Budget Review Committee Meeting - March 10, 2026
Budget Review Committee Meeting Summary - March 10, 2026
The Budget Review Committee met on March 10, 2026, at 7:30 PM in the Alomatic Chamber. The meeting was chaired by Alderman Javert Kabo. The committee reviewed and voted on several funding resolutions and a collective bargaining agreement.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No members of the public testified.
Discussion Items
-
Arts Commission Funding (Communication): The staff liaison for the Arts Commission presented a recommendation to allocate $30,000 of the commission's $40,000 annual general fund budget for grants to local arts organizations. She noted that requests totaled $57,000, indicating growing need. Alderman Clayton commented on the thorough application and reporting process. The committee approved the recommendation unanimously.
-
R-26010: Snow Removal Trust Fund: The committee discussed a proposed increase in the maximum allowable amount in the Snow Removal Expendable Trust Fund and a supplemental appropriation of $500,000. Alderman Kelly asked Director Foto about salt costs and the impact of using brine; Director Foto confirmed that brine reduces salt usage but is less effective in very cold weather. The committee voted unanimously to recommend final passage.
-
R-26012: Hydropower Reserve Fund: A supplemental appropriation of $600,000 was proposed for the hydropower reserve fund (Fund 706). Director Sullivan explained that $450,000 remains in the account, but $290,000 in upcoming contracts for the fish passage project would leave a low balance. The $600,000 estimate covers turbine blade fabrication and labor, with some contingency for unexpected issues (e.g., lifting the facility roof). Alderman Kelly asked for the basis of the estimate. The committee voted unanimously to recommend final passage.
-
R-26013: Solid Waste DES Surcharge Fee: A supplemental appropriation of $280,000 was proposed for the New Hampshire DES surcharge fee. No discussion. The committee voted unanimously to recommend final passage.
-
R-26-003: Main Street Cleanup (Amended): The committee took up a previously tabled resolution for downtown cleanup. Alderman Tebow moved to amend the appropriation from $200,000 to $55,000, split between the Street Department ($15,000 for overtime) and Parks Department ($40,000 for overtime), effective April 1 through June 30. A memo from Economic Development Director Liz Hanum detailed the scope of work (litter pickup, power washing, graffiti removal, etc.). Alderman Greg asked for a specific geographic grid; Director Hanum described Main Street, side streets up to about two blocks, riverfront, and library walk. Alderman Kelly confirmed this is not a recurring expense; future budget requests may include permanent staff. Alderman Clayton cautioned against listing every side street to avoid exhausting funds. Alderman Tebow emphasized the reduced cost and specific deliverables. Alderman Johnson supported the measure, citing constituent concerns about homelessness and needle hazards. The committee voted to recommend final passage. (Note: This item will go to a public hearing and then back to committee before final board approval.)
-
R-26001: Collective Bargaining Agreement (Unit E & F): The committee reviewed a new collective bargaining agreement between the Board of Education and the Nashua Teachers Union for 32 employees (16 sign language interpreters and 16 family engagement coordinators) for July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2028. Superintendent Mario Andre and COO Crystal DeGray presented the terms, noting the contract is modeled on the paraeducator contract. They explained that the FY26 increase is higher due to a stipend for family engagement coordinators who did not receive an increase the prior year. Alderman Kelly noted the contract included benefit details with a date error (July 1, 2022 instead of 2025). She suggested correcting the date. Alderman Tebow raised a concern about altering a union-approved contract; it was agreed to work with corporation counsel to correct the clerical error. The committee first voted to adopt the goldenrod copy (amended language) and then voted on final recommendation. The final recommendation passed with at least one nay vote (transcript indicates "Nay" heard).
Key Outcomes
- Approved $30,000 for Arts Commission grants (unanimous).
- Approved R-26010, increasing snow removal trust fund and appropriating $500,000 (unanimous).
- Approved R-26012, appropriating $600,000 to hydropower reserve fund (unanimous).
- Approved R-26013, appropriating $280,000 for DES surcharge (unanimous).
- Approved amended R-26-003, appropriating $55,000 for downtown cleanup (unanimous). The item will proceed to a public hearing and further committee consideration.
- Approved R-26001 as amended (goldenrod copy), recommending final passage of the collective bargaining agreement (motion carried, with one nay). The goldenrod copy included a date error to be corrected by corporation counsel. The agreement will go to the Board of Aldermen for final approval.
General Discussion
- Alderman Kelly asked about the budget calendar. The chair stated the mayor's budget is expected on April 14, and committee meetings will begin shortly after. Alderman Tebow thanked Alderman Johnson for her support on R-26-003 and expressed anticipation for budget discussions.
The meeting adjourned at 8:19 PM.
Meeting Transcript
I'd like to like to call the meeting of the budget review committee to order. It's seven thirty PM. We're in the alomatic chamber and the meeting's been posted in all the appropriate places. Present. Alderman Javert Kabo. Here. Alderman Lodge or Alicia Greg? Here. Alderwomen at large Shoshana Kelly? Here. Alderman Lodge, Michael O'Brien is present. Alderman Tim Senate. Here. And Alderman Richard Dow. Present. Okay. Also in the tennis is Alderman Clayton. Okay. Uh first item on the agenda is public comment. Is everybody wishes to testify in public comment? See no members of the public. Communications. Communications. Uh we have communication from Lisa Photo, Director of Public Works. We've reasoned referral from the board of Alderman of R dash twenty-six- zero zero seven. And seek a favorable recommendation relative to the approval of two C BA agreements. Um, I am the staff liaison for the Arts Commission. Um, and they get an allocation of about 40,000 every year with the general fund budget. Um, and we're looking for more visibility and to work with the aldermen more, and so um we are now making recommendations um for how to spend the 40,000 to you for your approval um as opposed to just doing things kind of in a vacuum. Um so we're looking for approval um for a $30,000 worth of the 40,000. So we we have not decided what to do with that other 10,000 yet. Um that will be tomorrow morning. Um, but um we're looking to give grants to local arts organizations for project specific um uh uh events and and activities and programming. Um and you have on the the memo is the the breakdown of of how much is going to each organization and just so you know that the arts commissioners did want me to um they couldn't be here tonight, but they wanted me to say that we had um more than twice um I think there was 57,000 dollars worth of asks um out of the 30,000 that we allocated to grants. Um so we know that there is an increasing need. Um we we normally see a little bit more than what we are allocating, but um double the amount is is new. Um so just just so you're aware um as we go into this budget cycle, what other organizations are are seeing. Okay, before we take final approval on on this uh action, is there any questions? Alderman Clean. Uh thank you. Um it's not so much questions as it is is comment to add to this. Um I am the the um alternate liaison to uh the arts commission and um last year one of the things that I um or I should say in calendar year 2025, I asked that they you know their approval process and so on that they have to report back, which they do, um, and so on. So they get an update as to how the monies were used and so on, and that becomes part of the that becomes part of the record. Um, and to be very honest with you, I don't see this being all that different than when we when the um human affairs gets more asks for the money um that we have to allocate out. It's pretty typical. So my question to them was um if they if they don't get everything that they asked for, can they still go forward with the project or are we kind of wasting giving them a grant? And the answer was yes, they have another alternative to supplement what we can't give them, otherwise they don't get the money. That's part of the application and so on. It's a very thorough application that they have to fill out and um so on. So while I don't get to vote on this committee, um, I just wanted to add my voice to it that I think that they've gone through all of the processes and and trust me, I I questioned them thoroughly.
openpublica.com