermen — 05/14/2019 Page 4

Testimony in Favor

Andrew Olding 8 Royal Crest Drive. So the idea of adding or appointing does sound iffy to me but | do like this
because obviously the special elections do cost a lot of money. | would like to make a recommendation for an
amendment to this where particularly on this Board if the vacancy is an at-large, | think it’s perfectly fine to fill it,
if the vacancy is a Ward, | think you should still have a special election because at that point in time, only the
at-large are the people who actually represent that Ward at any given time. And so the Ward should be able to
choose its own representation. If it’s an at-large it is easier because you all represent, collectively, all of
Nashua and that’s cleaner to me. And just doing a special election on a Ward | don’t think is going to cost the
$30,000.00 or whatever the last special election cost us. | don’t know exactly how much it cost but | figure like
$5,000.00, $6,000.000.

President Wilshire

About $30,000.00 about $35,000.00 Is there anyone else who wants to give testimony in favor of R-18-073?
Anyone else want to give opposition to R-18-073? Ok one more time, testimony in favor?

Testimony in Favor - None

Testimony in Opposition - None

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN FOR THE CITY CLERK TO SEND THIS PROPOSED CHARTER
AMENDMENT TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND THE COMMISSIONER
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ADMINISTRATION FOR APPROVAL

MOTION CARRIED

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO ADJOURN
MOTION CARRIED

The meeting was declared adjourned at 7:19 p.m.

Attest: Patricia Piecuch, City Clerk

To: Board of Aldermen, Mayor Donchess,

My testimony is both to speak AGAINST both the current system for filling vacancies on
the Board of Alderman, Board of Education, Board of Public Works, and Fire
Commissioners and the replacement process proposed in Resolution R-18-073 Amended.

My name is John Lisle, and I have been the Moderator for Ward 8 for the past almost 6 years. I
have served now through three (3) special elections to fill vacancies on the Board of Aldermen
and Board of Education. In my opinion, the process we have now is expensive, marginally
democratic, and wasteful.

Before last year's Special Election to fill a vacancy on the Board of Education I wrote a letter to
the editor of the Nashua Telegraph concerning the expense to the City of having that election. I
also talked to many of the Aldermen and the Mayor about changing the process, but they seemed
to have had no urgency to make a change. However, with the unexpected passing of Brian
McCarthy and the subsequent need for yet another Special Election, the Board seems now to be
willing to consider making a change.

The process Nashua has now is not effective based on three criteria:

First, the mechanism of holding a special election means that the office will not be filled for up
to 5 months. And, if the vacancy occurs 6 months or less from the next election, the office would
go vacant until after the November election.

Second, the city will have to go the serious expense of holding the election. The direct costs
attributed to holding a special election can be as much as $36,000. In addition, there will be
indirect costs in terms of extra work that needs to be done by city employees in the City Clerk's
office, DPW staff, and the School department staff to handle the needs and inconvenience of the
election. And this does not consider the disruption of the lives of the Ward election officials who
will be inconvenienced and may lose pay from their regular work or disrupt personal travel plans
to serve the City.

Third, the elections are always extremely low turnout elections. This is in part due to voter
apathy about municipal elections and the difficulty in today's media environment about
publicizing that the election was happening. Even with the extensive publicity in the Nashua
Telegraph of this month's election and the several candidate forums, the "man of the street"
either did not know the election was taking place or was not interested in participating. These
minimal turnout elections are a poor representation of the will of the City.

Let me share some actual numbers with you.

Ward 8 had an almost embarrassingly predictable 6.4% turnout. With 471 votes cast alongside 6
write-ins, we averaged just over 33 votes per hour. We also registered just 2 new voters during
the day and processed one name change. In the 2018 BOE race, we registered 7 new voters and
the 2015 BOA race we had 464 voters and registered 12 new voters. Ward 8 has the largest
number of registered voters of any Ward in Nashua with over 7400 registered voters.

To put this in perspective, during last November's midterm election, we processed 442 ballots in
the first hour! And registered 35 new voters that same hour. And even with an extremely busy
election day last November, our turnout was just over 50%.

For both elections, we did this with the same nine (9) Ward election officials and two (2) Ward
Deputy Registrars. In November, our Ward needed additional staff, For the March special
election, we only needed that level of staff as we needed to fill all of roles required by State and
City law.

In my letter to the editor, I spoke against the current system, and I am still opposed to it.

I proposed at that time what I consider to be a more effective approach. That being that the
Mayor appoint an interim replacement to fill any vacancy on the various elective Boards and that
the Aldermen confirm that selection. And further that a replacement to fill any unexpired part of
the term be elected at the next November election, as Nashua holds a general election every
November.

Mr. Teeboom, in a comment to my letter, objected to that proposal on the grounds of cronyism. I
agree with his concern which was why I proposed that any interim appointment be confirmed by
the Board of Aldermen to mitigate cronyism concerns.

The Proposal R-18-073 Amended is cronyism on steroids by reverting Nashua to a previous
process that was replaced as it invited serious cronyism. To revert is to take a step backwards.
The City needs a process that is timely, cost effective, and rejects cronyism.

Let me share an extreme example.

Based on R-18-073 Amended, if a new member of the Board of Education were to quit
immediately after being sworn in, the remaining 8 members of the BoE (assuming the BoE, now
evenly numbered, could reach a timely consensus...) could appoint a Member who would serve
until the next Municipal election, almost 2 years in the future.

Clearly, that should be unacceptable to all of you.

My proposal is this:

1. Within 30 days of a vacancy on any subject Board, the Mayor would nominate a
candidate to fill the position. The subject Board with a vacancy may forward to the Mayor
within 2 weeks of such vacancy the name(s) of their proposed candidate(s) to fill the

vacancy. The Mayor would not be bound to nominate a candidate proposed by the Board.

2. The Board of Aldermen will vote to confirm the Nominee of the Mayor within 30 days of
the nomination.

3. The Nominee will serve until a permanent replacement, elected at the next November

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, | 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.

I 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

Board of Aldermen 05-14-2019 Page 10

She is an accountant. She’s been an accountant for 22 years before she came to Nashua; she’s been
a Chief of Staff, and a good one to the Mayor, basically taking notes and things, I’ve been to meetings
with the Mayor, taking notes and answering the mail. But has she got the experience to deal with 7
complex departments? Human Resources? Information Technology? GIS? Purchasing?
Insurance? Risk Management? City Buildings? Assessing? $53 million dollars of fund management.
$7 million dollars of operational budget, she has none. So Mayor | don’t understand why you would
appoint her. The real problem, there is no problem in the IT Department that | know of. There’s no
problem in Human Resources. There’s no problem in GIS. There’s no problem in Purchasing.
There’s no problem in Insurance. There’s no problem in Risk Management that | Know of. There’s no
problem in Maintenance & City Buildings. There is a problem in Assessing. And you are not replacing
the Chief Assessor.

Now the guy that was there, | dealt with him, he was incompetent. | knew that right away. | didn’t
complain about it. A private citizen at her own substantial expense brought forth the problem in the
Assessing Department; none of you did. The Mayor didn’t, none of the City staff did, the attorney
didn’t. A private citizen who spent $8,000.00 just on the private investigator. The problem is in the
Assessing Department. Now we hear that there is an assessor who about 10 years ago was dealing in
pornography. That’s what | read and he admitted it. Sleeping on the job; got a PI report. There’s the
problem. A lot of people are complaining about the Assessing; they are not complaining about GIS, IT,
Purchasing, Insurance, Risk Management, City Buildings, they are complaining about Assessing. So |
don’t understand what you are trying to do.

| recommend that you drop this insanity of creating a new division, that'll accomplish nothing but
conflict in fact between the CFO position and a new position. If you look at the Ordinance there are all
kinds of building conflict. And | should say Marcoux, who you keep mentioning was really the CFO. |
was an Alderman. He was a CFO. Carol Anderson who is the budget director, worked for Marcoux.
Now they called him an Administrative Servicer but he was really the Chief Financial Officer, there was
no position called the Chief Financial Officer back in those days. So my recommendation is drop this
charade. Don’t enforce Administrative Services, Ms. Kleiner very well, very nice person, qualified as
an accountant, keep her on the job, she’s doing a nice job for you and get that Assessment
Department under control. Thank you.

Jim Tollner Good evening, Jim Tollner, 1 Sequoia Circle, |’ll be brief. | want to take a second to weigh
in on this appointment. | think it’s worth mentioning that it has always been at the discretion of the
Mayor to recruit and appoint his or her choice. | seems fundamentally unfair to speak against this
particular person because the folks didn’t like how this department was run in other administrations.
Personally | have had a chance to work with Mrs. Kleiner and | have found her to be professional. She
is someone who has worked within City Government and someone who understands City
Government. | have to say when there were questions, we heard back from Kim. And if she didn’t
have the answers, she’d work hard to get you that answer. Thank you very much.

Laurie Ortolano 41 Berkeley Street, I’m here to speak to the Administrative Services Position. | think I'd
like to ask you to just put it on hold and consider bringing back the Chief position. | want you all to think
about whether there is enough money in the budget right now to fund both positions. | would hope
that as Aldermen and Alderwomen, you all recognize at this point the need for a Chief. And | am so
compelled to tell you from the bottom of my heart | think we need that Chief. Assessing is a complex
function and Ms. Kleiner just doesn’t have that background. And when the Mayor points out that she’s
going to be a Director or a Manager, she’s managing all other departments that have directors except
for Assessing. And Paula Johnson was correct when she said the other Administrative Services
Directors, we had a manager down there, we had a Chief. We don’t anymore. And the day-to-day
functions and the issues that Alderwoman Kelly asked are a serious issue.

If you are going to just vote this position in tonight and say she is going to take over Assessing, as a
bare minimum, please move her office down into Assessing, into John Duhamel’s office. Let her work
on the culture and the environment down there day-to-day right now. That’s a 40 hour a week job.

Board of Aldermen 05-14-2019 Page 11

She’s got the other 25 to do the other 5 or 6 functions and that’s going to make up the 65 hours. But |
really believe you need that. I’ve been taking the State’s Statutes class this week with Ms. Kleiner up
in Concord. It has been super interesting. But you meet people up there and speakers who are Chiefs
and Managers from other Towns that are so intelligent and passionate about their work. And it leaves
me feeling a little broken that we can’t find anyone like that for Nashua. Why can’t we find anyone who
is a numbers person who is passionate about equity. Why does that allude Nashua? You know what
it is about the culture here that doesn’t allow that to happen. And if what the Mayor keeps telling you,
that we can’t find candidates, then | beg you to please look at outsourcing, because it isn’t fair to us as
residents to have such a weak department where the bar is so low that you can’t get answers to
questions. Raising that bar is going to be enormously difficult; | think it will be more than 40 hours a
week.

And the last gentleman who spoke has had a wonderful experience getting questions answered. It is
far more difficult for us with Assessing questions because we are dealing with somebody who has no
background for something so technical. Those questions require her to call the State every time and
she can’t even rely on her people internally to go down there and get the answers and she told me she
doesn’t, which | am thankful for. We should not be taking any information from within at this point, not
a good idea. So you know | think it is vitally important that we bring back that Chief position. And |
don’t want to wait until Ms. Kleiner says its important, we will just wait until she decides we need it. Or
we wait until you decide we need it. How does that happen. What does it take to decide you need it?
You know what do we have to do? | for myself can tell you there’s no amount of data that | can put on
the table that would convince there’s a problem that hasn’t worked.

| will tell you Friday | had a meeting and Steve Bolton acknowledged that some of the numbers | was
pointing out were too low. | honestly believe that in 8 % months that is the first time an administrator or
somebody in City Hall said “yeah those numbers are too low’. I’ve never had anyone confirm
anything. | mean it has taken 8 1/ 2 months to get the confirmation on a number. And | think I’ve gone
way too long waiting for answers, just way too long. You know the problems are deep and what you
have happening now, | am sensing the complaints that you are getting hit with a lot of RTK letters,
property files, you are. I’m generating a good bit of it. I’m going to dump another 1,000 pages on you
pretty quickly here for RTK. You know why? Because | am conducting your external audit because
none of you did it. It was your job to do an external audit and the internal one really didn’t work. |
prefer not to do that, | have to pay a lot of money for those copies — Ben | am hoping you write that
letter and waive those for me. But that’s what needs to be done.

And | object to an Alderman like Ben Clemons sending out an e-mail telling me this weekend that |
need to prove myself more, get all the reimbursements, get all the travel cards, get all of the
information out of City Hall to prove that we have mismanagement. When do you step up and look at
the data? When do you go get it? Because | have to RTK all that. | have to put staff through a lot of
work to get that. I’d rather let you do your investigation and really get the information. Do it, get it, look
at the reports, just let me know you're doing it. | won’t ask for it. But | don’t know how anyone thinks
here that they can really run this place without having a Chief down there.

You know | sat in a class yesterday and the Chief Assessor who taught for the afternoon ran a Tri-
Town up by Lake Sunapee, Sunapee, New London and Newbury | think. He was so impressive. He
was aman of numbers and you could tell he really loved his job. And the one comment he said is “I
love a really intelligent property owner who comes in and challenges me with questions; it makes me a
better assessor’. We haven’t had any one like that in our assessing office in a long time. You can’t go
in there with a question, there’s nobody to answer. So please, | don’t mind that you want to bring the
position back but boat them together and bring back your Chief Assessor. If you really don’t think you
can get one, get serious about out-sourcing that Department so we can get some equity in this town.
Thank you.