Board of Aldermen — 9/12/17 Page 12
If you look at the operation and maintenance costs, it’s even worse. There was a lady here to talk about the
capital thing in Concord. They expect in a pro forma several hundred thousand to $900,000 annual for an
income. Where is that going to come from, Nashua? They expect $160,000 income for a $4 million
endowment that no one has identified as who’s going to provide that $4 million. They expect on top of that
$160,000 from the $4 million endowment another $100,000 from additional contributions or gifts to make this
thing operate. Why? They project $500,000 to $600,000 in staffing costs. Eleven people to staff this thing.
Eleven. Four full time, four part time, and three event. Eleven people and the total cost of $500,000 -
$600,000. That’s why you need $1 million to operate and that’s why you need all this money from
contributions. How is that going to operate? How is this realistic compared to what happened at Court Street?
Tracy Hatch was here as an alderman. Well | was here also as an alderman twenty-five years ago. It was all
the same emotion. Got buy Court Street. Got to buy Court Street. What happened? The whole thing
collapsed. It’s a farce from all the budget and one director is still — it was gifted. There’s no bond. It was gifted
by the family and it collapsed. What about the Keefe Auditorium? Have you been there? Have you ever gone
to the men’s room or the woman’s room? The place needs a lot of work. That’s where the work has to be
done right now.
Now if you look at other theaters. People brought these up. In the study as in your presentation as you
receive at 2 May, there were four theaters mentioned. Out of the four, only one was profitable. The other
three lost money up to $929,000 — Vermont. Connecticut | think made money but the other three failed. One
of them was New Hampshire. | happened to be the one in Keene — the Colonial in Keene. Guess what? It is
running an angle deficit of $232,000. Who’s making this up? This facility is going to be owned by Nashua
taxpayers who pay the $1.2 million bond a year. If it’s a deficit, the taxpayers have to make it up. It makes
really not a lot of sense. Now if you look at the layout, this is a two-story building made by Alec Shoe Store
and then there’s a four-story behind it. The way they configured this thing, they’ve got to raise the roof on the
two-story of Alec Shoe Store because they've got tiered seating and it’s up on the second floor. They got two
stair cases to the left, none to the right. They have cramped 500 seating. There’s no center aisle. There’s a
small 800 foot performance stage. I’m telling you if you sit in the corner of that room on the second floor the
way it’s laid out and there’s a fire — you’re a fireman — you’re in a heap of trouble. Has the fire code bought off
on this thing? Has the fire code bought off on this thing?
Economic impact. | heard of millions of dollars annual report into May it does do an economic analysis. That’s
what the consultant Duncan Webb does. Guess what the impact is? $400,000 in net spending. $400,000 -
$139,000 net earnings — 5 jobs. For debt you pay $1.2 million a year. Like Dan Richardson said, give them
the $1.2 million. It’s a lower risk and better use of the money. Meanwhile, you have Court Street. What
happened to Court Street? Here you're creating a space of 7,000 square feet performing center but you’re
renovating 57,000 square feet. That sound strange? Look at your report. Look at the 2 May report. You don’t
have that. That’s in the detailed construction report that you don’t have - 57,000 square feet. It has to be
renovate it because you’re going to put stuff downstairs. You'll put meeting rooms in. We have a meeting
room in the Hunt Building. We have a performance area in Court Street. In fact doing your meeting in 2 May
because the architect consultant mentioned $2 to $5 million if you want to do some stuff and make it work and
do some minor fixing in Court Street. No one five years ago, Alderman McCarthy, that was in your 2 May,
2017 report he mentioned $2 to $5 million.
Now they also did a very detailed study for Court Street. They did what they call a less complete analysis for
Court Street and a more complete analysis of Court Street. The less analysis for Court Street was $9 million
that compares with the $60 million with Alec Shoe Store. The full construction, complete reconstruction at
Court Street was $14 million. Both of them less than Alec Shoe Store. Of course, it’s already a theater. This
study gets funded mostly by the Downtown Economic Development Expendable Trust Fund. | think it was 60
percent of it. $29,000 out of the $51,000 for the study came from this trust fund and they steered it! In fact an
alderman caught that. He says how can these costs be so high? Remember that? How can these costs be
so high? They started talking about Court Street. Mr. Clemons interrupted and he said we’re getting off track.
“Court Street is not our preferred site.” Quoted on page 4 of the minutes of 2 May. “Court Street is not our
preferred site.” The architect said we focused on Alec Shoe Store. He was steered by the downtown money
and the downtown committee to look only at Alec. To only look at Alec. When | mentioned too the $5 million
