Search

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019 Page 3

Manchester in 2006;p maybe we can achieve the same 60% that they did. But this idea that we should
defy the regulators, that we should fight, that we should obstruct the effort of the State to find out what is
the situation with the rational that we are only going to get a 5% or 10% entry rate is a foolish way to
proceed, in my opinion.

Also these statements are made that we should go out and get bids before we authorize any money; that
is against City Purchasing Regulations, adopted by the Board of Aldermen. That is a very bad practice, |
mean we never put out an RFP or a bid proposal, proposal for bids unless we have the appropriation;
otherwise people don’t know that we are serious. So our own regulations require that we have money
appropriated before we solicit bids. Now where does this estimate come from? Yes it is a KRT estimate
but we have not got an actual quote regarding how much it would cost since 1991 because we haven’t
gone out to bid. So if we put out one three and the number comes in lower, fine; we don’t spend as
much. If we get a higher number, then we consider appropriating more money. Given what has occurred
and | guess the desirability of getting into as many houses as we can, maybe we should spend a little
more money and make the same kind of effort that Manchester did when they received 60, six zero, %
entry.

Steve, | am going to ask him to fill you in a little bit more on his interactions with the BTLA and the DRA
from the legal perspective. | think he can give you more detail than | have, but | think we would be
putting the City in a bad position if we just defy and just say we are not going to do this, we don’t really
care what you think; make us. Because probably in very short order we will get an order that we do it;
and when we get an order it can cost more money than it will if we just proceed on our own. The Full
Measure & List being our control not in the DRA or the BTLA’s control.

The other thing | wanted to mention Madam President is R-19-148. | think there has been some
misunderstanding regarding this. This would authorize the sale that has been recommended by the
Infrastructure Committee as well as the City’s Business & Industrial Development Authority. There is a
long history to this, there’s the Development Agreement that goes back 10 years or so or more. This
does not allocate the funds though; that is what | am getting at, it does not allocate the funds. These
funds come in as revenue, the Board of Aldermen can and should consider how to appropriate these
funds over the course of the remainder of the Fiscal Year. There’s nothing that prevents once this
passes, the Board of Aldermen from deciding how the money should be used.

There are those who think it should be rededicated to the neighborhood; others maybe to recreation,
maybe both. But there are various arguments that could be made, people may have different opinions
but those are things that can be discussed in detail when a proposal is made as to exactly how to
allocate this money. But again, my point in speaking on this is that this merely authorizes the transaction
and if you read it, it is very clear, | mean it speaks not at all to any allocation. There has been a
recommendation from the Planning Board but that is their thoughts, their recommendation. You are not
bound in enacting this thing you do not enact their recommendation and their recommendation is not
referred to. So | just wanted to be clear on that.

Now if Madam President will allow, | would ask Attorney Bolton to follow up with respect to the BTLA, the
DRA and what has transpired with them from his perspective as the City’s Attorney.

Steve Bolton, Corporate Counsel

For reasons that are not entirely clear, back in June the Board of Tax & Land Appeals which | should tell
you, the Board of Tax & Land Appeals typically hears specific cases when a taxpayer believes that they
have been disproportionally highly assessed compared to other properties in the community. The BTLA
as it is called sits in judgment of that case; the taxpayer has the burden of proof. | or someone else in my
office would represent the City and we would have a hearing on the particular property at issue and what
it is worth. They do a similar thing when property is taken by eminent domain, but in that case the position
is reversed a little bit, we tend to argue for a lower value and the property owner for a higher value. In
the case of tax appeals, we are arguing for the higher value and they are arguing for the lower value.
That is generally what the BTLA does.

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019 Page 4

As | said for reasons not entirely clear to us, in June they decided to open a docket to explore whether
Nashua was doing things correctly within the Assessing Department: whether there were failings that led
to inequities and disproportionalities within the Department. So we had that Hearing a week ago today. |
should say that by every statistical measure that the International Association of Assessing Officials has
in standards that they have set, we meet them all. Those same standards have been adopted by the NH
Assessing Standards Board, we meet them all. Over the last 15 years at five year intervals, the NH
Department of Revenue Administration and their Municipal & Property Division, does a study of our and
all the other municipalities; does a study on our assessment records. It is a statistically significant
number of samples and checks those records for accuracy. If one card fails, we still meet the standard.
If two cards fail, we flunk; we have never failed, never.

In-between those 5 year intervals, there’s a much less strenuous review; we’ve not failed those as far as
our property records are concerned. 10 years there was an issue whether the former assessor had filed
complete compliance report following the revaluation that that employee did. Again, no problem with the
information as to individual pieces of property. Now we explained all of this, we had the assessor from
Manchester not in our instance, not as a City favor to us, completely on his own the assessor for
Manchester who is highly qualified, he is a member of the Assessing Standards Board, he is previous
employee of the Department of Revenue Administration. He spoke and said if the municipality meets all
the standards which Nashua does, | am very worried, both as the Chief Assessor in Manchester and a
member of the Assessing Standards Board, what are you using for criteria? If you can do that to them, |
should be worried that you are going to do it to my community next. So we are hopeful as to how this
exploration will come out.

But | did let them know that Nashua was considering and basically had plans to do a Full Measure & List
for tax year 2022. Frankly this is something that | have recommended for approximately 2 years now. So
the suggestion that this is a knee-jerk reaction to some of the criticism that that Department has been
subjected to over the last 10 months is inaccurate. As the Mayor said before, 30 years is a long time
without undertaking the Full Measure & List process. It is called a Full Measure & List because there is in
fact measurements done to confirm the square footage, listing refers to listing the attributes of a particular
property. In residential properties the number of bedrooms, number of bathrooms, square footage of the
home, does it have special amenities, special features, tennis courts, basketball courts, whatever else
might be, central air conditioning that sort of thing.

If we do not undertake this, | think we are going to see some pushback from the Department of Revenue
Administration who will encourage the Board of Tax & Land Appeals to order us to do this. | think there is
some wiggle room in the law as to whether we could fight that; | don’t recommend that we do. It is
something that we ought to do anyway; but we ought to do it of our volition rather than wait until we are
ordered. The primary reason for that is it will be more strenuous; we won't just be ordered to do it, they
will want to monitor it every step of the way. They will want to add requirements perhaps that are not
ordinarily required. These things have every likelihood of costing us more money, delaying and delay
costs money as well. | happen to think that we have a good set of data currently. But you always run into
the “Well when is the last time you did a Full Measure & List”.

By the time this comes around, if we go forward with it and do it for 2022, we will be 31 years old. If we
don’t do it, the number will get higher and higher. People start looking at you with a little more
skepticism. If | go in and I’ve got the Pheasant Lane Mall appealing or something, I’d like to be able to
say “we are as accurate as we can be and we just did a Full Measure & List within the last few years’. |
think in the long run, the expenditure will be well worth it. And it is not spend $1.3 million or spend
nothing; by 2023 at a minimum we have to do a statistical evaluation, that is going to cost more than half
that $1.3 by itself. So you might as well do it right every few decades then put it off any longer. Sol am
with the Mayor on this and | am certainly going to be here all evening so any questions feel free.

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019 Page 5

RESPONSE TO REMARKS OF THE MAYOR

Alderman Dowd

Yes | just want to congratulate the City Clerk, Trish Piecuch for her new appointment up at the State. |
know she will do a great job up there and congratulations. And for Ms. Lovering, even though we are
going to miss her severely, she won't be that far away and congratulations on your pending appointment.

Alderman Klee

Yes | would like to each Alderman Dowd’s sentiments and as State Rep | am glad to see Ms. Piecuch
coming up to the State House and working. | know she has been doing a lot of work on our behalf, going
to a lot of different conferences and truly working your tail off. | am grateful that you are going to be the
one working this project. We are going to miss Ms. Lovering but | Know where she lives; she’s in my
Ward. And we will know where she works so congratulations both of you.

President Wilshire
Just for the record I’d like to note that Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja arrived at 7:50 p.m.
READING MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS

There being no objection, President Wilshire declared the minutes of the Board of Aldermen
meetings of July 9, 2019, July 22, 2019, August 6, 2019, and the public hearing conducted by the
Planning & Economic Development Committee on July 16, 2019, accepted, placed on file, and the
readings suspended.

COMMUNICATIONS REQUIRING ONLY PROCEDURAL ACTIONS AND WRITTEN REPORTS
FROM LIAISONS

From: J. Bradford Westgate, Esquire
Re: Acceptance of Legacy Drive and Serenity Lane

There being no objection, President Wilshire accepted the communication and referred it to the
Committee on Infrastructure.

From: Tim Cummings, Economic Development Director
Re: | Communication Seeking a Review & Approval of Design Concept Plans for the
Performing Arts Center located at 201 Main Street

There being no objection, President Wilshire accepted the communication and referred it to the
Planning & Economic Development Committee.

There being no objection, President Wilshire suspended the rules to allow for the introduction of a
communication received after the agenda was prepared

From: Marylou Blaisdell, Chair, on Behalf of the Downtown Improvement Committee
Re: 0-19-051 Providing Free Library Parking For Up To Three Hours for Nashua Students Using
the Nashua Public Library

There being no objection, President Wilshire accepted the communication and referred it to the
Committee on Infrastructure.

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019 Page 6

PERIOD FOR PUBLIC COMMENT RELATIVE TO ITEMS EXPECTED TO BE ACTED UPON THIS
EVENING

President Wilshire

We have 8 speakers and a 15 minute time period. | will call up the first person, Michael Ortolano, if you’d
give your name and address for the record please?

Michael Ortolano 41 Berkeley Street. | just want to provide some community input regarding the Full
Measure & List, R-19-159. Notwithstanding the Mayor and Attorney Bolton’s comments, the Full List &
Measure is not currently required by the State and it is a more economical approach to it. Attorney Bolton
provided pretty extensive arguments in his testimony before the NH BTLA regarding the statistical status of
the data in Nashua and basically made a strong case that it was within acceptable standard. So the need
to perform a Full Measure & List or to move away from Full Statistical Revaluation are really issues that are
being driven, at least in our perception, by the City not by the DRA or the BTLA. So unless you know I’ve
missed some correspondence or some dialogue on that issue, it hasn’t appeared as stated. So | would
prefer the City to continue its cost-effective practice of using a Full Statistical Revaluation.

Second point is in the event that it is the desire of the City and the Board of Aldermen to move forward with
a Full Measure & List, it seems appropriate that we would want to wait for the input received from several
reviews that are ongoing. One is Mr. Cornell's review of certain procedures that are being used in the
Assessing Department. It seems to me that they make effect the scope of work and the methods used for
a Full Measure & List and it would be appropriate before moving forward to get that input. The same could
be said for the investigation that is ongoing by the New Hampshire Board of Tax & Land Appeal regarding
their observations. There may be items in there, in their situation and in their disposition of the issue that
could affect the contractual elements of a Full Measure & List.

The fourth point is basically that the Full Measure & List is to a certain degree a matter of speculation. You
know we've talked and heard testimony here from the Mayor that different levels have been achieved by
different communities. That’s all well and good but what we actually achieve in this City allows for a
window where the benefits would vary from potentially very strong benefits to potentially very weak
benefits. | think that is the reality of the numbers that we would actually get. The one final point that | will
make is the contractor oversite procedures, it appears that there was a significant miss in the Statistical
Revaluation Contract where the internal inspections of homes was just not performed as outlined in the
contract by KRT. It was a big scope of work, about 1,200 homes and that’s the sort of thing that | think the
monitoring, the contract and the contract monitoring policies and procedures probably need to be
strengthened to make sure that you know when the City specifies a scope of work to be done that it is
actually completed. So that’s all | had for comments, thank you.

Laurie Ortolano 41 Berkeley Street. | want to provide some clarification to a few of the Mayor's comments.
He mentioned that there is no validity for the 15% or 10% entry rate. The Board of Assessor’s meeting on
March 7" of 2019, | would ask you to refer to those meeting minutes where the Chairman, Dave Hansberry,
spoke that he had spoken to Rob Tozier who felt that we wouldn’t get any more than 1/5" entry into our
homes. Based on that, Dan did not, questioned whether a 20% entry and an 80% miss was worth us doing
this List & Measure. So that is on the record. There is another set of minutes, that | think it is documented
that KRT spoke of a 15% entry rate, | couldn’t find them because | was short on time and | was scrolling
through. But March 7", 2019 is a good set for you to look at.

Also, the documentation that the Mayor referred to from the BTLA and the DRA strongly suggesting that we
move forward on a List & Measure, I’d like to see it. | hope that’s not just verbal and | hope you all want to
see it. | want to see what the DRA wrote, and | want to see what the BTLA has written; not implied but
written because | have not seen that and | have been watching these correspondence closely. | have been
in communication regularly.

Regarding the Bob Gagne, | had a chance to talk to Bob Gagne, Bob Gagne used to be a Deputy in our
Assessing Office. He is now the Chairman of the Board of Assessors up in Manchester; he’s their head

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019 Page 7

guy. | spoke to him last Tuesday. | asked Bob, “what do you think we will get for entry in Nashua’. He said
“10% no more”. The Mayor pointed out in 2006 that they had gotten high level. That was before the laws
were changed and it was after 2011; he also pointed out 2011 the law was changed after that. One, you
don’t have to allow entry and two, even without the allowing of entry, you can still appeal if you are
contesting the valuation you have. It used to be that if you didn’t allow entry, back about 6 years ago, you
didn’t allow entry, you lost your right to appeal to abate. You had to accept the number given; the Courts
threw that out. So the data you are seeing that was higher in 2006 and 11 has changed dramatically. We
should be checking these facts Mr. Mayor.

Also, when you point out communities from Maine or Massachusetts, | do not know the laws in those
States and you should cite those lows. Because if they are different from New Hampshire it will make a big
impact on how doors are opened. So let’s get our facts straight and let’s all get on the same page. The
validity of the $1.3 million dollars is in question and the Mayor seemed to indicate that KRT gave us that
number. | am very concerned with that number. Let’s investigate that. We had a quote years ago, Patriot
was in here, it was over $2 million dollars OK? How is it only $1.3 now? Also, why haven’t we checked
with other cities that have done more of this work, bigger cities, to find out what their numbers are? So the
$1.3 million, | am not comfortable with a KRT estimate. Entry rate we heard what | just said, Steve Bolton
told the BTLA he hopes to get into 50% of the homes. Our own Board, Rob Tozier, Bob Gagne and today |
called Scott Bartlett who is the head of the Goffstown Assessing Office and also the President of the
NHAAO. | had a talk with him, they do a cyclical review. | said to him, “Scott, how many homes do you
really get into”; “next to none” he said, “I’m looking at 800 homes this year and we will get entry into very,
very few”. And he said, “I'll tell you what, I'll never see a house with a new kitchen, or a basement finished,
I'll never be invited into that kind of home, the only homes | ever get invited into are the very old ones that
are dated that the people are willing to show you hoping their assessment goes down”. | just spoke to him
this afternoon.

| think these numbers that you are being sold on or told to vote on are not accurate, we are just not going to
get that data. The law says we don’t have to allow entry. | wrote a statement in here that List & Measure
Initiatives are obsolete and should not be funded in Nashua any longer. Jan wanted to know why, because
one — you are not required to give entry. And two — what we know right now definitively is that 100% of the
people can say “no”. That’s for sure, we know they can.

President Wilshire
Ms. Ortolano, we have 6 other speakers and we have 6 minutes left to our Public Comment.

Ms. Ortolano It is an important topic Chairwoman and it is really important so I'll be quick. The technical
data capture is a big issue in the office. We are getting a review done, we don’t have any of the information
back. We have ongoing investigations, Drummond & Woodsum was hired to review mileage logs of Greg
Turgiss. We don’t have any data on that. The Board filed a motion, Steve Bolton filed a motion up at the
BTLA expanding it appears the scope of work has been expanded into a management investigation. We
don’t have any information on that yet. The DRA is conducting an investigation based on the PA71’s. We
don’t have information on that. The City is investigation the $24 million dollar assessment reduction made
by an assessor on October 10". We don’t have any information on why $24 million was cut off the
assessment records and we should. The BTLA just concluded a Hearing and will make a ruling in the near
future.

The final point is the breach of contract with KRT. There is and somebody else is going to speak to this,
there is serious evidence that this contract was not followed and the data used to generate the model was
not verified. That was a very big cost for our contract, six figures. This City should be going after KRT to
get that money back. The entry into homes, there was no addendum signed by the Mayor or anyone else
that authorized them not to gather the data. So that’s a huge issue. Thank you.

Michael O’Connor 42 Berkeley Street. Just about everything | was going to cover has been — just a couple
of very quick comments. The Mayor says, there is no basis for this. And | think the implication was for or
the investigations and the questions around this. And Attorney Bolton also said that it seemed to imply that

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019 Page 8

this open docket for the BTLA was some sort of mysterious thing. It’s hard to believe that the BTLA, the
DRA and others would be looking into this seriously if they didn’t have some credible evidence. And | think
anyone that is willing to open their eyes knows that there has been a lot of credible evidence. | think most
of you here on the Board have probably received some.

The last thing, the only other thing | wanted to mention, just because | make my living doing statistics and
have for decades, the statistical significance, this unfortunately it is long recognized if something is
statistically significant doesn’t mean it is significant. There’s a famous statistical modeler named George
Boggs and he said that all statistical models are wrong; but some are useful. So the question is “do you
have a useful model here in Nashua”. The model itself is what is called into question. The statistical
significance that keeps getting cited here in the Coefficient of Dispersion. Let me just tell you very simply
without putting everyone to sleep; all it is is the standard of deviation over the mean and it is a measure of
variance. It has nothing to do with accuracy and it is the spread of the data. So when you pull the 33 cards
which | think the number is, all it says is they are within the acceptable variation.

Attorney Bolton

That is not the study that is done on those cards.

Mr. O’Connor Say that again.

Attorney Bolton

That is not the extent of the study that is done on those cards.

Mr. O’Connor I’m not saying that is but the Mayor has cited the Coefficient of Dispersion, it is not the only
statistic, but it is certainly in the manual that gets cited by the State, OK, if you look at that. So there are
statistics, but they really need to be just not bandied about, they need to be understood. Thank you.

Laura Colquhoun 30 Greenwood Drive. | just would like to say | do not believe in the Full & Measure. At
this point | would like the City to invest and get more qualified assessors. Mr. Bolton obviously hasn’t gone
through some of these files to realize that our assessors can’t tell the difference between a plastic pool and
a cement pool. And in assessment valuations that’s $20,000.00 and | think assessors should know the
difference and | am looking at files and | am finding that they don’t. So at this point | don’t want to waste
our money on trying to get into homes which | do not think you are going to get into because | have always
had assessors come in. | will never have an assessor come in my home again. And I’ve looked at a lot of
people that work for the City; they have not had assessors come in to verify building permits and this and
that so why does the City think that the normal resident is going to let them in their house? | would rather
you spend some money and get some qualified people downstairs and start cleaning up the records.
Thank you.

Andy Prolman Madam President, Mr. Mayor and Members of the Board, Good Evening. My name is Andy
Prolman, | am an attorney with Prunier & Prolman here in Nashua. | am here on behalf on Renaissance of
Nashua to answer any questions the Board may have on Resolution 19-148 the Bridge Street Project. We
are hopeful for your support tonight. This agreement that is before you was a long, maybe one year
negotiations with the Business and Industry Development Authority. We have the support of the Planning
Board, the Infrastructure Committee and we are looking for your support tonight. Again | am here to answer
any questions when the matter comes up. Thank you.

Stephanie Wolf-Rosenblum Thank you so much, Stephanie Wolf-Rosenblum from 47 Berkeley Street. | am
here in support of amending NRO 93-6, impoundment of dogs, cats, ferrets and chickens. As a physician
and member of the Board of Health, | would just like to thank Representative Klee for this amendment
because it is a critical factor in keeping our residents safe that this go forward and | would be happy to
answer any questions. Thank you.

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019 Page 9

Fred Teeboom 24 Cheyenne. First of all welcome back Alderman Gidge, | hope you feel much better. |
wish to talk about R-19-159. Unlike any of you in this horseshoe except for Attorney Bolton, | attended the
Board of Tax & Land Appeals meeting last week. No one on that Board asked for a list and measures.
They did mention the list and measure but they questioned whether that should take 3 years. They said if
you take it, you should do it in 1 year. That’s important, because things change. Things change, so why
take 3 years? If you do it, it should be done in 1 year. And that’s because of great inaccuracies, there is a
sticky thing called the 4" Amendment of US Constitution that says that Government cannot come into your
home without Due Process. So a lot of people don’t let you into their home. Now who doesn't let you into
their home? The very people that don’t apply for permits. The very people that make changes to their
homes inside that no one can see.

An assessor is not allowed to come on the lawn; they are not allowed to look even in the back. They can
do some overflights. But the people who violate the Code Enforcement Laws are not going to allow you
into their homes. So the whole List & Measure is a phony, not demanded by the Board of Tax & Land
Appeals and the stuff that Attorney Bolton said about presumptive measures or proactive measures doesn’t
apply. The Board of Tax & Land Appeals will come out with their decision and they may make whatever
they decide to do in order, whatever Nashua has to do. Nashua has to run a full revaluation in the year
2022; every 5 years. There are a lot of problems in Nashua. The Department of Revenue Administration
brought a stack of paper this tall that Attorney Bolton hasn’t seen; they called a recess to review the
documentation. It looks like there are a lot of complaints against the City, probably the way Angela Marina
ran the office, because it is neighborhood by neighborhood assessments there are probably a lot of
problems with that.

Hundreds if not over a thousand errors were pointed out by Ms. Ortolano in a thick report that she
discussed before the Board of Tax & Land Appeals and about an hour and a half of discussion. Hour and a
half of presentation that will be taken under advisement by the Board of Tax & Land Appeals. Whatever
they decide, Nashua will have to follow. This $1.3 million you are spending is a complete waste, it
accomplishes nothing. Alderman Clemons nailed it, what does it do? Does it establish a fair assessment?
At the Budget Committee Alderman Dowd said it is not going to prevent a fair assessment. Of course it is
not going to prevent a fair system. People who will let you into their homes it is not going to be a fair
system. You have to do a statistical evaluation. | believe the whole Mall is in question. | haven’t looked at
the statistics on the Mall. It takes 10 votes from the Full Board; | think you are missing two members or so,
so it is going to take 9 members to pass this Resolution. | hope you don’t have 9 members to pass this
Resolution. Thank you.

Kim Kleiner Good Evening Members of the Board. | realize that this is probably a little abnormal but | am
here tonight to represent myself and members of your Assessing Department, your Assessors. These are
your experts. These are our experts. We would like to address some of the inaccuracies that have been
stated. | would like to start with a preface: We the Nashua Assessors offer this response out of concern to
the allegations made my Miss Laurie and Mr. Michael Ortolano because we believe that certain documents
that were sent to you on August 11" and to the Board of Assessors contain inaccuracies, misinformation,
falsehoods, unsupported data and gross assumptions that would otherwise negatively influence this
Honorable Board of Aldermen, the Nashua Taxpayers and the General Public. | would like to address some
of these.

A Full Measure & List is not required by the State of New Hampshire. That is what was stated. As the
Board already knows, the City has wanted to conduct a Full Measure & List for some time, since none have
been conducted in almost 30 years. Although not required by law, the International Association of
Assessing Officials Guideline recommends a Full Measure & List every 9 years. This is their guideline.
Also we'd like to note that Ms. Ortolano produced a 62 page document that she produced to the Board of
Tax & Land Appeals. Page 62 and | quote, “] want to emphasize that by itself the List & Measure, though
needed, will not restore trust and do away with all the problems. Indeed it my exacerbate some, though
needed” she quotes. And | have copies of this Memorandum both on the back table and for you this
evening. The City should wait to move forward on the Full Measure & List until the results of Mr. Cornell’s
review are issued, that is what has been stated.

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019 Page 10

The purpose of the technical audit currently conducted is only to review practices and procedures of the
Assessing Department on behalf of City Management. The scope of work does not address any
recommendations for the Full Measure & List, that’s not his scope. It has also been stated that the City
should wait to move forward on the Full List & Measure until after the inquiry of the BTLA is closed. We'd
like to tell you that there is no telling what the Board of Tax & Land Appeals will order. However, it is
known that if the Board orders a Full Measure & List, it will limit the City’s input and most likely be
considerably more expensive. It has also been stated that the benefit of a Full Measure & List is a matter
of speculation; not true. In fact a Full Measure & List is a widely used tool that will provide the property
owners of the City of Nashua with an opportunity to help ensure that the assessment records are accurate,
up to date and provide equity among all.

The City should receive formal bids prior to approving the bond. The Mayor spoke to this, this violates our
City’s policies. Our Purchasing Policies state that you do approve a source of funding before you issue an
RFP. It has been stated that the Assessing Department needs to review and strengthen their contractor
oversight procedures. You've heard a little bit here tonight about a section of the contract with KRT. There
was a misinterpretation of Section 3.1.6 of that contract. But it does not in any way invalidate the results of
the 2018 Statistical Update. All sales were qualified or unqualified using MLS and many other tools which |
have a list for you here this evening.

The validity of $1.3 million dollars; the $1.3 million dollar bond that the Assessing Department will request is
an estimated cost for the Full Measure & List. The BTLA questioned if the bond is sufficient not whether
the Full Measure & List is necessary. After we choose a contractor, if more funds are required, a formal
request will come to this Board. There seems to be a lot of discussion about the entry rate into properties.
It’s is not true that you can only expect a 15% entry rate. So across the bridge in Hudson there are
conducting a Full Measure & List right now. First pass through — 24%. The rates that Mayor Donchess
quoted earlier were from the last 3 Measure & List that KRT presented and we also spoke with Mr. Gagne
in Manchester, got the 60% rate and | also spoke with David Cornell who is our expert. At his last class
that he had with assessors that he was training, he did a kind of informal survey; 20 to 35% throughout the
room. So it depends on what you put into it. But it is not 10 or 15 necessarily.

There has been a whole and | would like to leave, there are some copies of this out back, I’d like to give
this Memo to the Board. I’d like to stress that your Assessing Department is here this evening in the back of
this room, this is important to us. It is not very often that you find that they all come to a meeting. We are
asking you to vote for the Full Measure & List. Your City Department is asking you to vote for the Full
Measure & List.

There is a lot of talk about investigations and | would like to just get into that for one minute. | realize you
are close to the time. It’s not true that the City has expanded a scope of work conducted by Drummond
Woodsum to include an investigation of management, that’s not true. Also, during the 2018 update, it was
determined that the base rate for school colleges, what we call in the Assessing Code 72, was incorrect.
Correcting the table for Code 72 resulted in the bulk of the $24 million dollar adjustment that you keep
hearing about. This has been verified by KRT; it was done prior to the file capture; it was a correction. So
there is no further investigation of the $24 million that you keep hearing about. Neither is there any other
investigations ongoing into our technical data that is down there currently by the City. So you know
sometimes | think you are getting a lot of misinformation, | realize it is not very often that your City Staff
comes out. But it is important to us; it’s important to our staff to always make sure that we have accurate
data. So we are asking for the Board’s consideration. Thank you.

COMMUNICATIONS REQUIRING FINAL APPROVAL

From: Mayor Jim Donchess
Re: Contract with Sapphire Digital for Smartshopper

MOTION BY ALDERMAN LAWS TO ACCEPT THE COMMUNICATION, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD
THE THREE-YEAR CONTRACT TO SAPPHIRE DIGITAL
MOTION CARRIED

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019 Page 11

From: Mayor Jim Donchess
Re: Contract for ESRI (GIS) Enterprise License Agreement and ArcGIS GEOevent Server

MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN KELLY TO ACCEPT THE COMMUNICATION, PLACE ON FILE AND
AWARD THE THREE-YEAR CONTRACT TO ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE
IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO- EXCEED $28,000 PER YEAR

MOTION CARRIED

From: Justin Kates, Emergency Management Director
Re: Approval of Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2018 and Certificate of Adoption

MOTION BY ALDERMAN CLEMONS TO ACCEPT THE COMMUNICATION, PLACE ON FILE, AND
APPROVE THE 2018 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE, AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN
THE CERTIFICATE OF ADOPTION

ON THE QUESTION

Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja

Yes | would just like to thank Mr. Kates and all of those who worked with him on putting this together. |
know they put a lot of effort in and it was good to see everything that came out. So thank you.

MOTION CARRIED

From: Lori Wilshire, President, Board of Aldermen
Re: — Appointments to the Animal and Dog Park Advisory Committee

MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON TO ACCEPT THE COMMUNICATION, PLACE IT ON FILE,
AND CONCUR IN THE APPOINTMENT OF ALDERMAN LOPEZ AND ALDERMAN KLEE TO
THE ANIMAL AND DOG PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MOTION CARRIED

PETITIONS

A Petition for Street Acceptance for Legacy Drive and two Petitions for Street Acceptance for Serenity
Lane were read into the record.

There being no objection, President Wilshire accepted the Petitions for Street Acceptance as read,
referred them to the Committee on Infrastructure and scheduled public hearings for Wednesday,
September 25, 2019, at 7:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber

NOMINATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS

Appointments by the Mayor

The following Appointments by the Mayor were read into record:

Animal and Dog Park Advisory Committee

June Lemen (New Appointment) Term to Expire: September 10, 2022
18 Manchester Street
Nashua, NH 03064

Board of Aldermen 08-13-2019

Amber Logue (New Appointment) Term to Expire:

20 Lock Street
Nashua, NH 03064

Business and Industrial Development Authority

Lydia J. Foley (Reappointment) Term to Expire:

2 Bruce Street
Nashua, NH 03064

John E. Tulley (Reappointment) Term to Expire:
PO Box 600

Nashua, NH 03061

Bradley Vear (Reappointment) Term to Expire:
547 Amherst Street

Nashua, NH 03063

Jason B. Haviland (Reappointment) Term to Expire:

29 Todd Road
Nashua, NH 03064

Deborah Novotny (Reappointment) Term to Expire:

65 McKenna Drive
Nashua, NH 03062

Kim Reagan (Reappointment) Term to Expire:

30 Temple Street, Suite 400
Nashua, NH 03060

David M. Denehy (Reappointment) Term to Expire:

56 Sherri Ann Avenue
Nashua, NH 03064

H. John Stabile (Reappointment) Term to Expire:

48 Lutheran Drive
Nashua, NH 03063

Carl Andrade (Reappointment) Term to Expire:

12 Mountain Laurels Drive, #203
Nashua, NH 03062

Page 12

September 10, 2022

September 13, 2020

September 13, 2020

September 13, 2020

September 30, 2021

September 30, 2021

May 1, 2022

September 1, 2022

September 13, 2022

September 13, 2022

City Clerk
Susan Lovering (New Appointment) Indefinite Term at the Pleasure of the Mayor
23 Bates Drive (Term to begin September 17, 2019)

Nashua, NH 03064

Conservation Commission

Gloria McCarthy, Alternate (New Appointment) Term to Expire: December 31, 2021

65 Musket Drive
Nashua, NH 03062