Board of Aldermen 10-13-2020 Page 4
Now, of course, some people have expressed a concern regarding affordable housing, a well placed and a
concern that we share because we want all families and all individuals to have an affordable place to live,
something we have been working on, on and off for decades. But if you look at the City’s record over the
last four years, four or five years, you will see that in the downtown areas, now again not in the central
business district but a little bit distant, we have promoted the development of 500 units and 150 of those
have been affordable. So what we have achieved is a 30% affordability rate.
We need to continue working on this problem of a shortage of housing and a shortage of affordable
housing, project by project. So a project which will accompany the School Street Housing is the Bronstein
Conversion, which Boston Capital proposed to do with the Housing Authority, guaranteeing those people
living there to return in an equal or better unit than they have now. That will add 150 affordable units two
blocks from School Street. In addition, and maybe Ms. Marchant is on this call, we have committed HOME
Funds to another affordable housing project on Amherst Street, close by to the School Street up on the
early part of Manchester Street. And we are working with Neighborworks and other projects, other ideas, to
promote the idea of affordable housing. And, of course, we have a study that is about to come out.
But again this project demonstrates that the Performing Arts Center will attract private investment, because
the taxes generated by the School Street Housing will pay for not only the public parking that will be
retained there, but will also pay for the additional bonding capacity for the Performing Arts Center asked for
in R-70-021. These are linked, at least conceptually because we’ve always said the Performing Arts
Center would attract private development and the developer of the School Street Housing, Peter Flotz, has
said that’s why he got interested in Nashua. He’s the first developer, builder of housing from the ground
up, apartments that has been willing to work in the central business district, in more than a century. So |
hope you all will support R-20-071 and we can make two projects successful. And, in addition to that,
develop affordable housing where we know we can do it.
R-20-016 | wanted to mention Madam President, this is the Energy Performance Contract. | don’t have a lot
to say about that. | think it’s been in two committees, but it will convert the high schools to more efficient
energy use, both LED lights and other features. It will reduce the carbon emissions at the two high schools
by 1,600 tons of carbon per year, the equivalent of taking 348 cars off the road. This will not cost the City
in the sense that the guaranteed savings are greater than the amount we will have to pay in basically rent
for these improvements. And we expect also to save $10,000.00 but probably significantly more money per
year in energy costs in addition to all the carbon reduction. It is something we’ve worked very closely with,
with the School Department. It’s a big project and it just shows how much we can accomplish if we keep
going in this direction. We will nearly have reached our goal of 25% carbon reduction by 2025 once this
project is completed.
Finally, Madam President, | wanted to mention with some concern Ordinance O-20-032. This has to do
with the reduction of the overnight parking fines. | think if you are inclined to vote for this we should hold
this because you need to understand the implications. If we reduce revenue, supporting the parking
enforcement function by $225,000.00 to $250,000.00 which is the fiscal note it would put parking
enforcement deeply in the red. We can’t run — especially now with all the financial issues we are facing,
COVID, the Pension Increase, the Health Care, we cannot afford to run Parking Enforcement deeply in the
red. So were this to pass we would need to go into effect, we would need to significantly reduce parking
enforcement to balance the budget there, probably by letting some people go, probably by little
enforcement at night. | think you should understand the implications before you vote on it. So | would ask if
you are inclined to vote for it, | mean | obviously | don’t support the idea at least in the current environment.
But | would ask members that are considering it to think about holding it so that we can have a more in-
depth discussion about how this could be handled and the implications it would have in terms of parking
enforcement.
But back to kayakers, | can’t wait until we get to the recognition because they have done such a beautiful
job for the City. Thank you, Madam President.
RESPONSE TO REMARKS OF THE MAYOR - None
