Search

Board of Aldermen 09-22-2020 Page 51
President Wilshire

Alderman Clemons.

Alderman Clemons

I'd like to briefly speak to that. Thank you. This was a companion piece to the Legislation that we disposed
of earlier this year which would have changed the serving time to 2:00 a.m. The theory behind this
particular Ordinance was that if we were to change that serving to 2:00 a.m. then we would have to change
the parking. Obviously, we declined that; this was left in Committee and then COVID-19 happened and we
forgot to basically move it out. So this is sort of housekeeping to just remove this because it is an
unnecessary piece of Legislation at this point.

President Wilshire

Thank you, Alderman Clemons. Is there discussion on the motion for indefinite postponement? Seeing
none, would the Clerk please call the roll?

A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows:
Yea: Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Klee, Alderwoman Kelly, Alderman Dowd,

Alderman Caron, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Tencza,
Alderwoman Lu, Alderman Jette, Alderman Schmidt,

Alderman Cleaver, Alderwoman Harriott-Gathright, Alderman Wilshire 13
Nay: Alderman Lopez, Alderman Laws 2
MOTION CARRIED

Ordinance O-20-008 declared indefinitely postponed.

President Wilshire

Alderwoman Kelly?

Alderwoman Kelly

| would like to take O-20-017 from the table.

MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN KELLY TO TAKE O-20-017 FROM THE TABLE BY ROLL CALL

A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows:

Yea: Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Klee, Alderwoman Kelly, Alderman Dowd,
Alderman Caron, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Tencza, Alderman Lopez
Alderwoman Lu, Alderman Jette, Alderman Schmidt, Alderman Laws,

Alderman Cleaver, Alderwoman Harriott-Gathright, Alderman Wilshire 15

Nay: 0

MOTION CARRIED

Board of Aldermen 09-22-2020 Page 52
O-20-017
Endorsers: Alderwoman-at-Large Shoshanna Kelly
AUTHORIZING FREE PARKING AT METERS AND PAY STATION SPACES THROUGH
NOVEMBER 15, 2020
MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN KELLY TO TAKE FROM THE TABLE O-20-017, BY ROLL CALL
A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows:
Yea: Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Klee, Alderwoman Kelly, Alderman Dowd,
Alderman Caron, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Lopez, Alderman Tencza,
Alderwoman Lu, Alderman Jette, Alderman Schmidt, Alderman Laws,
Alderman Cleaver, Alderwoman Harriott-Gathright, Alderman Wilshire 15
Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED

MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN KELLY FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT OF O-20-017 BY ROLL
CALL

ON THE QUESTION
President Wilshire
Alderwoman Kelly.

Alderwoman Kelly

And speak to it please? | want to clear this off the books, | think we have done a good job with the other
things we have done downtown for businesses, including the barriers, so (audio cuts out), so let’s clear it.

President Wilshire

The Motion is for indefinite postponement. Is there any discussion on thatmotion? Seeing none, would
the Clerk please call the roll?

A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows:
Yea: Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Klee, Alderwoman Kelly, Alderman Dowd,

Alderman Caron, Alderman Clemons, Alderman Tencza,
Alderwoman Lu, Alderman Jette, Alderman Schmidt, Alderman Laws,

Alderman Cleaver, Alderwoman Harriott-Gathright, Alderman Wilshire 14
Nay: Alderman Lopez 1
MOTION CARRIED

Ordinance O-20-017 declared indefinitely postponed.

Donnalee Scan

Mayor
To: Board “tle,
From: Dann ozeau
Date: Jafnyary 8, 2016
Re: Clarification of CTAB Process

Re: Process Regarding Minutes and Attendance

Attached please find a memo from Director Codagnone. The purpose is to clarify for
the public record the process used by CTAB regarding minutes and agendas.

Thank you.

229 Main Street - PO Box 2019 + Nashua, NH 03061-2019
603.589.3260 - fax 603.594.3450 - NashuaMayor@NashuaNH.gov

Board of Aldermen 09-22-2020 Page 53

O-20-029, Amended
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Patricia Klee
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman Linda Harriott-Gathright
Alderman Thomas Lopez
Alderman June M. Caron
Alderman Jan Schmidt
Alderman Skip Cleaver
Alderman-at-Large Brandon Michael Laws
Alderman-at-Large Lon Wilshire
SUPPLEMENTAL REQUIREMENTS RELATIVE TO FACE COVERINGS
Given its second reading;

MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON TO AMEND O-20-029 BY REPLACING ITWITH THE GOLDEN ROD

COPY OF AMENDMENTS MADE AT THE PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, BY
ROLL CALL

ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Caron

And | would ask if Attorney would explain the amendment to the Board.

Attorney Bolton

The Amendment adds Section 17.

President Wilshire

Ok the Motion is to amend by replacing Ordinance 20-029 with the Golden Rod Copy. Alderman Jette?
Alderman Jette

Could Attorney Bolton elaborate wnat Section 17 is?

Attorney Bolton

Section 17 concerns the documentation if someone claims to have been advised by their healthcare
provider that wearing a mask would be a risk to their health. It had been pointed out that the current
version of the Ordinance, the current requirement, was not expresses, was more vague. So this essentially
defines wnat we mean by a healthcare provider and makes it clear that the documentation has to express
that the healthcare provider has advised the individual that wearing a mask would pose a risk to their
health. So it makes more explicit the current requirement.

Alderman Jette
Thank you.
President Wilshire

The Motion is to amend. Furtherdiscussion on that motion. Alderman Caron?

Board of Aldermen 09-22-2020 Page 54
Alderman Caron

Yes, thank you. Aquick question to Attorney Bolton, if we don’t approve this amendment it doesn’t change
the fact that we still have this mask ordinance, am | correct.

Attorney Bolton

You are correct, it does not affect the current requirements that you adopted by Ordinance 20-018.
Alderman Caron

Ok thank you.

President Wilshire

Alderman Lopez?

Alderman Lopez

| have a question to Attorney Bolton as well just because one of the communications we had some

misinterpretation of it | think so | just wanted to clarify. Is the Ordinance requiring any businesses to block
people from entering their business?

Attorney Bolton

No, the word “block” is not contained in the Ordinance.

Alderman Lopez

So the intention is that if somebody were not to serve somebody coming in the business and that person
refused to leave, they would then call the Police and let the Police handle it like they would any other
situation where someone was not following their rules.

Attorney Bolton

It is exactly the same thing as if someone walks into a restaurant or a grocery store without wearing shoes.
It is the exact same thing.

Alderman Lopez

Thank you.

President Wilshire

You're welcome. Anyone else? Alderman Lu?

Alderwoman Lu

Thank you. Just two points, | wanted to clarify, there’s a little more to it than just the requirement for a note

if you are not going to wear a mask. Isn’t there also the change that proprietors or managers are ordained
to not permit or not transact, sorry it’s late, to do the transaction with someone that does not wear a mask?

Attorney Bolton

When | describe Section 17, which is the amendment that was made, that just concerned the document

Board of Aldermen 09-22-2020 Page 55

from the medical provider. There are 16, well actually no because it starts with number 10, there are a total
of 7 other provisions in this Ordinance; one of which prohibits a business from transacting business from
providing goods or services to people in violation of this Ordinance or Ordinance 20-018. And as | said just
a few minutes ago it’s precisely the same as if someone walked into a restaurant without wearing shoes.
Current law provides that a restaurant cannot serve someone who is not wearing shoes. It would make
this the same thing, if they are not wearing a face covering, this law would prevent that restaurant from
serving that person. Similarly with a store or any other place of business.

Alderwoman Lu

Thank you, could | just follow-up?
President Wilshire

Yes.

Alderwoman Lu

| didn’t mean to be argumentative. | wanted to establish that there are a couple small changes. It’s exactly
like the public health requirement to wear shoes but this amendment is not exactly like the standing
Ordinance in terms of wnat the store owners are expected to do if ’m correct. There area couple of
changes and one of them does speak to the requirement thata store owner take some ownership of this.
Attorney Bolton if you will recall, | sent you a question and | said, my understanding of the wording of the
Ordinance as proposed just says that an owner has to put a sign in the window, that’s new, there wasn’t
anything previously that said there has to be a sign in the window. And that’s all | am trying to establish is
that there are a couple of different changes in this Ordinance, rather, additions to the prior Ordinance. But |
just want to finish up because ...

Attorney Bolton

Can | interrupt here? | never said there weren't other additions. There are 7 newprovisions in this. | can
speak to every one of those 7. Previously | was asked about the difference between as originally proposed
and as amended this evening. As amended this evening, it only adds Section 17. Section 10 through
Section 16 are new and different from what previously had been in Ordinance 20-018. So lam not trying to
mislead anyone.

All of this stuff is in addition to wnat was in Ordinance 20-018. So if you want me to speak to each one |
can, if you have specific questions about any one of them, | can speak to it. But yes, there are seven new
provisions that will become law if this passes.

Alderwoman Lu

Can | just respond?

President Wilshire

Yes.

Alderwoman Lu

Attorney Bolton, | apologize it was a misunderstanding on my part. | didn’t follow the discussion, | think.
And | understand now that there was a recent further amendmentto the amendment. | didn’t realize you
were answering —| hope you accept my sincere apology. Yeah | was actually just discussing that because

| wanted to lead into what | feel is a helpful thing to keep in mind is that you and | had some communication
a week ago or so and | felt like in my mind, knowing that, | asked you, doesn’t this mean that a business

Board of Aldermen 09-22-2020 Page 56

owner simply must tell them that they don’t have permission to enter without wearing a mask? They are not
required to bar or physically, you clarified to me in your response, they are not required, they are not
responsible for if that person forces theirway in. But they are expected to communicate that, that they
cannot do business with them per the Board of Health.

So | am sorry for that misunderstanding. | did think that Attorney Jette’s or whoever asked it question was
what is this whole amendment about. | didn’t realize that they were questioning the most recent change.

Alderman Dowd

Point of order, point of order. We are only discussing the addition ....the amendment which is the addition
of paragraph 17 and not the basic Ordinance. So we are only addressing what Attorney Bolton just
described as Paragraph 17 which has to do with the doctor's thing. None of the other parts are under
discussion at the moment.

Alderwoman Lu

Alright thank. Alright, well if | could just finish my comment is that | was offering that for the public as an
explanation of why this is a good idea. Thank you.

President Wilshire

Anyone else on the amendment?

Alderman Clemons

Yes thank you, briefly | won’t support the amendment because | believe it is an undo burden for folks to
have to go to get a doctor's note when they know their own health risk. |, quite frankly, don’t think itis a
private business owner or the City’s responsibility to look into other people’s healthcare decisions with their
doctor. Sol am going to vote “no” on this amendment.

President Wilshire

Ok, anyone else? Seeing none, the Motion is to amend with the Golden Rod Copy. Would the Clerk
please call the roll?

A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows:
Yea: Alderman O’Brien, Alderman Klee, Alderwoman Kelly, Alderman Dowd,

Alderman Caron, Alderman Lopez, Alderman Tencza,
Alderwoman Lu, Alderman Jette, Alderman Schmidt, Alderman Laws,

Alderman Cleaver, Alderwoman Harriott-Gathright, Alderman Wilshire 14
Nay: Alderman Clemons 1
MOTION CARRIED

MOTION BY ALDERMAN CARON FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-20-029 AS AMENDED, BY ROLL CALL
ON THE QUESTION

President Wilshire

The Motion is for final passage as amended. Discussion on that motion, Alderman Dowd?

Board of Aldermen 09-22-2020 Page 57
Alderman Dowd

Yes, just a few points. This is not anew or a second mask Ordinance. We are amending, if you will, the
existing mask Ordinance of O-20-018 to clarify the Ordinance and assist in enforcement. The majority of
people | talk to in Nashua are strongly in favor of this Ordinance. People have written us saying they are
taking away their right to choose about wearing a mask. Choice of which laws they want to adhere to,
cannot go into restaurants or stores not wearing a shirt or shoes for healthreasons, those laws come from
our Health experts, as does this mask Ordinance. Wearing masks during this pandemic is requested by
the vast majority of scientists and doctors, including the President's own medical experts.

This morning Dr. Fauci reiterated again that we need to wear masks especially with the number of cases
growing in the majority of states including New Hampshire. Also, we are not asking store employees nor
manager to get into arguments or fights with patrons. They simply point out to the patron that just entered
that they passed a sign saying that they should come into their establishment and cannot be served without
wearing a mask. If they give them a hard time for the person or persons involved, they need to get the
store manager involved and if the patrons won’t comply, the manager can call the Police.

| just came back from upper New York where the State of New York has done a fantastic job fighting this
pandemic. All stores and all restaurants have signs on the doors saying they will not serve you if you come
in without amask. They offer the patron a mask and if they will not wear one they are asked to leave. |
must say that over 98%+ of the people | saw were complying with the law and those that were not, | believe
medical reasons for not wearing them which were fairly obvious. So without masks in Nashua right now, it
is the law. We are only clarifying the lawwith this O-20-029. When the Board of Health says its time to
rescind the mask Ordinance, we certainly will. Thank you.

President Wilshire
Thank you. Alderman Klee?
Alderman Klee

Thank you, Madam President and again | echo everything that Alderman Dowd has said. When we first
put this supplemental out, | started looking at the ADA Laws and wnat can and cannot be done and it was
hard actually to find information as to whether or not this fell within the ADA Regulations and Laws. It’s
even hard to get people like from the ACLU or so on to say “yea” or “nay” because they will be representing
those people. So | can understand where they were coming from. But! was able to find on the ADA
Southeast.org a web site wnere they talk about and say that this does not really fall within the ADA Laws.
They went further to say is the best practice is to make sure you have some kind of — and! am scrolling
here trying to find the exact — “reasonable modifications’ is the way they said it.

So for instance, if someone wanted to go shopping to the grocery store and they couldn't wear a mask,
we’ve made reasonable modifications, it said if you have a doctor's note than you could do it. A
reasonable modification could be that you can order on-line and the store will deliver it to your call. That
would be reasonable modification. The problem here people keep talking about, they lose their choice.
Well the flip side of that are those people that are more vulnerable, that may have a pre-existing condition
without having this kind of a mandate, they can’t go shopping. So if there’s anybody’s rights that are being
stomped on are those that are probably a little bit more fragile. And | want to protect those people and |
want to make sure that they can go to the grocery store. And | want to make sure that we do look at
everybody because the bottom line is, yes some people can’t wear masks. I’ve read studies of people who
say that your oxygen level drops and you’re taking in CO2. And they’ve done studies were people have
the ox-meter | think is what it’s called, oximeter on their finger and they walk around for 15, they walk
around for 30 minutes and there’s almost no drop in their oxygen level. So | find that very difficult to
believe. ButI’m sure that someone will come up with as many studies as | say one way, they are going to
come up with the other way.

Board of Aldermen 09-22-2020 Page 58

The bottom line is | think we’ve made reasonable modifications. One of the important things in this
supplement are for gyms. | know there are a number of gyms that have been telling people you have to
wear face masks when you are on the equipment and machines. Everybody will tell you, including the
CDC, is that when you are doing heavy exercise you should not be wearing a mask. And | think that’s one
of the things that we address in this. So | think it’s important that we pass it. | think it’s important that we
look at all citizens. | can go with and say OK the shoes and the shirt and you have to be over 18 to be able
to have a drink and so on. And yes, we can put that reasonably to this. But the bottom line is that if] wear a
mask then someone who is more vulnerable whether or not they do it or they don’t wear a mask, but they
can go shopping. So they can’t stop this from happening except for to stay home.

And Ill be honest with you, | had an e-mail that came in just before the meeting that basically said to me if |
don't, if people don’t wear a mask, | can’t leave my house. And | don’t want to see that happening. So|
want to be fair to all citizens and | think we need to pass this, thank you.

President Wilshire
Alderman Cleaver?
Alderman Cleaver

Yes, thank you very much Madam President. Alderman Dowd hit everything on key and everything he said
was exactly right and well-done. | think we have a moral obligation to pass this law. It is the least we can
do to protect our citizens and | think we have to do, simple as that.

President Wilshire
Alderman Lopez.

Alderman Lopez

Yeah, | just wanted to clarify that for my part these Legislation amendments and stuff don’t come out of a
vacuum. There was a lot of constituent concems that were coming to me regarding supermarkets
particularly in May and how adherence was going. And people were starting to show pandemic fatigue at
that point. They were already getting tired of being locked up, of having to change theirlife. Its beena
huge and very difficult adjustment process for everybody. But at the same time, there’s been a lot of
concerns raised by individuals from those businesses too that they have to serve the public. They don’t
want to be in a position where they have to confront the public but we inadvertently — the suggestion was
made to me that we inadvertently created something of that situation by making it an Ordinance that didn’t
include any responsibility by businesses, because otherwise the businesses would have to call the Police
every time somebody did it. So now businesses as people get fatigued and customers start coming back
that are a little less cautious are being put in a position were they have to say, ok well if you are breaking
arule | don’t want to be Karen, sorry Alderman Caron, | don’t like want to call the cops on you and all that
kind of stuff. There’s this whole like cultural pressure. So | think by having a consistent approach where we
say, OK look, everybody is subject to the same Ordinance; Alderman are subject to it, the shop owners are
subject to it, essential personnel are, non-essential personnel, customers.

| think we are doing more to make sure that everybody has the same script. | think that’s also the reason
why we have to have the posted signs. Because some people were kind of creating their own language
and their own explanation of what was going on and that was creating all kinds of debates too. | think it’s
very important, something that Alderman Lu said at the Committee when we were speaking that there area
lot of different agencies and institutions that are providing public comment and opinions and things of that
nature. This is the problem of having a pandemic in your front lawn. Typically when new diseases are
discovered, they are in a far off section of the world, if they are even out of our country, they are isolated,
action is taken to keep them from out of containment and then there’s time to study them and fully
understand what's going on and howthey work. We didn’t have that this year, in fact, we also had the

Board of Aldermen 09-22-2020 Page 59

added burden of social media and instant clicking and 20 million platforms where people could spread
memes that very much spread misinformation and confusion because the scientific process if one of
constant refinement. There are absolutes that have been always been maintained by our own health
professionals.

And | think we should look to those, such as the importance of wearing a mask to prevent inadvertently
infecting somebody with your germs. | think we have Attorney Bolton sitting right here if we have legal
questions about ADA or any of that kind of stuff, we can ask him, we can have those kinds of conversations
and we have been having it. So | think here in Nashua it would be convenient if at the State level — hint,
hint — we figured out how to get some kind of statewide mask ordinance or at the national level if there was
even any helpful anything coming from there but there isn’t so we are elected to represent Nashua. We
need to look out for our constituents. My constituents say this is a pandemic. They don't want to lose
family and friends. Some of them have lost family and friends and have lost people that they care about
and | don’t want to see that continuing either. So! support this amendment and | appreciate that it’s being
brought forward. | appreciate the disagreements that have been raised as long as people are being
reasonable about howthey present them. But! have full faith and confidence in our Board of Health, in our
Public Health Professionals and in their qualifications to advise us appropriately.

President Wilshire
Alderman Schmidt?
Alderman Schmidt

Thank you, Madam President. | did have a question concerning number 11. What happens to businesses
if they do not follow this?

President Wilshire

Attorney Bolton.

Attorney Bolton

They have violated the Ordinance, if convicted they are subject to a fine of no more than $1,000.00.
Alderman Schmidt

Interesting, thank you. | do have a really big issue with this. | imagine a kid, 16 years old, being assigned
to stand in the door and some big guy comes in and says, “I’m not going to wear a mask”. That sets that
person up for a terrible experience. And |don’t knowwnat the answer is at this point. Are we going to
monitor wnat happens at all the shops in the City? Is there any way that we can actually make sure that
this is going to happen and happen correctly? Or will the Police be extremely busy running between stores
and telling kids everything is going to be OK, don’t worry we will take care of that guy? Other than that, |
wear a mask. | wear a mask even though I have asthma and allergies. And even though I’ve had asthma
attacks with my mask on, | think everybody should wear it. So this is a really good idea. | think the Nashua
Mask Ordinance really saved the State. We were a barrier between people coming up from Massachusetts
and made a difference. It's agreatidea. I’m just really concerned about what is going to happen when we
fully get this involved. Thank you.

President Wilshire

Alderman Tencza?