Finance — 01/20/16 Page 2
MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO ADJOURN
MOTION CARRIED
The Finance Committee meeting was adjourned at 7:02 p.m.
Alderman Ken Siegel
Committee Clerk
S.U.R. Construction West, Inc
SCHEDULE 0, - WORK ON HAND - Current Projects
TA B/20,
Contrag Job Name Descnpiton ‘Complete % Sublet Completion Owner Resign Engineer Contac Person Phone #
$2,797,993 00 Nashua 2020 Sewer Replacement Sewer / Road 95% 10% June 2p22 City of Nashua Hayner-Swanson Paul Hayner 603-566-8850
748.20500 Forest Park, Water & Sewet Project Water/Sewer/Road “60% 20% June 2022 Fores! Park Cooperatwe CMA Engineers Phi Corbett 603-431-6196
$ 9637.00 Oillant-Hop ~ s Fuel Farm Fuel / Ste 15% 40% June 2022 Gity of Keene Dubors & King Mark Goodrich 603-637-1043
$962 925 00 Claremont Water Project Water 60% 20% July 2022 City of Claremont. Ni Outresne Group Naomi Johnson 802-674-2904
FINANCE COMMITTEE
JANUARY 20, 2016
£:00 PM
ROLL CALL
ELECTION OF COMMITTEE CLERK
PUBLIC COMMENT
UNFINISHED BUSINESS — None
NEW BUSINESS — None
DISCUSSION
RECORD OF EXPENDITURES
PUBLIC COMMENT
POSSIBLE NON-PUBLIC SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
Aldermanic Chamber
REPORT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE
JANUARY 6, 2016
A meeting of the Finance Committee was held on Wednesday, January 6, 2016, at 7:00 p.m. in the
Aldermanic Chamber.
Mayor Donnalee Lozeau, Chair, presided.
Members of the Committee present: Alderman-at-Large Daniel T. Moriarty, Vice Chair
Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderman-at-Large Jim Donchess
Alderwoman Pamela T. Brown
Alderman Paul M. Chasse, Jr.
Also in Attendance: Mr. John L. Griffin, CFO
Mayor Lozeau
Before we begin tonight with public comment | would like to take a moment and call to your attention on your
agenda item #3 and item #4; | just want to make a couple of corrections. Item# 3 where it references CDBG
*15 and CDBG ’16, it’s only 15. On item #4 where it says Community Development Fund Grant Activity
CDBG, ’15 and 16, that shouldn’t be there at all.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Mr. Fred Teeboom, 24 Cheyenne Drive
Mayor, since this is your last committee meeting | wanted to thank you for meeting the anti-panhandling
ordinance.
Alderman Siegel
Point of order, that’s not relevant to what is before this committee.
Mayor Lozeau
| understand. | generally allow a little bit of flexibility but it would be nice, Mr. Teeboom if you stuck to the
matters at hand tonight. | appreciate your appreciation and you'll have another opportunity at the next Board of
Aldermen meeting to share the information that you want.
Mr. Teeboom
But you won't be there.
Mayor Lozeau
No, | won't be there but I’ll look up the minutes.
Mr. Teeboom
I’d like to now make my comments on the item that is tabled in committee which is on the agenda which is the
generator for the Nashua Police Department. | had made comments about this before. | have commented
about the fact that the original resolution was for $440,000 and was unsupported and | don’t think it was
Finance — 01/06/15 Page 2
justified. The resolution was approved nevertheless and the RFP went out and the IFP went out and | can only
say that it was disastrous. The first attempt was recalled, the second attempt turned into four options. It was
very confusing except for maybe the last one. The last one puts the generator outside of the building. Clearly
it indicated that the Nashua Police Department really doesn’t know how to purchase a generator. Now who in
the city does | don’t know but certainly the school department had no difficulty getting a generator put in for a
reasonable price. | don’t Know why the police department is having so much trouble. They then came up with
another entirely new IFP in September and at first | would be asking for a consultant to be brought on board.
When | appeared before the Finance Committee last time they met on this subject | said where are the
requirements documented that need consulting? NRO 5-77 says any purchases between $1,000 and $10,000
have to be defined and meet the requirements. As | started checking after the meeting and there was no
requirements documented by the police department. What they did was had visits with consultants who toured
around and they told the consultants to give them a bid. When you don’t write down the requirements you are
going to wind up with bids of all different types. In this particular type pays for the consultant to come in and
raises it from $5,800 to do whatever they thought they had to do all the way up to $45,700. That’s an
incredible range for a relatively straightforward job. You take together outside of the building and hook them
up to whatever equipment you have. | hope the mayor will enforce 5-77. That applies to any purchase
between zero and $10,000. It also states in the ordinances that the purchasing manager, who writes the
check, should not write a check without a warrant. | spoke to Mr. Kooken about this at length. He sent me an
email that said | was correct. In an email dated December 31, 2015. There are some issues with the
consultant. The consultant wrote a 53-page spec. in detail. Then he wrote very detailed notes about
construction. The bidder that bid this job, based on what the city required based on the consultant, added to
the proposed contract, Attachment B. | don’t’ know if you have Attachment B because when | looked at the city
website | couldn't find Attachment B. Attachment B contains written details from July. You can’t write a
contract without Attachment B. | asked Mr. Kooken for a copy, and he sent it to me. | should also mention that
because | have been critical of this generator purchase since May when it started, you, yourselves, generated
a subsequent meeting. The meeting was attended by Captain Paulson, representatives from the consultant,
the Emergency Management Director, Justin Kates, myself and Alderman Siegel, to try to get some of the
details. My first question was where are the details of the cost proposal that you delegated, whatever, as being
prepared by the contractor. There was none. It’s just alump sum. The other question at the time | said how is
the size of the generator at 500 kilowatts? As it turns out the people over at the police department is about 376
kilowatts. That’s a very big load measured over about two years of time. You need a 500 kilowatt generator.
Well, you certainly need a 400 kilowatt generator. You could do with a 400 kilowatt generator. As | was
checking up on these prices | found there’s a difference between a 400 kilowatt diesel generator and a 500
kilowatt diesel generator is very small so you might as well go with the 500 kilowatt generator. We only found
this out after Justin Kates submitted the measurements from PSNH. The other problem | have goes back to
the specification and it’s if the city says on the specification | guess they would expect it to be adhered to. If
you look at attachment B which is attached to the contract which you may or may not have in your package, it
says quite clearly that the supplier only intends to meet the intent and he doesn’t intend to meet the
specifications. It says ASNE does not guarantee compliance with every government code. We'll just do the
best we can and that makes sense because what you are buying is an off-the-shelf system. You are buying a
generator of which many are sold all around the world. Gererex is the supplier and is a very well-known
supplier and it says in attachment B on page 8, ASNE will review the compliance and the codes upon request.
Who is ASNE? ASNE is not the bidder and ASNE is not the consultant so who is ASNE? It turns out that
ASNE is the supplier of the generator. In Boston, MA they supply Generex generators throughout New
England. Why is there a 53-page spec? Why pay a consultant $9,000 to do a spec that no one is going to
use? | have a problem with that. | have a problem with the fact that option 4 which is the earlier bid goes back
to May since applying, ASNE, the same generic generator except the fibrous component built-up generator, it
went for $293,000 and now it goes to $392,000; why is there an extra hundred dollars? That’s not very clear at
all. The consultants submitted some information, I’m talking to the $293,000 but they didn’t baseline it back to
figuring out where the $293,000 came from. There’s a $100,000 in question here. So, what! did because I’m
pretty familiar with this technology, | contacted some dealers on my own and | came up with my own estimate
on what | think this job will cost. I'll make this available to all of the members’ on the committee. If you look at
this you'll see that there are actual quotes. | actually received quotes. | don’t get special discounts and I’m not
sure the City of Nashua does. You can see here that the generator itself would be dropped shipped to right
Finance — 01/06/15 Page 3
here in Nashua and the whole job would be for $112,000 and that’s a quote. It’s a diesel generator. It’s
natural gas and it’s not $60,000 more. Then | go to a local supplier, I’m not going to mention their name
because | don’t want to embarrass anybody but | called a big local supplier who hooks up these generators
every week of the year, they are very familiar with back-up generators. The first question was why did you get
a (inaudible) generator and | said nah, generic is fine, it's good enough. They gave me a quote of $25,000 to
hook it up and $24,000 for the labor based on ten days with four people. There is some additional wiring
required but | don’t know what it is but the consultants know and it adds $22,000 on with no detail. The
concrete pad has to be 48”; you don’t need a 4’ deep pad for that kind of thing.
Alderman Deane
What would you use?
Mr. Teeboom
2’. Anyway, if you take a 4’ pad it’s $5,000 and demolition is $10,000. A temporary generator would be there
for four weeks. You bring it in on a trailer open it up and you take it back. The service contract is $16,000 and
a year to five years is $8,000. There are no drawings but | assume you want CAD drawings even though it’s
not specified anywhere. Anyway you add all that together put the 10% contingency for the unknown, 10% for
project management is pretty standard and | put in 10% of the profit and the bond; it’s pretty good. | came up
with $89,000. If someone gave me this I’d sign it right now because I’d make a nice profit which would be
anywhere from $22,000 to $44,000. My conclusion is a generic generator is fine but you need to get a detailed
cost before you start this. You are getting a federal grant and they require specific details to regulate federal
regulations. When you buy equipment they want written specs. Finally, the police department knows a lot
about buying ammunition and buying guns and all that stuff but the departments ought to buy the things they
know what they should buy. Generators are not something they should buy. The school department knows
how to buy them but not the police department. My conclusion is that you should hold this until you get the
final detailed cost breakout.
COMMUNICATIONS
From: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau
Re: Emergency Change Order #12 to Continental Paving Contract
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE
MOTION CARRIED
From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Purchase of Nashua Police Department Bulletproof Vests (Value: $18,850)
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE
FROM ATLANTIC TACTICAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,850. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS DEPARTMENT
150, POLICE; 50% FROM 2014 BULLETPROOF VEST PARTNERSHIP GRANT AND 50% FROM NPD
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING; 61, SUPPLIES & MATERIALS
MOTION CARRIED
From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Contract Award for Repairs of Tennis Courts at Sargent’s Ave (Value: $15,750)
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO
EAST COAST SEAL COATING IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,750. FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE IN
DEPARTMENT 184, URBAN PROGRAMS, CDBG FY15 ($15,000) AND DEPARTMENT 177, PARKS &
RECREATION; TRUST FUND ($750)
Finance — 01/06/15 Page 4
ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Chasse
When will this be done?
Mayor Lozeau
In May and it will take about five days to do both of them, the two tennis courts; this and the one at Greeley
Park.
MOTION CARRIED
From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Contract Award for Repairs of Tennis Courts at Greeley Park (Value: $14,450)
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO
EAST COAST SEAL COATING IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,450. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS DEPARTMENT
177, PARKS AND RECREATION; TRUST JACKMAN FUND
MOTION CARRIED
From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Purchase of One (1) Roll Off Truck (Value: $117,400)
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO
LIBERTY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS IN THE AMOUNT OF $117,400. FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE IN
DEPARTMENT 168, SOLID WASTE; CERF
MOTION CARRIED
From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Waukesha Generator Maintenance (Value: Not To Exceed $20,000)
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO
HIGHLAND POWER IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $20,000. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS
DEPARTMENT 169, WASTEWATER; PROPERTY SERVICES
MOTION CARRIED
UNFINISHED BUSINESS — None
NEW BUSINESS — None
TABLED IN COMMITTEE
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO TAKE FROM THE TABLE THE COMMUNICATION REGARDING
THE PURCHASE OF A GENERATOR AT THE NASHUA POLICE DEPARTMENT AND EMERGENCY
OPERATIONS CENTER
MOTION CARRIED
From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Purchase Generator at Nashua Police Department and Emergency Operations Center
(Value: $392,817); Department: Nashua Police Department; Fund: Prior Year Escrow $270,500
and Homeland Security (EMPG) Grant $122,317
e §=12/2/15
Finance — 01/06/15 Page 5
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO
ELECTRONIC ENVIRONMENTS CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $392,817. SOURCE OF FUNDING
IS THE NASHUA POLICE DEPARTMENT; PRIOR YEAR ESCROW ($270,500) AND HOMELAND
SECURITY (EMPG) GRANT ($122,317)
ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Siegel
| want to clarify a whole lot of things about this purchase. Mr. Teeboom made a variety of statements. | was at
the meeting and I’ve researched the contract itself. There have been some misstatements shall we say. The
information regarding the additional cost has been provided to all of the members of the Finance Committee
and it was provided at that meeting to Mr. Teeboom and myself. We discussed it at length. Mr. Teeboom at
that time indicated that he understood the additional $100,000 and where it came from and the additional cost
from 400 kilowatts to 500 kilowatts was outlined explicitly at that meeting. He didn’t come up with it on his own
in some revelation. It was $11,000 in additional costs for a 100 kilowatt difference. I’ve seen Mr. Teeboom’s
documents which is the same thing that he has handed to us this evening. | believe that was sent via e-mail to
each member of the committee also. This omits significant portions of the contract that we have before us
including an entire secondary transfer switch and all of the associated work that is done with that. | reviewed
that contract and had some significant questions last time and Mayor Lozeau was kind enough to arrange for a
meeting that | attended with police staff, Justin Kates, the consultant that did the work and Mr. Teeboom was
invited and attended. The specific question that | had at the time with the additional cost was how was the
additional spec arrived at, why did we go from 400 kilowatts to 500 kilowatts and what was the thinking behind
that and where were the costs that came out of that. The actual process by which this happened | will explain
forthwith so there is clarification both for the Finance Committee and the public record. The generator was
initially specked at 400 kilowatts because that was what was there and the police department not only never
tried to be an expert at specking generators, they explicitly acknowledged they were not experts which is why
we had a consultant do that work which was clearly an intelligent thing to do. The 400 kilowatts was based on
what was there. The consultant did a 22-month measurement. They got the records from PSNH and the peak
power consumption was up above 350 kilowatts and by code you need to have 25% head room above
whatever your measured peak is so right then and there we are above 400 kilowatts just to meet code
requirements. This is even without any allowance for growth in the police department facility. The next step up
in generators is 500 kilowatts and that was $11,000 for that infrastructure and the associated additional costs
were the switching infrastructure to handle that because clearly there is more energy being transferred and
that’s an important consideration. At the time of the meeting we went through these costs and Mr. Teeboom
expressed that he understood where those costs came from and why and that wasn’t an issue and he even
specifically said that. Unfortunately, | believe that Mr. Teeboom has been excellent at providing data but it
would be nice if he were as good at inputting data. That information was available to us and it was given to my
satisfaction. The other issue that | brought up was the lack of clarification about what would happen with the
transfer switch. There is an electrical characteristic about the switches flopping around and the consultant was
there and explained exactly how that was derived. It was my understanding that it was based on a misread of
the way the spec was written. It turns out that it’s not going to flop around every 2 seconds, its 8 % seconds
which is well within spec. The other question | had was about the power level dropping below 90% and
potentially causing an issue with the motors; 85% is the industry standard and that’s where we are at and
should we want additional protection on the motors then we have the option to do that, if we believe that it will
be an issue. | felt that reading this contract and looking at the specification and all the costs are specified, we
have documents in front of us; this document that you have been made aware of that’s available which outlines
every single thing that we are purchasing and as an electrical engineer | can tell you that the consultant was
very helpful and | must say he was helpful despite Mr. Teeboom’s incessant badgering which | thought was
unfair. | will say that | would recommend that we do purchase this as it has been thoroughly vetted and all
questions at least that | had have been answered. | believe this is a wise purchase and a necessary purchase
for our police department.
Finance — 01/06/15 Page 6
Alderman Donchess
Alderman Siegel, thank you for going to the meeting and getting so deeply involved in this. You said the
consultant provided a reason for the additional regarding the extra $100,000. Can you paraphrase or briefly
explain that difference for us?
Alderman Siegel
There’s $11,000 attributed to the generator itself and the rest of it was the upgraded infrastructure required to
carry the additional power load and it’s a requirement. None of it was optional, there was no fluff in there and
every item was specified as necessary. We have to be code compliant so there were no options with a lot of
this stuff. Once you go up you have to be within spec.
Alderwoman Brown
| will be voting in favor of this and | would like to thank Mr. Teeboom for his research and also Alderman
Siegel. It’s obviously a very complex issue and |’m glad that we have individuals that delve into these issues.
MOTION CARRIED
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO TAKE FROM THE TABLE THE COMMUNICATION REGARDING
THE PURCHASE OF AVL MONITORING SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT
MOTION CARRIED
From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Purchase of AVL Monitoring Services and Equipment (Value: $57,070); Department: 160,
Admin/Engineering; Fund: Prior Year Escrows; Account Classification: Other Purchased Services
e Tabled 12/16/15
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO
MOTION LINK IN THE AMOUNT OF $57,070. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS DEPARTMENT 160,
ADMINISTRATION/ENGINEERING; PRIOR YEAR ESCROWS; OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES
ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Deane
’ve thought long and hard about this and | think that, | mean from my involvement on the Board of Public
Works this would be a reoccurring cost and | think we ought to try this and partially outfit a division with the
equipment within the different departments that are involved with winter operations and not quite load up solid
waste or the rest of whatever park department equipment is utilized for snow removal and/or vehicles of waste
water or engineering for that matter. | would support the street department equipment as well; any equipment
that is utilized during snow removal. | suggest we try it first and see how it works out and if it does work out
then go for the rest of it.
Mayor Lozeau
| also wanted to let you know, Alderman Deane, at the last meeting when we discussed this you asked about
other communities that might be using this and we did look into that for New Hampshire communities. | sent
you all letters from communities that have been using it as | had also sent to the Board of Public Works.
Merrimack, Concord and Manchester all use AVL.
MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO AMEND TO REFLECT THAT THE AVL MONITORING SERVICES
AND EQUIPMENT WOULD BE PURCHASED AND UTILIZED IN THE EQUIPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
WORKS DIVISION ONLY INVOLVED IN WINTER SNOW REMOVAL OPERATIONS
Finance — 01/06/15 Page 7
Mayor Lozeau
| appreciate you moving on this and recognizing that it might be worth taking a look at. | think that the
superintendents over the last couple of years as we’ve looked at this and other communities using it, | think all
of them have made a credible argument for all of their divisions to be able to manage their vehicles whether it’s
soft yard waste pick-up or all of those different things. | think it’s important and | support this as is but whatever
the pleasure of the committee is. | just think if we have an opportunity to affordably have tools on our hands to
let us know what happens and to allow the superintendents to manage their departments and equipment, |
think we should take it. In some instances it would be very helpful, particularly in snow operations as Alderman
Deane has mentioned. When people call and say we haven't seen a plow it would be nice to be able to take a
look and say well the plow came at such and such a time. When things happen to be able to look up and know
where the vehicles are at any given time makes a lot of sense to me. | appreciate that they were able to get
the price down to the $57,000. The reoccurring cost is about $30,000 per year in monitoring. We use this with
our buses and it has proved to be very helpful.
Alderman Chasse
Mayor-elect Donchess, what are your feelings on this? Would you rather see this just for the snow plowing
now and maybe expand later on?
Alderman Donchess
l’ve not had the opportunity to discuss this in any detail with Ms. Fauteux or anyone. | think Alderman Deane’s
suggestion is good. Mayor Lozeau makes the point that this can certainly improve operations and that’s
probably the case but on the other hand it is a significant annual cost. | like Alderman Deane often go by the
approach of taking it step-by-step. If you are asking me then | would recommend that we follow Alderman
Deane’s suggestion.
Alderman Chasse
| think it’s a great thing and | think maybe Alderman Deane’s suggestion is a good one.
Alderman Siegel
As a point of order are we voting then on the amendment proposed by Alderman Deane?
Mayor Lozeau
The amendment comes first.
Alderwoman Brown
| also believe that the amendment is not necessary and | won’t be supporting that but | will support the actual
item.
Alderman Siegel
| think Alderman Deane’s suggestion makes a lot of sense. The snow plowing is clearly where we have an
antiquated technology approach and it’s also the most unpredictable thing that we do whereas the trash routes
and things like that are generally more predictable and we probably get less complaints about that. | think the
go slow approach makes a lot of sense. | also think the fact that our incoming Mayor thinks that as well carries
a lot of weight.
MOTION CARRIED
