All right, let's call a meeting of the Finance Committee to order on March 18th, 2018.

Mr.

Clerk, would you please call the role?

Absolutely.

Alderman Patricia Clee, Vice Chair.

Here Alderman at Large, Laurie Woolshare.

Here.

Alderman at Large, Ben Clemens.

Alderman at large, Alicia Gregg.

Here.

Alderman John Sullivan is here.

And Alderman Smith.

There are four.

And our chair, Jim Donchus.

Here.

Five in attendance.

And we also have Alderman Johnson.

So first item is public comment.

Does anyone have any member of the public won't wish to comment on any of the items on the agenda tonight?

I don't see anyone.

So we'll move to communications.

First being from Amy Girard purchasing manager, Alderman Sullivan.

Yes, I'd like to make a motion to accept and place on file an award of a three-year contract to CompSYC as the city's employee assistance program, EAP that will improve access to services, expanding counseling support, and assist with early intervention resources in the amount not to exceed $61,240.

Funding will be through Department 113 benefits fund, benefits self-insurance fund, 52 fringe benefits.

Yes, please just come ahead.

Hello, Kathy Fournier, Benefits Manager.

I'm here to introduce Christine Knolt.

She's our wellness specialist, and she's been working very hard to find this new EAP for us.

Thank you, Kathy.

Thank you, Mayor.

Since my arrival in January of last year, I received countless comments and feedback from employees here at the city in regards to concerns around the current EAP provider.

Network deficiencies, lack of follow-up, poor service quality, and overall lack of trust in the provider by our employees here at the city.

The existing model operates primarily as a referral-based service without an internal clinical team.

Their network is a very small network, as we've learned over the last year and a half, which has, I think, been the contributing factor as to our low utilization and higher cost for staff having to go outside and seek support within the network on their own.

Upon further review, I found that the fiscal year 25, the EAP usage was just over 1% of employees here at the city.

While in that same time frame, the city incurred $2.8 million in benefits costs specifically related to professional behavioral health services.

This data highlights a clear disconnect here at the city, the need for better intervention, improved self-resources, self-care resources, and more accessible network providers in our area for staff and families.

With the approval for an RFP process, we sought out potential providers here at the city.

We um I'm not sure if this is normal, but we created a selection committee here at the city made up of staff representing all of the departments within the city.

We went through demos, we evaluated proposals, we met again and scored based on what we had received for the demo information and what um materials were support were sent supporting the services based on that evaluation process.

Myself and the committee are recommending that the city move EAP services to ComSEC EAP with the new benefit year, which will be getting Beginning July 1st, 2026.

Sorry.

ComSite demonstrates the strongest alignment to the city's needs, including a robust internal clinical team, strong engagement tools, high satisfaction ratings in the industry, a network of over 500 providers in our area.

So access is great.

The ability to move the city from what is now a four-session model to an eight-session model.

I just want to explain what that is.

When our employees engage in the service for support, they currently receive four sessions at no cost.

This new model will move us to an eight-session model.

In closing, this recommendation strength strengthens the behavioral health support for the city employees, their families, by providing earlier access to care in a larger network of providers to choose from.

It also directly addresses employee feedback while demonstrating the commitment to their overall health and well-being.

Any questions?

Thank you.

Thank you for uh coming tonight and explaining everything.

You had mentioned, I think early in your comments that the past provider was a 1% usage rate.

Our usage was 1.1%.

1.1 over the fiscal year of 25.

In your in your experience and maybe your research and in finding this new provider, what is what's the norm?

What's the norm?

I mean, uh, so at the end of end of this contract, if usage is X percent, what what's what's considered good?

So the book of business is anywhere from 3.4 upwards of 6% of the populations.

So we're definitely way under.

Um and what ends up happening if you take a deeper dive into the data, and I didn't want to share this this evening just for sake of time, but you're seeing that people will engage, they're provided a network of option, and most of those providers are either not seeking new patients or they're not within our network and will cost much greater.

And we all know the behavioral health system currently is is taxed.

There's not a lot of options.

Um what happens with our current provider is those are all within a network.

They're not their employees, they're not contracted by them in in no way.

So what happens moving to a new provider, these are their employees.

So they they're valued by the mission of COMSYC itself.

They believe in, you know, the services, the quality services, which is what ComSec stands for.

Um, and it's not just we talk about behavioral health because that's our greatest need here and where the 2.8 million came from, but you know, they offer so much more in that life balance, um, the legal, the financial, um there's so much more that they have to offer.

Actually, ComSec has a cancer program that I just learned of in the last day or two that supports families going through cancer right down to the the adolescents, young children, um, and you know, if it's a family member, a grandparent.

There's a lot here to offer that I really think um would show that we've listened to our employees and we're moving in a direction that's going to benefit them greatly.

Well, kudos to you for doing the research.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Alder Woman plea.

Uh thank you, uh Mr.

Mayor.

And thank you again for all the work that you did.

This sounds like a great program.

And I don't know if this should be towards you or or um Miss Gerard or or the mayor.

Where this is starting on 7-1, do we still use this fiscal year's funds for this?

You said this contract starts 7-1 2026, which would be the next fiscal year.

So does that still would we still do that through this fiscal year's budget or the next?

Well, it would be in the next budget because it's over the next fiscal year.

Okay.

Um, it's cost neutral.

It will be the same rate that we're currently paying our provider just for a far greater amount of resources, and we're moving, as I said, from the four to the eight session model.

That was actually gonna be my second question.

How much what was the cost difference?

No, it there's no difference, it's cost neutral.

Wow, that's wonderful, and thank you so much for thinking of our and and taking the time to survey um the employees.

That's really important, I think, uh, to find out where their needs are, and at the same time trying to help us bring our costs down.

Getting back to what um the the previous speaker had asked you, you said that it was normally is three to six percent of the population of the population that uses behavioral health or of the total population.

And is this one percent of the um 2.8 million dollars?

Only one percent of that was through the current program or through the entire population of employees.

So just to clarify, the 2.8 million, that was in cost incurred for people going outside of our EAP to receive services.

So that is is separate from the EAP itself.

The 1.1% was combined engagement in all of the programs at EAP.

So you're talking behavioral health, um, financial, um, legal, all of the concepts that are within that current provider.

It was 1.1%.

And you you're you're saying that we should have at least a three percent to maybe potentially six percent.

Yeah, my experience in the industry, typically you're gonna see a spend in outside the net within your network of health care claims and your behavi um your EAP usage is gonna be just about even.

Um quality of care, which I think is most important, and it's going to be within our network, so we know that they're paying at the lower cost.

They're not paying at a higher cost for seeking the services on their own.

One more question.

Yes, thank you.

Um and this may be just pardon my ignorance here.

Um, where you're giving eight sessions, and thank you for doubling that as well.

Um, but if someone were we're gonna say was going for mental health um eight sessions may not be enough, um and they want to continue that.

Can they continue it with that provider, or do they have to get another provider?

So what would happen is they would they would move outside of that EAP itself, but move to a network provider that was familiar and able to continue that that continuum of care would not be disturbed for that individual.

Just to follow.

Um I I guess my concern is um that I know myself, if I were going to someone and I know I can only have eight visits with this person, and then I almost feel like I have to start over again.

I might not use that service.

It's just my own thinking and so on.

So valid concern and what um again information I'm not sharing tonight, which I have.

They have a success rate of over 90 percent in a an individual who engages being through their needs by the time they hit that eighth.

There it's over 90 percent success in this ComSite product.

So I I feel I feel you have a valid concern, and I I share that because obviously we want someone to be able to continue with those individuals if they're comfortable, but I don't think that that's gonna be a situation that occurs here very often.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Anyone else?

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

I motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next communication from Amy Gerard purchasing manager Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve change order number five for the Verdantis contract to support additional scope for the contract that includes water quality studies to be performed in accordance with the New Hampshire DES issued water quality certification requirements.

And the amount not to exceed 196,942.

Funding will be through Department 170 Hydroelectric Operations, uh Mine Falls Trust 53 Professional and Technical Services.

Ms.

Chisholm.

Good evening, Deb Chisholm, sustainability department manager.

Um the change order that you see in front of you is for a contract with an existing um consultant that we have.

They're the ones that are doing the uh all of the design work for fish passage work for both Jackson Mills and Minefalls Hydro.

Uh the work that we're including here is um additional scope and these studies that um were described by Alderman Sullivan, the water quality sampling, the upstream um eel passage evaluation and the zone of passage study.

Um those studies are required by the fish agencies.

Uh that includes U.S.

Fish and Wildlife, the New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Um I'll refer to those for the rest of the night as the fish agencies.

Um we work in collaboration with them, and they have some stipulations along with the approvals for our license exemption amendment at Jackson that was required uh when we did the upgrade work with the turbine, um, as well as the new license that we have applied to uh for minefalls.

So these um the water quality and the and the two other studies are required and verdantis.

Uh we already have them under contract, and they're um they're uh excellent at the work that they do.

These types of studies are are work that they do all the time.

Thank you.

I should say uh on the record, I appreciated the the conversation that uh that that we had on Friday along with our community development director Sullivan about hydroelectric.

I went to bed a lot smarter about hydroelectric.

Uh I went to bed tired, I would say.

That was a two-hour meeting.

That was a lot.

Umway, uh the the contract and the contract said that you've basically got 14 months to complete this study.

So I'm gonna ask you to speculate.

You feel 14 months is enough time for this organization to do that work.

I do.

I actually feel like they'll have this particular work done, I think, by the end of the calendar year.

Okay.

Oh fantastic.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion passes.

Next communication from maybe Gerard purchasing manager, Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve a contract with Natal Energy for design engineering work to evaluate the feasibility of retrofitting both turbines at Mine Falls with fish safe restoration hydro turbine runner designs.

In the amount not to exceed $90,000, 40 dollars.

Funding will be through Department 170 Hydroelectric Operations Fund.

Hi, Deb Chisholm, sustainability department manager.

Um this is a contract with a new vendor.

Uh they are currently known as one of the only uh design companies that is working towards achieving fish safe passage through hydroelectric turbines.

Um I will tell you that the the way that this came to be um as part of the other contractor, we just spoke about Verdantis and the design work that they're doing for upstream and downstream fish passage, they had provided us with a draft uh report for downstream fish and eel passage at mine falls.

And one of the alternatives that they provided, they provided us, I think there were seven uh different alternatives.

One of the alternatives was a fish-friendly turbine.

Uh ordinarily we might not think uh that a fish-friendly turbine was a great idea, but in light of what we'll be talking about in a couple of minutes, the repair work that needs to be done on one of the turbines at Mine Falls, this fish-friendly turbine scenario became m much more appealing.

Uh currently in the United States, this company has two facilities that are currently operating as fish-friendly turbines.

One small one in the state of Maine, one in the state of Idaho.

Um, I will tell you that uh Gavins Falls up in Manchester is also using this company to evaluate fish-friendly turbines.

I do believe they will actually be installing a fish-friendly turbine up there.

So we're actually going to be keeping a close eye on how that plays out.

Um in addition, the contractor Essex Hydro that does the operation and maintenance for both of our facilities is also entertaining the idea of using these f fish-friendly turbines.

I I can't give you a whole lot of details on how these things work, but my understanding is that the way that the blades are made, they're made with more rounded edges.

And the idea is to funnel the fish through the turbine rather than try to make them go around the outside of the turbine.

And there are specific requirements by the fish agencies on the survival rates of fish going through these turbines.

I I want to say it's somewhere around 95% survival rate is the requirement.

Um we're currently meeting that.

Um, but as I was saying, trying to understand fish-friendly turbines and how that could be a cost saver for the city.

If we are required to have downstream fish passage infrastructure, and we are also realizing we may need to upgrade the two turbines at Minefalls, this might actually kill two birds with one stone.

This feasibility study will simply provide us with the details on whether that type of turbine will actually fit into minefalls, and hopefully it will provide us with some cost estimates that will help us determine if that is indeed gonna be a cost saver for us.

Uh Alderman Alderwoman Greg.

Thank you, um, Mr.

Mayor.

So one of the turbines at Minefalls has to be replaced, right?

Like we've discussed that in a previous meeting.

Is this one of the ones that we're talking about retrofitting?

One of the turbines is going to need to be repaired.

We're gonna talk about that in a couple of minutes in the next line item on the agenda.

And we just we just replaced the only turbine at Jackson.

Okay.

That was the one that is completely brand new over there.

That took a that took a good few years to get done.

The two turbines that are at Minefalls, one of them is broken, so it's offline, and the other one is running fairly well at this point.

But they were both of those facilities were built in the 80s.

And they have those turbines have mostly original equipment still running out there.

So thankfully we've been able to get this many 40 plus years out of them.

But they they're running out of steam as as far as life expectancy.

So I guess the question is so this is they're both going to be in the realm of being able to be retrofitted.

We're not gonna have to replace one to where we would just replace it with the um the type of thing that's already fish friendly or whatever.

The idea behind this feasibility study is to evaluate whether the turbines can be retrofitted to to be fish friendly, but at the same time, we will also need to be evaluating other equipment that needs to be repaired.

You know, it c it kind of it's kind of like your own car.

You would certainly not want to go and replace everything to be brand new and then have half of it still be still be old.

So it it's a really it's a it's going to be a thorough evaluation of what the overall costs are going to be for replacement.

Okay, thanks.

Alder Woman Clee.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I I know I'm kind of jumping ahead to the next one where we we're gonna have that that other but um we had a very lengthy meeting about the six hundred thousand dollar supplemental fund for the repair of that.

This 90,000 um that we're looking at this is just to kind of look into it to see if it's feasible, it's just a design.

Is that going to be part of that 600,000 or because I'm looking at the 436,000, and um I know that we talked about what was the exact amount of it.

And um and so on.

I will say that if that supplemental appropriation hadn't happened, we had funding available in the hydro reserve account that we were planning to use for this feasibility study.

For this 90,000.

Okay.

Um, thank you.

I appreciate that.

Thank you.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion passes.

Next communication from Amy Gerard purchasing manager, Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve change order number one with Essex Power Service relative to the expensive re expenses required to repair unit number one at the Mine Falls facility in the amount not to exceed 436,000 dollars.

Funding will be through Department 170 Hydroelectric Oper Hydroelectric Operations, Mine Falls Trust 53 Professional and Technical Services.

Hi, Deb Chisholm, sustainability department manager.

Um this change order here is a change order for the existing contract that we have with Essex Hydro.

They are the ones responsible for doing all of the operation and maintenance of both um of our facilities, both Jackson Mills and Mine Falls Hydro.

Um their contract and I I want to make sure that I'm I'm clear and I see Alderman Clemens is not here this evening, but I want to make sure that I'm clear and tell you that la at last Tuesday's meeting I misspoke about indicating that there was not a limit on that contract.

There is indeed a 755,000 amount not to exceed on that contract that we have with them.

Um so in light of that, we had decided that coming tonight to finance with this 436,000 dollar change order, um, despite the fact that we would not be obviously exceeding our 755,000 amount not to exceed tonight, because the contract has only been in effect since January 1st of this year.

Rather than wait until the end of the year when we would then be over the amount, it seemed appropriate to come now with such a large amount uh as a change order to the existing contract.

The funding that we're requesting this 436 is for that's the those are the quotes for the two companies that will be primarily the ones focused on retrieving the turbine out of the existing unit and then sending it off to the milling company that will create a new blade to insert into the entire turbine, and then the other company, Fairbanks will come back and put it back.

There will be additional costs associated with this.

There may be a crane that is needed to come out and actually pull the equipment out of the powerhouse.

Unfortunately with hydro, we we'll spend that in a heartbeat.

The um the total amount that we pay for the dam operation and maintenance every year.

I think our budget for this year is about $695,000.

So it's a fairly expensive um to undertake.

I think next year we're looking at something similar, maybe a little bit higher.

I think $717 is what we're we had proposed uh for for dam OM for next year.

So the the costs can be expensive.

Um, but I think that in light of what we have going on there now and trying to figure out are we going to replace this now?

Should we just wait?

I will tell you the time it took for us to determine what type of turbine to use to the point where we could flip the switch at Jackson, that took us over five years.

So the idea of turbines that seem to be acting a little bit wonky, I'm we need to sort of be picking up the pace a little bit if our intention is to have those have the equipment out there up and running, you know, for the next 30 years.

Uh thank you.

Um if I remember correctly, wasn't it was stuck in Sweden or somewhere, one of the Netherlands.

Where we had uh the the turbine was was actually made in in the Czech report.

So it was kind of there for a while.

But um thank you so much for for bringing us back to that six hundred thousand dollar um supplemental.

Um so just again, I'm just gonna clarify that this 436 is just kind of a portion of that.

And when we talked, we said that it would probably be more expensive than just the cost of repairing it because it would have to potentially lift the roof, the crane and and so on.

But we also talked about the um money that's generated for that.

Can you um I know this is a hydroelectric type of um type of thing, but it's also at the dam.

Is it also necessary to help water flow to make sure that not too much water goes down or is it not that kind of dam?

It the hydroelectric facility is what's considered a run-of-river facility.

So we don't stockpile any water behind it.

We just let the water flow through.

We we have some bit of control over it when it's going through the facility if if need be, if there's a lot of water coming through as typical in the springtime, we'll get a lot of water through there, and sometimes it's too much for the facility to actually handle.

Um so we'll have to turn the we'll turn the um the turbines off and during times of very high water levels and very low water levels.

Yeah.

The re the reason I was asking was because I remember there was a question that was asked, what if we don't do anything?

What is the cost to the city?

And my question was if if we didn't have the turbine or we didn't maintain, because you talked about the cost of maintaining this facility.

If we didn't have that facility there, um, would we lose the power over the not just the electrical power, but the power of controlling the water um in the to the lower portions, or do we even do that?

That's just kind of uh we can we can do that.

Okay.

We can do that.

We can, and we've done it in the past when we have had repairs at Jackson where we needed to get the river to sort of stop while we were putting in that coffer dam while we were doing some repairs on the downstream side near the library.

We are able at Mine Falls to sort of hold the water back temporarily.

Um the fish agencies and FERC are not crazy about that idea of us being able to control the river in in that way.

Um but both of those dams are controllable.

If we're in a flooding type situation, we are able to control those and and monitor those so that we're not getting too much flooding or we're not getting enough water in certain in certain areas.

Just a follow-up real quick.

Um, thank you.

And the reason why I asked that question was because the comment was made, what if we just don't do anything?

And I can hear people saying, well, if it's costing us this much, why do we bother even having the dam there?

But the idea that we could hold water back in case of flooding and different things like that.

I that's what I really wanted to hear is that it has some beyond the electrical potential of it, has it has a use.

Sure.

Well, and there I will add there are very specific requirements for dam owners to be protective of how things are operated for sure.

So even if we had decided tomorrow, like okay, that's it, we're not going to do this anymore.

We we still have requirements that we need to follow that can still require costs.

It's not it's not like all of a sudden we'll have zero expenses uh related to those facilities if we decide we're not going to operate them.

Okay, thank you.

Alderman Sullivan.

Thank you.

Looking at the contracts that you have in front of us tonight, Fairbanks Mill takes out and puts the blade back in.

D and G machine produces the part, correct?

Correct.

Um okay, a follow-up.

Uh I did not see on the quote from D and G a lead time to create the new part.

Do you have an idea of what that might be?

I do not.

Okay.

All right.

That's it.

Thank you.

All right.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion passes.

Thank you very much.

Next communication from Amy Girard purchasing manager Alderman Sullivan.

Yes, I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve the purchase of a 2026 Ford F 350 super duty XLT 4x4 regular clap cab plow truck through McGovern Municipal HQ and the amount not to exceed $97,505.

Funding will be through Department 150 police department.

And SURF 81 capital outlay improvements.

Hi, I'm Kevin Rack, um assistant supervisor to the Fleet Department for the National Police Department.

Um we'd like to replace our um our F 350 uh pickup truck for the fleet department.

Um for 97,505 because uh our old truck is starting to um fall apart and it's getting old and it's for plowing and stuff like that.

Alderman Sullivan.

Thank you.

I was looking at the uh fiscal year 2026 surf, and you have the police department has listed here uh an F Ford three F 354 truck from 2012.

Is that the same?

Is that the one you replace?

Yes, it is.

Okay.

So in the budget, and and this I'm just I'm just pointing this out.

In the budget, it was estimated that it was going to be 172,000 eight dollars, and it's now ninety-seven thousand five oh five.

So a nice savings there, yeah that I wanted to point out.

So thank you.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Next communication from Amy Gerard purchasing manager Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve the purchase of two 2026 board police interceptor utility hybrid AWD marked vehicles to replace units number three and number four as part of the FY 2026 surf replacement schedule through McGovern Municipal HQ in the amount not to exceed 152,625 dollars.

Funding will be through Department 150 police department fund, surf 81 capital outlay and improvements.

Yeah, I'd like to place um the interceptor uh hybrid um Ford.

Um it's the two supervisor cars uh for our fleet um for the 1526 25.

And they both have over almost 100,000 miles on them and stuff like that.

Anyone?

Uh Alderman Johnson.

Thank you very much.

Um if these were not hybrid, how much did you know how much the cost would be?

How much less it would be?

Um it's about $4,000 to $5,000 less.

$15,000 less.

Yes.

But the gas savings alone for the life of that car.

You're you're way over saving saving that money.

Because when idles, it doesn't run.

It just runs on the electrical power.

Thank you.

Alderman, Alderman Clean.

Thank you.

Um, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, just for edification, I I know that um we had talked about looking at the different price and so on.

Maintenance is much lower on the hybrids, aren't they?

Then or are they equal the warranty on the hybrid is much better?

That's why the maintenance costs is a lower.

Oh, much lower.

So it's got the eight uh eight-year 100,000 mile warrant.

Um, one of the things that we had, I don't, I think was we passed legislation that said that we would try to, or at least we we put through that we would try to um always look at green.

Um and and so on.

Um I wouldn't want to have an electric police vehicle.

Um hundred percent electric police vehicle because I don't trust it.

It wouldn't work for us.

No, I wouldn't trust it.

But uh they're proven in the cold weather, they have a hard time.

Okay.

Uh thank you very much.

No problem.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Next communication from Amy Girard purchasing manager, Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve the purchase of two 2026 Ford Police Interceptor Utility Hybrid AWD marked vehicles to replace units number six and number seven as part of the fiscal year 2026 surf replacement schedule through McGovern Municipal HQ in the amount not to exceed 158,241 dollars.

Funding will be through Department 150 police department fund, surf 81 capital outlay and improvements.

Yep, it's the same um same basic premise.

Um place the two interceptors.

Um, separate because they're we're gonna put radars in these cars.

That's why it's uh it are separate from the other four that's on underneath it for the 1585.

It's still a marked unit, it's the same as a regular patrol car.

We're just sticking radars on.

All right.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Next communication from Amy Girard purchasing manager Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve the purchases of four 2026 Ford Police Interceptor Utility Hybrid AWD marked vehicles to replace units number 10, number 16, and number number 22 and number 30 as part of the fiscal year 2026 surf placement schedule through McGovern Municipal HQ and the amount not to exceed 303,422.

Funding will be through Department 150 police department fund capital outlay improvements.

And these are just the regular marked cruisers, they already have radars from last time we replaced them.

Um the other two are like our last ones.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Next communication from Amy Girard purchasing manager Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve the purchase of two 2026 Ford Police Interceptor Utility Hybrid, all-wheel drive marked vehicles to replace unit number D 10 and number D 32 as part of the fiscal year surf replacement schedule through McGovern Municipal HQ in the amount not to exceed 120,523 dollars.

Funding will be through Department 150 police department fund 81 capital outlay improvements.

Yeah, these are um to replace our gased uh polis from 2010, I believe, or 12 around there.

Um replacing with the hybrid police interceptors.

So we're gonna have more hybrids in our fleet.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Next communication from Amy Girard purchasing manager, Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve the purchase of one 2026 Ford Police Interceptor Utility Hybrid all-wheel drive marked vehicle to replace unit D 37 as part of the fiscal year 2026 surf replacement schedule through McGovern Municipal HQ and the amount not to exceed $67,159.50.

Funding will be through Department 150 police department fund, surf 81 capital outlay improvements.

This is our marked traffic car.

Um it is gas now, so we're switching it to hybrid and um it has different equipment and has different technology of pulling off cars, card readers, and stuff like that.

That's why it is separate, and all the lights are inside the vehicle.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Next communication from Amy Gerard purchasing manager Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to accept place on file and approve the renewal of a three-year software contract with police app.com incorporated for the recruitment of sworn personnel in the amount not to exceed $6,500 annually.

Funding will be through Department 150 police department fund, general fund 55 other services.

I'm a little disappointed Kevin couldn't take this last one for me.

The system itself includes job postings, advertisement, active recruitment, applicant uh progress tracking, document storage, and easy communication with potential candidates.

Police app is one of the first results in a Google search.

You can try it here when you type in police jobs in New Hampshire.

So we're getting a lot of applicants telling us that they're finding out about NPD through the police app website, which is great.

Uh candidates able to find our job posting very easy, reply right on police app, and we'll immediately be notified once they've applied.

Uh this has streamlined our communication over the last several years with candidates.

It makes it for an easy process for us and for the candidate, which is obviously the uh the best thing uh for us.

Uh police app has been a great tool over the past few years, and we're just hoping to continue our relationship with them.

There are other recruiting tools out there that we use, uh but this one with the applicant management system is is a unique uh situation.

And how are you doing as far as uh your the workforce?

How many how many are you looking for?

How many officers are you looking for at this point?

Uh we're currently down 15.

Uh that's our that's our strength right now.

Uh we have hopefully uh six to eight being hired April 21st, which will get us into single digits for the first time in a long time.

Uh we just had a test this past Saturday.

Uh we had 64 applicants apply through police app.

21 showed up.

You might think that's a low number, but that's on par uh with what happens uh that we have uh another police test coming up in May.

So obviously constant recruitment out there, and I think we're we're doing pretty well with uh with the hires that we've had.

Alderman Sullivan.

Thank you.

You mentioned in police app that you do document storage.

Yes.

Are those uh personal documents or those uh I'm just concerned about security for for the applicants if if you know if that app already so everything's secure, uh only we can see it on our end.

Uh you have to have a user profile to log in.

Only professional standards uh bureau has that profile uh to log in and see it.

But uh we're not putting in anything.

Other PDs might do it, but we keep hard copies of medical sites, anything like that uh for document storage, it's more like application resume and things like that, so it's easily available.

Uh but nothing private would be stored on that.

Great.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Thank you.

Uh new business resolutions and ordinances.

We have none, nothing tabled in committee.

So we'll go to record of expenditures.

Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion that the finance committee has complied with the city charter and ordinances pertaining to the record of expenditures for the period from February 27, 2026 through March 12th, 2026.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

General discussion.

Is there any general discussion?

Public comments.

There's no member of the public, but I will still say, is there any member of the public who would like to speak to the finance committee?

No one's coming forward.

Remarks by Alderman.

Alderwoman Clee.

Uh yes, Ms.

Mayor, I'd like to uh make a motion for adjournment.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

And uh the motion passes, and the meeting of the finance committee is adjourned at 7 45 p.m.