Board of Aldermen 04-12-2022 Page 31
Karen Bill
You pointed out when other people do it. Somebody living in Mary's house on the third floor doesn't have the same rights
as somebody sitting in a restaurant because when the ambulance is a minute later and they're dead, or two minutes later,
and the stroke is permanent, yeah, let's have those conversations at that point.
$617 last year for one barrier. Okay. The costs went up last year. That was two years ago. $688 last year for one
barrier. These restaurants should have had a plan for this year if you were going to do any barriers. And you who have
voted for this have done a great disservice to the residents of Nashua. I've been here for almost every single hour of
these meetings as well.
Craig Hermle
Craig Hermle, 12 Brittany Way, Nashua. I'm not against outdoor dining, however if a landlord or if a tenant said | want an
additional 500 square feet and didn't want to pay for it, | don't think that would happen and that's exactly what is
happening in downtown Nashua right now. Power to be or hats off to everybody that's making it work. | don't get
anything for nothing and | don't think anybody should be allowed it. Just because you're paying additional taxes for
something you sell isn't paying for the landscape or the square footage that you're utilizing.
A good compromise in my opinion would be to allow the dining on the sidewalks only this year. You've had three years to
figure out how much businesses should be paying. The compromise should be allow sidewalk walk dining and we'll
explore the expanded dining once we agree to a price upfront to allow businesses to flourish without having to pay for it at
my expense, at the taxpayer’s expense. It sounds great but there's been a heck of a lot more than just barrier removal
that's been involved in this process. | don't know how much your consultant cost that did his two day data points on
parking utilization, but that was a farce. How much did that cost? And the line items go on and on. Do it but please do it
properly and this is being rushed through and it shouldn't be. Thank you.
President Wilshire
That's all | have for public comment. You need to sign up when you come in for meeting.
Elizabeth Lu
Oh, sorry. | was late. Elizabeth Lu, 17 Roby Street. Just two things. After the passage of this barrier decision, |
wondered whether is there anything to stop a property owner whose tenants are not restauranteurs or bar owners is there
any way to stop them from renting this space in front of them to the highest bidder? If that were possible, that does not
seem like a good - seems like something we should have thought of.
Also the difficulty in deciding how much to charge. It was a lot to figure out working through that compromise. | don't
understand why the charge is difficult. If it would help, | mean, you could go with what income was derived from those
parking spaces the last year they were available and price it at that price so that the people who were using those parking
spaces are bringing in the same income that the parking space would Was that considered? That seems like a pretty
simple concept. So thank you.
Matthew Gouthro
Thank you. | wanted - this is Matthew Gouthro, 104 Fawn Lane. | wanted to use my time for this public comment to
express my concerns over the joint Task Force meetings on the proposed outdoor dining and how they were operated.
The attitude displayed by our elected officials of we know better than the taxpayers were never more discouraging than
having a sitting Alderman comment during the meeting that those who are opposed to outdoor dining were not concerned
about public safety in our historic downtown district. But these were the same malcontents that oppose the mask
mandate and their concern should be dismissed. Is this how our elected officials welcome civic engagement by our
residents?
Additionally, | need to express a concern where the Chair’s actions made it appear as if the job as a State official was
more important than the role of allowing public comment during the meeting as he openly campaigned in the meeting for a
motion to adjourn because he needed to be at the State House in the morning. This essentially silenced those residents
who waited hours during the meeting to speak. This selfish display was absolutely repugnant. The Chair chastised
several members of the public during the meeting telling them that their comments needed to be reserved for the general
comments portion of the meeting. I'm sure that that people who waited patiently for hours to speak had jobs and other
important things to attend to the next day. It was disappointing to hear that there wasn't time as the Chair prioritize his
need to be in Concord the next morning. | know this statement may not need to be popular but it needs to be said. If you
