We'll always be for the betterment and greater happiness of all our fellow citizens.

So help us go on.

Yes, I am present.

I'm attending remotely.

I'm at home.

My wife is in the room with me, and the reason I'm uh here is because I am taking care of my wife who is out.

Alderman Johnson.

Present.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Here.

Alderman Morgan.

I am here.

I am attending remotely due to child care, and I can see and hear everyone, and I am alone.

Alderman Lopez.

Here.

I actually.

Aldman Wilshire.

Here.

13 present, two absent.

Thank you.

Also joining us this evening is Mayor Jim Donchis and Corporation Council Steve Bolton.

Mayor, did you wish to address the board this evening?

Yes, madam President.

Thank you.

Well, we had our public hearing last night on the fiscal 27 city budget.

I wanted to thank all of the residents who came out to speak about the budget or ask about it from various points of view.

And of course, the all of the department heads and division directors who came and were available for what turned out to be a pretty long meeting, like till about 11 o'clock.

But I think overall the room went well.

Alderman Senate did a well, did very well leading the meeting, and we missed Rick Dowd, but overall I thought it went pretty well.

Next, Madam President, I wanted to mention just briefly uh 26009.

That has to do with the designating which flags can fly in front of City Hall.

The amendment which we asked for would include also the Betsy Ross flag, which we want to fly on July 4th, the 250th anniversary of the of the country, and I want to thank the infrastructure committee for making that amendment.

Madam President, we have the Pride Parade and Pride Festival coming up on Saturday, June 20th.

The parade begins at 1.30 p.m.

at the top of Library Hill.

We'll leave from the soldiers and sailors monument area, down Amher Street to Holman Stadium, and then in what we call Don Newcomway to the stadium.

And at the stadium, the National Downtown Association will be hosting the festival that will go on for a number of hours.

Tickets will also be available at the entrance, but it's better to reserve in advance just to make sure that things aren't filled up.

Given by Vices Inc.

at 7.30 p.m.

A couple other things, Madam President.

There is the Taste of Downtown is coming up on June 17th.

That's from 5.30 to 7:30 p.m.

Tickets are available are at 45 and they're now available on the downtown Nashua Association website.

And finally, we are having a community blood drive on Tuesday, June 23rd, from 9.30 to 5.30 here in City Hall up in the auditorium.

This is being sponsored by the city's employment employee wellness program.

Everybody is welcome.

And appointments can be scheduled through the city website for anybody who wishes to uh donate blood.

And those who do that uh will each receive a $15 gift certificate and the chance to win a $7500 prize.

So anybody who's interested should uh sign up.

And uh that's all I have, Madam President.

Thank you.

Response to Mark Mayor.

Alderman Keeble.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um I don't often praise the mayor because I'll get in trouble and people say I'm a bobblehead for Mayor Donchus, but uh I do want to say that you did a good job handling uh the the long meeting last night um and also the department heads who came up and spoke.

I thought they did a really nice job of answering the questions that were posed.

Um the one thing I'll say is is is it's still in this day and age to see people come up and speak about anti-trans and racist language and anti special education students.

I think is just awful.

Um to have to hear that last night is just it it really was a bad thing for the people for people to say those things.

Um and it's it's it's cruel in my opinion.

So uh thank you for for taking on uh the the heart some of those harsh words and uh I appreciate the uh long meeting, so thanks.

Alderman Dowd?

Yeah, I just want to say I'm sorry, I missed the public hearing last night.

I was ill for a couple days, and I want to thank uh deputy chair Tim Senate for doing a great job last night.

Anyone else?

Seeing none.

Recognition period.

None.

Reading minutes of previous meetings, none.

Communications requiring only procedural actions and written reports from liaisons.

Communication has been received from Lisa Foto, Director of Public Works regarding referral from Board of Alderman on O 26-008.

There being no objection, I'll accept the communication and place it on file.

Public comment relative to items expected to be acted upon this evening.

We have nine people who have signed up.

The first is Ben Heaney.

So you give your name in your town of city or town of residence, and you have three minutes.

Thank you.

My name is Ben Heaney.

I live at two and a half Verona Street here in Nashua.

On March 24th, nine of you acknowledged in varying degrees that this body has failed to meet the most basic needs of its constituents or has actively worked at withholding them.

Alderman Lopez, Alderman Morgan, Alderwoman Kelly, Alderman Senno, Alderwoman Greg, Alderwoman Smith, Alderwoman Clee, Alderman Clemens, Alderman Tebow, and Mayor Donchus, and former Alderman Chess agreed that, and I'm quoting Alderman Thibault here, there are some things we need to do better at, and it is on us to do something about it.

My math is correct.

That is a comfortable majority of this body.

So why are our neighbors hiking miles in and out of town every day to find a safe place to sleep?

Why are all those ideas you had for resource centers still on the table?

And why is an ordinance ban in camping a last resort for survival still on our books when it costs nothing?

It would actually save the town resources.

Yes.

That's not on the agenda tonight.

We're not taking any action on that tonight.

I'm sorry, can I speak on um 09 then?

Yes.

Um I think it's kind of sad that flag poles have more rights than people in this town to exist on public property.

Um that being true, you are not doing your jobs.

And if our redress in that regard is ineffectual, we will end of right ought to fire you and establish a new government that provides for the common benefit, protection, and security of the whole community.

To do your job to get the survival ban off the books so that people have as many or more rights than flagpoles, and stop persecuting people's basic existence.

Expand public shelter and transitional health transitional housing options, and while you're at it, exempt nonprofit organizations from commercial kitchen licensing requirements so that people who actually give a damn can work where the current system has failed.

Unlike what we have heard from this board over the past couple months since last fall, our rhetoric is not empty, and we will not suffer these abuses.

Thank you.

So, those of you who have who have signed up to speak on the um resolution 2620.

We're not taking action on that this evening, so we're not taking testimony on that this evening.

So the next person I have is Ken Duset.

Thanks.

Mr.

Ducette, are you here to talk about that same issue?

The issue stands.

And I need to speak my piece on this because it needs to fall not on deaf ears, but on diligent ears.

And I need to speak what I need to speak for time.

Yeah, there is a time at the end of the meeting for that, but this is not the right time for that, sir.

Okay.

We'll let the next person come up and you can speak at the end of the meeting.

I've signed up for that as well.

Okay.

I appreciate that that I may you know have speaking time for that.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Clark Gephardt.

Could you please stop the applause?

Someone has to transcribe these minutes, and it's really hard for them to do so with all the noise in the background.

Thank you.

Good evening, members of the Board of Alderman.

My name is Captain Clark Yaphart, and I'm here tonight on behalf of the National Police Department to respectfully express our concerns with the proposed amendments to the Nashua City Ordinance regarding pawnbrokers and secondhand dealers.

First and foremost, I want to emphasize that our department views Nashville's local business owners as vital partners in keeping our community thriving.

We completely understand and empathize with the concerns regarding this ordinance.

In business, we understand the timing can be everything.

We recognize that the market value of precious metals, rare coins, sports memorabilia, and collectible items can fluctuate rapidly, and that a 30-day holding period introduces financial risk and uncertainty for businesses that buy and sell these types of goods.

We do not take their concerns lightly, and we appreciate their perspective.

However, we find ourselves in a difficult position where we must balance our strong support for local commerce with our fundamental duty to protect the property and security of Nashua's residents.

The existing reporting and holding requirements for secondhand dealers are not meant to be averted.

Instead, they are effective tools that are officers and detectives can use to quickly track down stolen property.

When a burglary or theft occurs in the city, the items stolen commonly include high liquid highly liquid valuables such as jewelry, coins, tools, or highly valued high-valued collectibles, which the perpetrators are looking to quickly sell and turn into cash.

Without this requirement to report these transactions and hold the items temporarily, a critical investigatory window closes.

Stolen property could be purchased and resold before a victim either realizes it realizes it's missing or before an initial police report can be fully processed and further.

Once those items move, the chances of recovering them and returning them to the rightful owners as well as prosecuting those that responsible drop significantly.

We want to see our local businesses succeed, but we also want to ensure that Nashua remains a safe place to live where residents can trust that their property is secure.

Alleviating dealers from the need to completely cooperate with this ordinance would unfortunately create a vulnerability that complicates our ability to effectively investigate thefts and burglaries and protect our citizens.

With all that said, we don't want to enforce outdated practices that hurt national businesses.

If the current framework creates an unintended burden for this specific industry, let's not scrap the security entirely.

Let's modernize it.

The National Police Department is fully supportive of exploring more modern, balanced approaches used in other communities.

We are willing to collaborate on an updated solution, but we feel a total exemption right now leaves our citizens vulnerable.

In the best interest of the security of our residents, property, the Nashua Police Department must respectfully stand in opposition to the proposed amendments as they are currently written.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, that's it for personal public comment period.

Communications requiring final approval.

Communication has been received from Mayor Jim Donchus regarding million-dollar contract award.

Change order number seven for the 2025 sewer replacement project.

Alderman Clee.

Thank you, Madam President.

I motion to accept place on file and approve change order number seven relative to the 2025 sewer replacement project for construction of manholes and raise manholes covers to grade.

Support sewer lining efforts and provide emergency sewer repairs as needed from crisp contracting in the amount not to exceed one million dollars.

Funding will be through Department 160 Admin Engineering Fund bond slash 54 property services by roll call, please.

Seeing none, would the clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Alderman Clee.

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman TiVo.

Yes.

Alderman O'Brien.

Yes.

Alderman Greg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Alderman Johnson.

Yes.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Aldman Wilshire.

Yes.

140 nays.

That motion carries.

Petitions.

None.

Nominations, appointments, and elections.

Joint convention with the Edgewood Cemetery Board of Trustees.

There being no objection, I'll declare that the Board of Alderman meet and joint convention with the Edgewood Cemetery Trustees for the purpose of electing two trustees and call for nominations.

Good evening, Madam President.

My name is Tom Mappy.

I'm on the Board of Trustees of the Edward Cemetery.

The trustees nominate Mr.

Kyle Andre and Tom Mappy.

Thank you.

There being no objection, I will close the nominations.

Would the clerk call the roll, please?

Alderman Clemens.

Thomas Matthew and Farl Andre.

Alderman Clee.

Thomas Maffey and Carl Hendridge.

Alderman Ravan.

Thomas Maffey and Carl Andre.

Alderwoman Smith.

Thomas Maffey and Carl Andrew.

Alderman Tebow.

Thomas A.

Maffey and former Wardy at Alderman, Carl Andre.

Alderman O'Brien.

Thomas Mappy and Carl Andre.

Alderman Greg.

Thomas Matthew and Carl Andrade.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes, Thomas Maffey and Carl Andre.

Alderman Senate.

Thomas Maffey and Carl Andred.

Alderman Johnson.

Thomas Maffey and Carl Andre.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Thomas Matthew and Carl.

Carl Andred.

Alderman Morgan.

Thomas Maffee and Carl Carlos Andred.

Alderman Lopez.

Carl Andred and Thomas Maffey.

Alderman Wilshire.

Tom Maffey and Carl Andre.

Trustee Andred.

Carl Andre and Thomas Mahffi.

Trustee Armstrong.

Trustee Dion.

Carl Aldred and Thomas Maffey.

Mayor Donchus.

Carl Andred and Tom Maffey.

Trustee Gagney.

Trustee Hollis.

Carl Andrade.

Thomas Maffey.

Trustee Law.

Trustee Lozo.

Trustee Maffey.

Trustee Macintosh.

Trustee Morrissey.

Madam President 19 for Thomas Maffee and Carl Andred.

That motion carries.

So if the two gentlemen that are here would come up and be sworn in, come right up to the attorney's desk and he will give you the oath of office.

I see.

Carl stop.

Do each solemnly swear that you will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon you as a trustee of the Edgewood Cemetery, according to the best of your ability and agreeably to the rules and regulations of the city charter, the Constitution Laws of the State of New Hampshire.

So help you got.

I do.

Thank you.

Reports of committees.

Confirmation of Board of Alderman's appointments.

Board of Health.

There being no objection, I will confirm the social worker member position of Christian Jimenez, 21 Forest Hills Drives Drive Nashua with a term to expire December 31st, 2027, to the Board of Health.

If you would come forward for the oath of office, please, Christian.

Yes, solemnly swear that you will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon you as a member of the Board of Health of the City of Nashua, according to the best of your abilities and agreeably to the rules and regulations of the city charter and the Constitution and Laws of the State of New Hampshire.

So help you got.

Yes.

Thank you.

There being no objection, I'll confirm the reappointment of Stephanie Ballantine, 9 Bartlett Abnashua to a term to for with a term to expire June 13, 2029 to the Grilly Park Advisory Committee.

Don't see Stephanie in the audience.

She will be sworn in at a later date.

Unfinished business resolutions.

Second reading of R-26-033, authorizing the City of Nashua to enter into contracts with the Sohegan Valley Transportation Collaborative, Nashville Community College, Rivier University, Town of Hudson, and Town of Merrimack for transit services.

Alderman Clee.

Thank you, Madam President.

I motion for final transition R 26-033 by roll call, please.

You've heard the motion.

Is there discussion on that motion?

Seeing none, would the clerk call the roll, please?

Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Alderman Clee.

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman Tebow.

Yes.

Alderman O'Brien.

Alderman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Alderman Johnson.

Yes.

Alderman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Alderman Wilshire.

Yes.

13 yes, 0 nays.

That motion carries and resolution 2633 is declared duly adopted.

Second reading of R-26-036.

Adopting the commercial property assessed clean energy and resilience C Pacer program.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'd like to make a motion for final passage of R26036 by roll call.

You've heard the motion.

Is there discussion on that motion?

Seeing none, clerk call the roll, please.

Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Alderman Clee.

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman Tvote?

Yes.

Alderman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Alderman Johnson?

Yes.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez?

Yes.

Alderman Wilshire?

Yes.

13 yes.

Zero nays.

That motion carries and resolution 2636 is declared duly adopted.

Second reading of R-26-037 authorizing deed waivers for certain properties.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'd like to make a motion to amend R26034 by replacing it with the Golden Brown copy of amendments made at the Committee on Infrastructure by roll call.

You've heard the motion.

Is there discussion on that motion?

Seeing none, will the clerk call the roll, please?

Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Alderman Clee.

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman Tebow.

Yes.

Alderman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Alderman Johnson.

No.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Alderman Wilshire.

Yes.

Twelve yes, one nay.

That motion carries.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Thank you.

I'd like to make a motion for final passage of R26037 as amended by roll call.

You've heard the motion.

Is there discussion on the motion for final passage as amended?

Seeing none, would the clerk call the roll, please?

Alderman Clemens.

No.

Alderman Clee.

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman Tebow.

Yes.

Alderman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

No.

Alderman Johnson?

No.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

No.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Alderman Wilshire.

Yes.

Nine yes, four nays.

That motion carries and resolution 2637 is declared duly adopted as amended.

Unfinished business ordinances.

Second reading of O-26-007.

Amending the unaffiliated employees' personnel policies by adding a medical insurance coverage opt-out stipended.

Alderman Tebow.

I'd like to make a motion for final passage of O-26-007 by roll call.

You've heard the motion.

Is there discussion on that motion?

Seeing none, would the clerk please call roll?

Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Alderman Clee.

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman Tebow?

Yes.

Alderman O'Brien.

Yes.

Alderman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Alderman Johnson.

No.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Alderman Wilshire?

Yes.

13 Yays, 1 nay.

That motion carries.

And ordinance 26.

7 is declared duly adopted.

Second reading of O-26-008.

Removing certain traffic common measures on a portion of Middle Dunstable Road.

Alderman Tebow.

Thank you.

I'd like to make a motion for an definite postponement of O-26-008 by roll call.

I'd like to speak to it briefly.

Alderman Tebo.

Thank you.

Um so this came up through our infrastructure.

This is something I proposed based on a couple of uh constituents.

Um but when we put it out there, we found out there was many more constituents on that road that did not want uh the speed bumps taken off.

Um went through infrastructure twice, it went through uh the Board of Public Works, and they all agreed to indefinitely postpone it.

Um talking with Dan Healy, um there's two sets of speed bumps on that road, one is the speed bump and one is the speed hump, and they're going to go speed humps instead.

So make it kind of an in-between where it will help a little bit more for people who don't like the sound and the big bump, and it'll still be on there for some traffic calming and some safety for children.

So I think that's the best way to go.

So I think they they came up with a good solution.

They're gonna be paving the road this summer, so I would like to uh have this postponed.

Thank you.

You've heard the motion because there further, sorry.

Dan Healy has nothing to do with this.

He's behind you, Alderman Clee for Moonlighting.

Moonlighting, Dan Motion is for indefinite postponement of ordinance 2608.

Further discussion none, would the curk clerk call the roll, please?

Alderman Clemens, yes, Alderman Clee.

Yes, Alderman Ravan, yes, Alderwoman Smith, yes, Alderman Tvote, yes, Alderman O'Brien, yes, Alderman Gregg, yes, Alderman Dowd, yes, Alderman Senate, yes, Alderman Johnson, yes, Alderwoman Kelly, yes, Alderman Morgan, yes, Alderman Lopez, yes, Alderman Wilshire, yes, 14 yes, 0 nays.

No motion carries and ordinance 2608 is declared indefinitely postponed second reading of 0-26-009 relative to flag polls on city hall grounds.

Alderman Dowd.

Like to make a motion to amend 02609 by replacing it with a golden rod copy of amendments made at the committee of infrastructure by roll call you've heard the motion.

Is there discussion on the motion to amend saying none with the clerk clerk called to roll, please?

Alderman Clemens Yes Alderman Clee.

Yes, Alderman Ravan, yes, Aldwoman Smith, yes, Alderman Tebow, yes, Alderman O'Brien, yes, Alderman Gregg, yes, Alderman Dowd, yes, Alderman Johnson, yes, Alderwoman Kelly, yes, Alderman Morgan, yes, Alderman Lopez, yes, Alderman Wilshire, yes, 14 yes, 0 nays.

And that motion carries.

Alderman Dowd.

Like to make a motion for final passage of the vote 2609 is amended by roll call.

You've heard the motion.

Is there further discussion?

Saying none with the clerk call the roll.

Alderman Clemens Yes.

Alderman Clee?

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman Tebow.

Yes.

Alderman O'Brien.

Yes.

Alderman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Alderman Johnson.

Yes.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Aldman Wilshire.

Yes.

14 years zero nays.

The motion carries an ordinance 26009 is declared duly adopted as amended.

Second reading of O-26-010 regarding use of electronic devices during meetings.

Alderman Lopez.

Apparently I would like to make a motion to recommend final sorry, I'm reading wrong one.

To recommend indefinite postponement of 026010 by roll call.

No recommendations.

Just sorry, the thing I was doing is recommend.

Thank you.

Can I do it right?

You've heard the motion?

Discussion?

Alderman Johnson.

Thank you.

This went down quite pretty quickly in the personnel administrative affairs committee.

And I did it because a lot of my constituents are concerned people using devices at meetings.

They see people on the devices on cell phones.

I'm not going to fight this.

I'm just going to let it go down for a nice peaceful rest.

It could be buried nicely.

But I am saying that people may mention things to me all the time.

Like I said, people see me all the time, they talk to me.

And so that's why I brought it forward.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

Seeing none.

Would the clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Aldwin Clee.

Yes.

Aldwin Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Aldman Tow.

Yes.

Alderman O'Brien.

Yes.

Aldman Gregg?

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Aldman Johnson?

No.

Aldwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Alderman Wilshire?

Yes.

13 yes, one nay.

That motion carries.

And ordinance 2610 is declared indefinitely postponed.

Second reading of O-26-011 regarding virtual meeting participation.

I'm sorry, Alderman Tebo.

I'd like to make a motion for indefinite postponement of O-26-011 by roll call and like to speak to it briefly.

Alderman Thibault.

Thank you.

I had originally endorsed this.

Um and then just thinking about it and thinking about how you know because I was originally going to amend it to have an ex some kind of exception clause in there, because there are times when we probably shouldn't be on camera if we're sick or doing something that you know helping our kids or something like that.

So I I kind of just figured maybe I I wouldn't go with it.

So I voted against it in personnel, and so I just wanted to say that piece of it.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Alderman Johnson.

Thank you.

I believe that if you are not attending the meeting, that you should be virtually with your face on that camera, definitely.

I've got to professional meetings, and especially during COVID, and if we had three-hour classes, our face had to be three hours on that screen on Zoom, or you didn't get credit for it.

This is a public body.

Our constituents want to see that if we're not able to attend publicly, that if we have to be at whether we're way on vacation, we're sick, and on or away on business, that we're showing up.

A black screen means nothing.

You could just run in quickly and just vote yes and nobody knows.

And so I think it's for transparency reason that they're able to see you because that means you're attending that meeting.

Thank you.

Further discussion, Alderman Clee.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, one of the issues that was brought up during that time is there are times when there's just not enough bandwidth.

Um, and I I think um Alderman Clemens was experiencing that during that meeting, where he had to shut the um uh shut the video down in order for him to be able to to hear us and for us to hear him.

Um so this is this is an issue, and then there are other times when um you know that it's just not um you're able to when you're in a hotel room or um you're wherever, even in a hospital.

Um so this is this is an issue and then there are other times when um you know that it's just not um you're able to when you're in a hotel room or um you're wherever even in a hospital we had um um at one time if I remember correctly um an alderman that was here who was um in the hospital with her husband and still attended meetings um and there just wasn't enough bandwidth so she had to to do that as well so um I just don't think that it's practical.

So thank you.

Further discussion Alderman Johnson, yes.

You know, if there's a circum we couldn't amend it and say if there's not enough bandwidth.

But there are certain circumstances, but nine out of ten times you should be able to be on Zoom and people in the community should be able to see you.

You know, we just make excuses on why we can't do it.

We shouldn't be making excuses.

We should be able to be there.

We're participating in a meeting.

And you should be there visually at that meeting, even during COVID.

You put all of this in so everybody could be at the meeting.

Okay, and most of the time you saw the faces, and even at other meetings.

I know when I was on the board, we couldn't do that because we weren't equipped.

We had to be by phone.

No, excuse me, we did do Zoom.

We had to do a a special um zoom.

But it should be.

Thank you.

Alderman Greg.

Um thank you, Madam President.

So I would like to, I have not had anybody say anything to me.

I've been on there before the migraine with all the lights off.

Um but I do want to reassure the public if there are people that are worried about that because we're not on camera.

We are still uh have to answer to our own votes.

You can still recognize our voice on these.

When there's big corporate things, they need to see faces because you don't always recognize the the um voices and stuff, but you all pretty much know our voices at this point, but it doesn't matter if we're voting, we still have to answer to that vote whether or not you can see our face, so it counts just as much.

So I just want to reassure the public that we are still uh working, even if we are you know off camera for whatever reason, and that we um still have to answer to that.

Alderman Clemens.

I'm all set.

Okay.

Alderman Clee.

Thank you.

Um I I want to remind the public and um um my colleagues here that um before we had Zoom, we used to call in.

You couldn't see someone's face at that time.

So I don't see what the difference is for and when that was acceptable to this.

There's not always times and to assume that most of the time that you can.

The truth is no, I have issues with bandwidth at my home.

Um, and there are times when I have to be in a very specific corner of my house in order for it to work.

Um Alderman Clemens was experiencing it during that meeting, so I think it's disingenuous and a little um um harsh to um make the accusations that have been made.

So thank you, Madam President.

Further discussion.

Seeing none with clerk call the role, please.

Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Alderman Clee.

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman T-O?

Yes.

Alderman O'Brien.

Yes.

Aldman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Alderman Johnson.

No.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Alderman Wilshire.

Yes.

13 years one day.

The motion carries, and ordinance 2611 is declared indefinitely postponed.

Second reading of O-26-012 amending the definition of second-hand dealers.

Alderman Senate.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'd like to make a motion for final passage of O 26012 by roll call, and I'd like to speak to it, please.

Alderman Senate.

So we had a um a pretty robust discussion on this at the uh personnel and administrative affairs committee where it was heard.

Uh it did pass through that committee.

Uh four to one.

Um I will concede that at the time uh we did not have the input of the National Police Department.

Um I had alerted um Chief Rourke to the fact that that meeting was taking place and that the um the ordinance would be heard at that time.

Um unfortunately we did not have that input.

However, we did still have a pretty robust back and forth discussion on the matter.

I think we covered a lot of ground on it.

Uh since that meeting, there has been a bit of follow-on discussion out in the community regarding um how novel this idea may be.

Many municipalities or localities are dealing with the fact that they have similarly dated uh laws on the books, and readdressing those with the resurgence of interest in some of the um some of the materials and the topics that are covered in this ordinance is leading locations to reconsider those.

We may be uh here in Nashua if this were to pass the first of the kind to do it in this fashion, but we're certainly not the first of the kind uh throughout the United States to amend similar laws.

Um the most interesting one I think that uh I found and I discussed with um Alderman Greg is the um the state of Connecticut actually offers a special designation that they title special collectibles dealers.

Um that uh designation is defined as a person who is primarily engaged in the business of buying or selling a distinctive type of manufactured item of limited supply designed for persons to collect or that possess attractive characteristics, rarity, uniqueness, production faults, or other distinctive characteristics necessary to cause a person to save it for hobby, display, or investment purposes without regard to its value or practical use, including but not limited to China, glass, toys, militaria, sports memorabilia, movie memorabilia, railroad memorabilia, models, comic books, dolls, figurines, or other items of interest to a discrete group of persons, which I think is the most broad descriptor you could get for something like this.

Uh that designation excludes antiques, coin stamps, work of art, books, jewelry, or precious metals.

Uh the statute clarifies, among other designations, that this special collectibles dealers are not pawnbrokers or secondhand dealers, and as such they're exempt from similar regulations that exist on the books in the state of Connecticut.

Um a little smaller scope, but um still relative to the discussion, uh the municipality of Fairlawn and Ohio, which is a suburb of Akron, uh revised in 2018 their definitions.

They actually rigidly define secondhand articles, not utilizing language like we utilize here in Nashua, such as including but not limited to.

And they define secondhand articles as furs, computers, laptops, printers, copiers, or other office machinery, pawnbroker tickets, artisan mechanic or common laborer tools, cameras, music, musical instruments, equipment amplifiers, mixing boards, precious metal stones, jewels, televisions, video monitors, record players, tape players, disc players, all sorts of electronic equipment uh for home entertainment, athletic equipment or fitness machinery equipment, retail gift cards or store credit, antique China flatware and serving wear, weapons, yard equipment, or designer items such as handbags or leather goods.

That is boxed in their definition of second hand items, which are subject to their laws regarding 30-day holds, um inventory recording.

And so while this is novel, because municipalities are slowly coming to terms with the fact that it's 2026 and many of these laws were written probably before I was born.

The the fact is they're not um compatible with the marketplace in 2026.

Um we can plug this whole certainly, um, which would, in my opinion, be discouraging to local businesses setting up shop here in Nashua.

Um but we can't plug any of the other holes.

We can't plug e-commerce, which anybody can engage in with a relative degree of anonymity.

Uh these laws that we have on the books don't extend to the monthly card shows that take place at the uh Sheraton Terra, um, where you know, even I, if I had a collection I needed to dispose of, could rent a table and go sell my wares for a day.

Uh so while I understand it's novel, I understand that it can give folks pause.

I think that this is still an ordinance that would be very business friendly uh for the city of Nashua, and I hope that this board can take the committee's recommendation for final passage.

Thank you.

Alderwoman Kelly, uh, thank you.

I supported this in committee, and I'm going to support it this evening.

And I'll tell you a few reasons why I urged my other uh board members to come along.

This came up actually a number of years ago, and I think at the time it was a little nebulous.

So I did I didn't quite understand it as an alderman at that time.

And I think that the co-sponsors of this bill have done an incredible amount of work to really look at this, talk us through why they came to these conclusions.

They worked with business owners and people in the city to come up with this plan.

I think the second thing that I thought was really powerful is there is a business owner who is sitting in our chamber right now who came and talked very eloquently about I chose to have my business here, and these are antiquated, and here is why.

And I think that those two things were really important to okay.

This makes sense.

There was a lot of work that was done.

But I do think that we have to start changing towards the times and supporting business.

Thank you.

Alderman Clemens.

Yes, I um I spoke against this uh in the committee, and a lot of my reasoning was what the uh police had to say this evening.

It's not that uh I am against um changing these laws.

Uh I'm definitely for that.

I'm definitely for updating them.

What I want to make sure is that these businesses are regulated in the sense that um they are required to record transactions properly.

So, you know, we should be knowing what what is coming in, we should be knowing what's going out and it's going to who they're thinking it from, who they're selling it to.

I have a uh a good friend of mine who who saw my my post online, and he's a property detective um in Osceola County, Florida, and he you know had a conversation with me and said, you know, that and this was before, you know, I knew what the police had had said.

But he had told me that you know, he absolutely thought that I had taken the right the right position as somebody who works in that field doing property theft and investigating and things like that.

These tools that municipalities and counties across the United States have oftentimes what helps uh these detectives, you know, find items that have been stolen and get them recovered back to their uh owners.

So I I think that um I agree that that the law is a little outdated.

I think that there is things that we should update with it in particular that 30-day hold.

I think that that's way too long.

Um, but I think that there are things that we can do to ensure that if a detective comes in looking for information that you know, we we have put on our books that there are requirements that that these businesses have to follow.

And so, you know, I'm not gonna support this the way that it sits this evening.

I think it should go back to the committee.

I think that we should have the police department weigh in on some of the changes.

I think that the business owners should come to the table uh as well.

Um, and we should find some common ground and some middle ground here.

Uh I think it would behoove everybody, I think it would help protect the citizens of the city against theft.

And I think that anybody who's properly doing business probably does these things anyway.

However, it is the ones that don't that are the ones that we we want to make sure that we have these laws on the books.

So I will not be supporting this in its current form.

I think it should go back to the committee.

Alderman Dowd.

Yeah, I'm concerned that the police have um some issues with this, and I won't make the motion, but I I don't know this is that expedient that we couldn't send it back to committee, work with the police department, come up with some language that everybody can agree to.

Um it appears like they had alternatives that might make this safer for them.

So that's my concern, and and as it stands right now, I will not support this until we have an opportunity to work work through the details with the police department.

Alderman Morgan.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, I will be supporting this, and I would love to share why if we keep chasing and putting up barriers for brick and mortar businesses to exist.

They're not going away, they're just going online.

They're making it harder for um us to enforce the roles to find them, um, less transparent, and it is extremely hard to operate a brick and mortar, especially in our downtown or any downtown across the country, not just ours specifically.

And so I commend this business owner for speaking up for speaking out with a Facebook post that she had posted saying, here's the situation I'm in.

One of her customers who is also mine came in and spoke with me about it.

Um and then I went over right away and uh we had a conversation, and here we are.

So um I just want her to hear, regardless of the outcome of this vote tonight.

Um, you know, you had people that are willing to um to do the work, and it is an outdated law, and uh I do appreciate you bringing that to our budget, and I hope that my fellow uh alderman will support this.

Alderman Teble.

Thank you, madam president.

Um so on the personnel committee, I voted for it.

Um and uh one of the reasons was because the police weren't there.

I thought maybe if if they weren't there, I figured maybe they it didn't, it wasn't they weren't against it, you know, then usually don't come to support something like this if they're for it.

They just assume we're for it.

So I just thought that, but then Chief Ort called me on Friday and said he did not know about the personnel committee.

So you can say what you want.

I know everybody's gonna give me a look, but that's what he told me.

It's not me saying it, it's him saying it.

So you guys can take that up with him.

But um, so he said uh he was against it and he told me why, and so just like the officer had said earlier, and uh, you know, and and so I started doing the research on this, and honestly, I mean it was I'm the one who put it on Alderman Clemens' uh Facebook page that I couldn't find anything, any law in the country that that had this.

It was all the one it was it was everything we have currently, and I know I guess somebody saw that and may find a couple, but uh Manchester doesn't do it, New Hampshire doesn't do it.

Um I don't see that this is the right time to do this.

I agree with Alderman Clemens.

Um, you know, send it back to committee, work on it more.

Uh it's it's there's a reason why towns and cities across the country do not do this, do not change this.

There's gotta be.

And uh, and and you know, I don't want anybody comparing it to like, oh well, women couldn't vote once.

Now they can, right?

It's not that kind of law, it's not that that kind of uh situation.

Um so I want to make sure that if we're gonna pass something different, and with that the police are on board and the city's on board, and it makes sense.

Um so I would I would send this back to committee.

That would be my my thing.

Alderman Kelly.

Alderwoman Kelly.

So I don't support sending it back to committee.

I it is surprising to me to hear that the chief doesn't know that my committee exists because he's come when his contracts were up.

Not what I said.

I also know that the co-sponsor said that they were invited more than once.

Um if they're not going to come to the committee and the work's supposed to be done in the committee, we're gonna be right back here in a month.

Well in the Senate.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um I I just have two additional things to add.

Um I have been doing some work with um some of the shops in Manchester, New Hampshire, uh, in regard to um research on this, just to understand the nuance of the laws that Manchester does have on the books and Manchester's laws do mirror ours uh for the most part.

But I will point out that most of their rig most of their rigid regulations that they require for their secondhand dealers or junk dealers as they just uh define them, which include transactional recordings, inventory holds, and um background checks, are exempt for a number of um business types in the Manchester market that deal in high value secondhand products, um primarily um you know me uh home media, uh, but the electronics that I had discussed with the um the regulations in fair law and Ohio, um comic book dealers, um things of that nature.

It was actually a comic shop that I was working with to um we haven't gotten that far in the conversation, but to understand the nuance because it is based on what their primary business purpose is.

Now I know of a number of shops that their primary business is comic books, but then they deal in other wares as well, and understanding how they kind of walk between the raindrops, so to speak.

Um so that conversation is ongoing.

The other point I wanted to make in concern with sending this back to committee, is that I modeled this legislation off a um piece of legislation that had come up several years ago during the 2020, 2021 uh session.

Uh it came up towards the beginning of that term.

Uh it went to personnel as this did, and it was tabled um pending input from the National Police Department, and it sat there for two years.

I'm not willing to let this happen.

Um, that this is something that many people have come together to um put the work into, and I don't want to see this just go to dying committee.

Um and I do wonder if uh what my colleague at large, older woman Kelly chairs that committee, if what she sort of foresees is um is what happens, and that we just wind back here in a month with the with the same piece of legislation because I know I'll be showing up when it's in committee, and I'll be asking for it to come off the table so that we can discuss it and move it forward.

Um I I know these businesses don't want to wait, and I'm not here to throw anybody under the bus, but you know, we we have spoken to several uh throughout the community, and you know, the question of you know, if this really came down hard on you, what what happens and the answer sort of blunt?

Just go somewhere else.

And is that the relationship we want with brick and mortar where so much is going online in this day and age.

Um I'm not gonna get into a shouting match in regards to um awareness of the personnel meeting.

Um I have the correspondence in my email and two of my colleagues who were co-sponsors on this are copied on that as well.

So I believe they could back me up in that respect.

Um there was plenty of awareness of this meeting.

Thank you.

Well then Lopez.

Um I thought one of my colleagues pointed out something that I thought was kind of intrinsically obvious that there's this can this is not being stopped if someone is online.

And so if we penalize the people who are actually setting up a brick and mortar location that can be identified, tracked, observed, policed, then we're driving potential criminal activity away from where we can actually do anything about it.

So I would rather have the transactions and interactions happening to where at least we can follow up and investigate it.

I think the concerns that were raised by the businesses that spoke, um, I I find it unfortunate that they are not being considered urgent by someone this board.

These are people's businesses, these are their livelihoods.

Yes, it is timely.

We do need to do something if business owners are telling us they're struggling, they're suffering, and this is causing distress.

I think that would have come out if if that person had observed or participated in the committee meeting.

The committee meeting used the information that it had because the police didn't provide the information that they wanted to have.

They did come and they spoke tonight at public comment.

We did not get a memorandum.

I didn't get a call from the chief.

This doesn't appear to be as urgent.

If they are willing to work on it, as Alderman Clemens has mentioned that he's willing to work on it.

There's no reason we can't pass this and then continue to work on it while offering relief to businesses today.

I don't think we need to wait.

I think we should take action on this because our constituents have asked us to do that.

And I think if city departments feel a strong kind of way, then that they need to be paying attention to these kind of things.

They need to be responsive when Alderman reach out and say, hey, I'm bringing this up.

Can you give me your thoughts?

Can you give me your input?

And not just try to ambush them the day of the uh you know the second the final reading and say, well, we disagree and that's it.

That doesn't give me any confidence that they're gonna work on a solution.

I have a lot of faith in the police department on a lot of different things, but if they're serious about working on this, then we can work to amend it further if that's needed.

If they have identifiable problems, and if they have tangible and concrete recommendations instead of let's kick it down the road and we'll get to it when we get to it.

There, I mean I don't know that there isn't gonna be a crime wave over the next month of other things going on and that they're even gonna have the time to do it.

So I mean, if there were concrete specific concerns that were raised, I didn't hear them, and they weren't brought up at the committee meeting either.

So I I'd rather support the businesses for now and and then continue to work with the police when they show up.

Oldman Gregg.

Thank you.

Um Madam President.

So as one of the co-sponsors, I think it was important to do due diligence on this.

I do want to thank my colleague for doing its due diligence and reaching out to the police chief multiple times.

Um and I was CC'd on that.

So I think when we have a bill like this where we're all kind of feeling safe in that, it's important to understand where the origins of a bill like this is.

And so when we think about um pawn shops and stuff, that's really where this kind of law came into play when you had serial numbers, you had identifiable um pieces, whether it be jewelry that was marked or you know, VCRs back in the day, you know, all these different things had serial numbers, and so that's why that 30-day hold held.

So you had time to check that kind of thing.

So the problem is, and where the current law is failing our constituents right now is that trading cards and collective most of these collectibles have no serial numbers.

So they can't be checked against the NCIC or any theft database.

A 30-day hold on a Pokemon card does not help police identify or recover stolen property.

As a matter of fact, there's probably numerous of those anyway.

So how do they prove that it's that particular one?

There's nothing to match it to.

The card values are highly volatile, so a 30-day hold can mean a significant financial loss to a compliant dealer.

Um and the compliance burden falls on good faith dealers while doing nothing to actually deter or catch bad actors.

So right now, I know that we heard from um Alderman Clemens in theory that he wanted you know, make sure people are record keeping and stuff like that, but good faith dealers are already documenting sellers and maintaining records and their existing law because that is their inventory.

We don't go into these other shops and say tell them how to inventory their dresses or how to inventory their food or anything.

Once again, this is trading that would be trading in over-regulation that we currently have because it does not meet what um you know current commerce is for another kind of burdensome uh regulation that I think we just don't need to do.

So I am happy that that the police came tonight.

I agree with Alderman Lopez that I think that we could continue this conversation later, but this is something that should be taken care of, and they had plenty of time to come in and talk to us.

We have done our due diligence, we have looked in other states and other cities where they are implementing this.

Connecticut and California completely as a state has done this.

We're a municipality working on that.

Um but I think that I think it makes sense, I think it's wise.

I do not think it's risky, and I will be supporting this tonight.

Alderman, I have a list.

That's okay.

Okay.

Alderman Johnson was next.

Thank you.

I'm going to agree with Alderman Lopez and Alderman Greg, because the police could have come in when we were at that meeting, and we could pass it and then add anything else, any other language that we might need in the future.

But right now, and um, I think it's the right thing to do for these businesses downtown.

We want to keep out businesses, not lose them.

Thank you.

Alderman Clemens.

Uh thank you, madam president.

Um the problem that I have with this, the way that it is written in is it's not you say due diligence, and I guess my only response to that is it's just complete deregulation.

It it's just completely stripping any oversight by the city whatsoever of these businesses.

Um there's no there's no I think I guess you can call that due diligence if that if you believe that you know that there's no con there's no middle ground.

Uh but I I don't believe that.

I think that there is always room for compromise.

I think that the most important people at the table, you know, would be the businesses to tell us how to put their current practices into law to make this a better uh to make it a better um better for everybody.

And and and have the police weigh in and make it a you know, a situation that that is palatable to everybody, but to completely deregulate this, which is what we're doing.

I just think those in the in in the wrong direction.

I don't think that it is the spirit of compromise that we should be having, and I think that it will ultimately lead to um somebody unfortunately being the victim of uh of theft down the line where something is not being able to be recouped.

Uh and that's that's really what um what this is about for me.

Again, you know, it's kind of like saying, like, you know, if you want to deregulate the environment, it's saying, well, the good businesses are going to do the right thing.

Well, yeah, they are.

But that's not why we make laws.

We make laws because we want to make sure that all businesses are doing the right thing.

And if they're not, then they're gonna be held accountable.

Um and that's that's the purpose here.

If we if we completely deregulate this, then we have nothing to fall back on.

So if we pass this tonight and then say, well, we want to work on it, we're completely deregulating something, basically making it a free-for-all, and then we're going back and saying, well, we're gonna put this, these other pieces in place.

I don't think that's the right thing to do.

I think the right thing to do is to send this back to committee.

Uh, and so I'm gonna make a motion to uh refer back to the personnel uh committee motion is to re-refer the clerk call the roll.

Sorry, Alderman Clemens, yes, Alderman Clee.

No Aldman Ravan, yes, Alderwoman Smith.

Yes, Alderman Tebow, yes, Alderman O'Brien, yes, Alderman Greg.

No, Alderman Dowd.

Yes, Alderman Senate.

No, Alderman Johnson.

No Aldwoman Kelly, no Aldman Morgan.

Alderman Lopez.

No.

Alderman Wilshire.

Yes.

Seven years, seven days.

And the motion to refer fails.

So the motion is for final passage.

Further discussion.

Alderman Clee.

Uh uh, thank you, um, Madam President.

Um the the author of this um legislation referred to legislation that had been put back in the um 2021.

Um myself and um Alderman Tenza were the um authors of that one or the sponsors of that particular um that particular bill, and um to my colleague's point, it died on the table, and the reason it died on the table was because the current chief at that time had reached out to us and asked us to kind of hold off and work with them, and that never happened.

Um, so I hate to see something like this happen again.

I believe that our NPD would try to work.

Um, and I and I've listened to everything everybody said here, and the sad thing is I can't disagree with anything that has been said here.

I can't disagree with Alderman Clemens, I can't disagree with Alderman Senate.

Um in in any way, shape, or form, everybody is right.

But I do think we can move forward, and I do think that moving forward may prompt maybe another um bill that's gonna come through and and regulate this.

I don't want to see this kind of die again.

Um, so for that reason I am going to support it.

Um it's been a long time coming.

Um, I do wish we had a little bit more, you know, you must keep um records, but putting them into this category uh makes it makes uh an issue with it.

And I do want to reiterate something that my colleagues have already said, and that's the e-commerce.

Anyone can get up on eBay and sell the stuff there, and I know our NPD probably monitors that and so on when something has been stolen and may be able to get it a little bit quicker.

Um, but I think when something is stolen, they're probably contacting all of these other places.

I know that there are um thrift shops that sell jewelry and various different things and don't necessarily have to follow that 30-day regulation.

So because of that, I again I am going to support this.

Thank you, Alderman Teble.

Thank you, madam president.

Um, we talked about places going elsewhere, but no one else does it unless they go to Ohio or California.

So that's again not a reason why we shouldn't change stuff, but I agree with Alderman Clemens, not total deregulation.

There's no harm to send it to committee if we're gonna actually work on it.

I don't know why we're scared that it's gonna die there.

This is a completely different board with the exception of a couple of you guys.

So I don't know why we would think it would die.

Um, for all those out there that's saying, oh, baseball cards, they don't have serial numbers, they absolutely do.

So the expensive ones absolutely do.

So I collect baseball cards.

Now 62 Mickey Mandel doesn't have one because they didn't put them back then, but nowadays they give you a pack of whatever 15 crappy cards, and there's one in there that might be a one in one thousand, and it's stamped in the back.

One of one thousand, two of one thousand, three of one thousand.

So there is serial numbers to some of the more expensive baseball cards, sports cards, all sports cards, not just baseball.

Whether or not that translates to Pokemon, Magic, Dungeons and Dragons, whatever, I don't know.

I don't collect those ones, but for sports cards, the most expensive ones absolutely have a serial number.

So just to say that cards aren't like that.

I don't know about comic books.

I couldn't tell you that.

I don't think they do, especially the old ones.

Um, but I think you know it it's it's worth talking about in committee.

I don't know.

We we throw so many things back to committee to work on when we don't think they're 100%, and yet other times we're just like, oh no, that that can't go to committee.

It's not gonna change if we if we do this within a month.

The world isn't gonna collapse, it's only a month.

Um, and I know businesses are struggling, there lots of businesses, big businesses are struggling.

Other types of businesses struggling, but we're not deregulating all regulations on all businesses because business in general out there is struggling.

It is, and I do feel bad.

I do have sympathy and empathy for the businesses that are trying to make it in this world, especially these type of businesses because eBay is destroyed them.

Um, you know, you don't have the card stores like you used to, you don't have these collectible stores like you used to.

I get it.

Um, but to fine-tune this better with police input, and I know they didn't come to the personnel.

I don't control that.

I thought they were gonna be there.

Um, so I don't I don't see why we can't send it back.

I couldn't send it back to committee, but that's fine.

I'm still not gonna support it in reform that it's in today.

Thank you.

Alderman Clemens.

Thank you, Madam President.

Yeah, I I um I I do think that um with a seven to seven vote.

I I mean I think I think it's showing that this board is pretty split on this this topic.

I don't see why we wouldn't just try to work on it and get a get a decent compromise out there that the business community can support, that the police can support, that everybody can support, and that protects our citizens.

You know, the serial number thing, I I I get it, but I think in my opinion, that the fact that an item doesn't have a serial number makes it even more important that we do have some kind of process in place to protect that, you know.

And I understand I I I heard from a constituent about the you know, the buying something in bulk and and not being able to, you know, maybe you buy like for example, you buy baseball cards by the weight, as opposed to looking at you know each item that might be within that box.

And I and I yeah, you do we want people to categorize those you know and catalog each and every single one of them that they buy.

No, that's but that's that's what I mean by compromise, right?

So we can find a way to to record that transaction in a in a way that um basically you know is is modern and and efficient and can give the police exactly what they're looking for.

You know, we have the technology to to do this.

We should bring our laws to to be current and reflect what the current business practices are.

Um this isn't this is just to me, this is just uh the government doing doing its due diligence, so rather than completely deregulating something.

So, you know, again, I would encourage that we have more robust discussion on this, and um you know that that uh I think there's there's more more to be said, Aldman Greg.

Um thank you.

I think that it's disingenuous to say that this is a deregulation and it goes against the hard work of my colleague.

Um, and those of us that have been working on this, this was a carve out to help define what we're seeing in these.

That these are not just pawn shops, these are not secondhand dealers.

This is not a full deregulation, and that's really disingenuous to say that.

So for anybody that has not read the previous legislation and read this legislation, um, I just want everybody to understand that's not what this is.

This is a carve out to modernize what we are seeing now that is not pawn shops, it's you know, these secondhand card dealers and stuff, and what their type of commerce is.

So, you know, I don't want to muddy the waters with things that are not true right now.

Aldman Clee.

Uh thank you.

Um Madam President.

Um, to to my colleague um Alderman um Clemens.

Um he's right.

We're split at seven-seven.

If we go to a vote right now, this is gonna die.

I don't want to see that happen.

So I'm going to ask um council um make the motion again.

We did a vote on something that failed.

Can we make another motion for that to go back to committee?

Is that allowable?

Something failed.

We didn't, obviously.

So we made a motion to send it back to committee, and it failed because it was a seven-seven vote.

Can I make that same motion to send it back to committee?

Yeah, see why not?

Okay.

I'd like to make that motion, Madam President.

Motion to re-refer.

And the reason I'm doing this is because I don't want to see it die here tonight.

I'd rather see it go back to committee and see if changes can be made, work with the the NPD.

I don't want to see something that I I know that I worked really hard on before, just die.

And I apologize to my colleagues who are for this.

I am too, but I don't want to see it die tonight.

So thank you.

Motion is to re-refer.

Would the clerk call the roll, please?

Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Alderman Clee.

Yes.

Aldwin Ravan.

Yes.

Aldwoman Smith.

Yes.

Aldman Tebow.

Yes.

Alderman O'Brien.

Yes.

Aldman Gregg.

No.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman said it.

No.

Alderman Johnson.

No.

Alderman Kelly.

No.

Alderman Morgan.

No.

Alderman Lopez.

No.

Aldman Wilshire.

Yes.

Eight years, six nays.

No motion carries.

And ordinance 2611 is re-referred to the Personnel Administrative Affairs Committee.

Second reading of O-26-014, amending the Board of Alderman compensation ordinance.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'd like to make a motion for indefinite postponement of O 26014 by roll call, and I'd like to speak to it, please.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Thank you.

I've actually stayed pretty quiet on this ordinance as well as the other two that were kind of brought along at the same time.

But I I want to weigh in on them before they go away because I feel that these were subtly crafted to attack many of the public servants in this chamber.

I have personally been attacked for having a baby while being an alderman.

I've been attacked for my attendance during COVID when I had two children home with me.

I've also been attacked for attending the Zoom meeting from the hospital after my baby was born because I should be here in person.

So I'm really trying to figure out what's what's right.

The sponsor of this also has a piece of legislation in to allow for public comment via Zoom because she had an issue where she couldn't get here.

So what what constitutes who decides these sort of policies?

And and the thing that I really want to talk about is that what this says about what it means to be an alderman.

What this says is if you don't have perfect attendance, you shouldn't be an alderman.

If you have anything that's keeping you away, or a child you need to check on, or a loved one who is sick, you shouldn't be an alderman.

Don't have a business.

Don't have children, don't get sick.

Please don't ever get cancer.

And I don't believe that is what should happen in this chamber.

We are enriched by the lived experiences of everyone on this board.

Everyone brings something different to this chamber, and we're all adults, and we are working our butts off to be the aldermen that we were voted in to be.

And I think that this piece of legislation and the previous ones were just silly wastes of time.

And I would really urge the sponsor of this to spend more time working on things for her constituents instead of trying to police the adults in this room.

Alderman Lopez.

Um it was stated earlier that we they all died really quickly, and I feel like that meeting was decently long.

Um so the public can watch us because I believe we did discuss each one of these in turn.

Um and particularly what seemed to be a pervasive theme is how exactly are we gonna enforce some of these things and what are the criteria?

Um I don't want to go into the other um ones that we've already in definitely postponed, but this one in particular I had a problem with because with respect to the president, I'm not in charge of what committees I get assigned to, and I'm not in charge of how often they meet.

So there are some members of this board who could miss a single week and be disqualified based on this the way this was written, and then other members who could like very routinely miss appointments or miss meetings, and they it wouldn't make a difference.

So I think it's too clunky.

Um I think the intention that we should all be present in the meetings is a hundred percent spot on.

Um personally, I think being present in the meetings is only the baseline.

You should also be actively representing your constituents, which means you have to go out, you have to engage your constituents, you have to know what's going on in your your neighborhoods.

Um and ultimately, if you don't, your neighbors will will vote you out.

Um, and so I think the attendance specific to the the stipend is reasonable.

We we should have it.

It is characterized in the committee meeting as though we all got a raise when many boards before me didn't get a raise, and we explicitly adjusted the stipends that are here so that we wouldn't keep politicizing them.

Um so now I guess we're trying to tie it to an hourly rate instead of a a stipend.

So I had I just found this way too problematic and I couldn't support it.

Alderman Johnson.

Thank you very much.

Well, I just want to say I do go out there and work with my constituents because today, tonight I was going to come to the ad hoc committee after work.

I was going to the zoning board of adjustment because of the buck medal, and then here.

The meeting was canceled, and two minutes before I walked out of my house, I was sending emails out to everybody on my email list telling them that the meeting was canceled.

I'm out there all the time with my constituents, and if people want to see what I've accomplished so far since January, working with my constituents on the covert and other areas in ward five, then come out and walk with me in the neighborhoods.

Thank you.

You live in ward five.

So that's that's your word.

You should be there with me.

And the reason I had asked for all this zooming, and I remember last year one piece of my legislation that is tabled because I had broken kneecap, and by law, I am totally um disabled.

And I couldn't come in here to Zoom.

And so if you want to go back to last year and everything that was here, I was always on the other side of the horseshoe.

So if you want to take this person, go right ahead.

And so that had started, and what I asked that we zoom and people can see.

And when you were on the board when you were pregnant, I wasn't here.

You were.

I wasn't on the board.

You came right there.

Doesn't matter.

I'm a constituent of yours.

You live in road five, you're an alderman at lodge.

Have every right to say what I wanted to.

So do I.

So exactly.

So you had your chance, I have my chance, and so it's failed.

It's done.

It's over with.

Move on now.

Thank you.

Ask you to do the same.

Don't don't get in my face.

Alderman Smith, what you've done.

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.

Um I think it's unfortunate some of the conversation I just heard between some of my colleagues.

But what I just want you know want to say is that, you know, I know I think at one point I was very naive at one point when I ran for this position because I was actually just doing it so that I could represent my community, represent our constituents, make a difference in the city.

I was doing it completely volunteer.

When someone told me that there was a stipend, I was like, you're kidding, I was gonna do it anyway.

Um and I really think that that is why individuals are here and we sit around this horseshoe.

And I think if we can all just remember that all of us are really here because we want to represent the community of Nashua, that we want to represent the individuals in our world, and that it doesn't matter.

We're nonpartisan, we're not red, we're not blue, we're not purple, we're nationalists.

And I think we just need to remember that all of us are working really hard and appreciate that, and then to to continue to work with each other and communicate in a respectful way.

Regarding this, yes, you know, I can understand some accountability for all of us to be at meetings and things, but we're we're adults.

Uh we do have lives.

Some of us are working, some of us are retired.

Some of us are when you retired, you're working harder than when you were working for pay.

You know, I don't take any of that for granted.

I assume that, and I'd like for all of us to assume that and to know that all of us are here once again because we are committed.

We all took an oath, and I know that all of my colleagues around this horseshoe take it seriously.

That's why whether you're having a baby or you're having a dinner or you're at a conference for work because you have to travel for your job, and whether you have to log in and do that remotely or by phone or Zoom or whatever we used to do this on Tim Tin Can and a string.

I don't know.

But you made, you know, you made the effort to be here, just like our constituents make the effort to be here so that we could hear their voice.

And that's why we are here.

And so I'm hoping that you know, one, we won't have to have things like this, you know, amended or written up or brought for us to even think about voting upon, and that we can just remember why we are all here, and that when there's things like this that kind of go against really what we're supposed to be doing, that we can just vote against it and just continue to do the good work that we're here for.

Thank you.

Alderman Clee.

Thank you, um, Madam President.

Um, first I want to address the three misses.

When this was um put through by then, I think Alderman Thiboom had uh put this through.

The three misses were based on the fact that there were nine Board of Alderman meetings.

So if you had um or two four six yeah, okay, sorry, six Board of Alderman meetings.

So if you um miss 50 percent of those meetings, um that's when you would lose your stipend.

This is three meetings, and um when we look at all the meetings and the committees that we're on, um, and you can only miss three of those, that could be quite difficult within within a quarter.

It would be easy to miss um three meetings.

And uh, and I kind of made a you know an off the cuff remark.

Do I get extra credit for meetings that I go to that I'm not on the um I'm on the committee, and I and I didn't mean that to be flippant, but the truth is um to to my colleague from Ward 5 who spoke about all the work that she does.

No one says that she doesn't.

She's reminded us of this a number of times.

Um, but we all do.

I I know myself I was up at 10 o'clock this morning going to a meeting, I met with three constituents today and so on.

But that's not here here or there, because that's my job, and that's what we all do.

We're answering emails, we're doing that.

Um so we don't take that into consideration on all the work.

As far as the stipend is concerned, um, we brought that up.

It had been um, I think 25 years since that had been brought up.

So we we went with the um uh the cost of living or the CPI, I don't even remember which one it was at the time, and we we brought it up to modern day time um and kind of backed it off a little bit, and then we put in the provision, much like what the mayors is that it automatically happens based on the on the CPI so that it doesn't become a political issue.

Um, and to say that that the aldermen who who do this don't deserve any money at all, much like the state reps, then what you're saying is just like the state reps, only those that are retired and have money in the bank are able to run.

That's ridiculous.

I want all income levels to be able to run, and all this does is just helps with that little bit of of here or there.

So um I'm gonna put the stipend aside because this is really about attendance.

Um, and yes, it bothers me when there's not quorum.

I there's nothing more than aggravating than me, and poor Donna gets my emails all the time.

Donna, can you check on quorum for this?

Can you check on quorum for that?

Because I have a concern we're gonna all get to the meeting, and there's not going to be a quorum.

But the truth is then trust me, on my committee, I will take people to task.

I will go, you have to show up.

Anybody that's on finance or Penachuk will have heard me say that it is important that you show up.

Um, I do my due diligence as far as that's concerned.

Um, and they will hear from me when they don't show up and didn't tell me they weren't going to show up.

So um the thing is we're adults, we have to take responsibility.

Um I agree with the three missed board of Alderman, full board of Alderman meetings.

I think we should have some.

The reason why this was put through was because there was an alderman who had been um in jail, and no one knew why he was missing for so long.

So there was a specific reason for that particular thing to come through.

This um is is just basically saying that we're children and we need to be policed, and I don't agree with that.

So thank you, Madam President.

Motion is for indefinite postponement.

Further discussion.

Seeing none would the clerk call the roll, please.

Alderman Clemens.

Yes, Alderman Clee.

Yes, Alderman Rabin.

Yes, Alderwoman Smith, yes, Alderman Tebow, yes, Alderman O'Brien, yes, Alderman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes, Alderman Senate, yes, Alderman Johnson.

No Alderwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Alderman Wilshire.

Yes.

13 years in one day.

That motion carries, and ordinance 2614 is declared indefinitely postponed.

New business resolutions.

First reading of R-26-041, approving the cost items of a collective bargaining agreement between the National Board of Education and the Nashville Teachers Union, local 1044 AFT, AFL-CIO units Cecretaries from July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2029.

Additional sponsors.

Alderman Thibault, Alderman O'Brien, Alderman Senate, Alderman Lopez, Alderman Smith, Alderman Clemens, Alderman Morgan and myself.

Alderman Morgan and myself.

Given its first reading, I'll assign that to the budget review committee.

First reading of R-26-042 relative to the acceptance of grant funds to the amount of 762,788 dollars from the State of New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services into various public health and community service grant activities.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Director Bagley.

Shouldn't we sponsor?

Oh, additional sponsors.

Alderman Clee, Alderman Ravan, Alderman Smith, Alderman Tebow, Alderman O'Brien, Alderman Gregg, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Senate, Alderman Kelly, Alderman Lopez, and myself.

Oh, and Alderman Clemens and Alderman Morgan.

Director Bagley.

Yes, good evening, and thank you.

This is the legislation that was uh as the resolution that was passed already once before this board and it's being brought back for first and second read um with the prospect of final passage for this evening to making it on the governors and council agenda.

There had to be an amendment to the resolution to add the two years of funding for this.

The first time we passed it, it was passed for just one year of funding, and it is a two-year grant.

We did contact the state to see if they would rewrite the contract for one year, and it would throw everything out of sync because all of the other regional public health network regions have two-year proposals, and so this resolution is being brought before you again for a vote, and I am hoping that we will be able to get this passed this evening so that I can get it on the governor's and council agenda, get it passed so that we will be able to have the funding ready to start uh for July 1 fiscal year 27.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Clerk?

Yes.

Do I have a procedural?

Yes.

Uh so there was a motion to suspend the rules, so we just need a roll call vote.

With the clerk please call the roll.

Uh Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Alderman Clee.

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman T O.

Yes.

Alderman O'Brien.

Yes.

Alderman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Alderman Johnson.

Yes.

Alderman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Alderman Wilshire.

Yes.

14 yes, 0 nays.

And that motion carries.

And then second reading of R-26-042 relative to the acceptance of grant funds and the amount of 762,788 dollars.

The state of New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services into various public health and community service grant activities.

Alderman Lopez.

I just want to apologize for getting that backwards.

I was looking at it as you should all know why we were suspending the rules.

But I think Mr.

Mason, who wrote this manual, looked at it differently, so I apologize.

Do you have a motion, Alderman?

Uh I thought we had to discuss.

Um I'd like to make a motion for final passage of R26042 by roll call.

Thank you.

Discussion.

Would the clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Clemens.

Yes.

Alderman Clay.

Yes.

Alderman Ravan.

Yes.

Alderwoman Smith.

Yes.

Alderman Tebow?

Yes.

Alderman O'Brien.

Yes.

Alderman Gregg.

Yes.

Alderman Dowd.

Yes.

Alderman Senate.

Yes.

Alderman Johnson.

Yes.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Yes.

Alderman Morgan.

Yes.

Alderman Lopez.

Yes.

Alderman Wilshar.

Yes.

14 yes.

Zero nays.

That motion carries and resolution 2642 is declared duly adopted.

First reading of R-26-043 authorizing a fourth amendment to the site lease agreement with new singular wireless PCS LLC regarding the cellular antenna site at Mine Falls Park.

Additional sponsors.

Alderman Smith, Alderman O'Brien, Alderman Gregg, Alderman Dowd, Alderman Lopez.

Given its first reading, I'll assign that to the Finance Committee and the Board of Public Works.

First reading of R-26-044.

Additional sponsors.

Given its first reading, I'll assign that to the budget review committee and schedule a special board of alderman public hearing on Thursday, June 18th, 2026, in the Aldermanic Chamber at 7 p.m.

First reading of R-26-045 authorizing a lease agreement with Drop by Corp DBA drop mobility at 117 Elm Street.

Additional sponsors.

First reading of O-26-015, no parking on sections of Selena Avenue.

Additional sponsors, Alderman Greg.

Alderman Ravan.

Given its first reading, I'll send that to the Committee on Infrastructure.

First reading of O-26-016, authorizing a stop sign on Pinebrook Road at its intersection with Ridge Road.

Additional sponsors.

Additional sponsors, Alderman Clee, Alderman Smith, Alderman O'Brien, Alderman Dowd.

Given its first reading, I'll assign that to the budget review committee and schedule a special board of alderman public hearing on Monday, July 27, 2026, in the Aldermanic Chamber at 7 o'clock.

Period for general public comment.

Point of order.

Yes.

I'm sure you're going to do it, but I was going to move that anyone who wanted to speak in the first section can speak tonight.

Well, without objection, I'm going to follow that and allow anyone who signed up on the first public comment that thought they were signing up for the second will be allowed to speak.

So I am going to go through the list here.

Chris Hayes.

So your name and city of residence, and you have three minutes.

Sorry.

First, I would like to ask that you allow Kenneth to speak after me in order to uh as uh he was skipped earlier as well.

I speak to you today as someone who weekly volunteers my time with our homeless population.

I'm in favor of the resource center.

It is a good first step, but it is not nearly enough.

When I speak to my unhoused neighbors, I hear that the inhumane camping bet is keeping them down.

Thousand dollar fines push under residents struggling to stay above water and jail time ties them to the bottom.

Each of you voted for this are directly responsible for the suffering of your constituents.

Derek, you say that the woman behind these words are cruel.

I agree with you.

I wonder how many of you think it is cruel and even unusual to punish your voters for struggling and being poor.

Kenneth Du set present, thank you.

Do we want to let someone else speak at this time?

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

So you have three minutes, Kenneth.

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your time in letting me speak as well.

Uh I'm not going to take too much of my time.

I'm going to just basically ask that this board of aldermen, all of you and the mayor, you know, Mayor Donchus, if you would as well.

You know, when all of you come together.

I'm when I was camping in, which I still would like to see because for me personally, uh my place from at the Y is up in all the end of August, as far as that be the case.

I really don't know where, because I'm not sure where my direction is, and who knows what I may be forced into what I have to deal with.

And so I bow to you all, you know, all the you aldermen and all the women as well, and you know, you, Mayor Dontrius as well, for the understanding that what this unhoused individual after might need to deal with, and how far I need in order to get a roof over my head, even if I it's that roof is made of uh of canvas and needing to be out there as well because I want you all, in fact, I'll even be willing to let every one of you come out and inspect my own personal abode after so that basically if you allow us to have you know tents out there again for what it's worth because why they're the only present alternative to what there is, and I ask one thing as well of you all.

In fact, I myself offended me literally, please.

Please I ask of you, every one of them in TV.

Rescend the ban for what it's worth.

Because why?

If there's a lot of Sir, you need to be you need to be at the microphone because I think no one can hear you on the on the TV or transcribing.

Very nice, okay.

Then fine.

If I can then take here and speak this way, I speak this way because why?

I want you to know.

I beg of you to tell you all this.

Please make a better choice.

Take up the take and take ban off.

Thank you.

My end is here.

Thank you very much.

Price Du Bois.

Du Bois.

Testing.

Yeah, you're good.

Yes.

Matt?

Go ahead.

Hello, I'm Matt, resident of Nashua.

And I'm speaking to you, speaking to you today as somebody who has worked at the warming station this winter and as a member of the Southern New Hampshire DSA and NH Mute NH Mutual Relief Fund who have been working to provide mutual aid to our unhoused neighbors and friends.

I would like to encourage the aldermen here to fund the resource center, but on top of that, to also reverse the camping ban.

We currently have a huge issue here in our city, and that being the fact that Alderman O'Brien, Alderman Sullivan, Alderman Clemens, Alderman Tebow, Alderman Clee, Alderman Dowd, and Alderman Wilshire voted for the camping ban that has criminalized poverty in our city.

And while that may sound a little hyperbolic, it's not because what do these people who have no other place to go?

Uh, what are they to do?

Right?

If they set up camps somewhere, they get fined a thousand dollars, and if they have to set up a tent somewhere, they're not gonna be able to afford a thousand dollars.

And then if they don't pay those fines, what happens?

Jail.

So we're criminalizing poverty with this, and we're not providing any sensible alternative for these people here.

And I believe we're doing this out of distinct lack of humanity and a prioritization of people's comfort at not having to encounter the problem in their parks and in their streets, um, over making sure that human beings have a place to live.

Right?

At the warming station this winter, most of the people who I worked with there were talking about how when this camping ban was passed, their stuff, their only home they have, their possessions were completely brutalized by the police, came through and bulldozed it.

And now we're telling them they set up camp anywhere.

Well, that's a thousand dollar fine, you don't pay it, you go to jail.

I'd like to share some uh statistics here.

New Hampshire has a vacancy rate of 3%, with it even being lower in Nashua.

And we have the fifth highest rent prices in this country.

So everybody is struggling with that right now.

But instead of coming up with a solution to that to make sure everybody can get housing, we instead say that it is a crime to be poor, and it is a crime to get any type of shelter you can, and we haven't come up with the solution to that.

We keep dragging our feet on the resource center, and the warming station wasn't enough for that.

Instead of solving these problems and making affordable housing and places to people go priority, we've decided to instead fine and jail anybody who dares to not have money.

So my ask to you all is to please fund the resource center, but not stop there.

Also repeal the camping ban, and please have some some humanity for our neighbors and friends who are unhoused.

Thank you.

Cameron Schofield.

Cameron Schofield.

Rolf Viniver?

Okay.

I feel like I'm almost wasting time here because I think the last two people hit it very very perfectly in terms of the resource center, which of course.

Could you give your name as City Town of Residence?

Sorry.

Cameron Schofield Town of Residence hoax it.

Um so basically, I I feel like the people before me already kind of said as much as they needed to say.

They put it all quite well.

What I want to hit is on specifically the fact that we see homelessness in the streets, right?

We see our homeless neighbors.

Right.

And the solution in the minds of the people who wrote this camping ban was we just need them gone.

We just need them gone as fast as possible.

So how do we do it?

We fine them a thousand dollars.

Something that we of course know they can't pay because they're homeless.

They would probably have something better by now if they could spend a thousand dollars on a bill or on a fine.

Um so of course, the obvious thing, they can't pay the fine, they go to prison.

Well, I'm sure all of you are well familiar with the 13th Amendment.

The 13th Amendment outlaws slavery except as crime for punishment.

Basically, what I mean to say is that everybody who signed on to that camping bill, the camping ban, the people who were like, hey, you know, let's make sure these homeless people go to prison for that camping ban to denounce you all as modern-day slavers.

I think frankly, that's all this meaningfully accomplishes is enslaving homeless people.

I mean, you might be better off turning them into biodiesel.

If that seems to be where your mind goes, is this is the option, like we just don't care about these people fundamentally.

I think you ought to be ashamed of yourselves.

I hope, frankly, that all of your positions are replaced.

That is all.

I'll see you the rest of the time.

Bob Keating.

Oh, I'm sorry, there was one person, Rolf.

Yeah, Rolf Van Bieber.

So my name is Rolf Van Biber.

Um, I did live in Nashua for a good part of last year.

Um, part of it was in ward one, and then I also lived in ward four in the Elm Street parking garage.

And I slept on Selena Avenue for a few nights, and I slept in Manchester for a few nights.

So I'm familiar with people who have to make do.

Just because I'm sleeping in my car out there doesn't mean that I should be charged a grand, which I obviously can't afford because if I could, I would be sleeping in an apartment or a room somewhere.

I'm 21 now, I was 20 then.

Do you think that I should be jailed for not being able to afford your parking lot rent?

Just because uh say the Selena ban that you're trying to put in right now.

You tried passing that a while ago when you first put in the camping ban, and it was tonight.

I'm not entirely sure why.

If you guys seem so hellbent on punishing homeless people, surely you'd want to go after those people in the RVs who are just trying to survive winter in New Hampshire, right?

You guys are all wearing pretty nice clothes, some of you are wearing suits.

I don't know if you've slept outside out of desperation.

When I was in high school, I was sleeping in a tent by the Sohegan River for a week.

Do you think that those kids should be fined for that?

Do you think that they should have their tents ripped up, their personal belongings stolen from them by the police because they have to survive?

I don't think so.

You shouldn't.

Bob Keating.

Hello, my name is uh Bob Keating and live at uh five Coleman Woods Drive.

Uh it's uh had to stay on my uh my topic uh, which is about homelessness uh and uh stay exactly on the agenda after uh hearing uh a number of the speakers beforehand.

But they do want to speak about the budget, um, and I want to put uh a couple things in in context.

Uh that this is the 22nd anniversary of our uh ending homeless uh fund that you've heard uh multiple times, and this is where we're gonna end homelessness.

It's 14 years since we uh said we would have the this completed, which was being 20 uh 12.

Um clearly we're still struggling, and some may argue that we may be in a more difficult position than we have been for uh years.

Uh speaking about more difficult position that uh the HUD has released uh uh their first notice now about uh the the monies that we receive and people throughout the country receive for ending homelessness, particularly around permanent supported housing.

Uh it was blocked, their initial uh efforts by the by the courts, but what it looks like that were previously we had 90% of our funding insured, it now will be 60%.

So it's going to be a more difficult uh times uh you know for us.

Uh I was gonna speak about a couple of people, but I'll just make it very brief about that given the people who have lived experience have spoken.

But you know, today I saw somebody that had been uh uh homeless, was sleeping uh behind his business and had health issues uh related to that.

The doctor at the ER said it was directly related to uh to that.

Um he's now doing fine and continues to do fine.

But moving to the budget, uh and looking at the budget, I do not see any place, and it may come in a different way, uh, that a significant amount of new monies were going to be devoted to permanent housing.

And I hope that the spirit that led us to think about 4.5 million dollars that we were going to spend for the Mulberry Street uh will come back because that can make a difference, a huge, huge difference.

Like most people have looked at the uh the numbers uh before.

So I I want to uh end with uh what the plan said.

Uh all individuals and families facing homelessness in Greater Nashville will have access to safe, decent, affordable housing and the resources and supports needed to sustain us.

We use the multitude of our resources in our community to add one more enduring legacy.

All our citizens have a home.

So I just hope that in spirit moves with the proposed budget of 383 million dollars that we can do more.

Thank you.

Stephen Scarf.

Good evening, Steven Scar Nashua.

I'm here to respond to some of the board members' comments regarding our comments on the Pride Festival.

Alderman Tibu declared the hate is still out there, and we have to continue to go against the hate.

Hate is a meaningless slur.

Deployed against anyone who dares question gender ideology.

The logic is circular.

Questioning child gender ideology is hateful because it questions gender ideology.

The tactic isn't just dishonest, it's coercive.

It's designed to silence parents and citizens or giving trans activists license to harm those who disagree.

Claiming the moral high ground by labeling others as haters is grotesque.

When you are actively defending the mutilation of healthy boys and girls, sterilizing them, pumping them full of cross-sex hormones, amputating healthy body parts, and condemning them to a lifetime of pain and medical dependency.

That's not love, it's cruelty.

Alderman Smith claims that teachers should support students based on who they are becoming and help them become their authentic selves.

This is a dangerous delusion.

A 13-year-old girl claiming to be a boy isn't discovering her authentic self.

Since subjectively, a girl can't be a boy.

Alderman Smith further suggested that we are spreading untruths and completely inaccurate information.

The irony is astonishing.

Officials who can't tell me what a woman is who insists that boys become girls, presume to call us ignorant.

I can't see the emperor's clothes because the emperor has no clothes.

Transgender women are men, transgender men are women.

Transgender children are boys and girls being systematically deceived, exploited, and irreversibly harmed by a captured and predatory medical industry.

Am I wrong?

I challenge Alderman Smith and anyone on this board to discuss the substance.

Define boy, define girl, define gender and gender identity without collapsing into circular reasoning or stereotypes.

You can't.

No one can.

All you can do is try to silence us.

This entire ideology is incoherent.

Yet it has become the sacred dogma from the Democratic Party, the city of Nashua, and our public schools.

A child mutilating cult, protected by institutional power, and celebrated at our pride festivals.

Remarks by members?

I don't have anyone else signed up.

Oh, you didn't sign them up?

He did not, so we're done.

Remarks uh remarks by members of the board.

I'm gonna start over here tonight.

Alderman Lopez.

Um, so I want to start by announcing for everybody in the tree streets, the tree treats block party has been moved to July 11th.

Um I had some people asking about it that were trying to sign up really late.

Um so if you're interested in participating, definitely sign up.

Uh Tree Streets Block Party is on Involved to Impact's website, it's on the Facebook uh page.

Sign up and register, please, and then you'll get all the updates from when we move the entire festival.

Um anybody who's wishing to volunteer, we meet on Tuesdays at 6 p.m.

Um, unless an aldermatic meeting would of course we would reschedule it.

Um so the Tree Streets Block Party is being moved to July 11th.

Um I also had the opportunity to meet with Quest 9 earlier today, um, who's been interested in volunteering with the block party, and they have a really interesting um plan for an art city event in war in the tree streets, which I just want neighbors to know about.

They are working with a lot of the local businesses to redo some of the murals that have been um degraded or tagged over the years.

They're working directly with the business owners.

Um, and so hopefully you'll start to see some work um evolving over the in the along the rail trail.

Uh so I just want to let people know that that's all going on.

I want to credit Quest Nine, she did a great job uh with the mural up at the end of the library walks.

If you're wondering what that kind of work looks like, just go up the library walk and you can see a sample.

Um I'm looking forward to when they do announce their uh Art City event to see what that will look like.

Um, and then finally, I just wanted to comment um thank you to all the people who came out today to speak their truths, the things that matter to them, um, particularly those who are championing people who are in need and people who are unsheltered.

Um we have our budget wrap-up uh session.

One of the things that I made note of last night, particularly was the personnel funding for the resource center has been removed from the budget.

So we don't have uh a location just because we were willing to spend money on a specific location that was proposed to the by the mayor's department, doesn't mean you can just transfer that to anything you want, and it also doesn't mean that we automatically would have the money to staff it.

So these are things you should pay attention to because when you're advocating for people who are vulnerable, you really need to make sure you're doing something that helps them.

Um I think a lot of really good people spoke tonight and have a lot of insight, but I do think it's important to follow the meetings as best you can or reach out to those of us who are willing to work with you and did vote against the encampment ban, did vote to support the resource center, so that you can be aware of some of the things that you need to be aware of.

Um, to my fellow aldermen, I would point out that the uh continual care, the entity in the city that is directly applying the HUD funding we just heard about, is going to be at the Human Affairs Committee this upcoming Monday, June 15th.

Please come hear about what they do, learn the kind of programs they're doing, and I hope you'll understand the duress that they're under and why as a city we need to step up and help them because this is not going to get better.

It's not gonna go away.

I don't think any of these people are gonna go over the summer, and they're definitely not gonna be you know absent in the fall.

We need to be working on this now, otherwise we're gonna be in the same situation year after year, where in the fall we have people with nowhere to go moving closer and closer to the downtown area, and then ultimately too much friction between neighbors and the people around them turns into who has the louder voice and the ability to attend more meetings.

So please keep in mind that we have this meeting coming up on June 15th.

The continuum care meets every Wednesday morning, the uh the first Wednesday of the month.

You can learn more there.

There's a lot of organizations that need our help.

Thank you.

Alderwoman Kelly.

Uh thank you.

I also wanted to thank everyone who came out to speak uh tonight.

It's always really important for us to hear from people who are directly affected by our um decisions in this chamber.

Uh I voted against this ban, and I also brought forward the repeal.

Um I have been talking to anyone I can about how we can come up with a solution that's fair for the community.

Um but I appreciate your courage.

It's not easy to come here and speak, and it is and is it can be very emotional.

So thank you for that.

Um, and I just wanted to uh reiterate that Pride Festival and Parade is coming up, something that is an incredible display of authentic love and kindness for anyone in this community.

Um, and it is really really important for a lot of people from you know, from being a child to an adult, um and in being involved in so many things around the LGBTQ community, you'd be surprised how hurtful and how it can really affect mental health how when we're out there talking about their personhood isn't in existence.

Thank you.

Alderman Johnson, thank you very much.

I just want to uh clarify the Selena Av parking.

It does not take place on all of Selena Ave.

It's just from the north side of the southernmost driveway of 10 to 12 Selena Ave, and that has to do with the USPS um 25 feet distance from the gate because the trucks cannot back in.

So there is not a full ban on Selena Rav, it's just in two areas where you shouldn't be parking, you should be 25 feet from the curb anyway.

Um, but people aren't doing that, so that's what we're that's what the Selena Rav has to do with.

So I just want to let everybody know that is not being um cut off all of Selena Ave.

I'd like to thank everybody for coming out.

I'd like, you know, it's up what's going on in the city.

I've known Ken for many, many years, and um Ken has such a good heart.

Um and um I'm glad that he that he has a place at this point in time.

Um I did give him his percolator that he asked to uh I just have to give him some coffee now to go into his perculator.

You know, that's the one thing that's stopping him.

But thank you, everybody, from coming out.

Alderman Senate.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just want to um thank everybody for the uh discussion tonight regarding um 02612.

It's always exciting when you can uh put forth uh something that galvanizes people as much as this has appeared to.

I hope that enthusiasm follows it back to committee so that we can uh do the work like we've committed to doing here tonight.

Um I also want to thank everybody who came out and spoke tonight.

I always think it's important for us to um hear from the public of what's on their mind.

Um I'm glad that the folks who may have erroneously signed up for the first uh public comment period were able to speak during the um during the second.

So thank you, everybody.

Alderman Teball.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um I I just want to start by saying um, you know, I don't define people's men, boys, girls, women, I define them as people.

They're people.

And to have what happened last night and what continues to happen here is just it's just wrong.

It's just wrong.

Um, you know, last night they said that people were leaving the public schools because of all this trans and DEI stuff.

The uh, and it's just not true.

And it's just to come in here and continue.

Every single one of us should be talking against it.

I mean, we uh represent a lot of people that you know if you don't like it, just ignore it.

I mean, it's pretty simple.

I mean, let people be the way they want to be.

Um, it's it's not that that hard.

Um, as far as so, you know, the whole camping ban thing, the resource center.

Um, the camping ban was never an intent.

I knew when we voted for it that no one was no one is gonna pay the thousand dollars.

It's just not, and from what I hear from the police, and maybe I'm wrong on this.

I don't know how many uh citations for a thousand dollars have gone out.

I don't think many, if any, I hope none.

Um the goal also wasn't to jail people, and there was warnings giving out or supposed to be warnings given out.

Um the only jail time should be for anybody that's committing any kind of regular crime, like any one of us would could do on the street.

Um the goal here was to help get people into services while we get a resource center in place, and the resource center options did not come as fast as I expected them.

Then we had one lined up, and I was for it.

A lot of people on this board were against it.

Talking to Mr.

Keating, he didn't want it.

So he talked me out of it.

We talked for about an hour and a half, he talked me out of doing this resource center, and I told him specifically that the money's not just gonna be taken from this and all of a sudden doing whatever you want with it.

It's not this is the start of helping people that need it.

We get the resource center in, we start helping people this way, and then we can work towards other things like low barrier shelters, and maybe at that point after that, maybe homes or or apartments or something.

This was the first step.

That money was just gonna go away once we didn't have it.

And that's exactly what happened.

I voted against it, and again, I was listening to somebody that really cares about the homeless.

He knows he's been in doing this, like he says, for a long time.

And so I voted that way, and it failed.

And so now that money's not gonna be in the budget because we don't have anything to put it to.

We don't just put it as a holder.

That that money's gonna be there, and you know, we're gonna we're gonna do that.

So I told him that money would end up being gone.

We can't just have it sitting there in the budget for next year.

Now, maybe if we get something else and somebody finds another place, we can then look at making a supplemental appropriation, which nobody likes to do.

So, you know, I definitely have empathy for the people out there.

I want to find them help.

I want them to find places where we can they can live and have a life just like everybody else has the right to life.

Um so it's gone a little bit longer than I thought it would, and now it's going even longer because we don't have a resource center.

So I know the resource center wasn't gonna solve homelessness, it was only that first little piece.

Because if we could solve homelessness, it'd be solved all over the country, and we would do what other people are doing to solve it.

So, you know, I will you know, raise my hand to continue to try to work on things that will help the people out there and to try to find ways that we can put in place that are safe for the people, not not only the people that are out there, but the people that are homeless.

We want them to be safe as well in safe situations, um, and also work with the police, work with the community, work with the local businesses to make sure that we can try to try to help everyone without uh impeding on anyone else the best we can in the situation.

So I I submit that I will try to do better at uh helping the people that are out there.

So thank you.

Um so once again, I want to excuse me, I've got allergies.

Anybody got yellow death, sorry, so excuse my froggy voice here.

Um I want to thank everyone for coming out.

Um also want to reassure everyone that you know we really appreciate hearing from our constituents.

Um, and I think all of us know that the issue around homelessness is unfortunately it's larger than all of us, but it is something that we are we have compassion for that we want to do the right thing about.

Um but once again, it's not gonna be an overnight fix, but please work with us, continue to share your voices and your opinion, and and help us to be more solution oriented.

There are some of you out there that I've already had conversations with where we're we're trying to work together because it really is about individuals being able to have a home, a place to put their head at night, a place to be warm and safe, and that's something we want for everyone.

The other thing I want to say, there's a sticker on my laptop now that I feel like I could share it and pass it out to some individuals in the audience because I just want to say that mental health matters, and if nothing else, I think based on some of the things I heard this evening that, and even last night that to say that mental health does matter, and uh we want to make sure that everyone gets the help they need.

Um the other thing I want to stand behind is my statement regarding authenticity, authenticity, make all your authentic self and often often sent to see the allergies.

Um there's a book by Susan Verde called I am me for anyone who heard anything hurtful or hateful in this chamber tonight, shared by anyone, and it's about being your authentic most beautiful self, and it has to do with a child getting positive messages and finding out who they are and being affirmed for the fact that they are beautiful just the way they are, and that's just the way it is.

And if someone does not believe that, it doesn't matter.

You need to believe that about yourself.

To me, that's about who we are, that's about who our educators are in Nashua, and I'm gonna keep standing with them as they work to support all of our children in the school, all of our children, because no matter who you are, you are a gift to the world, and don't let anyone ever tell you anything any different.

Don't believe the hate.

Aldman, for then first, I'd like to apologize to the board and to the mayor for not being at the budget review uh last night.

It was a scheduling snafu with my particular calendar.

I'm working on that, and I apologize for not being there.

Second of all, I want to I want to thank everyone who spoke tonight at the end of the meeting.

I know it's tough to sit there and listen to us go through all the procedures, procedures that we have to do to get our work done, and then wait to to share your lives with us.

And I will tell you that my moral compass points towards solving this problem.

It's it's a problem that that we know about, it's a problem that's hard, but we're going to work on it.

Thank you.

Thank you, um, Madam President.

I'm gonna uh sound like a me too, but I also too want to thank um most of the speakers that came out today.

There were a couple that were very um at least one that was very hateful, and um, while I appreciate their right to speak, um it it it just kind of rose me the wrong way.

But um I also want to comment that I supported the resource center.

I fought for the resource center.

Um and um as as my colleague spoke out, uh Mr.

Keating was dead set against it, spoke out against it, um, and so on, which convinced a number of of people that it wasn't the right thing to do.

I do believe it was the right thing to do.

It wasn't the perfect solution, but was the start to a solution.

We can't take whatever the monies were, whether it's four million, two million, nine hundred thousand.

We can't just take that and say, okay, we're gonna put this and get everybody apartments as what was requested because that's not how um the laws read.

Um so we were going to bond money and we were going to take this building and try to make it into a resource center that would have um beds, it would have the um and so on.

So it did come out of the budget, and it came out of the budget because there's no plans currently, and we have to look at the budget as what is it that we are specifically going to do.

Um, well, I do agree with my my colleague who said, you know, it shouldn't come out of the budget.

I understand that, but until we have something planned, we also don't want people saying we're patting the budget on a what if.

Um so we can do a supplemental um amendment if necessary.

I am on a continuum of care um executive committee, um, and I do listen to all of the different departments and so on and things that they're doing.

Um they work very hard.

Um I've worked with them.

I am currently taking uh a class that HUD is giving on um homelessness and how we can work towards it.

There are amazing um people within other states that are doing really great work.

Um, and I and I'd like to see that happen here.

Uh, the resource center would have been a step towards that because it would have been putting all resources towards one way and not everybody doing the same thing.

The problem is that grants come to these different departments and say you have to do ABCD.

Well, guess what?

The next one gets a grant, and they have to do B C D E when we need GH, you know, we need all these other things to be done.

So the grants are dictating how we can do that, but they need the grants to do it.

It's very, very frustrating, no more frustrating than what all of you are going through.

So please, I am not minimizing anything.

And I appreciate everybody that is working towards helping and so on.

I am so glad that the Continuum of Care will be coming to the Human Affairs Committee meeting, and I will be here as well to hear what they're having to say.

HUD has significantly cut what we can do and changed and define redefined what we can do.

So housing first is no longer the HUD method.

And the current administration pulled the carpet out from underneath us.

This is why I say elections matter.

You can say I don't want you there anymore because you voted for the camping ban.

I own that.

I talk at the continuum of care meeting that I did vote that way, and I voted that way for safety, not to hurt anybody, but we heard from fire, we heard from police that people were being harmed and so on.

It got out of control.

If it hadn't got out of control, maybe we could have kind of done something differently.

We do need to work harder, and we do need to not ignore that we need a resource center, but that failed.

And it failed because people from the public were saying that's not good enough.

And as my colleague from Ward 4 said, when we try for perfection, we get nothing.

So we have to start somewhere, and that was killed because of we were trying to get perfection.

So I apologize that that happened, um, and it did, but we are all working very hard.

Don't think that we are ignoring anybody.

Um, you know, this is such a kind board with large hearts.

Um and I can tell you that um as a um I know it's been a year now, but I'm a widow, and um I lost three quarters of my income.

I wake up every day thinking I have this roof over my head, but how long?

My tax bill came in, I'm struggling trying to figure out how I'm gonna do that too.

So um I've been very close to homeless, and I think many of the people here and past board members understand what that feeling is, but I do have a roof over my head, so I am grateful for that, and I I wish the same and will continue to work through different organizations for that.

The Pride Festival, I will be there, and in my opinion, the Pride Festival shows that we love everyone, and we will continue to love everyone, and we don't judge.

I was a state rep for six years up in Concord, and I so the speaker who spoke against this and said and and talked about this person and this person, this person, I could do the same thing tenfold with the people that I spoke to that are suffering because of the hate and so on from transgenders.

I was brought to tears more times than I can speak about.

And it was because of people like the speaker that were here with so much hate and anger.

And um, you can laugh all you want, but that's exactly what it is.

And these people were hurt, and any kind of discrimination is wrong.

Um I also want to say that no clapping, please, please, no clapping.

No, no, thank you.

Um, and I want to uh apologize to my colleagues, but I I had to ask for that vote to go back on 02612 because I didn't want it to die, and I hope that we can all work towards it.

And I'm so sorry I went on so long.

Thank you, Madam President.

Welcome.

Holman Clemens.

Uh thank you, Madam President.

Yeah, thank you to um to everybody that uh that came out to speak tonight.

I know that um and also to to all of my colleagues as well around the horseshoe.

Um, I'll just say that um I am probably about as straightforward as you you will find a person can be.

Um I speak my mind, I tell you exactly how I feel, exactly what I think, and that's how I I I vote uh on this board as well.

Um, I I don't mask things in politics.

Um I also don't look at things in black and white either.

I always find that the world is much more gray uh than it is black or white.

One of the things that that um you know I pride myself on is the fact that I live by the creed of doing to others as you would have done on to you.

And so, you know, when I when a difficult vote comes up, like the camping ban, um, you know, and I and I vote that way, I have to really consider all of the the aspects of why I did that, you know, and it's not to punish people that don't have a home.

Um what it is is it for me, it is it comes down to morality.

And if I as a person would not allow somebody to sleep in my backyard, why would I allow them to sleep in a park that's owned by the city?

I think it's immoral, it's a moral either way.

I don't know what the solution is to this problem.

I don't think that this board of Alderman is going to find that solution.

My hope is that we can find a better way moving forward, and I'm always open to hearing what that might be.

But I know that we can't allow, uh as one of the previous speakers said, I we can't allow what happened last summer to happen again, where get a hundred people living in unsanitary conditions, um, you know, that constantly had police and fire and and public health down there trying to basically keep order.

Um that that's that's good for nobody, you know.

And so I don't know what the answer is.

I don't pretend to know what the answer is, but I do know what we can't allow, and I do know what you know, there has to be some limitations to what we as a city can sanction, and and certainly situations like that are just not something that that we should be doing.

It's just not good for the public health uh of our city.

So I incur I appreciate the fact that everybody came this evening and everybody spoke um about that issue uh tonight.

Uh, in regards to the legislation in regards to the fund brokers and the and the collectible shops, you know, again, I as I stated before, you know, I I think that there's some common ground to be had here, and I certainly am looking forward to the discussion uh at the committee.

Um I will bring to the table some ideas myself, um, but certainly I think more importantly um will be if we can invite some of the the folks who are in the industry as well as the police to the table and really hear what they have to say um to craft a better ordinance that takes into account some sort of balance because I do believe that uh that there is a middle ground there.

And in regards to uh the the last thing I'm just gonna say it well, two two other things.

One is the resource center.

We do need to keep looking out for a place for the resource center.

I had said um, you know, and I I stated it that night when we voted on it on it.

I said, if we don't do this, we're not gonna be we're not gonna have a resource center for a very long time in this city, and here we are in June, at the money that was going to be allocated to it in the budget is gone, it's not in there.

I don't know if somebody's gonna make a motion to put it back in there tomorrow night, but it's not in there now.

And um while we have about 400,000 sitting in a in a fund for it, that's not going to buy that's not gonna get us there.

We're gonna need to do if it's not in the budget, we're gonna need to do a supplemental appropriation when we find a property.

And part of the issue, you know, not to rehash this again, but part of the issue was the larger the the building you have, the more square footage it has, the more staff you need for it.

So that just increases the cost.

You really need to have, you know, there was a comprehensive plan to to staff that volunteers and some people from other agencies.

I just hope that we can find another property sometime soon that fits the bill, um, and we can bring that forward again, you know, because it is an important part of this whole solving some of this this the homeless crisis.

People need a place to be able to go and get the resources that that they deserve.

And that and quite frankly, that are out there.

Um last thing I will say is I am very happy that pride's happening.

Uh I am so thankful to the mayor uh for going forward and putting the parade back on the agenda.

That was very important to a lot of my constituents who reached out to me.

Um I think it was uh an oversight that uh I'm glad we've added back in.

Uh and I hope next year we can do a bigger and better parade as part of the festivities.

I think that's something that um the community is looking for.

I think this year was definitely a compromise.

Um but again, I I do want to thank the mayor for getting that uh back in.

Um I unfortunately will not be able to attend, even though I probably was the biggest one of the biggest thorns in the mayor's side, so I'm sorry I won't be able to attend it, but I do have uh uh a wedding that day that uh I have to go to.

Um, but otherwise I I would be there, and I definitely am gonna be there in spirit.

Uh I I love Pride Month, and uh I think it's something we should all be proud of uh that we live in a city where we can uh celebrate uh every the inclusity of uh of everybody.

So thanks everybody.

I appreciate uh your time committee announcements Alman Lopez, uh June 15th, the human affairs committee will be meeting Alderman Dowd.

Yes, tomorrow night and the following night are the budget wrap-up sessions.

Uh Donna's gonna be sending you out a sheet uh where you can list the basically what your motion is, and you need to put down the department and the line item that you're either adding to or subtracting from so that we can make sure that we capture all of the motions um correctly rather than just orally so uh we can give those to Don and right when then and whatever we do tomorrow night, we'll see if we have a summary for the following night or if there are additional motions, and hopefully by uh Thursday evening we will have a budget to go forth to the full board for the the next meeting committee announcement Alderman T ball.

Yeah, I think I got PDC next Tuesday.

Um more coding, more looking at the the new code that uh hopefully will go uh live at some point this year.

Okay Alderman Clemens Thank you, Madam President.

Uh I would like the motion to adjourn the June 9th Aldermanic meeting.

I roll club the motion is to adjourn.

Would the clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Clemens, yes, Alderman Clay, yes, Aldwin Ravan, yes, Alderwoman Smith, yes, Alden Tebo.

Yes, Alderman Greg, yes, Alderman Dowd, yes Alderman Senate, yes Alderman Johnson, yes Aldwoman Kelly, yes Alderman Morgan, yes Alderman Lopez, yes, of course Aldwin Wilshar, yes 13 yay zero nays and we are adjourned at 1004 p.m.

Thank you everyone.