Search

EDUCATION
MA, Global Leadership &
Sustainable Development,

Hawaii Pacific University

BS, Integrated Marketing
Communications, Ithaca

College
CERTIFICATIONS
* Trainer = Center for

Disease Control and
Prevention’s Crisis

and Emergency Risk
Communications (CERC)

Certified Facilitator
through the Rocky
Mountain Public Health
Training Center

TRAINING

*

CDBPHE Project

Management Essentials

CDPHE Behavioral
Health for Spokespersons
Training

FEMA Introduction to
ICS for Operational First
Responders

FEMA National Incident
Management System

FEMA joint Information
Center f Joint Information
System

JULIANN K. BERTONE

Niet2(@) 2@l NI MIAN elas

Jullann has extensive expenence in CDBG-DR, cross-cutting federal compliance requirements
and development, and execution of federally funded programs. She is a quality improvement
project leader, who plans and organizes multiple projects, meetings and presentations, creatively
collaborates with partners in government, non-profit, for profit, and academic settings to
enhance project skill set; conducts data collection and specializes in data driven reports; and
easily manages goals, details and scheduling.

Jufiann is well-versed in training and technical assistance, subrecipient management, program
design, and CDBG-DR compliance requirements. With demonstrated subject matter expertise
in public health and comprehensive disaster recovery, Juliann is well equipped to manage a
broad range of disasters. As a graduate of the Regional Institute for Health and Environmental
Leadership’s Advanced Leadership Program; member of City of Boulder's Health Advisory
Committee; collaborating member of the Colorado Department of Public Health Equity and
Environmental Justice steering committee; voting board member of social justice non-profit
Hawaii People’s Fund; member of Hawati Food Policy Council think tank: supervisor of graduate
level practicum students; and volunteer organizer, Julian offers unique experience
EXPERIENCE

* Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF)
Grant Management, Seward County,

Housing Program and Housing Counseling
Programm. In this role, she managed a

Finney County, and Neosho County, portfolio of over $50 million.

KS. Program Manager. Juliann serves as * Colorado Department of Public

Program Manager for Neosho and Finney Health and Environment, Denver, CO.

County's suite of programs aimed at Communications & Policy Analyst. As the

recovery and ongoing mitigaton of impacts Public Information Specialist for the Office

of COVID-19, including programs providing of Emergency Preparedness and Response

assistance to individuals and households, (CEPR), Juliann led all communications,

grants to small businesses, FEMA match, outreach, and mass messaging for

and grants to non-profits and government emergency and non-emergency health

entities to design and administer recovery Slakons

initatrves
* Isles Inc, Trenton, NJ. Grants &
* Community Development Block

Communications Associate, Juliann
Grant, Puerto Rico Department of
Housing (PRDOH}. Supervisor. Juliann
served as Portfolio Manager for Puerto
Rico's suite of CDBG-DR programs

targeted to address the needs of its most

prepared and submitted grant proposals
while ensuring high quality standards,
meeting all deadlines, collaborating with
departmental managing directors and
achieving over $500,000 in funding towards

vulnerable, including a Social Interest Isles’ community resilience and sustainability.

@

Special Board of Aldermen 6-13-2022 Page 16

It was a hypothetical question just to try to make it easy because we’ve been dancing around this a lot about what to
exclude, what not to exclude.

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

Well then | don’t understand your question. (inaudible) you don’t have the authority to do it.

Alderman Sullivan

What | am saying is if you had the general fund to make it simple, you would just say the general fund cannot exceed
that 2.8% number year over year and that’s it just be done with it. That would be your spending cap.

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

But that has to be done by a change to the Charter.

Alderman Sullivan

| understand that. | was asking what would be the down side of doing that my hypothetical question.

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

| guess you could get into an argument about what should be included in the general fund or not. So you might have
to think about what kind of definition you apply to that. But if you wish to propose that as a Charter amendment, |
don’t see much of an impediment to that.

Alderman Sullivan

| don’t. | was just questioning why.

President Wilshire

All set Alderman Sullivan?

Alderman Sullivan

Yes.
Alderman Klee

Thank you Madam President. In 56C that last paragraph that was kind of bounced around that said, “This provision
shall not prevent the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen from appropriately funding any programs or accounts
mandated to be paid from municipal funds by State and federal law”, perhaps it’s just my interpretation but | feel that
this was put in so that the City can’t say well we spent all our money and now we can’t afford to do this otherwise it’s
going to put us over the spending cap. Therefore, this was put in there that says you basically will pay those bills first
and the rest of your bills last. Is that a correct interpretation Attorney Bolton?

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

That is certainly one possible interpretation.
Alderman Klee

| feel that | take it that way. It’s kind of like we can’t go bankrupt on any kind of a — a person can’t go bankrupt in a
federal obligation so | take it in that respect that you pay your federal and State bills first.

The other comment that | kind of wanted to make. Two comments. One is when this was written, | understand that
there was some sitting Aldermen that wrote it but was it a citizens group that created this that went through the
Secretary of State or did it actually come from the Board of Aldermen?

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

Special Board of Aldermen 6-13-2022 Page 17
It was a citizens’ initiative that put this on the ballot, yes.
Alderman Klee

So the wording of it is how the citizens put it there not how it was necessarily worked appropriately and so on. | just
wanted to kind of get that — | thought that was the case but | didn’t want to make that statement without...

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

One of our frequent commentators claimed to have been the sole author. | have heard other people say they
contributed to the drafting of it. Frankly if | were in the room when it was drafted, | would not be taking credit at all.

Alderman Klee

| completely understand that. And then to the comment about we’ve never really gone over the spending cap. Would
it be fair to say we don’t go over the spending cap because when we do our budgeting we’re keeping that in mind? In
other words, we didn’t take care of necessarily the streets, or the paving, and so on. That was something that
happened after this kind of got lifted because we knew it didn’t fall within the spending cap. So to say that we did not
hit the spending cap is probably kind of an unfair. We went forward with knowing the spending cap was there. Would
you feel comfortable saying that Mr. Griffin?

John Griffin, CFO/Treasurer/Tax Collector

Yes Madam President and members of the Committee. Having presided kind of when the recession of the second
great recession was mid-way 2011, 2012, 2013, inflation was very low, cost of living wasn’t as high. Clearly the first
thing | do for the Mayor is calculate the spending cap because | knew what the numbers were. | kept track of it so |
could definitely provide how tight the submittals were. | think one was under $1,000 one year. So if you start with the
spending cap, you reduce spending to get there.

Tax cap on the other hand, you know what your revenue is to be able to spend. Spending caps are a little bit
problematic and decide as Attorney Bolton says, deciding what’s in and out of the general fund is going to be a
challenge but that is okay. You start with that. So when | first came here, | advised the Mayor this is the total amount
and we had to work with the Police Department, Fire Department, Department of Public Works and there really wasn’t
a lot of money available to do anything material. As you’ve heard, we used to have a $2 million capital improvement
budget where $1 million was given to pave roads. Just not effective. The other million — well what you see now, we
don’t have a robust capital improvement program. That’s why you get a lot of bonding authorizations. It was tight. It
was tight. We were fiscally constrained because as you know, the CPIU at the time that was changed to the S&LIPD.
It really kind of chocked the ability to add to the budget.

Alderman Klee

So just for clarification, basically we backed into the budget and said this is all we can spend, not necessarily this is all
we have without going up on taxes, but all we can spend based on these constraints. Is that correct?

John Griffin, CFO/Treasurer/Tax Collector

There was a significant limitation on the ability to spend on things that were needed.

Alderman Klee

Again, that is what makes the difference between a tax cap versus a spending cap. They are not the same thing. A
tax cap, we could stay within the tax cap if we have increased revenue and that would not affect the people. A

spending cap actually can affect how we can do our job to keep our infrastructure straight. Is that correct?

John Griffin, CFO/Treasurer/Tax Collector

Correct. Both are challenging — tax caps. There are several individuals that love to come in and add revenue streams
and then you find out early it costs you more to get the revenue that what is intended. But they’re both very
challenging having like | said, resided in 2-1/2 in Massachusetts it’s challenging. But | do have that information and |
see some folks that wouldn’t mind sharing it because it’s literally lifting the information off all these budgets ona
spreadsheet and you can see. It’s very challenging to do supplement appropriations when you don’t have any room

Special Board of Aldermen 6-13-2022 Page 18

left under the cap. In my tenure here, the exclusions were looked at more of an override. So there was kind of a
challenge to not want override and not want to exclude. So that’s what | lived with from ‘13 to ‘17 and then the
spending cap was deemed unenforceable by the courts. Thank you.

Alderman Lopez

If (inaudible) be present, Attorney Bolton. Earlier we were talking about has the City ever actually exceeded the
spending cap and it was sort of described that previously there were ordinances put in place to kind of dodge the
spending cap by redefining what went under it, but | also believe that | understand that we can’t do that now. Is that
the case?

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

Yes.

Alderman Lopez

So we can’t take the short cuts that the previous Boards took and we probably shouldn’t have in the first place.

But then my second question was, | think to Attorney Bolton but maybe to CFO Griffin, we were talking about
overrides with regards to Infrastructure or maybe exclusions with regard to infrastructure improvements. So if we
build a fire station, then we could potentially get ten votes and do that but what about personnel expenses? Would
those be considered part of the budget that can’t be removed from the spending cap so would we be able to afford to
staff those firefighters?

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

That might be a problem. Now right now we’re $113 million away from hitting the cap. So right now you might be able
to squeeze it in but we may not always be in the same fiscal circumstances. So yes, personnel expenses are not
capital. They’re ordinary expenditures and there’s no exclusion for that.

Alderman Lopez

Thanks for clarifying.
Alderman Dowd

Just a couple of things. | think every cities in New Hampshire their Charters are different. They’re not all identical,
correct?

Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel

That is correct.
Alderman Dowd

In Manchester, this is the first year in a number of years where they haven't overridden whatever cap they have. So
their cap isn’t working too well either.

Having been around for a while, | can tell you that the road structure in Nashua - let me use a different term - went
downstream severely and that’s why we have spent | think it’s $75 million to bring the roads back up to speed. We
have sort of promised that we would allocate enough money after this bond is done to stay ahead of the roads
because because of the cap, we weren’t able to do the road paving that we were supposed to do. Other infrastructure
failed. When we replaced Nashua High with the current Nashua High South, | can tell you from personal observation
that building was in terrible, terrible shape. The only thing that we were able to survive for the new buildings was one
wall and the stairwells. | don’t need to go in a lot of detail.

The other thing it hurt was CERF. They had developed this CERF program because our vehicle replacement under
former Mayors because of the spending cap went to hell in a handbasket. Even the CERF isn’t up to where it should
as we've explained several times. So the cap has not been a friend to anyone. It boils down to pay me now or pay
me a lot more later. When we built the two high schools, we built them to last. If you go in the high schools now, they

Special Board of Aldermen 6-13-2022 Page 19

look brand new and they are functioning perfectly well but they’re 20 years old. The high school before that didn’t
even last 15. So you have to spend your money wisely and having that constraint on it that was opposed didn’t do the
City any favors and it didn’t do any taxpayers any favors either.

Alderman Cathey

Thank you Madam Chairwoman. | just noticed that there was no public comment tonight. Can | motion for public
comment before we adjourn?

President Wilshire

You can.

Alderman Cathey

I'd like to make a Motion to add Public Comment.

MOTION BY ALDERMAN CATHEY TO ADD PUBLIC COMMENT
MOTION CARRIED

Alderman Cathey

Thank you.

President Wilshire

You're welcome. Any further discussion, any further questions, clarifications, anything? Okay. | will open the floor for
public comment. 3 minutes, name and address for the record. Anyone that wishes to give public comment regarding
the spending cap.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Mike Ortolano

Mike Ortolano, 41 Berkeley Street. This whole issue has been really interesting and kind of enlightening to listen to
what’s going on with this spending cap versus tax cap. You know sometimes it’s best to simplify as much as possible
up front. | mean it was kind of hard to determine that, in fact, we’re not really - this is an issue that doesn’t appear to
be affecting the budget this year, right? The spending cap as | understand it there’s such a large gap between what
would be possible and where you hit a limitation. If | understand it right, the interpretation of the Board or at least
Attorney Bolton and the CFO is that we have no problems. If that’s the case, that’s kind of nice because it doesn’t
make a lot of sense to me that grant money which if you get $50,000 and then you're supposed to spend $50,000 but
you're allowed to go like 3% above the $50,000, you know, are you permitted to? It’s just kind of the math of it. It
doesn’t make a ton of sense to me.

The other thing that | see is sometimes there are alternative interpretations. One of the nice things about public
comment and being able to bring other people in is that you can get these alternative interpretations put on the table
so that everybody can see where the differences are. A lot of times it ends up the same place, but it makes you feel
like the process is a lot more transparent, you know, it’s other than it’s my way or the highway sort of dialogue. My
understanding would be and I'd like confirmation...

Alderman O’Brien

One minute.

Mike Ortolano

...I'd like confirmation that | have it right is that this is kind of an irrelevant issue to this specific budget cycle and if it
isn’t, then it would be nice to see the alternative interpretation so at least the Board is acting with full knowledge of

there are different ways to look at this thing and maybe the Board would consider alternatives. I'll go 30 second short.

Laurie Ortolano

Special Board of Aldermen 6-13-2022 Page 20

Laurie Ortolano, 41 Berkeley Street. | want to thank the Board for holding this meeting. It was very informative,
interesting to hear the perspective, and | appreciate the questions everyone brought to the table. | would have liked to
have heard some of the people who worked on the spending cap speak and have an opportunity to have a little bit of
time to present their positions because | think interpretation is always a little complicated and it’s not a black and white
issue. | hate to see things come down to arguments that are we’re going to court on it, we’re going to sue on it, we’re
force it through that hole. I'd like to see more consensus building done so that is not the case. It’s not often
productive and these are complex issues.

| tend to agree that | do not think the grant money belongs in the calculation. | think grants are different. They really
are different. There’s the money you're appropriating for departments to run and operate and then grants come in and
it's not money that you are necessarily in need of appropriating. When | looked up “expenditure”, the term “total
expenditure”, and “municipal expenditure”, GAL, or any type of organization, accounting organization, it really talks
about the monies required by schools, police, fire, all your departments. No language that | reviewed it for definitions
on my phone came up with grant money included. So | do think that’s separate and | think that’s a legitimate point.

I’m not certain we’re at that $113 million under the cap. | think there is some skew there that | don’t fully understand
and I'd like to understand that a little bit more. Yeah I'd like to see us work together more with the public and gather
the views of those that have been around longer...

Alderman O’Brien

One minute.

Laurie Ortolano

..-and value the input that they have because there is perspective there. For whatever reason in 2017, 2018, 2019,
we went along with the calculation done this way. We had virtually the same management leadership team here that
applied it that way and then it changed in 2023 and for somebody looking in from outside, it’s a red flag. It’s a little bit
of a hey what’s going on here? Why the need for the switch?

Alderman O’Brien

30 seconds.
Laurie Ortolano

So again, thank you very much for holding this. | think it was informative for everyone. Appreciate the time you all
gave this. Thank you.

Scott McCullough

Ladies and Gentlemen, my name is Scott McCullough, 49 Congress Street, Apt. 6. I'd like to say thank you to the
Board of Aldermen who showed up - Lopez and Kelly | think it was. Thank you very much. My goal is if you guys can
help, if Lopez can help, | need to raise — I'd like to raise $1,500 to get these awesome Best Buddies shoes. The ear
piece is probably not this time because they are $2,500 that | have to raise. | think he can help me. | greatly
appreciate it and I'd like to come to the chamber maybe sometime in September. Miss Co-Chair if that’s alright with
you Lori. | called you and left you a message. If you could check your schedule and let me know what the best time
to come to the Chambers and present an award. I'd like to present an award and do a thing on the big screen and
show you what Best Buddies is all about. When is a good time? Maybe some time in September if you could let me
know please. Thank you.

Matthew Gouthro

Matthew Gouthro, 104 Fawn Lane in Nashua. | really want to thank you guys for hosting this opportunity to listen to
how the spending cap is being put together. | agree with many of the Aldermen who spoke up concerning grant
funding. | think anytime we can offset the tax payer dollars with grant funds, | think it’s an optimal solution that we
should all be in favor of. | think that this is a great opportunity for us to look at doing stuff like that. | came from a City
four years ago in Florida. It’s about the same size as Nashua and we had a full time staffer that was looking for these
grant fund opportunities. So | think if we can find opportunities to offset taxpayer dollar with grant funds, | think it
would be beneficial for us and for our budget, especially if we’re looking at the cost of living increases and everything

Special Board of Aldermen 6-13-2022 Page 21

that we’re seeing right now in today’s economy. | think we should definitely dig deeper into grant funding for these
expenditures. Thank you.

Fred Teeboom

Yes Madam. | did not prepare in the chamber because | did not know that you’d allow comment. | asked to attend
this meeting and present the spending cap as it has always been intended. That is a control of taxes and fees.
Grants have nothing to do with taxes and fees. The thing about gross budgeting from CFO Griffin is a farce, is false,
is misleading, is untrue.

| presented to this Board in writing the spending cap calculations should be about $5.7 million over the cap. As far as
putting in projects that haven’t even been bonded yet and make it part of the spending calculation is absolutely
insane. It’s ridiculous. What you’re doing is a gross injustice for what has been a cap for many, many years. | resent
it. | resent what you’re doing. | think we’re going to be heading straight to court and this time if we do go to Court, I’m
going to ask for a fine for every Aldermen that participates in this discussion and adheres to this farce presented by
CFO Griffin. Thank you.

President Wilshire

Okay. Seeing no one else, | have Alderman O’Brien.

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN THAT THE JUNE 13, 2022, SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF
ALDERMEN BE ADJOURNED
MOTION CARRIED

The meeting was declared adjourned at 8:54 p.m.

Attest: Tara King, Interim Deputy City Clerk

FY¥2023 - Base Spending Cap Calculation

§/4f/22
Special Revenue Capital Project
Line No. Description Resolution# General Fund Funds Grant Funds THF District (s} Funds Enterprise Funds Total
“1 Adopted Budget:
2 FY22 Adopted Budget R-21-142 $ 368,438,438 $ 18,570,313 $ - $ 38,344,285 | 5 425,353,036
3 Adopted Budget Reclassification R-21-159 $77,411,477} § 77,411,477 $ ‘
4 Total Adopted Budget $ 291,026,961 | $ 18,570,313 $ 77,411,477 $ . $ 38,344,285 |$ 425,353,036
5 |
6 Suppl I Appropri: | I
? Transfer of Unanticipated Revenue to East Side Recreational Fac ities ETF R-21-158 96 $ 750.000 $ 750,000
8 _Transfer of Unanticipated Revenue to (B DA) Business & Industrial Authonty ETF R-21-160 = $ 250.000 $ 250,000
3 Authorizing the City to enter into.an agreeement with Liberty Utilities R-21-169 § 38.394 s 38,394
10 Repurpose of LED Street Light Bond Proceeds to DPW Sidewalk Infrasturcture Improvements R-21-187 s 440,225 $ 440,225
11 Solid Waste Department Bonding Resolution for Improvernents , Refuse Truck & Wheel Loader R-21-189 $ 1,859,440 | $ 1,859,440
12 Unanticipated Revenue sale of Burke Street Property R-21-190 | $ 3,650,000 $ 3,650,000
13 Repurpose of Broad St Parkway Bond Proceeds to DPW Facility Project R-21-191 $ 7.000.000 $ 2,000,000
14 OPW Faci ity Project $3 Mion Bond Resolution R-21-192 $ 3,600,000 $ 3,000,000
15 Bond Resolution Design & Construction of School Street Riverwa k R-21-193 $ 21,900,000 $ 21,000,000
16 Bond Resolution - Franklin Street School Bulld ng Improvements. R-22-016 $ 5.000,000 $ 5,000,000
17 Bend Resalution « te fund the second Five Year Phase of a Ten Year Pavernent Management Provect R-22-020 $ 37,500,000 $ 37,500,000
18 Transfer of Assigned Fund Ba ance te School District - Teachers Contract R-22-022 S$ 1,300,000 $ 1,300,000
ig Bond Resolution - Replacement and Upgrade of Radio Communications Equipment R-22-027 $ 3,700,000 $ 3,700,000
20 {
21
22 a
23 Total Suppl | Appropriations: $ 2,338,394 § $ S $ . $ 76,290,225 $ 1,859,440 | $ 80,488,059
24
25
26 Total Base Budget: 5 293,365,355 § 18,570,313 I$ 77,411,477 $ 76,290,225 | $ 40,203,725 | $ 505,841,095
27
28 S&LIPD - 3 Year Average 2.80%
29 I
S$ 520,004,646

S:\Finance\BUDGET\FY2023\Base Budget Calculation\FY2023 Base Budget Caleulation as of 5_9_2022

R-22-035

RESOLUTION

RELATIVE TO THE ADOPTION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2023 PROPOSED BUDGET
FOR THE CITY OF NASHUA GENERAL, ENTERPRISE, SPECIAL REVENUE AND
GRANT FUNDS

CITY OF NASHUA

fn the Year Two Thousand and Twenty-Tiwo

RESOLVED by the Board of Aldermen of the City of Nashua that the Fiscal Year 2022
Proposed Budget tor the General Fund of the City of Nashua be and is hereby adopted, and that
the following amounts are hereby appropriated for the several accounts and for other needs of the
City of Nashua General Fund for the fiseal year beginning Juty |, 2022. and ending June 30,
2023, and for the purpose of Section 50-a et seq. of the Nashua Revised City Charter, as
amended, cach item of this budget shall be considered as a scparate apprepriation, The proposed
General Fund appropriation amount is $302,.998,903 with estimated Gencral Fund Revenues of
$72,322,078 including estimated state funding for education in the amount of $41,110,000.

That the Fiseal Year 2023 Proposed Budget for the Enterprise Funds of the City of
Nashua be and is hereby adopted, and that the following amounts are hereby appropriated for the
several accounts and for other needs of the City of Nashua Enterprise Funds for the fiscal year
bevinning July |, 2022 and ending June 30, 2023, and the purpose of Section 30-a ct seq. of the
Nashua Revised City Charter, as amended, cach item of this budget shall be considered as
sepurate appropriation. The propesed Enterprise Funds appropriation amount is $44,082,794
(inclusive of anticipated Capital Appropriations). with estimated Enterprise Funds Revenues of
$38.222,735 and any additional funding for capital and CSO-related expenditures from retained
carnings, bonding andor State Revel ving Fund Loans.

That the Fiscal Year 2023 Proposed Budect for the Special Revenue Funds of the City of
Nashua be and is hereby adopted, and that the following amounts are hereby appropriated for the
several accounts and for other needs of the City of Nashua Special Revenue Funds for the fiscal
year bexinning July £, 2022 and ending June 30, 2023. The proposed Special Revenue Funds
appropriation amount is $36,607,613 with estimated Special Revenue Funds Revenues of
$36,607,613 for the City of Nashua. The proposed Special Revenue Funds appropriation amount
is $22,974,364 with estimated Special Revenue Funds Revenues of $22,974,364 for the Nashua

School District.

RESOLUTION R-22-035

Neither the approval and adoption of this budget, or any appropriation contained herein,
or to any City department or agency, including the Nashua School District, whether as proposed
or amended, shall be decmed to mean that the City has approved any program or responsibility
for funding in accordance with Part 1, Article 28-a of the Constitution of the State of New
Hamnpshire. Notwithstanding any appropriation herein, the city hereby expressly declines to
approve funding for any program or responsibility for which it is entitled by law to payment
from the State of New Hampshire pursuant to Part 1, Article 28-a of the State Constitution,
whether it has previously been determined that the City is entitled to said funding or not.

Pursuant to NRO § 5-145, E, the accumulated sum of all appropriations of the FY¥2023
combined annual municipal budget pursuant to Nashua City Charter $56-c is $406,663,584. The
FY 2023 dollar amount under the limit established by City Charter Section 56-c is $113,341,062.
Please find attached the Combined Annual Municipal Budget Calculation for the FY 2023
Proposed Budget and the City of Nashua Charter and Related Laws pertaining to $56-c and $56-
d.