Board of Aldermen — 4/11/17 Page 3
They recommend what they call a network priority ranking. In other words, based upon this analysis of the
condition of each street, the streets where the most significant improvement in terms of prevention of
deterioration be done first so we preserve the most value that we can regarding the maintenance often streets.
The report in conclusion says the overall roadway network in the city is currently in fair condition. The study
shows that the city is in a critical point from a pavement management perspective and future diligence will be
necessary to improve citywide pavement conditions.
It also points out that all of this is based upon a computer model and that the city, once it undertakes a
pavement improvement program, needs to re-evaluate the situation every year. Re-evaluate the streets, re-
evaluate the situation because the deterioration of the streets may not be as quick as the computer projects or
may curve more quickly. The idea is we need re-evaluate as time goes on. The report says it this way: “it is
recommended that roads be reviewed each year to confirm that deterioration is occurring at the expected
computer model rate. Based on these reviews and inspections, an update to the pavement management
software will provide the city with a better understanding of its roadway degradation and confirmation of
appropriate funding needs to prevent it.”
Then it again says that: “If preemptive action is not taken, the large mileage of streets currently in the need of
preservation maintenance will rapidly digress to poor conditions that would subject the city to far more
expensive roadway work.” What they recommend is that we undertake a paving program at the rate of $7.5
million per year which is what is proposed in the resolution.
The resolution sponsored by myself, by Alderman Deane and by Alderman Siegel, and now endorsed by the
Budget Committee, proposes that for a period of five years we authorize the borrowing of $7.5 million in order
to improve the conditions of our streets in order to attack these preventive maintenance problems and in order
to save the requirement that we spend far more in the future.
Of course, the question is: how does this get paid for. For the past several years, we have appropriated into
the special road and highway fund $2.3 million as | said. Two-thirds of this approximately comes from the
revenue high block grant we receive from the State of New Hampshire. $700,000 is revenue that we have
directed from automobile registrations into this user fee based account. Now if we continue to do this, and if
we do the $7.5 million per year of paving, and if we accumulate money in the account when we do not require
it to meet the obligations under the bonds, the projections show that we will rise to a surplus in the account of
about $5 million in year four. Then we will see a declining surplus in the account, but the account will never go
below zero through a 20-year payment program. These will be 15 year bonds, but because the last of the
borrowing would occur in year five, full payment would not occur until year 20.
What we are proposing is a five year plan for various reasons. First of all because the consultant in the paving
study suggests to us that this is just a projection and that we need to re-evaluate the situation every year and
that the reality on the ground, so to speak, could be different than they project in the computer. Number two,
we may achieve additional revenue sources that we don’t have now. For example, the governor’s budget that
is pending now before the Senate, no budget passed the House as you know, so the governor’s budget is sort
of the prevailing document at this point, the default document, the governor’s budget proposes a 40 percent
increase in the revenue highway block grant. If that occurred, this fund would accumulate a much far greater
surplus and would pay for all this not for five years and beyond but for six or seven years and beyond. Also,
we have recommended in this projection that we increase the revenue from the motor vehicle registrations by
$400,000 in year four. In any event, | wanted to give the Board which has not had a chance or was not able at
the budget committee to see the presentation of the consultant, to give you some sense of what they are
saying. They are recommending that we take a preemptive strike, a big leap forward, that we invest now to
save in the future and that we spend money and evaluate the situation every year in order to make sure that
we do not let the value of a $450 million infrastructure decline further than it has so far.
With that, Mr. President, | am recommending that you follow the recommendation of the budget review
Committee that you answer the call of the citizenry and improve paving by adopting a reasonable,
commonsense paving program based upon the scientific analysis of our streets and the value of our
infrastructure.
